[VerryBestr]

And lets not forget, that the conditions at Foxconn are better than at most other factories, according to the Fair Labor Association ...[+ more arguments defending Apple]

OK, this is off-topic ... but I've just had it with these ritualistic defenses of Apple. I say that as a long-time Mac user / administrator / fan even, and I'm writing this note on one of my 5 Macs.

Apple is a "gorilla" and has the power to change things for the better, more so than most other electronics manufacturers. I don't see how anyone could read the NY Times investigative article, for example, and not think that Apple has a problem. Here are a few excerpts relating to Apple's relentless pressure on supplier margins and on its will to effect improvements:

�You can set all the rules you want, but they�re meaningless if you don�t give suppliers enough profit to treat workers well,� said one former Apple executive with firsthand knowledge of the supplier responsibility group. �If you squeeze margins, you�re forcing them to cut safety.�
...
Many major technology companies have worked with factories where conditions are troubling. However, independent monitors and suppliers say some act differently. Executives at multiple suppliers, in interviews, said that Hewlett-Packard and others allowed them slightly more profits and other allowances if they were used to improve worker conditions.
...
Some former Apple executives say there is an unresolved tension within the company: executives want to improve conditions within factories, but that dedication falters when it conflicts with crucial supplier relationships or the fast delivery of new products. Tuesday, Apple reported one of the most lucrative quarters of any corporation in history, with $13.06 billion in profits on $46.3 billion in sales. Its sales would have been even higher, executives said, if overseas factories had been able to produce more.

Executives at other corporations report similar internal pressures. This system may not be pretty, they argue, but a radical overhaul would slow innovation. Customers want amazing new electronics delivered every year.

�We�ve known about labor abuses in some factories for four years, and they�re still going on,� said one former Apple executive who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality agreements. �Why? Because the system works for us. Suppliers would change everything tomorrow if Apple told them they didn�t have another choice.� �If half of iPhones were malfunctioning, do you think Apple would let it go on for four years?� the executive asked.
...
�If you see the same pattern of problems, year after year, that means the company�s ignoring the issue rather than solving it,� said one former Apple executive with firsthand knowledge of the supplier responsibility group. �Noncompliance is tolerated, as long as the suppliers promise to try harder next time. If we meant business, core violations would disappear.�
...
�We�ve spent years telling Apple there are serious problems and recommending changes,� said a consultant at BSR � also known as Business for Social Responsibility � which has been twice retained by Apple to provide advice on labor issues. �They don�t want to pre-empt problems, they just want to avoid embarrassments.�
...
[This] reporting is based on interviews with more than three dozen current or former employees and contractors, including a half-dozen current or former executives with firsthand knowledge of Apple�s supplier responsibility group, as well as others within the technology industry.

| http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/bu...pagewanted=all

[hootyhoo]

OK, this is off-topic ... but I've just had it with these ritualistic defenses of Apple. I say that as a long-time Mac user / administrator / fan even, and I'm writing this note on one of my 5 Macs.

Apple is a "gorilla" and has the power to change things for the better, more so than most other electronics manufacturers. I don't see how anyone could read the NY Times investigative article, for example, and not think that Apple has a problem. Here are a few excerpts relating to Apple's relentless pressure on supplier margins and on its will to effect improvements:



| http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/bu...pagewanted=all

Help me understand.

You think it's up to apple to OFFER it's contractors more money? Why shouldn't it be up to foxconn to say "hey, we're going to have to raise our prices".

How many people do you think would offer their plumber more money just because they think he may need it?

[VerryBestr]

... Wonder how the conditions at RIMs factories in Indonesia compare? Or at Quantas factories that build the Playbooks? ...

One would have to ignore a great deal of information to conclude that worker treatment in Chinese factories is equivalent to that in, for example, the Quantas factory that assembled the PlayBook.

Just one detail: When Quantas downsized the PlayBook factory, Taiwanese news reports said that worker layoffs were "voluntary" with average compensation of nearly $3,500. Would anything like that have happened in a Chinese factory?

By the way, RIM chose to put a factory in Malaysia, not Indonesia.

[VerryBestr]

Help me understand.

OK, I'll try to.

You think it's up to apple to OFFER it's contractors more money? Why shouldn't it be up to foxconn to say "hey, we're going to have to raise our prices".

Here is that quote again:

Many major technology companies have worked with factories where conditions are troubling. However, independent monitors and suppliers say some act differently. Executives at multiple suppliers, in interviews, said that Hewlett-Packard and others allowed them slightly more profits and other allowances if they were used to improve worker conditions.

This has something to do with values, I think.

[hootyhoo]

OK, I'll try to.



Here is that quote again:



This has something to do with values, I think.

Which is fine and dandy for hp, but again, why isn't foxconn responsible for their own pricing? I can't imagine too many businesses relying on the goodness of their customers for their profitability or the salaries of their employees.

I have a good idea. For those who really want to help their favored company, refuse to pay retail and offer said company more money. I have a feeling RIM would love this idea.

[Rootbrian]

I agree with the OP and the linked news, even about Jared co, screw their datamining info selling apps. We've got better ones. I'm careful to verify permissions with anything I install or use. I even deny some permissions after the app is installed, if it makes any changes.

[T�nis]

Zahdoo is a Personal Assistant Apps! It is a true hybrid, working via Voice Notes or keyboard commands. Unlike other personal assistant apps, Zee works in all levels of ambient sound.Mobile App allows Android users to quickly search, compare prices, read reviews, share products with friends, access Gold Box Deals, and make purchases on zahdoo.com using a simple yet elegant interface. To make on-the-go shopping and price comparison even easier, the Mobile App includes helpful shopping features that allow users to quickly check prices and availability by scanning a barcode, snapping a photo, or typing a search.Refer:zahdoo.com

This spammer forgot to mention that in addition to crashing and freezing your R2D2 smartphone, this rubbish app also steals your personal information and sells it.

[T�nis]

... I'm careful to verify permissions with anything I install or use. I even deny some permissions after the app is installed, if it makes any changes.

When do you set the permissions? And how do you know the app has tried to change anything? Whenever I've installed an app (always followed by uninstalling) I've denied the app trusted application status. Usually I find that the app won't even work or load properly without being granted every permission under the sun. I recently was almost inclined to pay $10 for IM+ but decided to try the free version first. I didn't give it trusted application status. It wasn't long (I hadn't even done anything) before the thing wanted to access the phone. Why??? It wanted to call home? I just uninstalled it.

[wuulfy]

Isnt this whole industry called INFORMATION technology?

[SaintThomasAquinas]

That's a start I guess. You're also going to have to make sure you call ANYONE who has you in their contact list who doesn't own a BB, and ask them to delete you, otherwise YOUR info is "out there" for the taking.

And from now on..i'm guessing all Blackberry owners concerned about having their info out there will have to start screening who they give their phone number to.

Aunt Maybel: I just got a new iPhone!

BB Owner: I'm sorry Auntie..you're going to have to delete me from your Contacts, and will no longer be able to get a hold of me except by land line.

Aunt Maybel: What?! Why?!

BB Owner: I don't trust my number in anyone's phone, as Google or Apple might use it and try to sell me something. Dont' worry though..it's not just you. I've been asking ALL my friends and family who don't have BB's to remove me from their contacts too. I've also decided to not use FB anymore, as I don't trust it either. I just can't have my info "out there", as someone may try to use it maliciously or store it without my permission.

Aunt Maybel: Ok... Have you been taking your medication?

I do not want to misrepresent your views so please be patient while I see if I understand your position.

1. Any attempt at Privacy is apparently futile in your world and particularly if we want to use technology.

2.Generally speaking Blackberry users do not screen or consider with whom they share their cell phone number with. Although in a futile attempt to curb their privacy concerns in the future they should start to screen people who would be given this information.

3. Based on the skit you present it is your belief that any concern regarding your constitutionally guarenteed right to privacy is a clear sign that you have become a candidate for medication as it would seem those people are mentally unstable? This position is itself making light of people with legitimate psychiatric problems.

Your comments read like trolling and your sarcastic and condescending tone suggests that you feel that only a moron who is mentally unstable would desire privacy.

Let me say that whatever your core belief is regarding an individuals right to privacy, which you seem to have expressed in your post. It is my opinion that you have ignored the central theme of the story and have become distracted by defining who would want/need/value their privacy.

What has caused the criticism is yet another companies lack of consideration for their users. The outrage is that the data collection was done without consent and there was no opt in/opt out process or disclosure with regard to the data collection. The founder went on to say, "We will continue to be transparent." I don't understand that statement given that according to the article it was a programmer who determined that this was in fact being done and not a disclosure made by the company or during the installation of the App.

[SaintThomasAquinas]

It's no different than those who put up with sh*t and abuse from RIM just for a physical KB..

Speaking only for myself I have yet to be given any "sh*t and abuse" by RIM. I haven't been on the forums as long as others but I don't recall anyone claiming here that RIM has given them "sh*t and abuse". I have read where many people have been given "sh*t and abuse" by their wireless provider though.

Can you cite some of the posts on CB where someone claims to have received "sh*t and abuse" directly from RIM itself in the name of having a Physical keyboard as you assert in your post please?

I am not singling you out for special attention here but I believe your replies thus far to this thread specifically have been misleading and trollish?

[SaintThomasAquinas]

I completely agree that it *should not* happen..but my point is, BB users who tout security, and think their info is completely safe, are negating the fact that any other user who has his/her info stored on their non-BB phone, aren't as secure as they think they are.

I guess my point is, unless you the user are keeping a strict lock down on who has your info in their phone...then it's pointless to say "well I have a BB..my info is secure"..when in fact it isn't..simply because you've given it out to someone's who phone may/may not be secure.

EDIT: Of course, i'm only referring to phone number, email address, as info that could possibly "be out there" from another user. Anything else stored on a personal BB such as CC info, passwords etc would still be secure.

If you do, "completely agree that it *should not* happen..." then forgive me but you appear to be playing both sides of the argument when you take into account your post above which as I read it clearly pokes fun at anyone with a concern about this practice. You go so far as to suggest in your dialogue that people who not only are concerned but make an attempt to remedy their concern by changing their behavior may need medication. As a result you due a disservice to people who may have a legitimate psychiatric condition.

[SaintThomasAquinas]

I guess my point is, unless you the user are keeping a strict lock down on who has your info in their phone...then it's pointless to say "well I have a BB..my info is secure"..when in fact it isn't..simply because you've given it out to someone's who phone may/may not be secure.

My point of view is Blackberry users claim to be more secure is in the context of their Blackberry device being compromised itself either remotely or directly not that they are not vulnerable to other attack vectors such as social engineering of family friends, dumpster diving or vulnerabilities in other mobile platforms [Android, iOS] as used by people with whom they communicate or share information with etc.

[SaintThomasAquinas]

in fact I couldn't give a rat's a** about aunt Maybel.

Wow! Aunt Maybel here is hoping you are not reading this while drinking your morning Coffee. I have no idea what misstep on your part may have caused such anger but hopefully the two of you reconcile sooner rather than later.

But seriously... When taken in the proper context of Social Networking your are not the client but the product. Hence the reason it is free. They sell/share/market you or your demographic profile to advertisers and anyone else willing to pay them for such information and that is how they keep the lights on and the paychecks flowing.

[T�nis]

... But seriously... When taken in the proper context of Social Networking your are not the client but the product. Hence the reason it is free. They sell/share/market you or your demographic profile to advertisers and anyone else willing to pay them for such information and that is how they keep the lights on and the paychecks flowing.

That's why I try to minimize my involvement with all that bs. Yea, I use all the free emails and free instant messengers (BBM is included with no ads, and I'm happy to pay for that), but there's no facebook, twitter, etc. for this kid.

[Rootbrian]

When do you set the permissions? And how do you know the app has tried to change anything? Whenever I've installed an app (always followed by uninstalling) I've denied the app trusted application status. Usually I find that the app won't even work or load properly without being granted every permission under the sun. I recently was almost inclined to pay $10 for IM+ but decided to try the free version first. I didn't give it trusted application status. It wasn't long (I hadn't even done anything) before the thing wanted to access the phone. Why??? It wanted to call home? I just uninstalled it.

I think the trusted status is for the firewall or something else. Going into options and application permissions, once you select an app or component, from there you could change it to your liking.

[Rootbrian]

That's why I try to minimize my involvement with all that bs. Yea, I use all the free emails and free instant messengers (BBM is included with no ads, and I'm happy to pay for that), but there's no facebook, twitter, etc. for this kid.

There is identica, which is totally free, community run and open source. No ads, no product and it's decentralized. Same for D* (Diaspora), the open source alternative to facebook.

[Rootbrian]

Posting again: Let's stay on topic, unless we want the mods to close the thread up.

[T�nis]

I think the trusted status is for the firewall or something else. Going into options and application permissions, once you select an app or component, from there you could change it to your liking.

I clicked on "more info" when the question about trusted status came up. It said trusted status makes it so an app doesn't have to ask you permission each time it wants to access parts of your phone. I clicked "no.". That's why the BlackBerry asked me if I want to let IM+ access the phone when it wanted to.