Comment Banking on a Fire Phone (Score 1) 245
a lot of apps (e.g. almost all mobile banking apps) are only available via Google Play
Which major bank's app isn't on Amazon?
a lot of apps (e.g. almost all mobile banking apps) are only available via Google Play
Which major bank's app isn't on Amazon?
Selling your blood plasma to pay for motor fuel amounts to that.
A car is arguably safer than being kicked out of a closing store and then arrested for sleeping in public because the buses have stopped running for the weekend.
consider the fact that your laptop's webcam cannot be accessed from outside sources unless you allow said outside sources into your computer.
Most people who buy a device are unaware of what outside sources had already been allowed into the device when it left the factory.
Financing a car (new or used) should be a last resort.
So where should someone entering the workforce for the first time find the money to buy his first car to get him back and forth to his first job?
On not-Android operating systems, you can choose to deny a particular app access to a particular permission if you don't use features of that app that require access to that particular permission. For example, on iOS, you can deny an app access to your contacts without blocking the rest of the app from installing, and the App Store Review Guidelines state that the rest of an app must continue working without the permission. Android permissions commonly cited as useful to some but overly intrusive to others include "access network state" (be notified when Internet access comes back so that the app can sync data for offline use), "start after boot" (be notified when the device has been turned back on so that the app can sync data for offline use), and contacts (spell-check your friends' names). One could in theory ship a bare-bones app without these features and make separate helper service apps that just grant each of these permissions to the main app, but I'm told that would create a poor user experience.
The Huffington Post reports on prominent Indian websites withdrawing from Facebook's internet.org initiative.
Isn't this the same as the now dead AOL?
Yes. AOL owns The Huffington Post.
Wouldn't [verification of Windows system files in an anti-cheating service for online video games] break every time a Windows Update comes through?
I imagine that such an anti-cheating service will switch to blacklist behavior on Patch Tuesday until the majority have provided the correct hashes of updated files to the anti-cheating service provider.
I haven't heard of this behavior before.
I've read reports of Punkbuster and Games for Windows Live applying something like this. From this post:
Wine could fully implement the Windows API - but how it return the same hashs, etc. for operating system files?? So it will **never** fully support such products as GFWL, Punkbuster, etc. (that can use low-level access to files to verify that the OS is "genuine").
but you can install other browsers on an iphone
Technically correct, but not helpfully correct. Browsers other than Safari are wrappers around WebKit for iOS, and they share the same limitations as Safari. Porting any rendering engine other than WebKit for iOS is both forbidden by the App Store Review Guidelines and technically blocked by the strict W^X policy of the iOS executable loader.
The sites can choose to have ugly html fallbacks
If you have created a document in an app, how do you upload a document to an "ugly HTML fallback" when the only approved HTML rendering engine refuses to provide an upload control that's been around since the HTML 3.2 days?
<input type="file"> is an HTML standard that has been around longer than the iPhone.
Not supporting something is very different from intentionally blocking something.
Apple intentionally blocks third-party web browsers that are not just thin wrappers around Safari. Therefore, features that Safari doesn't support and which third parties could have implemented but for this blocking are features that Apple intentionally blocks.
In the US consumers pay once for internet and then have access to all non-private services with no added cost.
Comcast (cable) caps at 300 GB per month. Exede (satellite) caps at 10 GB per month. Cellular Internet caps even lower. If you read the article, you'll discover that it is about cellular Internet.
Which jail is that? I'm writing this on a Mac
Unlike Macs, iPhones ship with cellular radios. From the article: "Internet.org is a partnership the partnership between Facebook and seven mobile phone companies" (my emphasis). This makes me think Anonymous Coward had iOS in mind, not OS X. And unlike OS X, iOS has a jail.
No Apple device restricts which websites a user can visit.
Perhaps that depends on what you mean by "visit". Even if you exclude sites that rely on SWF or JAR components, it took until iOS 6 for Safari to support <input type="file">, and it took until iOS 8 for Safari to support WebGL outside vetted iAd modules. Until then, Apple was restricting users from visiting web sites that rely on those web platform features by restricting browsers on iOS from implementing them. And I'm under the impression that support for <input type="file"> is still woefully incomplete.
Sometimes the MPAA/DGA will say a distinction should be made, sometimes not.
Which explains Precious: Based on the novel Push by Sapphire to avoid a similarly titled film directed by Paul McGuigan. (I'm glad we didn't get Precious: Based on the novel The Lord of the Rings by Tolkien.) On the other hand, there are two Nine movies released in 2009: one with Sackboy and the other a musical directed by Rob Marshall.
A failure will not appear until a unit has passed final inspection.
