Hi All,

My wife is considering replacing her outgoing Android
tablet with an iPad for the better quality hardware.

She is really angry at Google's interference/spying
on her Android tablet. Samsung uses open source
Android, but builds their own spying into the firmware.
So not an improvement.

Is iPad any worse? Is Apple also collecting information
on you and interfering with you as well?

Many thanks,
-T

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When we ask for advice, we are usually looking for an accomplice.
-- Charles Varlet de La Grange
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> My wife is considering replacing her outgoing Android
> tablet with an iPad for the better quality hardware.
>
> She is really angry at Google's interference/spying
> on her Android tablet. Samsung uses open source
> Android, but builds their own spying into the firmware.
> So not an improvement.
>
> Is iPad any worse? Is Apple also collecting information
> on you and interfering with you as well?
>
> Many thanks,
> -T

If the marketing propaganda is to be believed, Apple is respectful
of User Privacy. I choose to believe that because of Apple's past
behaviour, not for any better reason.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.

My pet rock Gordon just said nothing.

On 10/22/23 05:01, Sn!pe wrote:
> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> My wife is considering replacing her outgoing Android
>> tablet with an iPad for the better quality hardware.
>>
>> She is really angry at Google's interference/spying
>> on her Android tablet. Samsung uses open source
>> Android, but builds their own spying into the firmware.
>> So not an improvement.
>>
>> Is iPad any worse? Is Apple also collecting information
>> on you and interfering with you as well?
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> -T
>
> If the marketing propaganda is to be believed, Apple is respectful
> of User Privacy. I choose to believe that because of Apple's past
> behaviour, not for any better reason.
>

Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all
iPhones to law enforcement (two microseconds later the
bad guy would have had it as well). So one attaboy for
Apple. But they still have the ability to break into
your phone if they want too, So one awsh** for Apple.

How is iPad for forced updates?

T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 10/22/23 05:01, Sn!pe wrote:
> > T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> My wife is considering replacing her outgoing Android
> >> tablet with an iPad for the better quality hardware.
> >>
> >> She is really angry at Google's interference/spying
> >> on her Android tablet. Samsung uses open source
> >> Android, but builds their own spying into the firmware.
> >> So not an improvement.
> >>
> >> Is iPad any worse? Is Apple also collecting information
> >> on you and interfering with you as well?
> >>
> >> Many thanks,
> >> -T
> >
> > If the marketing propaganda is to be believed, Apple is respectful
> > of User Privacy. I choose to believe that because of Apple's past
> > behaviour, not for any better reason.
> >
>
> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all
> iPhones to law enforcement (two microseconds later the
> bad guy would have had it as well). So one attaboy for
> Apple. But they still have the ability to break into
> your phone if they want too, So one awsh** for Apple.
>
> How is iPad for forced updates?
>

I'm not aware of any. If you don't update you leave yourself vulnerable
to new exploits and some newer websites might not work correctly, but
I think that's about it.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.

My pet rock Gordon just said nothing.

On 10/22/23 07:10, T wrote:
> How is iPad for forced updates?

Definitely better than Microsoft. They have a popup asking whether you
want to install the update now, at night, or cancel. And the "at night"
option starts the update at the time you're least likely to need your
phone, which is super nice.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all iPhones to
> law enforcement (two microseconds later the bad guy would have had it
> as well). So one attaboy for Apple. But they still have the ability
> to break into your phone if they want too, So one awsh** for Apple.

There is no evidence of this claim.

> How is iPad for forced updates?

Apple doesn't force updates. But you'd have to be pretty foolish to
allow publicly-known vulnerabilities to remain unpatched on your
devices. There aren't many rational reasons to avoid updating Apple's
mobile devices.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all iPhones to
>> law enforcement (two microseconds later the bad guy would have had it
>> as well). So one attaboy for Apple. But they still have the ability
>> to break into your phone if they want too, So one awsh** for Apple.
>
> There is no evidence of this claim.

FBI certainly thought Apple could do it:
https://search.brave.com/search?q=apple+fbi+unlocking+iphones

Proud of Apple for sticking to their principles. (Now
if Apple will stop manufacturing in a country involved
in a mass genocide.)

>> How is iPad for forced updates?
>
> Apple doesn't force updates. But you'd have to be pretty foolish to
> allow publicly-known vulnerabilities to remain unpatched on your
> devices. There aren't many rational reasons to avoid updating Apple's
> mobile devices.

Very true.

I do believe most of folks hesitation
comes from their experience with Microsoft products.
Microsoft updates are of tragic poor quality. Some
of my costumers have said that ransomeware has caused
less damage than Microsoft updates to their system(s).

And since the device belongs to the owner, the
owner has the right to have complete control over
it, even if it is something stupid. Rental,
depends on the contract.

The last forced Android that Google foist on my
wife's Android took me about two days to fix
everything. Saying she was angry was an understatement.

Apple's "Now", "Later", or "Not-At-All" method is
fine with both my wife and I. Later gives the
option of researching if there are any unintended
side effects.

Apple has had a few bloopers come through, but they are
years and years apart, unlike Microsoft's months apart.

As a computer consultant to small business, I do a lot
of work with Microsoft products. My customers are
so scared of Microsoft updates that they do not install
good updates from other vendors, which does eventually
cause a lot of problems. Open Shell and Ice Drive suffer
a lot over this. I tell my customer, if in doubt,
call me. (Established customers get quick
questions answered for free over the phone.) Some do
and most do not.

Unfortunately, Microsoft has won the applications war.
OSx and Linux are far better OS'es. But if your business
software won't run or won't run properly on them ...

I would not have a job if not for Microsoft's poor quality.

On 2023-10-22 22:35:40 +0000, T said:
> On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all iPhones to
>>> law enforcement (two microseconds later the bad guy would have had it
>>> as well). So one attaboy for Apple. But they still have the ability
>>> to break into your phone if they want too, So one awsh** for Apple.
>>
>> There is no evidence of this claim.
>
> FBI certainly thought Apple could do it:
> https://search.brave.com/search?q=apple+fbi+unlocking+iphones
>
> Proud of Apple for sticking to their principles. (Now
> if Apple will stop manufacturing in a country involved
> in a mass genocide.)
>
>>> How is iPad for forced updates?
>>
>> Apple doesn't force updates. But you'd have to be pretty foolish to
>> allow publicly-known vulnerabilities to remain unpatched on your
>> devices. There aren't many rational reasons to avoid updating Apple's
>> mobile devices.
>
> Very true.
>
> I do believe most of folks hesitation
> comes from their experience with Microsoft products.
> Microsoft updates are of tragic poor quality.

Even if Windows wasn't an awful kludge from day one, the problem
Microsoft has is that Windows devices are made by various other
manufacturers using numerous different parts that Microsoft have to
attempt to cater for, whereas Apple is in complete control of what is
in their devices. That alone helps make MacOS far more robust than
Windows can ever be.

> Some of my costumers have said that ransomeware has caused
> less damage than Microsoft updates to their system(s).
>
> And since the device belongs to the owner, the
> owner has the right to have complete control over
> it, even if it is something stupid. Rental,
> depends on the contract.
>
> The last forced Android that Google foist on my
> wife's Android took me about two days to fix
> everything. Saying she was angry was an understatement.
>
> Apple's "Now", "Later", or "Not-At-All" method is
> fine with both my wife and I. Later gives the
> option of researching if there are any unintended
> side effects.
>
> Apple has had a few bloopers come through, but they are
> years and years apart, unlike Microsoft's months apart.
>
> As a computer consultant to small business, I do a lot
> of work with Microsoft products. My customers are
> so scared of Microsoft updates that they do not install
> good updates from other vendors, which does eventually
> cause a lot of problems. Open Shell and Ice Drive suffer
> a lot over this. I tell my customer, if in doubt,
> call me. (Established customers get quick
> questions answered for free over the phone.) Some do
> and most do not.
>
> Unfortunately, Microsoft has won the applications war.
> OSx and Linux are far better OS'es. But if your business
> software won't run or won't run properly on them ...
>
> I would not have a job if not for Microsoft's poor quality.

On 10/22/23 19:33, Your Name wrote:

>> I do believe most of folks hesitation
>> comes from their experience with Microsoft products.
>> Microsoft updates are of tragic poor quality.

> Even if Windows wasn't an awful kludge from day one, the problem
> Microsoft has is that Windows devices are made by various other
> manufacturers using numerous different parts that Microsoft have to
> attempt to cater for, whereas Apple is in complete control of what is in
> their devices. That alone helps make MacOS far more robust than Windows
> can ever be.

There is a lot of truth in your statement, with one exception.
I work with Linux too. I have come across some really poor
equipment before that had issue running Windows and that
run flawlessly on Linux.

On one instance, a windows computer got tossed into a dumpster
after a thief stole it from my customer. It refused to reinstall
or run Windows after that. I installed Fedora on it and
it ran flawlessly as a server for over five years.

So, although there is some truth in what you say about
hardware control, most of Microsoft's problem are of
their own creation and not the hardware. It is a
marketing excuse to cover for bad software.

That being said, I have been doing computer consulting
for 29 years now and have only seen two pieces of
bad Apple hardware.

On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all iPhones to
>>> law enforcement (two microseconds later the bad guy would have had
>>> it as well). So one attaboy for Apple. But they still have the
>>> ability to break into your phone if they want too, So one awsh**
>>> for Apple.
>>
>> There is no evidence of this claim.
>
> FBI certainly thought Apple could do it:

Actually, the FBI wanted Apple to change things so that they would have
the ability to break into iPhones. Not only did Apple refuse, but Apple
has steadily added even more protections to ensure they cannot access
the data stored on iPhones..

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 10/22/23 20:54, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all iPhones to
>>>> law enforcement (two microseconds later the bad guy would have had
>>>> it as well). So one attaboy for Apple. But they still have the
>>>> ability to break into your phone if they want too, So one awsh**
>>>> for Apple.
>>>
>>> There is no evidence of this claim.
>>
>> FBI certainly thought Apple could do it:
>
> Actually, the FBI wanted Apple to change things so that they would have
> the ability to break into iPhones. Not only did Apple refuse, but Apple
> has steadily added even more protections to ensure they cannot access
> the data stored on iPhones..
>

Hmmmm. I wonder why so many thought Apple could do that.
Our news media is not very reliable now-a-days

On 2023-10-23, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 10/22/23 20:54, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all iPhones
>>>>> to law enforcement (two microseconds later the bad guy would have
>>>>> had it as well). So one attaboy for Apple. But they still have
>>>>> the ability to break into your phone if they want too, So one
>>>>> awsh** for Apple.
>>>>
>>>> There is no evidence of this claim.
>>>
>>> FBI certainly thought Apple could do it:
>>
>> Actually, the FBI wanted Apple to change things so that they would
>> have the ability to break into iPhones. Not only did Apple refuse,
>> but Apple has steadily added even more protections to ensure they
>> cannot access the data stored on iPhones..
>
> Hmmmm. I wonder why so many thought Apple could do that. Our news
> media is not very reliable now-a-days

Neither are your critical thinking facilities, but that's the world we
live in.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 10/23/23 17:27, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2023-10-23, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 10/22/23 20:54, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all iPhones
>>>>>> to law enforcement (two microseconds later the bad guy would have
>>>>>> had it as well). So one attaboy for Apple. But they still have
>>>>>> the ability to break into your phone if they want too, So one
>>>>>> awsh** for Apple.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no evidence of this claim.
>>>>
>>>> FBI certainly thought Apple could do it:
>>>
>>> Actually, the FBI wanted Apple to change things so that they would
>>> have the ability to break into iPhones. Not only did Apple refuse,
>>> but Apple has steadily added even more protections to ensure they
>>> cannot access the data stored on iPhones..
>>
>> Hmmmm. I wonder why so many thought Apple could do that. Our news
>> media is not very reliable now-a-days
>
> Neither are your critical thinking facilities, but that's the world we
> live in.
>

Sticks and stones ..

On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> But they still have the ability
>> to break into your phone if they want too, So one awsh** for Apple.

> There is no evidence of this claim.

Apple's official response:

https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/answers/

Has Apple unlocked iPhones for law enforcement in the past?

No.

We regularly receive law enforcement requests for information
about our customers and their Apple devices. In fact, we
have a dedicated team that responds to these requests 24/7.
We also provide guidelines on our website for law enforcement
agencies so they know exactly what we are able to access
and what legal authority we need to see before we can help them.

For devices running the iPhone operating systems prior to
iOS 8 and under a lawful court order, we have extracted data
from an iPhone.

We’ve built progressively stronger protections into our
products with each new software release, including
passcode-based data encryption, because cyberattacks have
only become more frequent and more sophisticated. As a
result of these stronger protections that require data
encryption, we are no longer able to use the data
xtraction process on an iPhone running iOS 8 or later.

T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 10/22/23 20:54, Jolly Roger wrote:
> > On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
> >>> On 2023-10-22, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Apple did refuse to give away the code to break into all iPhones to
> >>>> law enforcement (two microseconds later the bad guy would have had
> >>>> it as well). So one attaboy for Apple. But they still have the
> >>>> ability to break into your phone if they want too, So one awsh**
> >>>> for Apple.
> >>>
> >>> There is no evidence of this claim.
> >>
> >> FBI certainly thought Apple could do it:
> >
> > Actually, the FBI wanted Apple to change things so that they would have
> > the ability to break into iPhones. Not only did Apple refuse, but Apple
> > has steadily added even more protections to ensure they cannot access
> > the data stored on iPhones..
> >
>
> Hmmmm. I wonder why so many thought Apple could do that.
> Our news media is not very reliable now-a-days
>

Back in the day there were strong rumours that the Feds were already
in the backdoor with the help of Israeli expertise and they just wanted
to greenwash that ability. Then, of course, there's the Smurf Suite:-

<https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/edward-snowden-smartphones-can-be-hacked-into-with-just-one-text-message-and-then-used-to-spy-on-their-owners-a6680546.html>

- but then again, the World is full to the brim with disinformation,
misinformation and downright lies. At the end of the day, "you pays
your money and you takes your choice."

HTH. No? Oh well...

For myself, I just try to keep the freelance black-hats out of my kit;
I take it as read that The Man is already in there; pesky boodly TLAs.

[trad. spookbait: jihad; dirty bomb; plutonium; assassinate; holy war;
Islamic State; Caliphate; Hezbollah; Hamas; Bill Burns is a d0rk]

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.

My pet rock Gordon just is.

On 2023-10-24, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 10/22/23 10:23, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>
>>> But they still have the ability to break into your phone if they
>>> want too, So one awsh** for Apple.
>
>> There is no evidence of this claim.
>
> Apple's official response:
>
> https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/answers/
>
> Has Apple unlocked iPhones for law enforcement in the past?
>
> No.
>
> We regularly receive law enforcement requests for information about
> our customers and their Apple devices. In fact, we have a dedicated
> team that responds to these requests 24/7. We also provide guidelines
> on our website for law enforcement agencies so they know exactly what
> we are able to access and what legal authority we need to see before
> we can help them.
>
> For devices running the iPhone operating systems prior to iOS 8 and
> under a lawful court order, we have extracted data from an iPhone.
>
> We’ve built progressively stronger protections into our products with
> each new software release, including passcode-based data encryption,
> because cyberattacks have only become more frequent and more
> sophisticated. As a result of these stronger protections that require
> data encryption, we are no longer able to use the data xtraction
> process on an iPhone running iOS 8 or later.

It's good you guys can admit you're wrong. Apple does not have the
ability to break into your phone if they want to.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 10/22/23 04:05, T wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> My wife is considering replacing her outgoing Android
> tablet with an iPad for the better quality hardware.
>
> She is really angry at Google's interference/spying
> on her Android tablet.  Samsung uses open source
> Android, but builds their own spying into the firmware.
> So not an improvement.
>
> Is iPad any worse?  Is Apple also collecting information
> on you and interfering with you as well?
>
> Many thanks,
> -T
>

Well now. My wife decided against the iPad when she
found our she could not run TOR and such on it.

Thank you all for the gracious tip and help!

-T

T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 10/22/23 04:05, T wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > My wife is considering replacing her outgoing Android
> > tablet with an iPad for the better quality hardware.
> >
> > She is really angry at Google's interference/spying
> > on her Android tablet. Samsung uses open source
> > Android, but builds their own spying into the firmware.
> > So not an improvement.
> >
> > Is iPad any worse? Is Apple also collecting information
> > on you and interfering with you as well?
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > -T
> >
>
>
> Well now. My wife decided against the iPad when she
> found our she could not run TOR and such on it.
>
> Thank you all for the gracious tip and help!
>
> -T

There is Onion Browser, which admittedly does not give quite the same
level of protection but might be good enough. It's recommended by the
Tor project people:

<https://onionbrowser.com>

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.

My pet rock Gordon just is.

On 11/1/23 01:13, Sn!pe wrote:
> T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 10/22/23 04:05, T wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> My wife is considering replacing her outgoing Android
>>> tablet with an iPad for the better quality hardware.
>>>
>>> She is really angry at Google's interference/spying
>>> on her Android tablet. Samsung uses open source
>>> Android, but builds their own spying into the firmware.
>>> So not an improvement.
>>>
>>> Is iPad any worse? Is Apple also collecting information
>>> on you and interfering with you as well?
>>>
>>> Many thanks,
>>> -T
>>>
>>
>>
>> Well now. My wife decided against the iPad when she
>> found our she could not run TOR and such on it.
>>
>> Thank you all for the gracious tip and help!
>>
>> -T
>
> There is Onion Browser, which admittedly does not give quite the same
> level of protection but might be good enough. It's recommended by the
> Tor project people:
>
> <https://onionbrowser.com>
>

Thank you!