That isn’t the kind of decision that turns on low level employees having passions, or some vagaries of hardware. Android eventually copied many aspects of Apple’s FBE, but only after several years — and incompletely.
-
-
Replying to @matthew_d_green @spongeclipper and
And vulnerability counting isn’t the whole story. The whole story is that Apple has much more control of the hardware, while Google (even in its own phones) has largely been assembling their own (much less widely sold) product lines from other parts.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @matthew_d_green @spongeclipper and
I’m not gonna go too far down this line because I’m not a hardware expert and it’s just speculation. But it’s hard for me to believe that Google and Apple are getting the same economies of scale on security spending, given the relative sales of their respective product lines.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
I think you can get better security through controlling the whole stack. But that doesn’t mean you’re under some moral obligation to. It’s silly to suggest that Google employees should be forming a labor union to demand more vertical integration in their product lines.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Wha?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
(
@Pinboard has been agitating for a long time for Google employees to unionize to demand better security for Android, which is unreasonable.)2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @pcwalton @matthew_d_green and
To elaborate more: Google could be doing more for Android security (and so could Apple!), but it’s not really possible to match Apple here without also controlling the whole stack, software and hardware…which is just a different business model.
1 reply 3 retweets 11 likes -
If Google wanted to match or outdo Apple in this area, do you think they couldn't do it? They've got people working on human immortality, so the idea that a Google Pixel just can't be made safe because business model is hard for me to grasp.
3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
It's within the realm of physical (vs. metaphysical ;-) action but Google chose the "low road" of OEM/ODMs they do not control tightly (as Apple does w/ its equiv), also regarding mandatory updates. Apple has higher ARPU than Android. That pays for some costs (updates, quality).
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @BrendanEich @pcwalton and
My point of reference is this: Windows was a horror show and very smart people argued that it was not possible to fix. Then Bill Gates said "fix it" and after much pain and gnashing of teeth, it was done. Is there a reason that a similar fatwa at Google could not succeed?
4 replies 1 retweet 5 likes
Windows is in the very same situation, though. Core Windows is decent in security, but OEMs load it down with all sorts of terrible crap. Microsoft has trouble fixing that because they’re a convicted monopolist (which now Google is too, in the EU…)
-
-
Put another way, I don’t think any tech company has successfully solved the “outsource consumer software to OEMs and make sure they can’t load it down with insecure crap” problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Right. Superfish e.g. OTOH
@Pinboard and@matthew_d_green are right to ask, if the encryption APIs are better (or if pixel is less secure than iPhone), why? I still think some is that they’re developing an OS for a much wider range of hardware capabilities though.0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.