802 posts • joined Friday 11th May 2007 12:08 GMT
Oh, that's fine then. As long as it's only a tiny number of children who are being ripped off...
Just read the summary linked to in the article. They did indeed just take the date and add 1 to the year, and not with a date object and the dateadd function.
Unbelievable that this happened on their production service. If I was a customer I'd be migrating to another platform right now...
Good that Google have patched already...
but does make me wonder how thoroughly that patch has been tested...
How's it on 360?
The boy had ME2, or possibly the first one, on his 360 and it ran like a dog when things kicked off, frame rate dropping to lowish single digits in a firefight. Anyone tried this on 360 and know if this is still the case?
Re: So, consoles going back to cartridges then?
Cool. Cartridges boot much faster than discs and have the big advantage of being able to save to the cartridge not the console. Take your game round to a mate's and your unlockables come with you. Buy a new console cos your old one melted and the same applies. Sweet!
you stuck up prick.
You're right, I'm not really arguing that people should be stupid or ignore the security messages. It seems we both read the messages and don't install apps that are asking too much.
However, the vast majority of users don't do this, they don't fully understand the risks or they just want the app that all their mates are raving about. For these users a good anti-malware app could be very useful, and would help them realise they should be reading the permissions before they install...
Are you new to Android? Pretty much every app asks for permissions that it doesn't appear to need. I've had an android phone for about a year and I've installed about 3 apps, and all of them asked for more permissions than seemed necessary.
The answer is only "common sense" if you don't want to install any apps.
Re: Matt you are a muppet
no you are!
The article isn't saying he doesn't understand how marketing works, he's saying that it doesn't help him as someone being advertised at. And judging by the fact no-one on here is saying "Actually I get really well targeted ads!" he's got a point...
Google can sell ads because they have user data to target, the data to target comes from us not the companies placing adverts, therefore the data has value. He thinks he should get something in return for letting them make money off his data.
Is that too difficult to understand?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ~2000 votes so far cannot be wrong, can they... can they?
@Sean Timarco Baggaley, 24th feb 17:23
Re: Re: Re: ~2000 votes so far cannot be wrong, can they... can they?
The number of people on this site who use noscript is surely greater than on most sites, why aren't they considered when you specify a voting form?
Yeah, I'm trolling, maybe you shouldn't all have bitten in the first place?
Sony is a strong position, says Wu
but tellingly omits Nintendo from the list of competitors. When the original PSP was announced "analysts" made it clear they thought it would win over Nintendo's toy DS. They were very wrong there, PSP did sell, but DS was the big success story.
I'm not suggesting this will go the same way, 3DS hasn't been a soaraway success, but to list all those competitors and omit the one company that actively competes in the same sector makes this forecast look like wishful thinking...
Google have taken their eye off the ball. They are so busy fannying around with other projects that basic search has fallen by the wayside. I didn't realise how important the "+" was in getting good results from them, but since they removed that feature I find myself having to look to other search engines for technical help in my day to day work.
But then, as the majority of their searches are people typing "facebook" to go to facebook, I guess I'm just not the target market anymore....
Re: Here's why!
Though you didn't choose to Reply to my post I guess it's me you're talking to. So explain why, if Android does everything on Arm, I'd want to run windows as well (if I'm a normal user...) Though obviously if my mum was using a tablet the first thing she'd want would be to get round the "signed kernel issue"....
Why would any normal user (not a tech head) want this feature? Isn't the success of iPad supposedly predicated on "it just works"? It's not "it just works in two different ways with two different sets of apps depending on which os you're in".
The past tense of spin is spun. Still, why use an existing word when you can make up a new one!
As his salary is $1 I expect you're doing better than him there too.
If only there was some way to make these greedy tax dodging CEOs live on their so called "salaries" without recourse to bonuses or expenses. Now that would be funny....
Windows users were only using the Start Button to access the items most commonly used on their desktops
Presumably they have metrics to back this up. If so then the removal of the start button won't be a massive problem for most users, providing they can easily get to the desktop instead.
OTOH, I do fear change...
People hankering for vinyl need a good slap
no they don't, they just like something you don't. I still buy on vinyl if available. All my recent vinyl purchases have come with free mp3 downloads anyway, but that doesn't stop the gatefold sleeves and coloured vinyl discs being lovely things to own.... (P.U.T.S Highlighter, I'm talking about you in particular!)
@Destroy All Monsters
your argument seems to be that things that happen frequently can't be illegal. That's unlikely to stand up in court....
If you think this article is apple bashing you must be new here. It's actually pretty balanced, makes it perfectly clear you're entitled to rebundle your work in a different format if you like and that the comparison to other paid for software is disingenuous. In fact, this site is getting more like the daily mail everyday, comment threads full of people complaining about articles they couldn't be bothered to read properly... Depressing...
You may need a word processor to leverage this baby for your purpose
You may need a thesaurus to avoid using the word "use". Sorry I mean you may need a thesaurus to avoid leveraging the word "use"....
Are you paid by the letter?
Re: Big O
rather than the barry shitpeas on here who has yet to say anything amusing (apart from his hilarious "real names" comment at the start of this discussion, obv...)
And i suspect you're talking shit..
...the point being that Google should have made a clearer statement (ie. We found the two people who had done this and booted them out because of it) instead of this ambiguous one. Besides which, the emphasis is on Google to prove they're not behaving badly, not on some random internet poster to prove they are.
Google shill much?
was is locally a problem?
I think we'd all like an answer to that....
I see your argument, but it's based on what I consider to be flawed design. Android assumes I know exactly what permissions I want an app to have at install time, and that choice will never change. Also, if I don't like one of the permissions then the only option I have is to not install the app.
There's a mobile operating system I use that asks for permission at run time, when the function is invoked. It makes perfect sense, I've just clicked the "show map" button, the app requests "App wants to use your location. Deny, Allow once, Allow always." This gives the permission context and allows me to make an informed choice.
I understand that Android apps avoid this kind of "nag" message, but to me it's not nagging, it's asking a sensible question at the appropriate time...
>>- A lot more work needs to go into managing each feature of your app as you don't know up front that you have permission to do something that you explicitly request in the manifest.<<
It's basic coding. You're supposed to have a mechanism to handle when things go wrong so your app doesn't crash. A permission exception is only one of many things that can go wrong when code is running. What is it with Android developers and the idea that handling security exceptions is really difficult? Is android so badly designed that security exceptions can't be trapped properly?
a pseudonym is at least as anonymous?
If there was only one person allowed to post on here anonymously that would be true. But it's not, Anonymous coward refers to loads of people, Craigness refers to one user. You might not be able to point them out in the street, but you can easily see all the posts by that user. So quite different to posting anonymously...
Price is the key differentiator, that's why hp touchpads became so popular. The fact that Amazon is a trusted brand won't hurt sales, but htc, motorola and blackberry are also trusted brands that have failed so far in tablets, as far as sales go....
will Foundem &co won't survive?
It's not passive drinking though, is it.
Passive smoking is where you inhale other people's smoke. Passive drinking would be somehow passively ingesting alcohol where people around you are drinking.
The negative effects of alcohol consumption on a developing foetus would be passive drinking, but being hit by a car driven by someone who's over the limit is something else and involves no drinking on the part of the victim.
This is a stupid use of language. Don't encourage it.
It's my turn..
...to explain to the new kid!
It's in Bootnotes! No IT angle required! If you don't want to read it, don't click on it!!!
>> Nintendo, on the other hand, haven't really been cutting edge since the SNES <<
You obviously never compared the instant loading and relatively massive draw distance of the N64 to the PS1 then. I remember playing Ape Escape on the ps1 and being gutted by how poor the rendering was, fogging everything but a tiny area around your character. Compared to Ocarina and Mario 64 it was a generation behind...
>> Even then, you can always install a permissions blocker. <<
only if you've rooted your phone, which most users haven't. Most of them don't know what that means....
Tbh I'm getting a bit sick of moaning about this, but just to be clear, the permissions system on Android provides very little security unless you just don't install apps. Nearly every app I've looked at has wanted permissions that don't seem relevant to the job it's doing. How many people just click install? I don't, but that's why I've only got about 3 apps installed on my phone...
Holding up android as a way to manage permissions correctly is wrong. There are many threads on the google boards requesting permission control after app install, and many crap programmers moaning that that means they'd have to trap permission exceptions and it's not worth it....
- Product Round-up Smartwatch face off: Pebble, MetaWatch and new hi-tech timepieces
- Geek's Guide to Britain BT Tower is just a relic? Wrong: It relays 18,000hrs of telly daily
- Geek's Guide to Britain The bunker at the end of the world - in Essex
- Review: Sony Xperia SP
- Dell's PC-on-a-stick landing in July: report