Articles Comments

digitalpercept.com » Entries tagged with "Google"

Android and iOS both fail, but Android fails better

digitalpercept_newsbyte

Powered by Guardian.co.ukThis article titled “Android and iOS both fail, but Android fails better” was written by Cory Doctorow, for guardian.co.uk on Tuesday 9th August 2011 15.00 Asia/Calcutta

My recent review of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 Android tablet stirred up a dreary and inevitable round of OS advocacy and such, with both Apple and Android lovers baying like wounded members of persecuted religious minorities, arguing about which OS is most worthy of our love and devotion.

For me, no love or devotion is due to an operating system or a gadget.

I’m enough of an old technology hand to know that any love we harbour for our gadgets is unrequited and generally tragic – not least because you are not destined to have a long-term love-affair with your gizmos, as they will be semi-obsolete in a year or two.

Don’t get me wrong. I know that some devices, apps and systems can work well – that is, they can make it easier to do something that was hard, or possible to do something that was impossible. That’s why we all use this stuff. But I think that how well a system works is only half the picture: the other half is how badly it fails.

Because technology fails all the time. Networked, general-purpose computing devices have so many different failure modes that they can hardly be counted. Your phone or tablet can have problems coping with something as abstract as bad Maximum Transmission Unit sizes in its network connection, or as concrete as being dropped and trodden on by your toddler.

A program that runs flawlessly one day can be derailed by another program, or an OS update, or a mysterious configuration problem – hence the old “Rename your preferences folder and restart” diagnostic procedure.

The general state of technology is to be broken; which is not so different from other complex systems, like technology’s users. You might have lost a pre-beach holiday stone thanks to diet and exercise, only to get a spot on your cheek, bad traffic on the way to the airport, a row with your spouse, and a jammed knuckle from your suitcase handle. Human beings who can soldier on and stay happy and functional in the face of adversity are said to be “resilient,” which means that they fail well.

After all, it’s no good being the world’s happiest, best-adjusted, nicest person if you fall to pieces the minute you get a paper-cut. And that goes double for interpersonal systems: any couple can be happy when everything is going right, but no marriage can survive unless both of its participants are capable of soldiering on when things are going pear-shaped.

I don’t use Android tablets and phones because I hate Apple; I most certainly don’t use them because I love Google. And I don’t prefer Android to iOS because it works better than Apple — in some aspects, it does, in some aspects it doesn’t.

I use Android because I don’t trust Google. Sure, I trust and like individual googlers, and admire many of the things the company has managed – but I don’t for one moment think that Google’s management is making its decisions in order to make me happy, fulfilled and free.

I think there are good days when Google’s management might believe that helping me attain those ends will make it more money, but if it were to believe that making me miserable would enrich its shareholders without alienating too many of its key personnel and partners, my happiness would cease to matter in the slightest.

So why use Android? Because it requires less trust in Google than using iOS requires that you trust Apple. iOS has one official store, and it’s illegal in most places to buy and install apps except through this store. If you and Apple differ about which apps you need, you have to break the law to get your iPhone or iPad to run the app that Apple rejected.

Jailbroken iOS devices have sometimes been targeted by Apple security updates that render them inoperable, and jailbreakers have a reputation for not keeping their devices up-to-date.

By contrast, Android allows you to run apps from any store you choose. Google still rejects plenty of apps submitted to its store, but if you don’t like Google’s choices, you can decide to make some of your own.

That’s failing well.

More of the internal workings of iOS are secret than their equivalent workings in the Android world. Apple’s operating system runs more DRM processes that are intended to allow code to run that treats you as an untrusted adversary and refuses to accept your commands. Not least, Apple has to run all those processes aimed at stopping you from choosing to use an app that Apple hasn’t blessed (and collected its 30% commission on).

I prefer Android because it’s relative openness means more people can and do inspect its workings to ensure it is doing what Google claims it is doing. I prefer Android because when Google decides to leave out a feature that users might want – such as tethering – the people making alternative OSes for the platform stick that feature in, and shame Google into adding it in subsequent versions.

My mobile phone can track where I go. It can record my voice and image, and the voices and images of those around me. It can leak email, voicemail, texts, and passwords. In the time since I’ve gotten a mobile phone, each passing year has meant that I rely on my phone for more things, and I don’t expect that will change.

Android and iOS will both fail their users in the years to come. Not a lot, but often enough, and dramatically enough, that it’s worth ensuring that those failures are as minimal as possible.

I’d like an official Android version without the DRM, with complete source code, and with generally greater transparency into the device and its ecosystem. I like the alternative Android OS, CyanogenMod, because it has many of those things. Functionally, a CyanogenMod Android phone and a stock Android phone work in much the same way, but CyanogenMod phones fail better.

Our relationship to technology is this: We’ve jammed ourselves into the cockpits of supersonic jets that are being constantly redesigned as they hurtle around the planet, in dangerously close proximity to everyone else’s supersonic jet. It’s good to pay attention to how fast our jets go, and how comfortable the upholstery is, but the thing we really need to keep our eyes on is what happens when they crack up, when their navigation systems go awry, and when they get a bad upgrade.

When you’re moving that fast, with that much at stake, failure is much more important than success.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

Filed under: Featured, Gadgets, News, OpenSource, Reviews

Google and Facebook face new privacy code

Alternatives to Bloglines

Powered by Guardian.co.ukThis article titled “Google and Facebook face new privacy code” was written by Josh Halliday, for guardian.co.uk on Wednesday 3rd November 2010 16.26 Asia/Calcutta

Individuals would be able to get redress against internet companies such as Google or Facebook if they feel they have invaded their privacy, under a code of internet conduct being proposed by the culture minister, Ed Vaizey.

The code would be an updated and more concise version of the code for privacy online (PDF) which is used by the Information Commissioner’s Office, whom Vaizey is understood to be meeting today to push his proposal.

Vaizey, the Conservative MP for Wantage and Didcot, last week likened this prospective mediation service to the Press Complaints Commission, which works to resolve complaints by members of the public about information published in the UK press.

“One wants at least to attempt to give consumers some opportunity to have a dialogue with internet companies, as they would be able to do if a newspaper had inadvertently published that information,” he said. “There is huge scope for self-regulation.”

Vaizey is understood to be meeting with the UK information commissioner (ICO) today to suggest a refreshed code of conduct to be signed up to by internet businesses such as Google and Facebook.

The minister wants businesses to sign up to an updated and more concise version of the ICO’s code of conduct, and then display that in a prominent place on their home page with a link to the code. It has been described by one well-placed observer as “the first step towards a proper internet bill of rights”.

During a parliamentary debate on privacy and the internet last week, Vaizey said that “more well-known and legitimate websites” should be made to sign-up to the code, saying later that both Google and Facebook would be required to discuss opportunities for redress for aggrieved citizens.

“Critical momentum could be built up if more well-known and legitimate websites signed up to the code, made that plain on their home pages and allowed consumers to see what that code states,” he said.

Privacy and the internet has been accelerated to the forefront of public debate across the world this year following a number of significant and large-scale breaches. Facebook, which signed up its 500 millionth user worldwide earlier this year, worried users – and the European commission’s data protection working party – with its rollback of privacy provisions. Google, meanwhile, continues to face unprecedented class actions and investigations around the world into its “mistakencollection of personal data from personal Wi-Fi connections by Street View cars.

Vaizey will also write to internet service providers and internet companies to propose a new mediation service, which would give people who feel their privacy has been breached another means of redress.

Facebook said of the proposals: “Facebook is an industry leader in giving people the best tools to protect their privacy. We look forward to hearing more about Mr Vaizey’s plans and continuing to work with both him and the ICO.” Google declined to comment.

A spokesman for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills said: “We are keen to explore ideas for how we can work together with industry to improve the customer experience around complaints and problems with service as well as other online issues, including a mediation service.

“Ed Vaizey will write to internet service providers and other key players to set up a meeting to explore various options.”

The ICO, widely thought to have insufficient power to enforce punishments against companies found to have breached privacy laws, will be given new capacity to protect citizens in line with new European Union privacy directives. The directive states that, among other things, the UK should establish a regulator to make sure the interception of users’ communication is within the boundaries of the law.

The European commission is in the process of taking the UK government to court for breaching EU laws on internet privacy over complaints about the Phorm activity-tracking web system and its failure to change the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) and the Data protection Act (DPA), the latter of which empowers the ICO.

In April, the ICO was given the power to issue monetary penalty notices to companies it rules have committed “serious breaches” of the Data Protection Act. Rob Halfon, the Conservative MP for Harlow, said last week that the ICO was prevented from taking stronger action against Google after its Street View cars collected sensitive Wi-Fi data because the Data Protection Act at the time limited its powers.

Halfon yesterday tabled around 50 written questions to the Ministry of Justice about the ICO, including a number on the office’s investigation into the Google Wi-Fi data.

The ICO ruled in July that Google had not breached data protection laws, but has subsequently said it will re-examine the data, following revelations uncovered by investigations from privacy commissioners in other countries. Last month Google admitted that the data harvested when its Street View cars mapped some locations was more sensitive than previously thought, in some cases obtaining full emails and passwords.

In a statement released on Monday, the ICO said: “Whilst we continue to work with our other international counterparts on this issue we will not be panicked into a knee jerk response to an alarmist agenda.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

Filed under: Featured, Gadgets, News, OpenSource, Reviews, Top Sites