atrash

I will most likely sell my S8 for an iPhone X. I don't trust Google/Android anymore, especially not with my fingerprint and face scanner (I am sure they sell those cheap to companies/States).
 
Been using Android for about 6 years now but no more, Google is not to be trusted with anything.

He had to shove the battery up and into the left corner (which considering what happened with the Note 7, doesn't sound like a particularly good idea for the masses), and he had to put the haptic engine at a pretty steep angle to make room for the jack. 
 
Of course Apple could have made the device bigger....but they could also make the phone the size of a brick and fit a battery that lasts literally a month. 

What does "locked down" even mean when you only use a phone for it's intended purpose (a couple of games, surfing the internet and making calls)?  I don't really care what phone you would rather. The WP I have kicks moto arse in that price bracket.  As I said before, it's as stable as iPhone and faster than any equivalent priced android. 
 
Damn it, the only reason I commented in this thread was because I liked the idea of having some of the features of this new phone but with windows OS.  I am not asking for advice nor am I interested in what others think is a better phone for my personal circumstances.
 
 

Are you drunk?
That has nothing to do with "terrible warranty" and everything I see on that Picture makes sense.
The warranty takes care of problems that are caused by the product, not problems that are intentionally or unintentionally caused by the consumer.
 
 
 

I'm sorry, but between this, the Hurricane Harvey donation thread and comments inside of them, it's pretty clear that this is scrounging to find excuses to attack Apple:
 
- Apple made it easy to donate to Harvey relief, but didn't publicly announce a donation?  Horrible monster.
- Apple won't repair your accidental damage for free, even though virtually no one else does?  Atrocious.
- Apple doesn't make near-indestructible products that always survive drops intact?  Devil incarnate.
 
See a recurring theme?  It's holding Apple to an increasingly unreasonable standard, and then blasting it when it invariably fails to meet that standard.  It's moving the goal posts to make sure Apple can't win.
 
The irony is that the OP probably owns many products from companies whose policies are similar or worse, but doesn't talk about them because, of course, they're Not Apple (and that's all that matters).  If he were consistent... well, we wouldn't hear from him, because he would boycott all electronic devices.

When Microsoft fucks things up so badly that you cant possibly defend them, then your last resort is to start pulling things out of your ass to make everyone else look worse thereby making microsoft look better.

I'd be willing to bet that most of the donations and help that companies offer throughout the year are for their own benefit in one way or another. Either for marketing purposes or monetary purposes in the form of tax write offs/deductions. 
 
It's really ridiculous to be giving Apple flack for offering people a way to donate. 

I really don't understand what there is to hate about this. What's wrong with Apple using their platform to try to get people to donate to an organization helping flood victims?
 
This really just seems like shitting on Apple because it's Apple instead of any real reason. Pretty fucking pathetic. 
 
 
 
 

I hate the fact that this is a stupid fanboy shit article is on and seemingly allowed the forums. These are the ones moderators are supposed to keep in check, yet they don't. You guys should flag the OP for spreading misinformation and this would certainly be different if it ever was google or Microsoft, etc
 
Apple has been doing this for a long fucking time. Whenever there has been a major natural disaster, Apple has always added an option to donate money for the unfortunate. WHY DO THEY DO THIS? Because people aren't jobless enough to visit redcross website every now and then and go through a lot of hoop holes to donate money. Sure in US probably everyone knows about this, but a dude in Russia, China, middle east. All Apple is doing is adding another channel for donation and making a billion people around the world aware of the fact. 
 
Also, I'm not sure what marketing benefit they get from this. The fact that they offered to accept and pay donations for a cause doesn't change my purchasing decisions. It's just pure fanboy excuse
 
Apple has been reportedly been donating to charity with the undisclosed amount with product red products and more. And here's an article about Tim Cook donating his entire fortune to charity. Other companies do publicly reveal the amount they donated and that's what is called marketing, in a sheer attempt to make headlines. Not that I'm complaining, nor anyone should, but the stupid shit die hard hater cook up here is just cancer
 
UPDATE:
 
Guess what, Apple collected 1 million dollars from their donation channel and Apple is willing to donate twice (2 million dollars) from their side.
https://9to5mac.com/2017/08/30/tim-cook-harvey-email/
 

The irony of all this is that many of the people attacking Apple for simplifying donations will gleefully endorse companies that aren't even doing that much.
 
It's as if they're less interested in the actual donations to charity and more in finding an excuse to attack Apple. 

You still need actual evidence that Apple will get a tax break.  Otherwise, you're just speculating.
 
And I'd still like to know why people are demonizing Apple for making donations easy, but seem to have no qualms with many of their favorite Android/Windows vendors doing sweet FA in response to the hurricane.

I don't even try anymore. Most people just loves to tear apart "rich people" because they don't have that kind of money, they don't really care about the people that needs those resources, they say things like "they do it to avoid taxes" or "they could donate their own money!". Yes they avoid taxes, you think the people that need that food cares about that? Yes, they could donate their own money, and they do it, often, this entire fucking forum full selfish jealous people would need at least 1500 years to help the same amount Tim Cook has helped.
 
You all should be ashamed of your attitude, hell, I'm ashamed of YOUR attitude, probably this is my last message on this forum.
 
BTW, if you could read at least a little you'd see Apple is directing 100% of the donations, so they're actually taking the hit of the costs of transactions. If Apple would only care about selling products they wouldn't put a pop up or a button that could potentially send your money away from them. But you all just want to trash about rich people I know.

So... Are the 30 000 employees of the American Red Cross supposed to work for free?  Just house, clothe and feed themselves with... I guess magic?
 
https://www.indeed.com/cmp/American-Red-Cross/salaries
 
Also, looking at these number breakdowns, people aren't making six figure salaries at the ARC.
 
The ARC is involved in a tremendous amount of logistics.  It needs managers, it needs staff, it needs accountants, it needs technicians and mechanics.  These are all full time responsibilities that require skilled individuals not 'Kevin from the local church group, who can donate a few hours on Saturdays'.
 
Do you think that supplies from the ARC just teleport into American disaster zones?  No, people have to arrange trucking and air transport.  Depots have to be arranged.  Aircraft have to be scheduled.  Landing permission.  How about the ARC's fleet of road vehicles?  They don't just spawn in like an RTS video game.  They have to be maintained, serviced, stocked, and staffed.  Or do you think there's no costs at all in managing a fleet of disaster ready ambulances?  Hell, they have to pay rent or property taxes on the facilities they store them at.
 

 
 

White hats don't publish exploits in public before contacting the company and giving it a chance to fix the problem (it doesn't appear that he talked to Apple first).
 
I don't think Apple will necessarily take him to court, but it probably won't be very happy with his irresponsible approach to disclosing security flaws.

As others have covered, I personally feel that releasing the information immediately is ethically wrong. You're potentially exposing millions of people to a potential vulnerability and Apple may not be able to create a fix before some black hat exploits it.
 
Just because some developers ignore the warning doesn't mean a damn thing.
 
The existing standard practice already includes a procedure for when they ignore you: After a set deadline, you release the info publicly. That way, Apple has already seen the info, and (in theory) could have a patch ready or at least in progress before the info is released.
 
I don't care that some hacker is jaded because Apple took 3 years to fix an iTunes flaw or Microsoft sometimes doesn't release patches before a deadline passes. That does not give them moral authority to release the info before even giving them the chance to patch it first.
 
Anyone who does that is not a White Hat hacker. And if they claim to be, they're lying - either to you, or to themselves.

That's why, if you look at @LAwLz post, generally you work WITH the developer to find out if they need more time, etc.
 
The whole point is that these systems need to be flexible. A bug in Notepad might take a few days to patch. A bug in the kernel might take months to properly patch without fucking up other things in the process.
 
Yes, the deadline is arbitrary - but hopefully you as the white hat hacker have developer experience enough to set a reasonable deadline, and the dev can even suggest a deadline or ask for an extension.
 
Or just go through the Apple Bounty program - though I imagine that's less desirable because I bet there is a clause that states you cannot make the info public if you take the money.

simply telling one company that they must allow everything on their service (even if they disagree with it or it costs them sales) is dictatorship and that is preventing them from their own rights to express (or not to express) certain viewpoints. 
 
No ones, freedom of speech is taken away when google decide to de-list or deny domain services.  No ones freedom of speech is taken away if spotify decide not to play their song.  
 
Now I am a fairly ugly man, I could take photos of myself and send them to every modeling magazine on the planet,  is it censorship if they refuse to publish them?  is it denying my right to free speech if they send them back saying "no thanks".    Of course it's not, this is no different.  

Is zMeul still here? I'd love to read his replies more. He seems to know his stuff

Is zMeul still here? I'd love to read his replies more. He seems to know his stuff

Is zMeul still here? I'd love to read his replies more. He seems to know his stuff

Is zMeul still here? I'd love to read his replies more. He seems to know his stuff

Is zMeul still here? I'd love to read his replies more. He seems to know his stuff

Well fortunately for Apple the USA isn't the entire world.
 
Posting this on my 100mbps unlimited 4G connection at £24 a month.

I'd say anything to push the technology/industry forward, I'm all for it.. Haters gonna hate I guess since their favourite phone company don't have it and they are just jealous ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'd say anything to push the technology/industry forward, I'm all for it.. Haters gonna hate I guess since their favourite phone company don't have it and they are just jealous ¯\_(ツ)_/¯