I still don't understand why businesses would leave BB to Android. They say it's the lack of apps that makes go elsewhere but my question is, is Angry Birds and Netflix really that much more important than a secure mobile infrastructure?
But I thought the press lies and makes stuff up? Oh... my bad.... they only lie when it is something perceived as negative about RIM.
Makes sense.
Problem with Android is the ease of shoving ill code into any app. The second problem is how easy you can put it on Google market and something happens only when there's complaints. You don't normally ever see this in Apple's or Rim's markets.
I still don't understand why businesses would leave BB to Android. They say it's the lack of apps that makes go elsewhere but my question is, is Angry Birds and Netflix really that much more important than a secure mobile infrastructure?
This argument only makes sense if the entirety of the "app gap" between BB and Android was the presence of absence of these two apps. However, since it's not, the argument is moot.
Lookout Mobile Security identified an industry first this Wednesday, discovering a malicious software package specifically designed to download to Android phones from hacked websites.
The trojan, called NotCompatible, comes in the guise of an automatically downloaded update file (Update.apk), which requires user confirmation to install.
The user will have to acknowledge that they want to install a program, with the set of permissions being shown as well. If a program that you didn't look for asks to install itself, then it's your own damn fault, not the OS. This happens on Windows and Mac as well.
This argument only makes sense if the entirety of the "app gap" between BB and Android was the presence of absence of these two apps. However, since it's not, the argument is moot.
I wouldn't presume to speak for Economist, but I believe his point, in essence, is that the pros of using Android greatly outweigh any of the perceived cons. Thus, companies have incentive to switch. In terms of ecosystem (read: apps, etc.), Android and RIM hardly have a level playing field.
Additionally, FIPS-certified Android devices do exist. Plus, Lookout (the company sweet enough to release this finding) is there for the poor consumers.
Ew I was interested in reading this and then noticed the disgusting troll infestation about halfway through (based on dumb-posts, and "likes" of dumb-posts).
Good old, Lookout... such an altruistic company... LOL.
That darned, biased press. Always looking for negative stories on Android, and spreading disinformation.
So how is the article not correct?
Remember, I'm currently using a Skyrocket, which I happen to really enjoy. I'm not trolling you, just looking for the rebuttal to the points the article makes.
Remember, I'm currently using a Skyrocket, which I happen to really enjoy. I'm not trolling you, just looking for the rebuttal to the points the article makes.
Oh, I don't think the article is wrong at all. I was just poking fun at the crowd that says that the press hates RIM, and posts nothing negative about Apple or Google.
Oh, I don't think the article is wrong at all. I was just poking fun at the crowd that says that the press hates RIM, and posts nothing negative about Apple or Google.
Ah!!!! Gotcha. I'll be putting my Skyrocket in the drawer for a while, and i'll take out my iPhone.
Getting back to the OP's point, why shouldn't BlackBerry leverage their security superiority? Let me address a few of the comments made: The linked article merely illustrates an old security axiom, "security is a journey, not a destination." We all know that.
An assertion that Android malware will always ask for permissions is false. No knowledgeable person would claim that a consumer Android device with a bolt-on enterprise package containing a FIPS certified crypto module is more secure than a properly configured enterprise BlackBerry.
Sure, security vendors hype exploits to sell product, but they also educate the public about real dangers, and they make OS and app vendors a bit more accountable.
I think 99% of people other than businesses do not care nor think about how secure their phones are so RIM going toward that isn't going to really bring in any new customers or get others to switch from what they currently use.
Getting back to the OP's point, why shouldn't BlackBerry leverage their security superiority? Let me address a few of the comments made: The linked article merely illustrates an old security axiom, "security is a journey, not a destination." We all know that.
An assertion that Android malware will always ask for permissions is false. No knowledgeable person would claim that a consumer Android device with a bolt-on enterprise package containing a FIPS certified crypto module is more secure than a properly configured enterprise BlackBerry.
Sure, security vendors hype exploits to sell product, but they also educate the public about real dangers, and they make OS and app vendors a bit more accountable.
Now if those knowledgeable people could be convinced to get BlackBerry devices, all will be good.
