Eric Schmidt Says Android is 'More Secure Than The iPhone', Prompting Laughter

[springsup]

Not really. Open in general is more secure.

That's not true. There is no reason why open-source code is necessarily more secure.

There may have been some open-source projects which were more secure than some proprietary products, but there's nothing like an absolute proof one way or the other.

There are theoretical ideas about why it might be, but there are also theoretical ideas about why it wouldn't be. It's not like a law of physics or anything; it's just a platitude.

It doesn't mean anything, but it's very misleading.

 

[samcraig]

Android is at the mercy of the carriers.

Less and less. Android updates its core apps and now has a lot funneled through Google Play Services. They can push out quite a bit - and often do very quickly.

 

[Oletros]

Faux metal, faux leather, faux stitching, faux wood boxes, and now faux comments from their boss. What's next?

Where do Android has faux metal, faux leather, faux stitching or faux wood?

 

[bryada]

Why do you believe that iOS is designed for non savvy users? Having a device that works great, is consistent, powerful, and polished isn't something the tech savvy are interested in? Okay...

Maybe that is why it is the #1 phone by far for Americans over 45 years old. In others words, generally not tech savvy. Sometimes stereotypes are closer to reality than most would like to admit.

 

[gatearray]

Maybe that is why it is the #1 phone by far for Americans over 45 years old. In others words, generally not tech savvy. Sometimes stereotypes are closer to reality than most would like to admit.

Yep, but I would guess that Android is the #1 operating system for that same demographic. And it's tops for the poor uneducated masses in third world countries, too.

Faux metal, faux leather, faux stitching, faux wood boxes, and now faux comments from their boss. What's next?

Don't forget faux benchmarks!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/state-of-cheating-in-android-benchmarks

 

[dagger01]

I hate trolls!!!

Apple deniers in full force but as a dev he is right. The only time security becomes an issue with android is with custom roms kernels and radios.

iOS just can't be customized at all. Most stock roms on android are super secure, very similar to iOS.

iOS is designed primarily for the average non Savvy user but that's fine it's a good OS for day to day tasks.

Oh, now you're a developer after only just buying an iPhone 5s recently? You seem to spit a lot of other people's misinformation and talk out of your rear end, a lot. You don't have to be logged in to [LINK='https://forums.macrumors.com/search/?searchid=36310865&pp=25']check out all your posts[/LINK] and quickly determine that you're a kid that knows nothing. I think you should post less and pay more attention to what's going on. You might learn something as you clearly know very little about which you post. Pathetic trolling little kid.

 

[samcraig]

Don't forget faux benchmarks!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/state-of-cheating-in-android-benchmarks

Android doesn't have faux benchmarks. Manufacturers have tweaked their versions of the OS with adjustments.

But by all means - lump everything together into a FUD statement...

 

[whtrbt7]

Stock Android OS since Jelly Bean is more secure than iOS 7. The security breaches in Android are through Google Play, gmail, and custom firmware. So overall, Apple's walled garden is still more secure for general use including app usage. The problem with Android lies with the manufacturers and their crazy tiered fragmentation of the Android platform.

 

[dagger01]

Maybe that is why it is the #1 phone by far for Americans over 45 years old. In others words, generally not tech savvy. Sometimes stereotypes are closer to reality than most would like to admit.

LMAO...ummm, you realize most of the tech companies in the Fortune 500 and beyond are created, run by, or financed by Generation Xers 45 and older? You trying to say there are not millions of tech savvy people over 40, if so you are horribly mistaken. Over 60, sure, different generation, but anyone born after 1966-1968 are sufficiently tech savvy. We didn't have the Internet but there was plenty of tech before that; ham radios, early computers you had to program to use because there wasn't much commercial software, cassette tapes, video recorders, all kinds of tech. Our tinkerings 20 or more years ago led to your aspirations of tech greatness today. Put it back in your pants youngster.

 

[roadbloc]

Oh, now you're a developer after only just buying an iPhone 5s recently? You seem to spit a lot of other people's misinformation and talk out of your rear end, a lot. You don't have to be logged in to [LINK='https://forums.macrumors.com/search/?searchid=36310865&pp=25']check out all your posts[/LINK] and quickly determine that you're a kid that knows nothing. I think you should post less and pay more attention to what's going on. You might learn something as you clearly know very little about which you post. Pathetic trolling little kid.

Instead of stooping to his level then, why don't you prove he is wrong? Unless you have no idea what you're on about either?

C'mon, let's see some damn evidence in this thread already. Everybody can claim anything, but which is really more secure? Android or iOS?

 

[rdlink]

YouTube: video

Laugh is faintly audible...

The laugh was loud enough to make him pause, and fluster him slightly. In fact, he seemed to almost stop, like he wanted to address the laughter. But he was smarter than that. He knew his only recourse was to try to slather plaster over the gash.

 

[newdeal]

iOS won't run anything not approved by the app store. Android will run everything regardless of where you get it from. It takes months of work for jailbreakers to get iOS devices to run unsigned code. This is pretty clear evidence that attacks can come in much more easily on android. Wonder how long it will be until antivirus programs really start to gain traction on android devices. Its clearly the next great software market and I am surprised that there hasn't been more push from the antivirus companies

 

[smakdown61]

That 304 number includes OSX, iTunes, Corelgraphics, Quicktime etc.

I went through a few of these and came up with these thoughts:

1. As part of a closed app system, the app code that could reveal personal info or allow for remote control are most likely going to be caught by apple during the review process. If they weren't, you'd be hearing about it. I have a feeling they are fully aware of most, if not all, of these and can auto scan for exploit code using these methods.

2. It looks like the worst the webkit vulnerabilities can do is crash safari. No other risk of obtaining personal info or remote control from this.

3. Other stuff related to itunes, quicktime, etc...I'm pretty sure any Windows program will have similar exploits.

I think the biggest reason you can call the iphone "more secure" is because of its locked down app ecosystem. Much lower chance of an exploit app passing through apple than a non-Play app on an android phone.

 

[dagger01]

Android doesn't have faux benchmarks. Manufacturers have tweaked their versions of the OS with adjustments.

But by all means - lump everything together into a FUD statement...

Ummm, no, all but Motorola and Apple were found to be tweaking their OS installs to fool benchmarks. So the lumping was appropriate in this case and was not based on FUD, but fact. When all but one Android installed phone vendor (not provider) is cheating to make their phones appear faster, lumping happens. So, yes, Android does indeed have faux benchmarks, as one distro of it is as valid as the next given its open source and licensing nature.

 

[newdeal]

LMAO...ummm, you realize most of the tech companies in the Fortune 500 and beyond are created, run by, or financed by Generation Xers 45 and older? You trying to say there are not millions of tech savvy people over 40, if so you are horribly mistaken. Over 60, sure, different generation, but anyone born after 1966-1968 are sufficiently tech savvy. We didn't have the Internet but there was plenty of tech before that; ham radios, early computers you had to program to use because there wasn't much commercial software, cassette tapes, video recorders, all kinds of tech. Our tinkerings 20 or more years ago led to your aspirations of tech greatness today. Put it back in your pants youngster.

yeah exactly. Changing your keyboard on an android device that is programmed to be able to do so by installing a prepackaged software, and then changing an easily accessible setting isn't tech savvy. Programming code to get your machine to do anything at all and sitting and punching cards to do it, now THAT is tech savvy

 

[rdlink]

Stock Android OS since Jelly Bean is more secure than iOS 7. The security breaches in Android are through Google Play, gmail, and custom firmware. So overall, Apple's walled garden is still more secure for general use including app usage. The problem with Android lies with the manufacturers and their crazy tiered fragmentation of the Android platform.

So, in other words, "the problem with Android" lies within one of the basic tenants of its philosophy? The fact that anyone can develop an insecure variant of the underlying OS, and thereby make Android insecure.

Your post would have some semblance of reality if Google would have reigned in the wild, wild west that is Android from the beginning. But the genie is out of the bottle, and they will have a difficult time ever getting it back in.

And further, let's just conveniently forget side loading. An easy switch to flip on any Android phone, including stock Android that allows even the non-technical user to leave the doors unlocked.

 

[gotluck]

Can't someone entice an Android user to side load malware through a website and have it wreak havoc? I really don't know since I've never used Android and have no desire to. But my understanding was this is the main security flaw in Android.

Yes but I would argue that the ability to sideload is a welcome feature, not a flaw. But yes it relies on the users intelligence, which is dangerous.
Freedom is not without its pitfalls.
We'd all be safer under a iron fist dictator in real life (similar to apples approach), for example.

 

[Shaggymax]

And to think that he used to be on the Board at Apple and Jobs introduced him during the 2007 iPhone unveiling.

2007 - The same year Android was unveiled hmmm Holy Schmidt you are slick.

 

[samcraig]

Ummm, no, all but Motorola and Apple were found to be tweaking their OS installs to fool benchmarks. So the lumping was appropriate in this case and was not based on FUD, but fact. When all but one Android installed phone vendor (not provider) is cheating to make their phones appear faster, lumping happens. So, yes, Android does indeed have faux benchmarks, as one distro of it is as valid as the next given its open source and licensing nature.

Again - Android - the OS does not have faux benchmarks.

You can blame whatever manufacturer you want - but it's not a function of the OS. It's a function of programming by the manufacturers. So no - it's not fact that ANDROID has faux benchmarks. Several Android PHONES have tweaked benchmarks.

Context is everything.

 

[SkippyThorson]

Written by someone who hasn't used an Android phone and/or one in several years?

You realize you don't need to do any customization to have a great working Android phone, right? The OPTION is there to do whatever you want. But out of the box many phones works great.

Fragmentation is a developer issue and getting less and less. I would imagine the general public notices any "fragmentation" rarely if ever.

But I love your hyperbole.

"Written by someone who hasn't used an Android phone and/or [...] one in several years" -- ??? I'm assuming you meant "owned one"? I also assume you meant myself? Or you? I'd respond to that, but that wasn't coherent enough to even guess.

-----

Think of it like Windows. Yes, it's good, and you're right - it works just fine out of the box.

Then updates happen, settings change, things get installed and deleted, and then there you have it, the end-result of the user. Different each time, although they all started out "stock". All like unique cars at a show.

Be realistic, and join the real world. How many people just use their smart phone out-of-the-box, without making any changes?
A) Users that buy smart phones don't buy them to leave them stock. They're always customized.
B) If for some reason the user isn't tech-savvy, or doesn't care to change anything since purchase, I'd like to shake their hand for not tweaking every little thing ever offered.

I don't customize these phones. They all come to me at different points, running different versions, all with personal touches.

But I love that you implied I said Android Phones didn't work out-of-the-box. Yes, that's precisely what I said.

 

[absurdamerica]

Android has equivalents of all of that. Don't see your point. The comparison seems fair.

Android is an Operating System.

iOS is an Operating System.

OSX is an Operating System.

Windows is an Operating System.

We're comparing Android and iOS and their security, not Android with iOS, OSX, and Windows versions of Apple's software products.

 

[samcraig]

"Written by someone who hasn't used an Android phone and/or [...] one in several years" -- ??? I'm assuming you meant "owned one"? I also assume you meant myself? Or you? I'd respond to that, but that wasn't coherent enough to even guess.

-----

Think of it like Windows. Yes, it's good, and you're right - it works just fine out of the box.

Then updates happen, settings change, things get installed and deleted, and then there you have it, the end-result of the user. Different each time, although they all started out "stock". All like unique cars at a show.

Be realistic, and join the real world. How many people just use their smart phone out-of-the-box, without making any changes?
A) Users that buy smart phones don't buy them to leave them stock. They're always customized.
B) If for some reason the user isn't tech-savvy, or doesn't care to change anything since purchase, I'd like to shake their hand for not tweaking every little thing ever offered.

I don't customize these phones. They all come to me at different points, running different versions, all with personal touches.

But I love that you implied I said Android Phones didn't work out-of-the-box. Yes, that's precisely what I said.

Yes - sorry - fast typing and I left out a word. You may have never implied you that Android phones didn't work out of the box but it's clear you think it must be tweaked or customized to be of use to the end user.

I have no idea where you think you are getting your facts about customization but I disagree. I would say the majority of people don't customize their Android phones other than typical settings which they would (have) to do on both iOS and Android regardless of which phone they owned.

I get it though - Android frustrates you. I just don't see how your experience equates to fact.

 

[bmunge]

Maybe that is why it is the #1 phone by far for Americans over 45 years old. In others words, generally not tech savvy. Sometimes stereotypes are closer to reality than most would like to admit.

Quite the logical leap you just did there.

 

[Drunken Master]

The laugh was loud enough to make him pause, and fluster him slightly. In fact, he seemed to almost stop, like he wanted to address the laughter. But he was smarter than that. He knew his only recourse was to try to slather plaster over the gash.

In other words, never Schmidt a Schmidter.

 

[satchmo]

I have to believe Schmidt knows exactly what he's doing with his comments.
Whether true or not, he knows these short sound bites make perfect headings and great PR for the Android platform.

That or he's the second coming of Steve Ballmer.

Schmidt is unintentionally comedy gold.