Showing posts with label Apple. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apple. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Apple iOS 6 and Privacy

When iOS 6 was released last week, the "big news" was Apple's decision to drop Google Maps. In the uproar that followed, iOS 6's privacy features received little fanfare, despite undergoing a major overhaul. Many changes CDT has advocated for—including giving users more control over tracking and increasing the visibility of and options in the privacy settings—have been adopted in the new version.

In Settings, Apple has created a new Privacy tab (see the images below). It contains the familiar Location Services tab, allowing users to determine which apps have access to the device’s location. The Privacy tab also lists a number of other types of data that will now require explicit requests to the user for data sharing, including Contacts, Calendars, Reminders, Photos, and Bluetooth. (Android, by contrast, lists all information and services that an app can access during installation, although they can't be changed later without a manual app update and a permissions notice to the user.)

Apple has also allowed users to limit advertising tracking, via Settings > General > About > Advertising > Limit Ad Tracking. When users enable this setting, they are setting a “flag” that tells apps they don't want to be tracked, much in the same spirit of the W3C’s Do Not Track efforts. It’s unclear why this setting is located outside of the Privacy settings and deep in the General settings, but its existence and functionality are welcome.

Apple has incorporated three new identifiers to take the place of the much-maligned and unchangeable UDID: iOS 6 now makes available a vendor-specific identifier, identifierForVendor, that can be used by app developers to recognize a device across their apps; a second identifier for advertising purposes, advertisingIdentifier, that can be used by third-party ad networks to identify a device for advertising purposes; and a third application identifier, UUID, that is a more accessible way for applications to create identifiers specific to that application. These three IDs may sound similar but the details are quite different: The vendor identifier is cleared when the user uninstalls the last app on their phone by a given vendor; the advertising identifier persists until the device is completely reset; the application identifier persists only if the application saves it, and then only until that application is uninstalled. Each of these new identifiers is preferable to the UDID, which cannot be modified.

How could these identifiers be used by apps? If a single app needs to store a lightweight device-specific identifier, they would choose the UUID (the UUID is quite different from the UDID; the UUID has a time-based element which means that two UUIDs created at different times will be completely different). If an app provider needs an identifier that persists across each of their apps, they would choose the identifierForVendor, which can be used across all the apps for a given vendor; for example, allowing a family of privacy-sensitive apps like Blendr/Grindr to offer “no personal information required” logins across each app where account information is tied to a device instead of personal information like an email account and name. Finally, for advertising purposes the advertisingIdentifier can be used to deliver, measure, and target advertisements to users. With the advertisingIdentifier, Ad networks installed in apps from different vendors will be able to track users across all the apps on which they are installed on the device - for example, a user’s love of wine in a wine cellar app could be leveraged to offer a discount on wine paraphernalia in a shopping app. This identifier is universal, making it easier for ad networks to trade and sell information about users (compared to the cookie-based model on the web, where each ad network has a different identifier for a user that only it can read). Arguably, Apple should have tried to replicate an advertiser-specific identifier for mobile, or at least made the identifier easier to reset.

However, the “Limit Ad Tracking” setting ameliorates the persistence of the advertisingIdentifier as app developers will have to check if the user has enabled the preference before they read or use the advertisingIdentifier in their code. If “Limit Ad Tracking” is set, advertisers and ad networks are only allowed to use the identifier for a limited set of exempted uses: “frequency capping, conversion events, estimating the number of unique users, security and fraud detection, and debugging.” CDT has long advocated for exactly this balance between user preferences and limited operational uses. This is an important and subtle balance. In negotiating the meaning of “Do Not Track” in the World Wide Web Consortium, we have argued that other uses like “market research” and “product improvement” could tip the scales too far; while these uses don’t directly impact the user’s experience, they wouldn’t be expected by users who enable the Limit Ad Tracking preference and these uses allow data collection of indeterminate scope and extent, potentially acting as exceptions that swallow the rule. The balance struck by Apple here in terms of permitted uses is a careful and appropriate one between honoring users’ desires to limit advertising tracking and ensuring a baseline level of accepted uses that promote a healthy app ecosystem. Furthermore, because Apple must approve iOS apps, they must respect the user’s choice for Limited Ad Tracking or face rejection or removal. This is in sharp contrast to Do Not Track, which requires affirmative representations and agreement from advertising networks to have any weight.

Finally, iOS 6 fixes some 200 critical vulnerabilities across the entire operating system. Some of these vulnerabilities are serious: from allowing bypass of the PIN-enabled lock screen to viewing pictures taken on the device without entering a PIN to running arbitrary code on the device by loading a malicious image file. Unfortunately, iOS 6 is only available for iPhone 3GS and later, iPod Touch 4 or later and iPad 2 or later, meaning the large quantity of older devices will still be subject to many of these potential problems.

CDT applauds Apple’s decision to incorporate these substantial pro-privacy elements into iOS 6, allowing users to finely control how their data gets shared with specific apps, and to more easily express a desire not to be tracked by marketers. We hope that this effort encourages mobile OS vendors to continue to iterate and compete on built-in privacy controls. For years, CDT has periodically published a report comparing the privacy settings for the major browser vendors. We are now in the process of evaluating the major mobile OS platforms in terms of comparative privacy features. Stay tuned!


View the original article here

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Apple iOS 6 and Privacy

When iOS 6 was released last week, the "big news" was Apple's decision to drop Google Maps. In the uproar that followed, iOS 6's privacy features received little fanfare, despite undergoing a major overhaul. Many changes CDT has advocated for—including giving users more control over tracking and increasing the visibility of and options in the privacy settings—have been adopted in the new version.

In Settings, Apple has created a new Privacy tab (see the images below). It contains the familiar Location Services tab, allowing users to determine which apps have access to the device’s location. The Privacy tab also lists a number of other types of data that will now require explicit requests to the user for data sharing, including Contacts, Calendars, Reminders, Photos, and Bluetooth. (Android, by contrast, lists all information and services that an app can access during installation, although they can't be changed later without a manual app update and a permissions notice to the user.)

Apple has also allowed users to limit advertising tracking, via Settings > General > About > Advertising > Limit Ad Tracking. When users enable this setting, they are setting a “flag” that tells apps they don't want to be tracked, much in the same spirit of the W3C’s Do Not Track efforts. It’s unclear why this setting is located outside of the Privacy settings and deep in the General settings, but its existence and functionality are welcome.

Apple has incorporated three new identifiers to take the place of the much-maligned and unchangeable UDID: iOS 6 now makes available a vendor-specific identifier, identifierForVendor, that can be used by app developers to recognize a device across their apps; a second identifier for advertising purposes, advertisingIdentifier, that can be used by third-party ad networks to identify a device for advertising purposes; and a third application identifier, UUID, that is a more accessible way for applications to create identifiers specific to that application. These three IDs may sound similar but the details are quite different: The vendor identifier is cleared when the user uninstalls the last app on their phone by a given vendor; the advertising identifier persists until the device is completely reset; the application identifier persists only if the application saves it, and then only until that application is uninstalled. Each of these new identifiers is preferable to the UDID, which cannot be modified.

How could these identifiers be used by apps? If a single app needs to store a lightweight device-specific identifier, they would choose the UUID (the UUID is quite different from the UDID; the UUID has a time-based element which means that two UUIDs created at different times will be completely different). If an app provider needs an identifier that persists across each of their apps, they would choose the identifierForVendor, which can be used across all the apps for a given vendor; for example, allowing a family of privacy-sensitive apps like Blendr/Grindr to offer “no personal information required” logins across each app where account information is tied to a device instead of personal information like an email account and name. Finally, for advertising purposes the advertisingIdentifier can be used to deliver, measure, and target advertisements to users. With the advertisingIdentifier, Ad networks installed in apps from different vendors will be able to track users across all the apps on which they are installed on the device - for example, a user’s love of wine in a wine cellar app could be leveraged to offer a discount on wine paraphernalia in a shopping app. This identifier is universal, making it easier for ad networks to trade and sell information about users (compared to the cookie-based model on the web, where each ad network has a different identifier for a user that only it can read). Arguably, Apple should have tried to replicate an advertiser-specific identifier for mobile, or at least made the identifier easier to reset.

However, the “Limit Ad Tracking” setting ameliorates the persistence of the advertisingIdentifier as app developers will have to check if the user has enabled the preference before they read or use the advertisingIdentifier in their code. If “Limit Ad Tracking” is set, advertisers and ad networks are only allowed to use the identifier for a limited set of exempted uses: “frequency capping, conversion events, estimating the number of unique users, security and fraud detection, and debugging.” CDT has long advocated for exactly this balance between user preferences and limited operational uses. This is an important and subtle balance. In negotiating the meaning of “Do Not Track” in the World Wide Web Consortium, we have argued that other uses like “market research” and “product improvement” could tip the scales too far; while these uses don’t directly impact the user’s experience, they wouldn’t be expected by users who enable the Limit Ad Tracking preference and these uses allow data collection of indeterminate scope and extent, potentially acting as exceptions that swallow the rule. The balance struck by Apple here in terms of permitted uses is a careful and appropriate one between honoring users’ desires to limit advertising tracking and ensuring a baseline level of accepted uses that promote a healthy app ecosystem. Furthermore, because Apple must approve iOS apps, they must respect the user’s choice for Limited Ad Tracking or face rejection or removal. This is in sharp contrast to Do Not Track, which requires affirmative representations and agreement from advertising networks to have any weight.

Finally, iOS 6 fixes some 200 critical vulnerabilities across the entire operating system. Some of these vulnerabilities are serious: from allowing bypass of the PIN-enabled lock screen to viewing pictures taken on the device without entering a PIN to running arbitrary code on the device by loading a malicious image file. Unfortunately, iOS 6 is only available for iPhone 3GS and later, iPod Touch 4 or later and iPad 2 or later, meaning the large quantity of older devices will still be subject to many of these potential problems.

CDT applauds Apple’s decision to incorporate these substantial pro-privacy elements into iOS 6, allowing users to finely control how their data gets shared with specific apps, and to more easily express a desire not to be tracked by marketers. We hope that this effort encourages mobile OS vendors to continue to iterate and compete on built-in privacy controls. For years, CDT has periodically published a report comparing the privacy settings for the major browser vendors. We are now in the process of evaluating the major mobile OS platforms in terms of comparative privacy features. Stay tuned!


View the original article here

Sunday, September 23, 2012

HTC uses Google patents to sue Apple

CEO and co-founder Steve Jobs with the Apple iPhone Apple is embroiled in a patent battle encompassing a number of rivals including HTC, Samsung and Motorola Photo: EPA

Google has sold a number of patents to HTC so that the mobile-manufacturer can sue Apple.

The nine patents, which Google itself bought from Motorola, Palm and other companies less than a year ago, concern Google’s Android operating system. In a sign both that Google is unwilling to sue Apple directly and also that the ‘patent wars’ between major manufacturers are further hotting up, HTC has now filed claims against Apple, while also itself being sued by the iPhone maker.

Florian Mueller, of the blog Foss Patents, wrote that Google knows that HTC is under tremendous legal pressure from Apple and clearly on the losing track. HTC is the first Android device maker sued by Apple, so that dispute is at the most advanced stage, and since HTC's own patent portfolio is weak, it has so far lacked the leverage to force Apple into a cross-license agreement. The possibility of HTC being defeated must have scared Google.”

He added that “another motivation for Google is probably to demonstrate some support to third-party Android device makers even though it's clear those won't be able to compete with a Google-owned Motorola Mobility on a playing field if the deal goes through.”

Bloomber reports that HTC sued Apple yesterday in court and filed a complaint at the US International Trade Commission. The firm alleges infringement of the patents obtained from Google.

Both HTC and Google have declined to say how much the patents in question, which relate to wireless upgrades, contacts and interfaces, have cost to transfer. Google spent $12.5 billion to buy Motorola Mobility, and acquire the firms 17,000 patents, earlier this year.

“HTC will continue to protect its patented inventions against infringement from Apple until such infringement stops,” said HTC General Counsel Grace Lei. “We believe that we have an obligation to protect our business, our industry partners and our customers, who love using our products.”

Steve Jobs has previously been quoted as saying Apple thinks “”competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours”.


View the original article here

Saturday, September 22, 2012

HTC uses Google patents to sue Apple

CEO and co-founder Steve Jobs with the Apple iPhone Apple is embroiled in a patent battle encompassing a number of rivals including HTC, Samsung and Motorola Photo: EPA

Google has sold a number of patents to HTC so that the mobile-manufacturer can sue Apple.

The nine patents, which Google itself bought from Motorola, Palm and other companies less than a year ago, concern Google’s Android operating system. In a sign both that Google is unwilling to sue Apple directly and also that the ‘patent wars’ between major manufacturers are further hotting up, HTC has now filed claims against Apple, while also itself being sued by the iPhone maker.

Florian Mueller, of the blog Foss Patents, wrote that Google knows that HTC is under tremendous legal pressure from Apple and clearly on the losing track. HTC is the first Android device maker sued by Apple, so that dispute is at the most advanced stage, and since HTC's own patent portfolio is weak, it has so far lacked the leverage to force Apple into a cross-license agreement. The possibility of HTC being defeated must have scared Google.”

He added that “another motivation for Google is probably to demonstrate some support to third-party Android device makers even though it's clear those won't be able to compete with a Google-owned Motorola Mobility on a playing field if the deal goes through.”

Bloomber reports that HTC sued Apple yesterday in court and filed a complaint at the US International Trade Commission. The firm alleges infringement of the patents obtained from Google.

Both HTC and Google have declined to say how much the patents in question, which relate to wireless upgrades, contacts and interfaces, have cost to transfer. Google spent $12.5 billion to buy Motorola Mobility, and acquire the firms 17,000 patents, earlier this year.

“HTC will continue to protect its patented inventions against infringement from Apple until such infringement stops,” said HTC General Counsel Grace Lei. “We believe that we have an obligation to protect our business, our industry partners and our customers, who love using our products.”

Steve Jobs has previously been quoted as saying Apple thinks “”competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours”.


View the original article here

Friday, September 21, 2012

Facebook 'headhunts Apple iPhone engineers' to build smartphone

The engineers are part of a team working on Facebook’s third attempt to build a smartphone, for release by next year, The New York Times said, citing unnamed multiple sources.

The first attempt, in 2010, was scrapped when the firm realised the difficulty it would face turning itself from a software developer into a hardware maker. Another effort, in cooperation with the Taiwanese smartphone firm HTC and codenamed “Buffy”, is still under development.

With its new, hand-picked smartphone engineers, Facebook is now reportedly going “deeper into the process, by expanding the group working on Buffy, and exploring other smartphone projects too, creating a team of seasoned hardware engineers who have built the devices before”.

The migration of web users to smartphones and tablets was named in Facebook’sn regulatory filings for its recent flotation as one of the main threats facing it as a business. It currently makes no meaningful revenue from mobile app users, who are growing in number more rapidly than traditional website users.

Meanwhile the smartphone market remains dominated by Apple, which has integrated Twitter into iOS, and devices running Android, a mobile operating system created by Google, Facebook’s main advertising rival on the web.

“Mark [Zuckerberg] is worried that if he doesn’t create a mobile phone in the near future that Facebook will simply become an app on other mobile platforms,” a Facebook employee told the New York Times.

The firm is reportedly aiming to keep its latest smartphone effort as secret as possible, by headhunting individuals rather than advertising vacancies on the team. Facebook has seemingly learned from its 2010 experience and is focused on recruiting hardware specialists.

A Facebook spokesman said: “We’re working across the entire mobile industry; with operators, hardware manufacturers, OS providers, and application developers.”


View the original article here

Apple extends legal action against Samsung and HTC

Meanwhile, in Australia, Apple sought to prevent Samsung from releasing its Galaxy Tab 10.1. The new version of Samsung’s tablet computer has a 10” screen and runs Google’s Android operating system. Apple claims that it is a “blatant copy” of the iPad.

The Sydney Morning Herald reported that Samsung had agreed to halt sales and advertising for the Galaxy Tab 10.1, which is scheduled to launch in Australia next week.

In a statement, Samsung said: “Apple Inc. filed a complaint with the Federal Court of Australia involving a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 variant that Samsung Electronics had no plans of selling in Australia. No injunction was issued by the court and the parties in the case reached a mutual agreement which stipulates that the variant in question will not be sold in Australia.”

Samsung said the Galaxy Tab 10.1 would be released in Australia “in the new future” but did not give a date.

Apple was not available for comment at the time of writing.

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 is due for release in Britain on Thursday.

The actions against Samsung and HTC follow a complaint by Apple against Amazon in Germany that forced the Amazon Appstore to suspend new app submissions until the resolution of a dispute with Apple over who owns the name ‘App Store’.


View the original article here

Apple cleared of violating HTC patents

The move reverses an earlier decision by an American judge and relates to a part of HTC called S3, which specialises in audio compression technology.

HTC purchased S3 in July; its shares fell 4.9 per cent on the news after the ITC, which has the power to block the import of products, said it considered that its investigation was now closed.

S3 was among a number of companies still in dispute with Apple, and Google itself has sold a number of patents to HTC so that the mobile-manufacturer can sue Apple over a range of ongoing issues. Samsung, which supplies chips for a range of Apple products, is also the subject of a number of Apple disputes.

The nine patents bought by HTC, which Google bought from Motorola, Palm and other companies less than a year ago, concern Google’s Android operating system. In a sign both that Google is unwilling to sue Apple directly and also that the ‘patent wars’ between major manufacturers are further hotting up, HTC has also filed other claims against Apple, while itself being sued by the iPhone maker on a number of fronts.

Florian Mueller, of the blog Foss Patents, wrote at the time that "Google knows that HTC is under tremendous legal pressure from Apple and clearly on the losing track. HTC is the first Android device maker sued by Apple, so that dispute is at the most advanced stage, and since HTC's own patent portfolio is weak, it has so far lacked the leverage to force Apple into a cross-license agreement. The possibility of HTC being defeated must have scared Google.”

Steve Jobs was previously quoted as saying Apple thinks “competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours”.


View the original article here

Android extends lead over Apple iPhone

Google's free mobile operating system was installed on 64.1 per cent of smarphones sold worldwide in the second quarter, compared to 43.4 per cent a year ago to, according to Gartner, the industry analysts.

It benefitted from the declines of Symbian, Nokia’s largely abandoned smartphone operating system, and of RIM. BlackBerry’s market share was more than halved from 11.7 per cent to 5.2 per cent on the year.

Apple’s smartphone operating system market share in the second quarter was meanwhile 18.8 per cent, up slightly from 18.2 per cent a year ago. Gartner said iOS users appeared to be holding off purchasing a new device before the expected introduction of the iPhone 5 in September.

Microsoft’s slow response to the smartphone boom continued, with Windows Mobile growing from 1.6 per cent to 2.7 per cent.

On the manufacturing side, Apple and Samsung maintained their rivalry ahead of other players such as HTC and Huawei.

“Samsung and Apple continued to dominate the smartphone market, together taking about half the market share, and widening the gap to other manufacturers,” said analyst Anshul Gupta.

“No other smartphone vendors had share close to 10 per cent.”

The leading pair are currently locked in a high-stakes court battle in the United States, trading accusations of patent infringement.

Samsung did particularly well out of the Galaxy SIII, which exceeded expectations. It extended its lead as the world’s biggest maker of smartphones and feature phones, with overall sales up almost 30 per cent on a year ago and a market share of 21.6 per cent.

By comparison Apple, which does not compete in the less-profitable feature phone market, had a 6.9 per cent share of the overall mobile phone market, up from 4.6 per cent.

Despite such success and the continuing boom in the smartphone sector, where 42.7 per cent more devices were sold compared to a year ago, the total mobile phone market declined by 2.3 per cent to 419 million units. Gartner attributed the slip to the economic crisis, as well as product launch cycles.

“Thee challenging economic environment and users postponing upgrades to take advantage of high-profile device launches and promotions available later in the year slowed demand across markets,” said Mr Gupta.


View the original article here

Thursday, September 20, 2012

Review: Apple EarPods

Comfortable fitBigger clickerImproved performanceNo noise isolationMuddy performanceAwful price

In its unending search for perfection, Apple has decided to completely redesign its iconic white earbuds. The new Apple EarPods with Remote and Mic are now the default earphones that ship with the new iPhone 5 and iPod touch, but you can also buy them separately.

They're still white, and aesthetically they look slightly squashed, but that's because they've been redesigned to ensure the maximum amount of sound is pumped directly into your ear canal.

Apple EarPods with Remote and Mic review

The new EarPod design makes sense – ear holes are not perfectly round, yet most earbuds are. The new design makes clever use of acoustic vents that enable air to flow in and out, resulting in improved low frequency sound.

Design-wise, they sit somewhere between traditional earbuds and in-ear solutions. While they don't form a vacuum seal like in-ear noise isolating earbuds, they do go deeper than traditional buds.

And because they don't seal themselves in, they feel a bit like they're going to fall out every now and again, but they never seem to.

Apple EarPods with Remote and Mic review

The EarPods - announced alongside the new iPhone 5, iPod touch, iPod nano, iOS 6 and iTunes - are also not noise cancelling or even noise-isolating, so you can still hear the world around you.

Apple EarPods with Remote and Mic review

There is no doubt that the EarPods are an improvement over Apple's original bundled earphones.

They performed as expected in voice calls, and the bigger clicker is easier for your fingers to find, which is a definite bonus.

The clicker functions exactly as with previous Apple earphones – there's a built-in mic and volume buttons. And they're compatible with all models of iPhone, iPad and iPod - including iPod touch, iPod, iPod nano, iPod shuffle - though not all models support volume up/down clicker functions.

Apple EarPods with Remote and Mic review

Audio performance is not terrible, but there's an obvious lack of sonic clarity in every facet of their output. Bass, treble and midrange all bleed into each other, creating a bit of a muddy mess just like Apple earbuds of old.

The tinkle at the high-end is certainly better than before, and there's improved bass as well. So they're more than good enough if sound quality is not something you are bothered about. If you're going to be buying an iPhone 5 or one of the new iPods, you'll be getting some marginally better earphones than you might have expected, so that's a good thing.

But for anyone thinking of buying these things separately for £25/$30 – forget it. That price is utterly ludicrous.

For that money you could bag yourself a decent pair of Sennheisers – low end ones admittedly – but they would still be head and shoulders better than the Apple EarPods. In fact, we challenge you to find a pair of £25 earphones on Amazon that sound worse than this - you won't be able to.

There is no value to be found here. Buy something else.