Or they could update to iOS 6.1.6 on their iPhone 3GS (previous versions of iOS did not have this bug)

The update is available to all supported devices (From the iPhone 3GS running 6.1.x and up).

Or they should be better worded.

"I want to stop all electronic devices from passively collecting visible light but still desire riders' eyes to passively collect visible light."

To be fair, Apple does a hell of a lot to prevent user stupidity from installing Malware. Such as blacklisting known malware nearly immediately (as soon as Apple reverse engineers it, its signature is pushed out to ever mac user via a list that is updated every 24 hours).

The sad thing is and a major security flaw of Apple's is that they create trust with third parties based on code signing. This allows code signed malware to skip the normal malware checks in Mac OS X. (It's super trivial to get multiple code signing certs from Apple and Apple doesn't verify code certs applications for individuals)

I'm pretty sure this is not about sharing code, but about collaborating on needed features via a shared spec. So both compilers implement something a standard way instead of coming up with new features independently.

And RMS' complain isn't about the license, it's about the modular design of clang/LLVM and the fact it can be used piecemeal in other software projects.

You make a good point. Where are the Android release notes for each release? Where are the security advisories published when they've fixed a vulnerability?

Apple documents how it figures out the encryption keys... you could look that up instead of saying "hopefully". Furthermore, you can't "guess" it in an offline attack easily. Well, if you have six months or so and a robot arm to do it, then maybe. Every time you enter an incorrect PIN, it takes longer and longer before you can attempt a different pin. Going from 0000 to 0010 will take around half a business day. Then it gets worse!

Google has removed apps that are banned from the Google Play store from people's devices remotely. Apple has not.

Is an unknown fear in the future somehow better for you to digest than that fear being played out in the past and present? (Apple's "may" versus Google's "has and does and will continue to do")

I still have the "Asian Boobs" apps I downloaded off the App Store on my iPhone even though it has long, long since been removed from App Store. (Yes, it's actually called "Asian Boobs")

Where was that part?

If you used the resource fork as a database, you deserve to DIAF.

From the carriers that complain they can't make as much profit on an iPhone as they do on other phones? The carriers want to increase the price of the iPhones to consumers to increase their profit margins.

Price-fixing is artificially keeping a product's cost higher than the product is worth via collusion. Display manufacturers, various entertainment stores (Sam Goody), and memory makers have done this a lot in the past.

The opposite of price-fixing is negotiating a deal so carriers cannot charge a higher price on the iPhone than the iPhone's going rate in that region. Carriers want to carry the iPhone, but they also want to charge much more than the MSRP for the iPhone. Apple says, "You can't do both!"

Basically, the carriers in taiwan want to engage in price-fixing for the iPhone, but the agreement they willingly made with Apple prevents it.

Because string theory isn't science!