What is the REASON that Mozilla (Firefox/Thunderbird) isn't on iPad?

[Pat Wilson]

Just curious why the free Thunderbird and Firefox apps
aren't on the iPad?

Is it due to a political squabble
Or is it because of a technical impediment?

[nospam]

In article <ljro5b$k1k$1...@dont-email.me>, Pat Wilson

apps that can execute downloadable code are not allowed for security
purposes, which means writing another html renderer isn't going to
happen any time soon. that means firefox would need to use the built-in
webkit and they don't want to do that.

[Alan Browne]

It's because you haven't taken the open source of Thunderbird and
Firefox and made a Thunderbird and Firefox apps for iPad.


--
"Big data can reduce anything to a single number,
but you shouldn’t be fooled by the appearance of exactitude."
-Gary Marcus and Ernest Davis, NYT, 2014.04.07

[Poutnik]

Alan Browne posted Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:03:33 -0400

>
> On 2014.04.30, 16:58 , Pat Wilson wrote:
> > Just curious why the free Thunderbird and Firefox apps aren't on
> > the iPad?
> >
> > Is it due to a political squabble Or is it because of a technical
> > impediment?
>
> It's because you haven't taken the open source of Thunderbird and
> Firefox and made a Thunderbird and Firefox apps for iPad.

This is just a half of a way.
The other half is Apple software policy, as explained in other post.

--
Poutnik

[Tommy]

"Pat Wilson" <patw...@example.com> wrote in message
news:ljro5b$k1k$1...@dont-email.me...

Why would you want them when you could have Opera = Free :-)

http://www.opera.com/tablet/ipad

http://www.opera.com/tablet

Cheers
Tommy

[nospam]

In article <bsdcqo...@mid.individual.net>, Tommy

<tommyle...@yohoo.com> wrote:

> > Just curious why the free Thunderbird and Firefox apps
> > aren't on the iPad?
> >
> > Is it due to a political squabble
> > Or is it because of a technical impediment?
>
> Why would you want them when you could have Opera = Free :-)

because opera sucks.

[Tommy]

"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:300420141848182161%nos...@nospam.invalid...

Is that your opinion ?

I use Opera on my iPad for a specific purpose - actually for 2 different
purposes.

I tried firefox and I hated it - a pile of crap

http://www.firefoxipad.com/

But eveeryone to their own ehh

Cheers
Tommy

[Pat Wilson]

Alan Browne wrote, on Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:03:33 -0400:

> It's because you haven't taken the open source of Thunderbird and
> Firefox and made a Thunderbird and Firefox apps for iPad.

I don't know how.

[Pat Wilson]

Tommy wrote, on Wed, 30 Apr 2014 23:46:45 +0100:

> Why would you want them when you could have Opera = Free

I agree there are plenty of alternative web browsers,
but, reading mail on the web versus using a real mail
program is like watching sports versus playing the game.

Is there a good alternative to Thunderbird for a
dedicated non-web mail application on the iPad?

[Hot-Text]

"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:300420141848182161%nos...@nospam.invalid...

Why because Opera
Allowed good security
On a iPad!

You can not the say the some abount
IE or FF

[Your Name]

In article <ljs226$a1h$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Hot-Text

Internet Explorer, like all Microsoft's rubbish, is buggy and hopeless.
Thank goodness that isn't available on ANY Apple equipment these days.

[Alan Browne]

While that may apply to Firefox to a degree, it has nothing to do with
Thunderbird.

[Alan Browne]

I've used it and you'd now have to pay me to use it more. Dead slow
most of the time.

[nospam]

In article <bsddlk...@mid.individual.net>, Tommy

<tommyle...@yohoo.com> wrote:

> >> > Just curious why the free Thunderbird and Firefox apps
> >> > aren't on the iPad?
> >> >
> >> > Is it due to a political squabble
> >> > Or is it because of a technical impediment?
> >>
> >> Why would you want them when you could have Opera = Free :-)
> >
> > because opera sucks.
>
> Is that your opinion ?

yes

> I use Opera on my iPad for a specific purpose - actually for 2 different
> purposes.

ok

> I tried firefox and I hated it - a pile of crap
>
> http://www.firefoxipad.com/

no you didn't.

there's no link to the app store for the app and the next story is
about the iphone 6 and ipad air 2 having been unveiled.

there's no firefox for ipad.

> But eveeryone to their own ehh

yes.

[Poutnik]

Tommy posted Thu, 1 May 2014 00:01:05 +0100

> "nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> >>

> >> Why would you want them when you could have Opera = Free :-)
> >
> > because opera sucks.
>
> Is that your opinion ?
>
> I use Opera on my iPad for a specific purpose - actually for 2
> different purposes.
>
> I tried firefox and I hated it - a pile of crap
>

I use Firefox - more exactly PaleMoon - on Windows
but Opera on Android.
I did try FF too, but I did not like it.

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Pat Wilson posted Wed, 30 Apr 2014 23:31:22 +0000 (UTC)

Does not have iOS native client ?
Are not there other 3rd pary clients developed for iOS ?

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 12:41:46 +1200

> Internet Explorer, like all Microsoft's rubbish, is buggy and
> hopeless.

It is hard to say about MS Office, compared to free alternatives.
Many Linux guys say MSO is the only good thing about Windows.

> Thank goodness that isn't available on ANY Apple equipment
> these days.

Others may say the same about Firefox.

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Alan Browne posted Wed, 30 Apr 2014 21:51:53 -0400

> On 2014.04.30, 18:07 , Poutnik wrote:
> >
> > This is just a half of a way.
> > The other half is Apple software policy, as explained in other post.
>
> While that may apply to Firefox to a degree, it has nothing to do with
> Thunderbird.

It is not so clear - it shares much of the code.

--
Poutnik

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcbf9a...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 12:41:46 +1200
> >
> > Internet Explorer, like all Microsoft's rubbish, is buggy and
> > hopeless.
>
> It is hard to say about MS Office, compared to free alternatives.
> Many Linux guys say MSO is the only good thing about Windows.

Only because they haven't used Apple's office applications.
Unfortunately thanks to fools in "big business", using Microsoft Office
is a necessity if you need 100% (or nearly) compatibility.

You can't even edit documents in the hopeless iOS version of Microsoft
Office without paying for the silly Office365 nonsense.

The only good thing about Windoze is that you can erase the drive and
use it for something useful.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcbf8a...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Pat Wilson posted Wed, 30 Apr 2014 23:31:22 +0000 (UTC)
>
> >
> > Tommy wrote, on Wed, 30 Apr 2014 23:46:45 +0100:
> >
> > > Why would you want them when you could have Opera = Free
> >
> > I agree there are plenty of alternative web browsers,
> > but, reading mail on the web versus using a real mail
> > program is like watching sports versus playing the game.
> >
> > Is there a good alternative to Thunderbird for a
> > dedicated non-web mail application on the iPad?
>
> Does not have iOS native client ?

iOS has Safari, as do MacOS X computers. You can even get it for
Windoze if you're silly enough to use that mess of a so-called
operating system.

> Are not there other 3rd pary clients developed for iOS ?

There are some, but iOS apps (e.g. clicking a link in an email) tend to
default to using Safari, so third-party ones are of limted use.

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 18:28:59 +1200

>
> The only good thing about Windoze is that you can erase the drive and
> use it for something useful.

There are more, if one wants to find them.
Those who do not, see nothing.

Seniors will not accept Linux but perhaps some Windows-like Ubuntu
flavours, as seems difficult to them,
nor Apple, as it is rare and expensive in Europe.

At some point of view, OS is as good as applications for it are.
Consequence of huge Windows spreading - regadless on OS quality
- is presence of many great apps hard to find alternative elsewhere.

Linux users like to use Wine to run some Windows applications
and wish they are ported.

One of them is e.g. Avisynth,
a powerful script based video frameserver with huge collection
of C++ plugins and complex processing scripts.
I was just recently ported to Linux.

The only good thing about iOS is I have alternative to their overpriced
devices :-) Now seriously, I think it is good, but expensive.
You pay a half of money just for trademark.
Rather snobbish.

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 18:31:49 +1200

>
> In article <MPG.2dcbf8a...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> > > Is there a good alternative to Thunderbird for a
> > > dedicated non-web mail application on the iPad?
> >
> > Does not have iOS native client ?
>
> iOS has Safari, as do MacOS X computers. You can even get it for
> Windoze if you're silly enough to use that mess of a so-called
> operating system.

I know there is Safari. I have thought is is just browser,
not some integrated suite like some Mozilla derived ones.

>
> > Are not there other 3rd pary clients developed for iOS ?
>
> There are some, but iOS apps (e.g. clicking a link in an email) tend to
> default to using Safari, so third-party ones are of limted use.

Is Safari bad ?
It is IMHO not good idea for email client to substitute browser.
Its web safety contra measures may be weaker then of dedicated browser.

--
Poutnik

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcc11c...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 18:28:59 +1200
> >
> > The only good thing about Windoze is that you can erase the drive and
> > use it for something useful.
>
> There are more, if one wants to find them.
> Those who do not, see nothing.
>
> Seniors will not accept Linux but perhaps some Windows-like Ubuntu
> flavours, as seems difficult to them,
> nor Apple, as it is rare and expensive in Europe.
>
> At some point of view, OS is as good as applications for it are.
> Consequence of huge Windows spreading - regadless on OS quality
> - is presence of many great apps hard to find alternative elsewhere.

It had little to do with the applications, but simply the fact that
"big business" had stupidly already invested bazillions of dollars in
DOS computers, which they blindly did due to the fact that originally
they were sold by IBM. The quality was irrelevant, as was the price to
some degree (although the Apple ][ was more expensive).

> Linux users like to use Wine to run some Windows applications
> and wish they are ported.

WINE is complete rubbish that doesn't work properly even with the
supposedly "supported" Windows applications. If you have to use Windows
applications, then you need a real version of Windows, even if it's
running under something like Parallels virtulisation.

> One of them is e.g. Avisynth,
> a powerful script based video frameserver with huge collection
> of C++ plugins and complex processing scripts.
> I was just recently ported to Linux.
>
> The only good thing about iOS is I have alternative to their overpriced
> devices :-) Now seriously, I think it is good, but expensive.
> You pay a half of money just for trademark.
> Rather snobbish.

Not really (it's the same myth with Mac computers). The cheapo brands
are usually cheap for a reason - they're crap. The more equivalent
brands like for example Samsung, tend to be around the same price.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcc12f...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 18:31:49 +1200
> > In article <MPG.2dcbf8a...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Is there a good alternative to Thunderbird for a
> > > > dedicated non-web mail application on the iPad?
> > >
> > > Does not have iOS native client ?
> >
> > iOS has Safari, as do MacOS X computers. You can even get it for
> > Windoze if you're silly enough to use that mess of a so-called
> > operating system.
>
> I know there is Safari. I have thought is is just browser,
> not some integrated suite like some Mozilla derived ones.

Sorry, Safari is just a browser - I misread the original message. Email
is handled by the separate Mail app, again on both iOS and MacOS X
devices.

I do vaguely recall reading about at least one combine email and web
browser, but I don't remember the name of it.

> > > Are not there other 3rd pary clients developed for iOS ?
> >
> > There are some, but iOS apps (e.g. clicking a link in an email) tend to
> > default to using Safari, so third-party ones are of limted use.
>
> Is Safari bad ?

Nope. It's about 50bazillion times better than silly Internet Explorer.

Safari is fine for most people. "Power" users tend to prefer something
else on their computer, often Firefox.

> It is IMHO not good idea for email client to substitute browser.
> Its web safety contra measures may be weaker then of dedicated browser.

Clicking on the link in an email opens the web browser, just like it
does on most omcputers where the two are separate applications.

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 19:38:04 +1200

> In article <MPG.2dcc11c...@news.eternal-september.org>,

> > At some point of view, OS is as good as applications for it are.
> > Consequence of huge Windows spreading - regadless on OS quality
> > - is presence of many great apps hard to find alternative elsewhere.
>

> It had little to do with the applications..... <snip>

Well, you do not use OS but applications. Superior OS without good
applications is useless, if desktop/hand held usage is concerned.

>
> > Linux users like to use Wine to run some Windows applications
> > and wish they are ported.
>
> WINE is complete rubbish that doesn't work properly even with the
> supposedly "supported" Windows applications. If you have to use Windows
> applications, then you need a real version of Windows, even if it's
> running under something like Parallels virtulisation.

It may be tricky and problematic,
but if not worked, if would not be used.

> > The only good thing about iOS is I have alternative to their
> > overpriced devices :-) Now seriously, I think it is good, but
> > expensive. You pay a half of money just for trademark. Rather
> > snobbish.
>
> Not really (it's the same myth with Mac computers).

> They are The cheapo brands are usually cheap for a reason - they're

> crap. The more equivalent brands like for example Samsung, tend to be
> around the same price.

Really.
BTW the opposite to expensive is not cheap, but not expensive.


--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 19:44:55 +1200

> >
> > Is Safari bad ?
>
> Nope. It's about 50bazillion times better than silly Internet
> Explorer.

It looks like typical noncritical approach of Apple fans....
Than it has to be 5 reptilions times better than Chrome of Firefox. :-)

Note that I do think Macs have ( or at least had ) beter HW design
than that time IBM PCs and its OSes are better than MS ones.

But crap calling is unreasonable.

HW and OS that you buy and use
is better than superior HW and OS that you do not buy nor use
as it is too expensive for you
or you do not know any your frind using it.

I personally know just 2-3 people using Apple desktop or notebook.
Apple is much more spreaded in America than Europe,
perhaps little more is Western Europe than Central one.

BTW I do not use IE
but PaleMoon on Win and FF ESR on Win and RH Linux.

If I have to use IE e.g. if a business related page need that,
I use flavours of IEtab FF addon with related plugin.

--
Poutnik

[Caver1]

On 05/01/2014 03:38 AM, Your Name wrote:
> In article <MPG.2dcc11c...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 18:28:59 +1200

>
>

>> Linux users like to use Wine to run some Windows applications
>> and wish they are ported.
>
> WINE is complete rubbish that doesn't work properly even with the
> supposedly "supported" Windows applications. If you have to use Windows
> applications, then you need a real version of Windows, even if it's
> running under something like Parallels virtulisation.
>

That's an opinion. Works just fine for the couple of programs that I
have that will never be ported for Linux.

[Pat Wilson]

Poutnik wrote, on Thu, 01 May 2014 07:27:22 +0200:

> Many Linux guys say MSO is the only good thing about Windows.

True.

[Pat Wilson]

Your Name wrote, on Thu, 01 May 2014 18:28:59 +1200:

> Only because they haven't used Apple's office applications.
> Unfortunately thanks to fools in "big business", using Microsoft Office
> is a necessity if you need 100% (or nearly) compatibility.

Most of us use whatever we know, and/or, whatever our
coworkers use, for sheer compatibility.

[nospam]

In article <010520141831499871%Your...@YourISP.com>, Your Name

<Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:

> > > Is there a good alternative to Thunderbird for a
> > > dedicated non-web mail application on the iPad?
> >
> > Does not have iOS native client ?
>
> iOS has Safari, as do MacOS X computers. You can even get it for
> Windoze if you're silly enough to use that mess of a so-called
> operating system.

not anymore you can't.

> > Are not there other 3rd pary clients developed for iOS ?
>
> There are some, but iOS apps (e.g. clicking a link in an email) tend to
> default to using Safari, so third-party ones are of limted use.

not tend to. it does.

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dcc11c...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> The only good thing about iOS is I have alternative to their overpriced
> devices :-) Now seriously, I think it is good, but expensive.
> You pay a half of money just for trademark.
> Rather snobbish.

apple products are not overpriced. they're competitive with similar
products and apple can't make enough to meet demand, the exact opposite
of something that's overpriced.

[Poutnik]

nospam posted Thu, 01 May 2014 11:14:03 -0400

This does not exclude high demand. People with money to spend think
they "must have it". If fact, Apple can keep price high BECAUSE of high
demand - it is rule of the market - they pay for their wish to have it.

It is "IN" to have Apple.

Samsung is stealing market from Apple, triggering law suites about
patents, as they produce comparable products at lower prices.
OTOH, to be fair, if they sold comparable product at comparable price,
most people would buy Apple and not Samsung.

--
Poutnik

[Calum]

On 30/04/2014 21:58, Pat Wilson wrote:
> Just curious why the free Thunderbird and Firefox apps
> aren't on the iPad?
>
> Is it due to a political squabble
> Or is it because of a technical impediment?

http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/mozilla-says-no-plans-to-return-to-ios/

--
Xbox: GallusNumpty Steam: scottishwildcat

[Jolly Roger]

You ask questions like this, yet claim that Apple's products are
overpriced... Just how ignorant are you?

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[bob mullen]

On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:16:20 -0400, nospam wrote:

> apps that can execute downloadable code are not allowed

What does that mean, in English?

[Ann Marie Brest]

On Thu, 01 May 2014 18:31:49 +1200, Your Name wrote:

> iOS has Safari, as do MacOS X computers.

Safari is a web browser, not an MUA (mail user agent).

It's like the difference between a bus and a race car.

On Windoze, I used Eudora, Zmail, and Thunderbird,
but on iOS, I don't think a decent mail application
even exists.

I suspect most Apple users don't even realize what they
are missing.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2014-05-01, Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>

> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 19:44:55 +1200
>
>> >
>> > Is Safari bad ?
>>
>> Nope. It's about 50bazillion times better than silly Internet
>> Explorer.
>
> It looks like typical noncritical approach of Apple fans....

Someone who knows no better might make that incorrect assumption.

> Than it has to be 5 reptilions times better than Chrome of Firefox. :-)

Please. IE is one of the worst browsers on the market, and has been for
ages. Recent versions are marginally better. And this is not debated by
anyone who actually knows his shit. Ask any web developer worth his salt
about IE. ; )

> Note that I do think Macs have ( or at least had ) beter HW design
> than that time IBM PCs and its OSes are better than MS ones.

Apple's hardware is among the best hardware in the PC industry. In fact,
it's not uncommon to see PC magazines claim Macs run Windows better than
other PCs. And Mac OS X is arguably better than other mainstream
operating systems on the market.

> But crap calling is unreasonable.

One wonders what rock have you been under that you aren't aware just how
much IE sucks?

> HW and OS that you buy and use
> is better than superior HW and OS that you do not buy nor use
> as it is too expensive for you
> or you do not know any your frind using it.

I see. So if I have two boxes, and I give you one with human shit in it
for free, and I ask for $50,000 the one with a diamond in it, your box
is "superior" because it's something you could afford. Got it. Have fun
with your box of shit then.

> I personally know just 2-3 people using Apple desktop or notebook.

And that means exactly: nothing

> Apple is much more spreaded in America than Europe,
> perhaps little more is Western Europe than Central one.

So? What's your point?

> BTW I do not use IE

You don't use IE, but somehow you are sure it doesn't suck? Something
smells fishy here...

> but PaleMoon on Win and FF ESR on Win and RH Linux.

> If I have to use IE e.g. if a business related page need that,
> I use flavours of IEtab FF addon with related plugin.

Best of luck with that...

[Ann Marie Brest]

On Thu, 1 May 2014 09:15:27 +0200, Poutnik wrote:

> Is Safari bad ?

It's not that Safari is bad.

It's that reading email on the web is like knitting
with ski gloves on your hands, as compared to using
a purposed mail user agent such as Zmail, Eudora,
Thunderbird, etc.

I don't know of any MUAs for iOS, but they should
exist for the power users.

[Ann Marie Brest]

On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:44:55 +1200, Your Name wrote:

> Sorry, Safari is just a browser - I misread the original message. Email
> is handled by the separate Mail app, again on both iOS and MacOS X
> devices.

+1

The fact that you can ski down a hill with barrel
staves strapped to your boots doesn't mean it's
more efficient than skiing with real skis.

A web browser is a lousy way to manage email,
as compared to a purposed mail user agent.

One would think that a free MUA must exist for
iOS, since not everyone on Apple products is
computer illiterate.

[Ann Marie Brest]

On Thu, 01 May 2014 16:41:53 +0100, Calum wrote:

> http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/mozilla-says-no-plans-to-return-to-ios/

Mozilla's Firefox browser will have no place on Apple devices so long as
Apple continues its unfriendly attitude toward third-party browsers, Jay
Sullivan, vice president of product at Mozilla, said today.

The nonprofit Mozilla, which pulled Mozilla Firefox Home from Apple's App
Store in September 2012, is not currently building a version of its Firefox
browser for iOS, nor does the company plan to, said Sullivan, speaking on a
mobile browser wars panel at South by Southwest Interactive moderated by
CNET Senior Reporter Seth Rosenblatt.

The sticking point for Mozilla is not being able to carry over its
sophisticated rendering and javascript engines to iOS. Essentially, the
organization doesn't feel like it can build the browser it wants to for
Apple's platform, Sullivan told CNET.

The decision is a risky one. Sure, Mozilla now has Firefox OS and can
attack the mobile browser market with low-end smartphones equipped with its
browser, but as it stands, Mozilla holds less than 1 percent of the market,
according to NetMarketShare. Apple, meanwhile, commands more than 55
percent of the mobile browser market with Safari.

Of course, Apple's environment isn't all that welcoming a place for
third-party browsers. The company prevents its users from making any other
application the default browser, which makes moving beyond Safari for all
of one's browsing needs nearly impossible.

Still, other mobile browser makers seem to embrace their underdog status
and maintain the lofty, altruistic position that they can push the industry
forward.

"Competition is critical to our survival," Dolphin Browser Chief Software
Architect David Dehgahn said during the panel.

Sullivan and Opera Software's Mike Taylor, also on the panel, shared the
same viewpoint. They all argued that giving consumers browser choice was
essential to making browsers, and the Web in general, great.

And, Sullivan argued, Apple's closed environment means users suffer.

It's a viewpoint that the general public might not share. Rosenblatt
queried the audience to find out how many people were iOS users, and a
majority of hands went up. By contrast, when he asked how many of them were
suffering, just a few hands surfaced.

[Jolly Roger]

Nothing's missing. Apple Mail is a decent mail application. And there
are *plenty* of third-party mail applications on the App Store if you
want something different. Also, a whole lot of Apple users are very
aware of what is available on other platforms because they actually use
those other platforms regularly.

[Poutnik]

Jolly Roger posted 1 May 2014 16:03:26 GMT

> On 2014-05-01, Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> >> Is there a good alternative to Thunderbird for a
> >> dedicated non-web mail application on the iPad?
> >
> > Does not have iOS native client ?
> > Are not there other 3rd pary clients developed for iOS ?
>
> You ask questions like this, yet claim that Apple's products are
> overpriced... Just how ignorant are you?

The questions are rhetorical ones.

--
Poutnik

[Jolly Roger]

On 2014-05-01, Ann Marie Brest <annmar...@qualcomm.com> wrote:

And they do. All one need do is look.

[Poutnik]

bob mullen posted Thu, 1 May 2014 09:10:10 -0700

>
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:16:20 -0400, nospam wrote:
>
> > apps that can execute downloadable code are not allowed
>
> What does that mean, in English?

It is clear even to me as not native...

There are not allowed applications
that can by their activity download some executable code
( binaries or scripts ) and launch them.

--
Poutnik

[Jolly Roger]

On 2014-05-01, Ann Marie Brest <annmar...@qualcomm.com> wrote:

Sheesh... It was a simple misunderstanding, folks. Nobody here is
recommending you use Safari to check email.

Use the right tool (app) for the job, of course. In this case, the
default would be Apple Mail which is included on every single iOS device
on the planet. If Apple Mail isn;t to your liking, then head over to the
App Store and grab a third-party mail client instead. The choice is
yours.

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dcc885...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> > > The only good thing about iOS is I have alternative to their
> > > overpriced devices :-) Now seriously, I think it is good, but
> > > expensive. You pay a half of money just for trademark. Rather
> > > snobbish.
> >
> > apple products are not overpriced. they're competitive with similar
> > products and apple can't make enough to meet demand, the exact
> > opposite of something that's overpriced.
>
> This does not exclude high demand. People with money to spend think
> they "must have it". If fact, Apple can keep price high BECAUSE of high
> demand - it is rule of the market - they pay for their wish to have it.

for niche items perhaps, but not when a company moves hundreds of
millions of units every year.

in the past three months, apple sold 43.7 million iphones, which is a
little more than 5 iphones every second, and that is in a traditionally
slow quarter. overpriced products don't do that.

for comparable specs, the prices are similar.

> It is "IN" to have Apple.

so what? that doesn't make something overpriced or not.

> Samsung is stealing market from Apple, triggering law suites about
> patents, as they produce comparable products at lower prices.
> OTOH, to be fair, if they sold comparable product at comparable price,
> most people would buy Apple and not Samsung.

samsung's products are about the same price as apple's, sometimes more,
depending on the product. samsung has a *lot* of products.

samsung spends a *lot* of money on advertising and that helps sell a
lot of samsung phones (their tablets aren't all that hot sellers).

price isn't everything either. the moto x and moto g are two of the
least expensive phones, yet they don't sell anywhere near what apple or
samsung sells. the htc one is also a very good phone, but it too
doesn't sell that well.

[nospam]

In article <bsfaup...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger

<jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> >> iOS has Safari, as do MacOS X computers.
> >
> > Safari is a web browser, not an MUA (mail user agent).
> >
> > It's like the difference between a bus and a race car.
> >
> > On Windoze, I used Eudora, Zmail, and Thunderbird,
> > but on iOS, I don't think a decent mail application
> > even exists.
> >
> > I suspect most Apple users don't even realize what they
> > are missing.
>
> Nothing's missing. Apple Mail is a decent mail application. And there
> are *plenty* of third-party mail applications on the App Store if you
> want something different. Also, a whole lot of Apple users are very
> aware of what is available on other platforms because they actually use
> those other platforms regularly.

there are quite a few, but none of them are particularly good, and the
better ones get bought by companies and killed off (e.g., sparrow).

[nospam]

In article <ljtscp$6ap$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Ann Marie Brest

<annmar...@qualcomm.com> wrote:

> > http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/mozilla-says-no-plans-to-return-to-ios/
>
> Mozilla's Firefox browser will have no place on Apple devices so long as
> Apple continues its unfriendly attitude toward third-party browsers, Jay
> Sullivan, vice president of product at Mozilla, said today.

he's full of shit.

there are hundreds of third party browsers on ios and apple has no
problem with any of them.

the issue is that firefox can't use their own renderer and they aren't
interested in any other options.

[nospam]

In article <ljts8o$61m$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Ann Marie Brest

<annmar...@qualcomm.com> wrote:

> One would think that a free MUA must exist for
> iOS, since not everyone on Apple products is
> computer illiterate.

there are many free email apps on ios as well as many paid ones.

[Poutnik]

Jolly Roger posted 1 May 2014 16:17:12 GMT

> >> > Is Safari bad ?
> >>
> >> Nope. It's about 50bazillion times better than silly Internet
> >> Explorer.
> >
> > It looks like typical noncritical approach of Apple fans....
>
> Someone who knows no better might make that incorrect assumption.

Better is highly conditional term.
Apple fans are known to be militant.

> Please. IE is one of the worst browsers on the market, and has been
> for ages. Recent versions are marginally better. And this is not
> debated by anyone who actually knows his shit. Ask any web developer
> worth his salt about IE. ; )

Do I defend above the IE ?

> I see. So if I have two boxes, and I give you one with human shit in it
> for free, and I ask for $50,000 the one with a diamond in it, your box
> is "superior" because it's something you could afford. Got it. Have fun
> with your box of shit then.

Well, if you have use for shit to care after your garden,
but there is no shop nor bank hundred miles around....
that shit is superior to money or diamonds....

>
> > I personally know just 2-3 people using Apple desktop or notebook.
>
> And that means exactly: nothing

Exactly.
Better is HIGHLY conditional term.

>
> > Apple is much more spreaded in America than Europe,
> > perhaps little more is Western Europe than Central one.
>
> So? What's your point?

Better is HIGHLY conditional term.

> > BTW I do not use IE
>
> You don't use IE, but somehow you are sure it doesn't suck? Something
> smells fishy here...

Where I have said it ?


--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Ann Marie Brest posted Thu, 1 May 2014 09:19:05 -0700

>
> On Thu, 1 May 2014 09:15:27 +0200, Poutnik wrote:
>
> > Is Safari bad ?
>
> It's not that Safari is bad.
>
> It's that reading email on the web is like knitting
> with ski gloves on your hands, as compared to using
> a purposed mail user agent such as Zmail, Eudora,
> Thunderbird, etc.

I cannot agree more...
Concerning links in emails - Does not iOS allow
to set default web/http(s) application ?
( Real question - I do not know iOS )

> I don't know of any MUAs for iOS, but they should
> exist for the power users.

It would be strange if not..

--
Poutnik

[Tommy]

"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message >>

>> Is it due to a political squabble
>> Or is it because of a technical impediment?
>
>

> Why would you want them when you could have Opera = Free :-)
>
> http://www.opera.com/tablet/ipad
>
> http://www.opera.com/tablet

>I've used it and you'd now have to pay me to use it more. Dead slow
most of the time.

Why is it dead slow ?

Can't say much for your system, but mine runs fast - I do clear cache and
cookies etcc

OK mine is the iPad Air, and my phone is the 5S. And I do keep both of them
lean and clean. (I don't have endless apps running)

I advise folks to keep running apps to a minimum (ie., location, settings
and icloud etc)

But everyone to their own ehh - what do you recommend ?

Cheers
Tommy

[Tommy]

"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:010520140033566432%nos...@nospam.invalid...
> In article <bsddlk...@mid.individual.net>, Tommy

> <tommyle...@yohoo.com> wrote:
>
>> >> > Just curious why the free Thunderbird and Firefox apps
>> >> > aren't on the iPad?
>> >> >

>> >> > Is it due to a political squabble
>> >> > Or is it because of a technical impediment?
>> >>
>> >> Why would you want them when you could have Opera = Free :-)
>> >

>> > because opera sucks.
>>
>> Is that your opinion ?
>
> yes
>
>> I use Opera on my iPad for a specific purpose - actually for 2 different
>> purposes.
>
> ok
>
>> I tried firefox and I hated it - a pile of crap
>>
>> http://www.firefoxipad.com/
>
> no you didn't.

Of course I didn't :-))

Just like you didn't download and try it ehh :)

Firefox for iPad gives you faster Internet access
With the Firefox for iPad you can easily play games, music, or other
Internet centric events and it has many different features. These include
Java, a flash app for iPad and opera for iPad, along with the other things
that the regular version of Firefox can do. Firefox for iPad allows much
faster web surfing, which means getting on your favorite YouTube movie
quicker or being able to browse sales pages, or post a note on Twitter, etc,
much quicker than ever before. After you install the Firefox for iPad you
will also get access to any future updates. It solves the problem many iPad
users had since the old iPad browser didn't have flash for iPad, and this
makes Firefox for iPad a superior browser. Plus, the Firefox for iPad lets
you be able to download tool bars from Yahoo or Google and get some of the
popular add-ons like Xmarks and Adlblock Plus. Firefox for iPad also
features private Internet browsing option, an Adobe Reader plug in so you
can read PDF files, and it all has been approved by Apple! It is available
for download in the Apple iTunes apps store free for both iPad and the
iPhone. Just logon to the iTunes apps store for Apple devices and find the
program and then download and install it per the included directions. It's
an easy and quick process that shouldn't take more than a few minutes of
your time! Sync up all your other Firefox settings with Firefox for iPad -
The file is called FireFox Home app. It lets users not only download it, but
they can then sync up any bookmarks, tabs or history from their other
Firefox browser gadgets. This makes the Firefox for iPad browser even more
special to all iPad and iPhone users! In order to do this function, however,
you will also need to download the Sync add on for the Firefox for iPad app.
Once you have downloaded Firefox for iPad and then the Sync add on for it,
then you will be able to upload your settings to the cloud and then access
it for your iPad and iPhone devices. When you activate it then it will go to
the cloud and get the information via your Safari browser settings. This
saves time since you won't have to reenter what could be dozens of your
favorite websites.

Currently, Firefox for iPad is available for the Apple devices, or idevices,
in the form of a virtual experience. This software is called VirtualBrowser
and has been doing quite well on mobile devices. The VirtualBrowser or
Firefox for iPad was recently launched by Xform Computing and it feels very
similar to the desktop version of the website browser, albeit with reduced
features. The application has gone through the stages of designing and
developing and is now available for the customer of these devices from
iTunes Store from where it can be downloaded.

thing to remember is that there are two versions of Firefox for iPad. One
of them is available free for download while the other one has to be
purchased. Obviously, the purchased version also contains additional
features compared to the free one, although the free is not bad at all for
average use, whether you are a simple user or a software builder. Additional
features on the premium Firefox for iPad are various options to save the
browsing data and unlimited JAVA capabilities. But whether you use the free
version of the premium version, Firefox for iPad has certainly opened up new
doors of amazing browsing capabilities for the fans of iPad. It is expected
that the Firefox website surfing software will turn out to be highly
successful among the home as well as office users.

[Tommy]

"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:010520140033566432%nos...@nospam.invalid...

> ok
>
>> I tried firefox and I hated it - a pile of crap
>>
>> http://www.firefoxipad.com/
>
> no you didn't.
>

> there's no link to the app store for the app and the next story is
> about the iphone 6 and ipad air 2 having been unveiled.
>
> there's no firefox for ipad.

> yes.

I'm afraid you are wrong -

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firefox-home/id380366933?mt=8

However in your defence, I acknowledge that not everyone is as good at
foraging out good stuff as I am

Just saying *-(\)

PS it appears the free one is not available - although for under a fiver,
users can be well pleased

Cheers
Tommy

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.01, 01:28 , Poutnik wrote:
>
> Alan Browne posted Wed, 30 Apr 2014 21:51:53 -0400
>
>> On 2014.04.30, 18:07 , Poutnik wrote:
>>>
>>> This is just a half of a way.
>>> The other half is Apple software policy, as explained in other post.
>>
>> While that may apply to Firefox to a degree, it has nothing to do with
>> Thunderbird.
>
> It is not so clear - it shares much of the code.

It's not the 'code' that's the issue it's what can be done on the media
side in iOS (eg: Adobe flash). It may also be the structure of the
Thunderbird code that is ill suited to converting to run under iOS and
would require a lot of effort.

There are ample mail and web clients for iOS. There are few usenet
clients - mainly because of usenet decline. There are no rewards for
packaging Thunderbird for iOS.

--
"Big data can reduce anything to a single number,
but you shouldn’t be fooled by the appearance of exactitude."
-Gary Marcus and Ernest Davis, NYT, 2014.04.07

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.01, 08:38 , Caver1 wrote:
> On 05/01/2014 03:38 AM, Your Name wrote:
>> In article <MPG.2dcc11c...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 18:28:59 +1200
>
>>
>>
>>> Linux users like to use Wine to run some Windows applications
>>> and wish they are ported.
>>
>> WINE is complete rubbish that doesn't work properly even with the
>> supposedly "supported" Windows applications. If you have to use Windows
>> applications, then you need a real version of Windows, even if it's
>> running under something like Parallels virtulisation.
>>
>
> That's an opinion. Works just fine for the couple of programs that I
> have that will never be ported for Linux.

Name the programs please. I'm curious (Ubuntu and OpenSUSE).

[dorayme]

In article <bsfac7...@mid.individual.net>,

This is one of your better posts GR.

--
dorayme

[dorayme]

In article <ljts5v$5th$1...@news.mixmin.net>,

Ann Marie Brest <annmar...@qualcomm.com> wrote:

I have a friend with an iPad and she has an icon on her iPad about
mail and has no trouble. She only uses Gmail. On her Macbook, she uses
Safari and seems to have no trouble and I have seen her with my own
eyes on it and even with forensic looking saw no ski gloves.

I would not like to use web based for email but it is used by a lot of
people and they get used to it and good at it.

--
dorayme

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dcc97b...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Concerning links in emails - Does not iOS allow
> to set default web/http(s) application ?
> ( Real question - I do not know iOS )

not unless it's jailbroken.

however, apps can support linking to any app (assuming the target app
supports it) and quite a few apps that do that, no jailbreak needed.

[nospam]

In article <bsfqt8...@mid.individual.net>, Tommy

<tommyle...@yohoo.com> wrote:

> >
> >> I tried firefox and I hated it - a pile of crap
> >>
> >> http://www.firefoxipad.com/
> >
> > no you didn't.
>
> Of course I didn't :-))
>
> Just like you didn't download and try it ehh :)

there's nothing to download. it does not exist.

> Firefox for iPad gives you faster Internet access

no it doesn't and there is no such product as 'firefox for ipad'.

> Currently, Firefox for iPad is available for the Apple devices, or idevices,
> in the form of a virtual experience. This software is called VirtualBrowser
> and has been doing quite well on mobile devices. The VirtualBrowser or
> Firefox for iPad was recently launched by Xform Computing and it feels very
> similar to the desktop version of the website browser, albeit with reduced
> features. The application has gone through the stages of designing and
> developing and is now available for the customer of these devices from
> iTunes Store from where it can be downloaded.

in other words, it's *not* firefox for ipad, it's firefox running on a
server and the actual app is just a proxy.

there are several apps that do that and have for years. it's nothing
new. they're mainly for seeing flash content for the few sites left
that haven't got the memo that mobile flash is dead.

in any event, have fun sending your banking info or any other login
into to it. anyone who does that is a fool.

[nospam]

In article <bsfrir...@mid.individual.net>, Tommy

<tommyle...@yohoo.com> wrote:

> >
> >> I tried firefox and I hated it - a pile of crap
> >>
> >> http://www.firefoxipad.com/
> >
> > no you didn't.
> >
> > there's no link to the app store for the app and the next story is
> > about the iphone 6 and ipad air 2 having been unveiled.
> >
> > there's no firefox for ipad.
>
> > yes.
>
> I'm afraid you are wrong -
>
> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firefox-home/id380366933?mt=8

unavailable app.

besides, that link says 'firefox home', not 'firefox for ipad' which
isn't what your link claimed.

> However in your defence, I acknowledge that not everyone is as good at
> foraging out good stuff as I am

except when the app doesn't exist.

> Just saying *-(\)
>
> PS it appears the free one is not available - although for under a fiver,
> users can be well pleased

if you are referring to virtual browser, then no they won't be pleased
at all.

that is *not* 'firefox for ipad'. it's firefox on someone else's
server, and anyone who uses it with personal info is an idiot.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcc25d...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 19:38:04 +1200
> > In article <MPG.2dcc11c...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > >
> > > At some point of view, OS is as good as applications for it are.
> > > Consequence of huge Windows spreading - regadless on OS quality
> > > - is presence of many great apps hard to find alternative elsewhere.
> >
> > It had little to do with the applications..... <snip>
>
> Well, you do not use OS but applications. Superior OS without good
> applications is useless, if desktop/hand held usage is concerned.

There were plenty of applications for the Apple ][ (in fact many of
applications started on the Apple ][ or Mac) many of which were better
than the DOS counterparts. Most business simply saw "IBM" and bought
into DOS-based computers, and then were stuck in an on-going (ever
deepening) pit of Microsoft trash and its malware issues.

Fortunately many business are now "seeing the light" and either
switching over to Apple or allowing workers to choose which system they
want to use.

> > > Linux users like to use Wine to run some Windows applications
> > > and wish they are ported.
> >
> > WINE is complete rubbish that doesn't work properly even with the
> > supposedly "supported" Windows applications. If you have to use Windows
> > applications, then you need a real version of Windows, even if it's
> > running under something like Parallels virtulisation.
>

> It may be tricky and problematic,
> but if not worked, if would not be used.

It's not used by anyone sensible nor for anything important. It's only
really used by nerds who like to play around trying to get things
working.

Anyone who really needs to use Windows applications on a Mac uses
Parallels Desktop, VMWare Fusion, or Apple's Boot Camp. Some semi-nerd
tinkerers may also use freeware solutions like DOSbox, but those are
usually a bit more difficult to set-up. In all cases it's a real
version of Windows.

> > > The only good thing about iOS is I have alternative to their
> > > overpriced devices :-) Now seriously, I think it is good, but
> > > expensive. You pay a half of money just for trademark. Rather
> > > snobbish.
> >

> > Not really (it's the same myth with Mac computers).
> > They are The cheapo brands are usually cheap for a reason - they're
> > crap. The more equivalent brands like for example Samsung, tend to be
> > around the same price.
>
> Really.
> BTW the opposite to expensive is not cheap, but not expensive.

Actually, it's "inexpensive". ;-)

I meant the real cheapo, no-name, Asian-"designed" (i.e. copied) brands
that are complete garbage.

[Your Name]

In article <ljtf8d$73d$1...@dont-email.me>, Caver1 <Cav...@inthemud.com>

wrote:
> On 05/01/2014 03:38 AM, Your Name wrote:

> > In article <MPG.2dcc11c...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 18:28:59 +1200

> >>
> >> Linux users like to use Wine to run some Windows applications
> >> and wish they are ported.
> >
> > WINE is complete rubbish that doesn't work properly even with the
> > supposedly "supported" Windows applications. If you have to use Windows
> > applications, then you need a real version of Windows, even if it's
> > running under something like Parallels virtulisation.
>

> That's an opinion. Works just fine for the couple of programs that I
> have that will never be ported for Linux.

Unfortunately it's a fact.

I have tested WINE, and although it's okay-ish for *very* simple needs,
but it falls over at the slightest bit of complexity. For example, we
had an Access database that had to be used and it worked fine for data
entry under WINE, but simply crashed whenever you tried to run the
reports. Running the exact same database under real Windows worked
properly.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcc299...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Thu, 01 May 2014 19:44:55 +1200
> > >
> > > Is Safari bad ?
> >
> > Nope. It's about 50bazillion times better than silly Internet
> > Explorer.
>
> It looks like typical noncritical approach of Apple fans....

> Than it has to be 5 reptilions times better than Chrome of Firefox. :-)
>

> Note that I do think Macs have ( or at least had ) beter HW design
> than that time IBM PCs and its OSes are better than MS ones.
>

> But crap calling is unreasonable.
>

> HW and OS that you buy and use
> is better than superior HW and OS that you do not buy nor use
> as it is too expensive for you
> or you do not know any your frind using it.
>

> I personally know just 2-3 people using Apple desktop or notebook.

> Apple is much more spreaded in America than Europe,
> perhaps little more is Western Europe than Central one.
>

> BTW I do not use IE

> but PaleMoon on Win and FF ESR on Win and RH Linux.
>
> If I have to use IE e.g. if a business related page need that,
> I use flavours of IEtab FF addon with related plugin.

Apple has always had a minor share of the computer market (anything
from about 3% to 10%). Apple used to be very popular with education
users (schools, universities), but that faded when Apple was seen to be
heading into bankruptcy.

Apple has been growing in popularity over the last few years in almost
all areas, with people switching from Windoze for various reasons - fed
up with Microsoft's rubbish and malware issues, bought an iPod / iPhone
/ iPad and liked it so tried a Mac, etc.

Most people who try using a Mac never go back to Windoze.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcc885...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> nospam posted Thu, 01 May 2014 11:14:03 -0400

> > In article <MPG.2dcc11c...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> > >

> > > The only good thing about iOS is I have alternative to their
> > > overpriced devices :-) Now seriously, I think it is good, but
> > > expensive. You pay a half of money just for trademark. Rather
> > > snobbish.
> >

> > apple products are not overpriced. they're competitive with similar
> > products and apple can't make enough to meet demand, the exact
> > opposite of something that's overpriced.
>
> This does not exclude high demand. People with money to spend think
> they "must have it". If fact, Apple can keep price high BECAUSE of high
> demand - it is rule of the market - they pay for their wish to have it.
>

> It is "IN" to have Apple.
>

> Samsung is stealing market from Apple, triggering law suites about
> patents, as they produce comparable products at lower prices.
> OTOH, to be fair, if they sold comparable product at comparable price,
> most people would buy Apple and not Samsung.

You actually have to compare the same specs. If you compare actually
comparable products, you'll find that Apple's prices are not that high
... whether that's because Samsung, etc. artifically raise their prices
close to Apple's is another question.

For example, yes you can buy a cheaper PC laptop than an Apple MacBook
Pro, but the cheaper PC one is usually a lower CPU, less RAM, weaker
graphics, fewer features, lower quality display, etc.

Then there's the fact that Apple's equipment tends to last longer and
have fewer problems. That means the largely mythical "expense" is
probably well worth paying for.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcc97b...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Ann Marie Brest posted Thu, 1 May 2014 09:19:05 -0700
> >
> > On Thu, 1 May 2014 09:15:27 +0200, Poutnik wrote:
> >
> > > Is Safari bad ?
> >
> > It's not that Safari is bad.
> >
> > It's that reading email on the web is like knitting
> > with ski gloves on your hands, as compared to using
> > a purposed mail user agent such as Zmail, Eudora,
> > Thunderbird, etc.
>
> I cannot agree more...
> Concerning links in emails - Does not iOS allow
> to set default web/http(s) application ?
> ( Real question - I do not know iOS )

No. The deafult web browser is Safari, and that can't be changed. You
can of course still use any other web browser you choose for your
Internet surfing, but links clicked in an email (for example) will open
in Safari.

[Savageduck]

On 2014-05-01 21:10:47 +0000, "Tommy" <tommyle...@yohoo.com> said:

> "nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:010520140033566432%nos...@nospam.invalid...
>
>> ok
>>
>>> I tried firefox and I hated it - a pile of crap
>>>
>>> http://www.firefoxipad.com/
>>
>> no you didn't.
>>
>> there's no link to the app store for the app and the next story is
>> about the iphone 6 and ipad air 2 having been unveiled.
>>
>> there's no firefox for ipad.
>
>> yes.
>
> I'm afraid you are wrong -
>
> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firefox-home/id380366933?mt=8

Note: That URL will get you the following message: "Item Not available.
The item you've requested is not currently available in the U.S. store."


--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 14:05:41 +1200

>
> There were plenty of applications for the Apple ][ (in fact many of
> applications started on the Apple ][ or Mac) many of which were better

> than the DOS counterparts. .....

I have never said there are not.

> .................. Most business simply saw "IBM" and bought

> into DOS-based computers, and then were stuck in an on-going (ever
> deepening) pit of Microsoft trash and its malware issues.

This is dramatization. BTW if market share had been inversed,
there would be inversed also malware share.

>
> Fortunately many business are now "seeing the light" and either
> switching over to Apple or allowing workers to choose which system they
> want to use.

Perhaps in US. There is not much such businesses in Central Europe.

Out company used Red Hat Open Client instead of Windows,
eventually with KVM based vitual Ubuntu or Windows 7 if one need.
( I do need, having some heavy Excel automation based on VBA )

>
> It's not used by anyone sensible nor for anything important. It's only
> really used by nerds who like to play around trying to get things
> working.

Supporting evidence for nobody sensible nor important ?
How do you know that ?

I agree virtual Windows or dual boot is easier and better way to go
for regular Windows app usage and that WINE is not for everybody.

--
Poutnik

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcd3dc...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 14:05:41 +1200
> >
> > There were plenty of applications for the Apple ][ (in fact many of
> > applications started on the Apple ][ or Mac) many of which were better
> > than the DOS counterparts. .....
>
> I have never said there are not.

You said people used Windows because the applications were better /
more ... which is technically incorrect at the start of desktop
computers. By the time the "more applications" side comes into effect,
big business had already mired themselves in Microsoft.

Besides which, even thought there may be more Windoze applications, a
lot of them are garbage. It's all vbery well saying there are 95
million shareware applications for Windows, but it's largely irrelevant
when 90million of them are unusable rubbish.

> > .................. Most business simply saw "IBM" and bought
> > into DOS-based computers, and then were stuck in an on-going (ever
> > deepening) pit of Microsoft trash and its malware issues.
>
> This is dramatization. BTW if market share had been inversed,
> there would be inversed also malware share.

Not necessarily. The Mac OS, especially Mac OS X, is more difficult to
create malware for. The extremely rare malware that does exist for Mac
OS X has to be specifially installed by the user by entering their
password (usually via pirate software pretending to be something else)
or enter via bad third-party applications like Adobe Flash (usually via
illegal or porn websites).

> > Fortunately many business are now "seeing the light" and either
> > switching over to Apple or allowing workers to choose which system they
> > want to use.
>
> Perhaps in US. There is not much such businesses in Central Europe.

Nope. The number of Apple users has risen, slowly, almost everywhere.
Even North Korean leaders use Apple Macs and rip-off Mac OS X. :-)

The move from desktop / laptop computers to tablets as well as the
iPhone and iPod has of course pushed Apple usage to huge levels in
recent years.

> Out company used Red Hat Open Client instead of Windows,
> eventually with KVM based vitual Ubuntu or Windows 7 if one need.

> (I do need, having some heavy Excel automation based on VBA )

>
> > It's not used by anyone sensible nor for anything important. It's only
> > really used by nerds who like to play around trying to get things
> > working.
>
> Supporting evidence for nobody sensible nor important ?
> How do you know that ?
>
> I agree virtual Windows or dual boot is easier and better way to go
> for regular Windows app usage and that WINE is not for everybody.

WINE isn't for anybody since it doesn't really work properly.

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 14:14:53 +1200

>
> Apple has been growing in popularity over the last few years in
> almost all areas, with people switching from Windoze for various
> reasons - fed up with Microsoft's rubbish and malware issues, bought
> an iPod / iPhone / iPad and liked it so tried a Mac, etc.

Definitely in portable market.

I do not see progress on bigger devices
but occasionally see rare Macbooks.
But America and Eurpoe market can differ.

Not sure if I know local company
that widely uses Apple computers.
At the best they allow Mac for individual "white crows".

> Most people who try using a Mac never go back to Windoze.

This may be true and I am fine with that.

I do not doubt technology HW/SW advance of Apple.
But I doubt Apple is enough better
in enough criteria ( many are not technical )
to get significant portion of ( european ) market.

Not all criteria speak for Apple.
History of technology knows many examples
of technically more advanced products that dissapeared
in the abyss of the past, or just survived at periferie.
Let us remind OS/2 or Steve's NEXT PC platforms.

I wish for Apple it will not be either case
and Apple will have comparable market share for all platforms.

Many people would not buy for them or their kids
a smartphone / tablet for money
the iPhone / iPad are sold for,
does not matter what brand.

Too regular usage, too vulnerable
to damage / loss / stealing / robbery.

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 14:28:05 +1200

>
>
> You actually have to compare the same specs. If you compare actually
> comparable products, you'll find that Apple's prices are not that high
> ... whether that's because Samsung, etc. artifically raise their prices
> close to Apple's is another question.
>
> For example, yes you can buy a cheaper PC laptop than an Apple MacBook
> Pro, but the cheaper PC one is usually a lower CPU, less RAM, weaker
> graphics, fewer features, lower quality display, etc.

I very doubt this is the case of European market.

Prices in local markets of things of US origin
are often high, partially because of low selling.
It is often much cheaper to buy electronics directly in US
and import it, even with paying taxes.

Also, it is often question of absolute money,
how much are people willing to spend.

I have just reviewed the local MacBook offers.

The cheapiest MacBooks cost equivalent of 1100 $.
I know many people do not wish to spend for notebook
more than 500-600 $.

Another topic can be comparison of available freeware
for IBM PC versus Mac platforms.

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 16:49:43 +1200

> Besides which, even thought there may be more Windoze applications, a
> lot of them are garbage. It's all vbery well saying there are 95
> million shareware applications for Windows, but it's largely irrelevant
> when 90million of them are unusable rubbish.

Did you count that ? BTW 5 millions of usable apps is a lot.

I repeat technical advance is far from being the only criteria
for people to choose.

> Not necessarily. The Mac OS, especially Mac OS X, is more difficult
> to create malware for. The extremely rare malware that does exist for
> Mac OS X has to be specifially installed by the user by entering
> their password (usually via pirate software pretending to be
> something else) or enter via bad third-party applications like Adobe
> Flash (usually via illegal or porn websites).

Part of my job is reporting sofware security vulnerabilities.
Lot of them is for Apple, that I fortunately do not report.
If Mac was on 90% of machines, hackers would find a way.
And, it is not so difficult.
What technically differs today malware from goodware ?
Technically nothing.
The difference is what they do, not how.

> > Perhaps in US. There is not much such businesses in Central Europe.
>
> Nope. The number of Apple users has risen, slowly, almost everywhere.
> Even North Korean leaders use Apple Macs and rip-off Mac OS X. :-)

I do not say it does not.
But very slowly in enterprise area.

> The move from desktop / laptop computers to tablets as well as the
> iPhone and iPod has of course pushed Apple usage to huge levels in
> recent years.

Sure.

>
> WINE isn't for anybody since it doesn't really work properly.

Rather WINE isn't for everybody
as not everybody can set it properly.

--
Poutnik

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcd494...@news.eternal-september.org>, Poutnik

<pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 14:14:53 +1200
> >
> > Apple has been growing in popularity over the last few years in
> > almost all areas, with people switching from Windoze for various
> > reasons - fed up with Microsoft's rubbish and malware issues, bought
> > an iPod / iPhone / iPad and liked it so tried a Mac, etc.
>
> Definitely in portable market.
>
> I do not see progress on bigger devices
> but occasionally see rare Macbooks.
> But America and Eurpoe market can differ.
>
> Not sure if I know local company
> that widely uses Apple computers.
> At the best they allow Mac for individual "white crows".

I can't remember, but it might have been Google Europe that was the
first of the Google offices to change.

> > Most people who try using a Mac never go back to Windoze.
>
> This may be true and I am fine with that.
>
> I do not doubt technology HW/SW advance of Apple.
> But I doubt Apple is enough better
> in enough criteria ( many are not technical )
> to get significant portion of ( european ) market.
>
> Not all criteria speak for Apple.
> History of technology knows many examples
> of technically more advanced products that dissapeared
> in the abyss of the past, or just survived at periferie.
> Let us remind OS/2 or Steve's NEXT PC platforms.

NeXT was definitely over-priced.

The price difference between Apple's phones and tablets is minimal
compared to similarly specc'ed devices from (e.g. Samsung). I haven't
got prices to hand, but both the Apple iPhone and Samsung Galaxy cost
around than NZ$1000 (wihtout a mobile plan). Similar with the iPad and
Samsung tablets. The difference is that Samsung does also have cheaper
models as well.

An Apple iPad is just under NZ$1000, but you could buy some no-name
Asian tablet for under NZ$300, but it has a smaller screen, less power,
less storage, and a who-knows what horrible OS.

> I wish for Apple it will not be either case
> and Apple will have comparable market share for all platforms.

Apple isn't really intersted in market share, never has been. If they
were, and with the bank balance they have, they could almost give
devices away for free and still make a fortune on the App Store and
iTunes Store sales.

> Many people would not buy for them or their kids
> a smartphone / tablet for money
> the iPhone / iPad are sold for,
> does not matter what brand.
> Too regular usage, too vulnerable
> to damage / loss / stealing / robbery.

Personally I'd never buy a kid an expensive gadget of any make or
model. The problem here in New Zealand is that many schools these days
are stupidly forcing parents to buy their kids (even very young kids) a
tablet, and most prefer it to be an Apple iPad.

[Poutnik]

Poutnik posted Fri, 2 May 2014 08:23:49 +0200

>
> > Not necessarily. The Mac OS, especially Mac OS X, is more difficult
> > to create malware for. The extremely rare malware that does exist for
> > Mac OS X has to be specifially installed by the user by entering
> > their password (usually via pirate software pretending to be
> > something else) or enter via bad third-party applications like Adobe
> > Flash (usually via illegal or porn websites).

Most today infections are done
by web access to otherwise trusted sites
via script injections via XSS, Clickjacking, CSRF
or similar techniques.

>
> Part of my job is reporting sofware security vulnerabilities.
> Lot of them is for Apple, that I fortunately do not report.
> If Mac was on 90% of machines, hackers would find a way.
> And, it is not so difficult.
> What technically differs today malware from goodware ?
> Technically nothing.
> The difference is what they do, not how.

Even for Linux time by time emerges the option for remote attackers
to remotely run application at elevated privilege.

And OS X or iOS will not be better.
Just 2 recent Highly critical cases from April

Apple OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities
http://secunia.com/advisories/58081/

Apple Safari Multiple Vulnerabilities
http://secunia.com/advisories/57688/

--
Poutnik

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcd4d0...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 14:28:05 +1200
> >
> > You actually have to compare the same specs. If you compare actually
> > comparable products, you'll find that Apple's prices are not that high
> > ... whether that's because Samsung, etc. artifically raise their prices
> > close to Apple's is another question.
> >
> > For example, yes you can buy a cheaper PC laptop than an Apple MacBook
> > Pro, but the cheaper PC one is usually a lower CPU, less RAM, weaker
> > graphics, fewer features, lower quality display, etc.
>
> I very doubt this is the case of European market.
>
> Prices in local markets of things of US origin
> are often high, partially because of low selling.
> It is often much cheaper to buy electronics directly in US
> and import it, even with paying taxes.
>
> Also, it is often question of absolute money,
> how much are people willing to spend.

The over-pricing of almost everything here in New Zealand means it's
cheaper to buy from overseas.

Even New Zealand made products like lamb and butter are cheaper in the
UK shops than they are here in New Zealand!! :-(

> I have just reviewed the local MacBook offers.
>
> The cheapiest MacBooks cost equivalent of 1100 $.
> I know many people do not wish to spend for notebook
> more than 500-600 $.

But as I said before, when you compare the actual specs, those $550-600
notebooks will almost certainly be of a lesser quality - slower CPU
(Intel i3 instead of i5 for example), less RAM, lower quality display,
doesn't have an in-built webcam, etc. Most people do not look at, nor
understand, these and just get blinded by the price tags.

What can make a PC look cheaper is that the retailers often do bundle
deals which include extra software, printer, etc. ... but that's
usually the retailer, not the maker of the computer. It's rare for
Apple resellers to do bundle deals, usually only when they're trying to
get rid of stock just before a new model is released, or as "Back to
School" specials.

> Another topic can be comparison of available freeware
> for IBM PC versus Mac platforms.

There's plenty of freeware and shareware for the Mac, but again simple
numbers don't mean anything if 75% of it is just utter rubbish.

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 18:32:48 +1200

>
> In article <MPG.2dcd494...@news.eternal-september.org>, Poutnik
> <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Not sure if I know local company
> > that widely uses Apple computers.
> > At the best they allow Mac for individual "white crows".
>
> I can't remember, but it might have been Google Europe that was the
> first of the Google offices to change.

I mean really local companies, with just e.g. hundreds of employees.

>
> An Apple iPad is just under NZ$1000, but you could buy some no-name
> Asian tablet for under NZ$300, but it has a smaller screen, less power,
> less storage, and a who-knows what horrible OS.

I would not buy a portable device of daily use
I would have to worry for damage or loss.
300$ is maximum for me.
I can afford more, but I do not want to.

--
Poutnik

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcd586...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 16:49:43 +1200
> >

> > Not necessarily. The Mac OS, especially Mac OS X, is more difficult
> > to create malware for. The extremely rare malware that does exist for
> > Mac OS X has to be specifially installed by the user by entering
> > their password (usually via pirate software pretending to be
> > something else) or enter via bad third-party applications like Adobe
> > Flash (usually via illegal or porn websites).
>
> Part of my job is reporting sofware security vulnerabilities.
> Lot of them is for Apple, that I fortunately do not report.
> If Mac was on 90% of machines, hackers would find a way.
> And, it is not so difficult.
> What technically differs today malware from goodware ?
> Technically nothing.
> The difference is what they do, not how.

Most of the "reported" Mac malware is nonsense "reported" by compoanies
that sell anti-malware applications. As above, you can only get it if
you actually install it yourself or visit pirate software / porn
websites.

Windoze malware you can get just by connecting to the Internet or being
sent an email.

> > > Perhaps in US. There is not much such businesses in Central Europe.
> >
> > Nope. The number of Apple users has risen, slowly, almost everywhere.
> > Even North Korean leaders use Apple Macs and rip-off Mac OS X. :-)
>
> I do not say it does not.
> But very slowly in enterprise area.

But it is rising, for many of the same reasons home users are
"switching" - to get away from buggy and malware ridden Windows.

> > WINE isn't for anybody since it doesn't really work properly.
>
> Rather WINE isn't for everybody
> as not everybody can set it properly.

Nobody can set WINE up "properly" because it doesn't work properly
(even for the supposed "supported" applications). If you want to run
Windows applications properly, then you need real Windows.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcd5be...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Poutnik posted Fri, 2 May 2014 08:23:49 +0200
>
> >
> > > Not necessarily. The Mac OS, especially Mac OS X, is more difficult
> > > to create malware for. The extremely rare malware that does exist for
> > > Mac OS X has to be specifially installed by the user by entering
> > > their password (usually via pirate software pretending to be
> > > something else) or enter via bad third-party applications like Adobe
> > > Flash (usually via illegal or porn websites).
>
> Most today infections are done
> by web access to otherwise trusted sites
> via script injections via XSS, Clickjacking, CSRF
> or similar techniques.

Actual malware on the Mac is basically non-existant. Anti-malware
applications on the Mac are completely unnecessary. The real problem is
fraudulent links (e.g. fake bank emails) clicked on by novice users.

> > Part of my job is reporting sofware security vulnerabilities.
> > Lot of them is for Apple, that I fortunately do not report.
> > If Mac was on 90% of machines, hackers would find a way.
> > And, it is not so difficult.
> > What technically differs today malware from goodware ?
> > Technically nothing.
> > The difference is what they do, not how.
>
> Even for Linux time by time emerges the option for remote attackers
> to remotely run application at elevated privilege.
>
> And OS X or iOS will not be better.
> Just 2 recent Highly critical cases from April
>
> Apple OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities
> http://secunia.com/advisories/58081/
>
> Apple Safari Multiple Vulnerabilities
> http://secunia.com/advisories/57688/

Reported by companies selling unnecessary anti-malware applications.
It's a sales gimmick to try and increase slaes of their useless
software.

In real world it simply doesn't happen. In the decades of using Apple
computers and helping all sorts of individuals and business with their
Apple computers I have never ever seen one with malware. Windoze on the
other hand gets infected just if the user holds the mouse in the
"wrong" way.

The closest I've ever gotten to finding malware on a Mac was an
anti-malware application telling me a Word document on a PC floppy disk
was infected with a Windoze virus (that couldn't possibly have any
affect on the Mac).

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcd5e9...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 18:32:48 +1200
> > In article <MPG.2dcd494...@news.eternal-september.org>, Poutnik
> > <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > Not sure if I know local company
> > > that widely uses Apple computers.
> > > At the best they allow Mac for individual "white crows".
> >
> > I can't remember, but it might have been Google Europe that was the
> > first of the Google offices to change.
>
> I mean really local companies, with just e.g. hundreds of employees.

Google probably has thousands of employees ... worldwide.

You'd be surprised which companies have switched completely to Apple or
have "chose your own" policies. It's only where there are
Windoze-specific applications that it's not possible.

The military in many countries are also switching to Apple because it's
more secure than Windoze.

> > An Apple iPad is just under NZ$1000, but you could buy some no-name
> > Asian tablet for under NZ$300, but it has a smaller screen, less power,
> > less storage, and a who-knows what horrible OS.
>
> I would not buy a portable device of daily use
> I would have to worry for damage or loss.
> 300$ is maximum for me.
> I can afford more, but I do not want to.

Personally, I wouldn't buy any portable device ... I have no use for
any cellphone nor tablet, even if it was free.

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dcd4d0...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Also, it is often question of absolute money,
> how much are people willing to spend.
>
> I have just reviewed the local MacBook offers.
>
> The cheapiest MacBooks cost equivalent of 1100 $.
> I know many people do not wish to spend for notebook
> more than 500-600 $.

that doesn't make the $500 notebook functionally the same as a $1100
macbook.

the reason why the $500 is cheaper is because its specs are lower the
macbook, so it costs less. match the specs and prices will be similar.

apple offers ipads in that price range and they sell more ipads than
they do mac notebooks and desktops combined.

> Another topic can be comparison of available freeware
> for IBM PC versus Mac platforms.

there's far more software that can run on a mac, since it can natively
run all windows and linux software as well as mac software.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2014-05-02, Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>
> Another topic can be comparison of available freeware
> for IBM PC versus Mac platforms.

This is untrue. Macs can run Windows applications if needed as well as
Linux software, and of course Mac OS software. This means Macs can
actually run *more* software than a typical PC.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[Poutnik]

Jolly Roger posted 2 May 2014 15:50:38 GMT

>
> On 2014-05-02, Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Another topic can be comparison of available freeware
> > for IBM PC versus Mac platforms.
>
> This is untrue. Macs can run Windows applications if needed as well as
> Linux software, and of course Mac OS software. This means Macs can
> actually run *more* software than a typical PC.

Topics cannot be true nor untrue.
It is just thema for discussion.

I did not know it is possible
to run Windows or Linux apps on Mac OS,
as said also in other post.

Good for Mac users.

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 18:42:55 +1200

>
> > I have just reviewed the local MacBook offers.
> >
> > The cheapiest MacBooks cost equivalent of 1100 $.
> > I know many people do not wish to spend for notebook
> > more than 500-600 $.
>
> But as I said before, when you compare the actual specs, those $550-600
> notebooks will almost certainly be of a lesser quality - slower CPU
> (Intel i3 instead of i5 for example), less RAM, lower quality display,
> doesn't have an in-built webcam, etc. Most people do not look at, nor
> understand, these and just get blinded by the price tags.

-------------
nospam posted Fri, 02 May 2014 10:07:29 -0400

>
> that doesn't make the $500 notebook functionally the same as a $1100
> macbook.
>
> the reason why the $500 is cheaper is because its specs are lower the
> macbook, so it costs less. match the specs and prices will be similar.
>
> apple offers ipads in that price range and they sell more ipads than
> they do mac notebooks and desktops combined.

--------------------------------
@Your Name and nospam:

I do not compare, it it what people or do not want to spend.

The categories are not comparable,
as they are not comparable even if from the same vendor.

You as well cannot reasonably compare
Rolls-Royce luxury and VW the Beetle.
Different classes, different target users.

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 19:19:13 +1200

>
> Personally, I wouldn't buy any portable device ... I have no use for
> any cellphone nor tablet, even if it was free.

Not even cellphone ?
At least cheap feature phones are handy outdoor.

For safety in case of accident in the wood or mountains,
or to search for transportation timetable of buses or trains.
Also, you can have use for GPS with hiking maps.

Old feature or Symbian Nokias with long lasting battery
are very good for that.


--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 19:07:11 +1200

>
> Most of the "reported" Mac malware is nonsense "reported" by compoanies
> that sell anti-malware applications. As above, you can only get it if
> you actually install it yourself or visit pirate software / porn
> websites.

This is your wish, putting a head into sand.

No OS is magically immune to malware,
all of them have many vulnerabilities that are progressively revealed
and patched.
And where are holes, there are found malware plugs.

Malware of today is not hobby of good classical hackers any more.
It is a business of cyberspace Mafia.

XSS, click jacking and spoofing
does not make you safe, visiting just good sites.

I do think Mac OS is more advanced than Windows.
But glorification of Mac and demonization of Windows is unreasonable.

>
> But it is rising, for many of the same reasons home users are
> "switching" - to get away from buggy and malware ridden Windows.

What I know, most switching users around
are switching to Linux/PC, not Mac.
I know much more Linux desktop users than users of Mac OS.

> > > WINE isn't for anybody since it doesn't really work properly.
> >
> > Rather WINE isn't for everybody
> > as not everybody can set it properly.
>
> Nobody can set WINE up "properly" because it doesn't work properly
> (even for the supposed "supported" applications). If you want to run
> Windows applications properly, then you need real Windows.

Did you ask everybody saying that nobody ?
Other poster claimed he has run Autocad on WINE.

--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 19:15:18 +1200

> >
> > Most today infections are done
> > by web access to otherwise trusted sites
> > via script injections via XSS, Clickjacking, CSRF
> > or similar techniques.
>
> Actual malware on the Mac is basically non-existant. Anti-malware
> applications on the Mac are completely unnecessary. The real problem is
> fraudulent links (e.g. fake bank emails) clicked on by novice users.

Topic of Macs and Malware is full of myths.
It is not so difficult to write application
that does not do exactly what you think it does.

>
> Reported by companies selling unnecessary anti-malware applications.
> It's a sales gimmick to try and increase slaes of their useless
> software.

Evidence ?

>
> In real world it simply doesn't happen. In the decades of using Apple
> computers and helping all sorts of individuals and business with their
> Apple computers I have never ever seen one with malware. Windoze on the
> other hand gets infected just if the user holds the mouse in the
> "wrong" way.

http://www.intego.com/mac-security-blog/5-more-mac-malware-myths-and-
misconceptions/

4. "There are No Mac Malware Affecting Real People"

"Let me throw a few names at you: Flashback. Pintsized. DNSChanger.
MacDefender. Three of these malware hit large numbers of Mac users in
the last few years; one of them also hit Apple?s own developers.
Malware is real, and it hurts. Two of these malware left infected
users? machines open to attackers, to do what they pleased with them.
One stole credit card information and ?nominal fees,? and the last
redirected users? attempts to surf the web so the attackers could
increase ad revenue. The underlying theme is profit motive ? where
there is a buck to be gained, there is a way. Choice of operating
system or other software is not a sufficient deterrent."


--
Poutnik

[Tommy]

"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:2014050120564266771-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...

> Regards,
>
> Savageduck

Hint - I am not in U.S. I don't expect you to emigrate though :-)

Cheers
Tommy

[Tommy]

"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message

news:010520142038369655%nos...@nospam.invalid...

>
>> Just saying *-(\)
>>
>> PS it appears the free one is not available - although for under a fiver,
>> users can be well pleased
>
> if you are referring to virtual browser, then no they won't be pleased
> at all.
>
> that is *not* 'firefox for ipad'. it's firefox on someone else's
> server, and anyone who uses it with personal info is an idiot.


And where in the whole of the internet is anyones personal info safe ehh.

OK EOD for me - do as you wish :)

Cheers
Tommy

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dcdfbc...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> > > I have just reviewed the local MacBook offers.
> > >
> > > The cheapiest MacBooks cost equivalent of 1100 $.
> > > I know many people do not wish to spend for notebook
> > > more than 500-600 $.
> >
> > But as I said before, when you compare the actual specs, those $550-600
> > notebooks will almost certainly be of a lesser quality - slower CPU
> > (Intel i3 instead of i5 for example), less RAM, lower quality display,
> > doesn't have an in-built webcam, etc. Most people do not look at, nor
> > understand, these and just get blinded by the price tags.
>
> -------------
> nospam posted Fri, 02 May 2014 10:07:29 -0400
> >
> > that doesn't make the $500 notebook functionally the same as a $1100
> > macbook.
> >
> > the reason why the $500 is cheaper is because its specs are lower the
> > macbook, so it costs less. match the specs and prices will be similar.
> >
> > apple offers ipads in that price range and they sell more ipads than
> > they do mac notebooks and desktops combined.
> --------------------------------
> @Your Name and nospam:
>
> I do not compare, it it what people or do not want to spend.

you said that apple products are higher priced because of the apple
name.

that means you are comparing.

> The categories are not comparable,
> as they are not comparable even if from the same vendor.

of course they're comparable. everything is comparable.

> You as well cannot reasonably compare
> Rolls-Royce luxury and VW the Beetle.
> Different classes, different target users.

true, but not applicable here.

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dce068...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> > > Most today infections are done
> > > by web access to otherwise trusted sites
> > > via script injections via XSS, Clickjacking, CSRF
> > > or similar techniques.
> >
> > Actual malware on the Mac is basically non-existant. Anti-malware
> > applications on the Mac are completely unnecessary. The real problem is
> > fraudulent links (e.g. fake bank emails) clicked on by novice users.
>
> Topic of Macs and Malware is full of myths.
> It is not so difficult to write application
> that does not do exactly what you think it does.

however, the user has to install and run the app, and for it to do
anything major, the app would need the user to authenticate.

it's possible that the app can crack root without the user
authenticating but that's more theoretical than anything else.

> > Reported by companies selling unnecessary anti-malware applications.
> > It's a sales gimmick to try and increase slaes of their useless
> > software.
>
> Evidence ?

it's well known. more on that below.

> > In real world it simply doesn't happen. In the decades of using Apple
> > computers and helping all sorts of individuals and business with their
> > Apple computers I have never ever seen one with malware. Windoze on the
> > other hand gets infected just if the user holds the mouse in the
> > "wrong" way.
>
> http://www.intego.com/mac-security-blog/5-more-mac-malware-myths-and-
> misconceptions/
>
> 4. "There are No Mac Malware Affecting Real People"
>
> "Let me throw a few names at you: Flashback. Pintsized. DNSChanger.
> MacDefender. Three of these malware hit large numbers of Mac users in
> the last few years; one of them also hit Apple?s own developers.
> Malware is real, and it hurts. Two of these malware left infected
> users? machines open to attackers, to do what they pleased with them.
> One stole credit card information and ?nominal fees,? and the last
> redirected users? attempts to surf the web so the attackers could
> increase ad revenue. The underlying theme is profit motive ? where
> there is a buck to be gained, there is a way. Choice of operating
> system or other software is not a sufficient deterrent."

intego is the last company to trust about malware.

they bragged that their antimalware product caught malware that others
didn't, and it turned out that they were including windows and linux
exploits which could never be an issue on a mac.

in other words, they lied.

[Hot-Text]

"Poutnik" <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote in message
news:MPG.2dcd5be...@news.eternal-september.org...

| Poutnik posted Fri, 2 May 2014 08:23:49 +0200
| > > Not necessarily. The Mac OS, especially Mac OS X, is more difficult
| > > to create malware for. The extremely rare malware that does exist for
| > > Mac OS X has to be specifially installed by the user by entering
| > > their password (usually via pirate software pretending to be
| > > something else) or enter via bad third-party applications like Adobe
| > > Flash (usually via illegal or porn websites).
|
| Most today infections are done
| by web access to otherwise trusted sites
| via script injections via XSS, Clickjacking, CSRF
| or similar techniques.

The error is in
The believing in
That you Can
Abiled or StopThat
Internet Explorer
Yellow Pop-Up Information Bar

This is surposed to be
Were you cross the Web safely
All today infections are done by

Run Add-on on AllWebSites
In a web browsers
That is given The Hackers
A Free Remote Contol
To a open/use of
A Your PC

| > Part of my job is reporting sofware security vulnerabilities.
| > Lot of them is for Apple, that I fortunately do not report.
| > If Mac was on 90% of machines, hackers would find a way.
| > And, it is not so difficult.
| > What technically differs today malware from goodware ?
| > Technically nothing.
| > The difference is what they do, not how.
| Even for Linux time by time emerges the option for remote attackers
| to remotely run application at elevated privilege.
| And OS X or iOS will not be better.
| Just 2 recent Highly critical cases from April
| Apple OS X Multiple Vulnerabilities
| http://secunia.com/advisories/58081/
| Apple Safari Multiple Vulnerabilities
| http://secunia.com/advisories/57688/

Poutnik you do know a
Hackers is a Bad WebMaster
Looking for that
Think You Too
AllWebSites

They do Make for Linux
Web Browsers with
A Free WebMaster Remote too

Just Run Add-on

[Poutnik]

nospam posted Fri, 02 May 2014 16:44:52 -0400

> In article <MPG.2dcdfbc...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>
> > I do not compare, it it what people or do not want to spend.
>
> you said that apple products are higher priced because of the apple
> name.
>
> that means you are comparing.

Yes, but in different context.

This one is about most people are willing to pay less for Notebook
than Mac NB costs, no matter if Mac price is too high or not.

>
> > The categories are not comparable,
> > as they are not comparable even if from the same vendor.
>
> of course they're comparable. everything is comparable.

It is.
You can compare cars and bananas.

1200$ NB will have better specs than 400$ one,
and 2000$ one will have better specs than 1000$ one.

It is obvious and expected. no much sense
to compare this.

>
> > You as well cannot reasonably compare
> > Rolls-Royce luxury and VW the Beetle.
> > Different classes, different target users.
>
> true, but not applicable here.

True, and applicable.
Just replace different car classes by different computer classes.

Apple producs target different users than
users you do not want or cannot spent such money.


--
Poutnik

[Poutnik]

nospam posted Fri, 02 May 2014 16:44:55 -0400

> >
> > Topic of Macs and Malware is full of myths.
> > It is not so difficult to write application
> > that does not do exactly what you think it does.
>
> however, the user has to install and run the app, and for it to do
> anything major, the app would need the user to authenticate.
>
> it's possible that the app can crack root without the user
> authenticating but that's more theoretical than anything else.

There are many privilege escalations vulnerabilities around the world,
on all platform, without need of authentification.

> > > Reported by companies selling unnecessary anti-malware applications.
> > > It's a sales gimmick to try and increase slaes of their useless
> > > software.
> >
> > Evidence ?
>
> it's well known. more on that below.

Believe what you wish.

>
> in other words, they lied.

Well, today hackers like you to believe that.

--
Poutnik

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dce2b4...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> > > I do not compare, it it what people or do not want to spend.
> >
> > you said that apple products are higher priced because of the apple
> > name.
> >
> > that means you are comparing.
>
> Yes, but in different context.
>
> This one is about most people are willing to pay less for Notebook
> than Mac NB costs, no matter if Mac price is too high or not.

there are products at various price points for people with different
needs and budgets. apple is no different.

> > > The categories are not comparable,
> > > as they are not comparable even if from the same vendor.
> >
> > of course they're comparable. everything is comparable.
>
> It is.
> You can compare cars and bananas.

you can but it's pointless.

> 1200$ NB will have better specs than 400$ one,
> and 2000$ one will have better specs than 1000$ one.
> It is obvious and expected. no much sense
> to compare this.

exactly the point.

a mac at $1200 will have better specs than whatever you can get at $400.

also, a mac at $1200 will have comparable specs as whatever you can get
at $1200.

there is no apple-tax.

> > > You as well cannot reasonably compare
> > > Rolls-Royce luxury and VW the Beetle.
> > > Different classes, different target users.
> >
> > true, but not applicable here.
>
> True, and applicable.
> Just replace different car classes by different computer classes.

it's not applicable.

macs are not the same as a rolls royce that costs 10x what a normal car
does.

they're normal ordinary computers and cost about the same as anything
else with similar specs.

> Apple producs target different users than
> users you do not want or cannot spent such money.

no they definitely don't do that at all. not even remotely close.

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dce2c...@news.eternal-september.org>, Poutnik

<pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> > > Topic of Macs and Malware is full of myths.
> > > It is not so difficult to write application
> > > that does not do exactly what you think it does.
> >
> > however, the user has to install and run the app, and for it to do
> > anything major, the app would need the user to authenticate.
> >
> > it's possible that the app can crack root without the user
> > authenticating but that's more theoretical than anything else.
>
> There are many privilege escalations vulnerabilities around the world,
> on all platform, without need of authentification.

there are, but they are rarely, if ever, used in actual malware on a
mac.

in almost every single instance, the user has to do something to cause
a problem, usually by tricking them into running something bogus, and
the default settings of a mac prevent this from happening accidentally.


there's very little anyone can do about that, and that's not a mac
exploit. it's a human exploit. people get tricked into doing all sorts
of stupid things.

if this was actually a serious problem, we'd be seeing an increase in
malware on macs with the large growth in sales that apple has had over
the past several years, and it hasn't happened.

> > > > Reported by companies selling unnecessary anti-malware applications.
> > > > It's a sales gimmick to try and increase slaes of their useless
> > > > software.
> > >
> > > Evidence ?
> >
> > it's well known. more on that below.
>
> Believe what you wish.

i believe the facts, not linkbait from companies with a vested interest
in selling products.

> > in other words, they lied.
>
> Well, today hackers like you to believe that.

the facts say otherwise.

another slimy anti-malware company claimed its os x anti-malware
utility could detect all sorts of mac malware, including ones that
haven't worked in over 20 years, when system 7 came out back in 1991
and on a motorola 68000-68040 processor (and it didn't do much other
than just annoy the user anyway).

since that time, apple switched to powerpc and then to intel
processors, as well as switch from classic mac os to os x (and even
when os x supported classic apps, the malware would not work).

in other words, that company lied too.

it would be like saying that a windows malware tool now detects all dos
malware even though what they list *can't* work in windows even if it
wanted to.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dce034...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 19:07:11 +1200
>
> >
> > Most of the "reported" Mac malware is nonsense "reported" by compoanies
> > that sell anti-malware applications. As above, you can only get it if
> > you actually install it yourself or visit pirate software / porn
> > websites.
>
> This is your wish, putting a head into sand.
>
> No OS is magically immune to malware,
> all of them have many vulnerabilities that are progressively revealed
> and patched.
> And where are holes, there are found malware plugs.
>
> Malware of today is not hobby of good classical hackers any more.
> It is a business of cyberspace Mafia.

I never said Mac malware doesn't exist ... I said it's near impoosible
to actually get infected, unless the user themselves does something
incredibly stupid.

> XSS, click jacking and spoofing
> does not make you safe, visiting just good sites.
>
> I do think Mac OS is more advanced than Windows.
> But glorification of Mac and demonization of Windows is unreasonable.

Fraudulent websites aren't malware, so yes, they are a problem on any
operating system and no piece of software can stop it (mind you, no
piece of software can stop ALL Windoze malware either).

> > But it is rising, for many of the same reasons home users are
> > "switching" - to get away from buggy and malware ridden Windows.
>
> What I know, most switching users around
> are switching to Linux/PC, not Mac.
> I know much more Linux desktop users than users of Mac OS.

I didn't say Macs were the only solution, simply that the people who
were switching to Macs were doing so to escape Microsoft / Windoze
hell.

> > > > WINE isn't for anybody since it doesn't really work properly.
> > >
> > > Rather WINE isn't for everybody
> > > as not everybody can set it properly.
> >
> > Nobody can set WINE up "properly" because it doesn't work properly
> > (even for the supposed "supported" applications). If you want to run
> > Windows applications properly, then you need real Windows.
>
> Did you ask everybody saying that nobody ?
> Other poster claimed he has run Autocad on WINE.

I've "run" quite a few applications under WINE, and none of them work
properly nor fully. They all suffer from some problems and
incompatibilities. It's only common sense that a system that claims to
be run Windows applications without needing Windows will never be fully
compatible. Anyone using it for anything other then extremely simple
requirements is just wasting their time.

Unless there's a specific Windows-only application that they need for
work / school, most people using Windows solutions on a Mac slowly find
they use Windows less and less, and eventually stop needing it at all.
For most applications that don't already have Mac versions, there is
usually something equivalent.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dce068...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 19:15:18 +1200
> > >
> > > Most today infections are done
> > > by web access to otherwise trusted sites
> > > via script injections via XSS, Clickjacking, CSRF
> > > or similar techniques.
> >
> > Actual malware on the Mac is basically non-existant. Anti-malware
> > applications on the Mac are completely unnecessary. The real problem is
> > fraudulent links (e.g. fake bank emails) clicked on by novice users.
>
> Topic of Macs and Malware is full of myths.
> It is not so difficult to write application
> that does not do exactly what you think it does.

It's not difficult to write an application ... but it's near impossible
to get it installed unless the user specifically installs it, entering
their Admin password. If you don't install software from pirate
websites and other strange unknown sources, then you will not get any
Mac malware.

> > Reported by companies selling unnecessary anti-malware applications.
> > It's a sales gimmick to try and increase slaes of their useless
> > software.
>
> Evidence ?

Evidence - never having found any Apple computer with malware installed
on it in decades of use. Nor have I ever heard of anyone having malware
on an Apple computer that wasn't the consequence of them installing
pirate software or visting porn websites.

> > In real world it simply doesn't happen. In the decades of using Apple
> > computers and helping all sorts of individuals and business with their
> > Apple computers I have never ever seen one with malware. Windoze on the
> > other hand gets infected just if the user holds the mouse in the
> > "wrong" way.
>
> http://www.intego.com/mac-security-blog/5-more-mac-malware-myths-and-
> misconceptions/
>
> 4. "There are No Mac Malware Affecting Real People"
>
> "Let me throw a few names at you: Flashback. Pintsized. DNSChanger.
> MacDefender. Three of these malware hit large numbers of Mac users in
> the last few years; one of them also hit Apple?s own developers.

Utter nonsense propgated by the malware sellers and "researchers". No
sensible real human being has ever been infected with Mac malware ...
that's actual malware applications, not fraudulent websites.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcdffa...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Poutnik <pou...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> Your Name posted Fri, 02 May 2014 19:19:13 +1200
> >
> > Personally, I wouldn't buy any portable device ... I have no use for
> > any cellphone nor tablet, even if it was free.
>
> Not even cellphone ?
> At least cheap feature phones are handy outdoor.

I have no use for a cellphone at all. They are handy if your car breaks
down in the middle of nowhere, but it's extremely rare that I am in the
middle of nowhere.

I have no use for an iPod or iPad either. I alos have no use for a
laptop computer, gaming console, or nuermous other electronic toys and
gadgetry that claim they "need" when in reality for most it's just a
case of "want" (often without even knowing why) ... but it's their
money and they can waste it however they want.

> For safety in case of accident in the wood or mountains,
> or to search for transportation timetable of buses or trains.
> Also, you can have use for GPS with hiking maps.
>
> Old feature or Symbian Nokias with long lasting battery
> are very good for that.

I don't do any of those things. Many people have a cellphone simply
because it's the "in thing" to have one, but they rarely use it as an
actual phone (more of a text pager) and keep "upgrading" simply so they
can continue to look "cool" and have the latest toy.

[Your Name]

In article <MPG.2dcdf0e...@news.eternal-september.org>,

It's not possible to run Windows or Linux applications under Mac OS X.
You need to install Windows / Linux or any of numerous other operating
systems under a virtualisation or emulation application (or the
hopeless WINE and similar no-need-for-Windows applications). These of
course will mean the "guest OS" runs a bit slower and has to share
resources with Mac OS X.

In the case of Windows, Linux, and similar Intel-compatible operating
systems you can also use Apple's free Boot Camp software to have the
ability to boot the computer into whichever OS you want to use, giving
100% speed and resource availability, and near-100% compatibility (the
exception will be any software that directly hits specific hardware).

It's nothing new. I've got emulators for lots of different systems on
my Mac and have done for the 16 years I've bneen using this computer. A
normal PC from any maker can do the same thing, although it's against
Apple's legal small print to install Mac OS X on non-Apple equipment.