Apple Maps: The Disaster (And How the Competition Fares)

For iOS6, Apple realised the importance of mapping software as part of an ecosystem and decided to ditch Google Maps in favour of its own offering. This is fine in theory, but the problem is Apple has not got the maps to a particularly useful standard before pulling the plug on Google’s. This has led to a backlash from users, and even led to TomTom, the supplier, speaking out in defence of its service so it doesn’t get caught up in the criticism.

So what’s wrong with Apple’s maps exactly? A whole new Tumblr page has been created especially to show the problems, and some images can be seen below:

 

A bumpy landing lays ahead
Oulu is the biggest city in Northern Finland, but iOS doesn’t know where to find it
This is Bogota, Colombia. Apparently.

 

Mashable also has another collection of iOS6 map photos

 

This is Apple’s idea of walking navigation. The red pin marks where the blue line should be going
Mumbai does actually exist.
Looks like the Brooklyn Bridge needs some structural attention.
 

Not missing a beat in recent months, Nokia has used this opportunity to explain how its own mapping services are the industry leaders. The new aggressive marketing from Nokia is a moment to revel in for its consumers, given the company’s reluctance in the past to hype its own innovations. In the arena of maps, Google is considered the one to beat. That may be true for mindshare, but when it comes to the most superior product, Nokia stands without peers.

 

Somehow, Apple is still employing its ‘reality distortion’ field and telling people that “it’s the best mapping program on any mobile platform“. The world begs to differ Apple…

Apple vs Samsung. And the winner is…Windows Phone

As of this week, Apple is walking away with a ruling that dictates Samsung copied many aspects of the iPhone. Samsung is set to pay out over $1 billion in what boils down to way over-inflated patent infringement. Now Samsung will of course appeal and attempt to have this decision mitigated as much as possible in order to save a few quid and its own backsides. However over inflated, out of proportion this whole fiasco was, one can be certain that somewhere in the corner of the court room, Microsoft and Nokia look at each other, nod their heads and smile.

What the general public now will “learn” from the past events will be various interpretations of “Android Copied iPhone”. It isn’t just Samsung though, so shouldn’t that also apply to HTC phones as well? The answer is simply yes, however, as the lawsuits Apple and Samsung filed against each other involved hardware as well, this battle was between the Korean Giants and Cupertino Fruits. There are two likely reasons why it was Samsung who were in court, not another Android OEM. The first one is that at any given time, only one Android maker is making profits. That was HTC at one point, but is currently Samsung. That makes it a prime target for Apple, as when Steve Jobs said he was prepared to go nuclear on destroying Android, it’s wise to choose the company with the biggest public perception. Secondly, whereas HTC has its own designs, as do LG and Sony, Samsung was dumb enough to copy the hardware aesthetics of the iPhone:

The main difference is that Samsung’s offering is slightly taller, and the Home button is rectangular rather than a circle. The dock even mimics the colours of the iPhone’s. Worse still, Samsung applied this look to many of its phones.

The mobile industry is heading in a single direction and has been since the first iPhone came out. The large touch screen interface, generally easy to use OSes and UIs, push email and installable apps were bound to emerge on any platform as technology advances. The importance is who gets their stamp on an improved existing idea first; and that person (company) will then become the school child in a playground who thinks he’s reinvented how to build a sand castle and will challenge anyone who says otherwise.

So where does Windows Phone stand then? For the past 18 months, every Windows Phone review has noted the radically different UI and the way things work. However, beneath the surface, all is still the same – easy to navigate UI, touch screen interface, apps. I’m not for a second saying that any of the items on WP are copied from any other company. I’m merely highlighting that the same functions can be integrated well into a phone OS without infringing anything, and Apple noted as such during the courtcase. The simple rule of thumb is just to be original, something many companies, technology or not, seem to be severely lacking these days.

Does Windows Phone have an advantage now? I would say a profound yes. While Apple and Samsung now tread very carefully, which means development will slow, Microsoft has a clean slate to push out as many new and exciting features and devices as it can. Plus for customers like me who do see the similarities in Android and iOS, it may be refreshing to actually change to a new phone OS in Q4 2012. The ruling against Samsung may even make the Korean technology company to spend more time on its Windows Phone 8 offerings; although it has released some Windows Phones already, Android has always been its main focus. However, knowing that Apple isn’t on a witchunt for Windows Phone may be a key incentive for it – but it will have to think up some new hardware designs.

The first round of the battle in the ever-growing smartphone wars has been fought. Apple emerged victorious, Samsung lost in court, but the  true winner to me looks to be Microsoft.

Microsoft Gets Motorola Android Phones Banned in USA

The International Trade Commission has ruled that Motorola’s Android devices are banned from the USA until the mobile company agrees patent infringement with Microsoft.

There’s something of an industry joke that Microsoft earns more money from Android than it does Windows Phone – and, indeed, more than Google earns from Android. Almost all of the Android OEMs have agreed a settlement with Microsoft whereby they pay a royalty fee for each handset sold, but Motorola has refused to do so. The end result was a patent infringement claim by Microsoft that has resulted in Motorola’s Android devices being banned. What’s particularly intriguing about this is that the Droid series has been successful in America, combining a marketable name (Droid) with a range of devices that made it a good comeback for Motorola.

A few short years ago Motorola had all but slipped into obscurity, so the Android lifeline it received it will no doubt want to keep. That leaves it with two choices: amend the software so it no longer uses Microsoft’s patents, or pay to licence it from Microsoft to keep selling the phones as they are.

The ITC ruled that the Motorola Atrix, Xoom and Droid infringed a Microsoft patent relating to Exchange ActiveSync technology, and the order prohibits “the unlicensed entry for consumption of mobile devices, associated software and components thereof covered by claims 1, 2, 5, or 6 of the United States Patent No. 6,370,566 and that are manufactured abroad by or on behalf of, or imported by or on behalf of, Motorola”. So while the devices themselves have not received banishment, the ruling places into effect a ban on the devices until amendments to the software or an agreement with Microsoft is made.

With Barnes & Noble recently settling with Microsoft for its Android-powered Nook, Motorola is the only major Android maker without a patent licensing deal with Microsoft, and Microsoft itself estimates that its licenses cover more than 70% of all Android devices (phones and tablets) in the USA.

Despite the ruling, Motorola doesn’t seem too concerned, as Jennifer Erickson, a spokesperson for the company, has said that “Although we are disappointed by the Commission’s ruling…Motorola Mobility will not experience any impact in the near term, as the Commission’s ruling is subject to a $0.33/per unit bond during the 60 day Presidential review period.” What this means is that the ruling is not yet final, President Obama has to review it within 60 days who can, if he so chooses, overturn it on the grounds of public policy. Beyond that, Motorola has said it is considering appealing.

While this battle may go on a little longer, it isn’t one-sided when it comes to the two tech giants. Another ITC judge ruled in favour of Motorola in another case, that Microsoft is infringing four of Motorola’s patents. The result of that was a ban on Windows 7 PCs and the Xbox 360 gaming console in Germany. Predictably, Microsoft is appealing the decision.

Android Anti-Malware Software Not Catching Malware

It isn’t a good time to be a user of Android. Not only is Google being sued by two separated individuals (one for invasion of privacy on his phone after Google’s new ‘privacy’ policy, the other for being caught by a Google camera for Streetview while urinating in his garden), it is also being sued by BT, Microsoft and Apple. Not only is the search giant itself constantly plagued with trouble, so too is its mobile operating system Android.

It’s no secret that Android has more than its fair share of malware and ‘trouble’ apps in its Market – giving a bad name to open-source software, although in reality it’s nothing to do with Android being open-source (which can be only be claimed in the most tenuous way) but Google’s “we don’t really give a shit, we’re only in it for the advertising anyway” approach.

Users concerned about rogue apps would install one of the various anti-malware apps available in the same way PC users install anti-virus. But recent tests found that two-thirds of the anti-malware scanners available for Android aren’t up to the job, including Comodo, McAfee, NetQin and Bullguard.

AV-Test put 41 separate malware scanners through testing, and almost two-thirds (66%) are unreliable and not to be trusted to do their job. How unreliable? Of the 618 types of malware tested, the scanners picked up less than 65%. The ones that are up to the job are the professional packages that we expect to work, and they caught over 90% of the Android malware that they were exposed to – Dr Web, Lookout, Zoner, Kaspersky, Ikarus, F-Secure and Avast.

There were also those products that scored better than 65% but less than 90%, and again these are names we expect to do well catching malware – AVG, ESET, Norton/Symantec and Webroot among them.

In addition to that, there were some that scored less than 40%, and while none of them are from recognised software makers, most of them failed to acknowledge that a week-known Trojan had been opened, let alone finding anything during a routine scan.

The problem with these results is the sheer amount of malware targeting Android, and thus its large amount of users. According to AV-Test there were over 11,000 different types of Android malware, and to give a context of how quickly that number has appeared, there were only 2,000 at the end of October 2011. The malware includes phishing and banking Trojans, spyware, SMS fraud Trojans, fake installers and premium diallers, and with it all lurking in the Market, the very least you want (if not a new operating system) is a reliable anti-malware scanner.

 

As if it isn’t enough that Google can’t even keep track of what’s entering its Market, it appears it can’t even be trusted to properly code its own software, as it is revealed that there is a weakness in Android phones that makes it possible for attackers to record phone calls secretly, monitor location data and gain access to other private data – without the user even knowing.

According to a paper written by researchers from the North Caroline State University, Android phones by HTC, Samsung, Motorola and Google contain code that grant powerful capabilities to apps that are not trusted, and that the “explicit capability leaks” circumvent key security defences Android has that require users to give permission to apps to access personal information and functions, such as location and text messages. Part of Android’s appeal is its customisation and that the hardware vendors can add their own ‘skin’ and services to the basic model provided by Google, yet it is these very customisations that make the weakness possible. The researchers stated that, “We believe these results demonstrate that capability leaks constitute a tangible security weakness for many Android smartphones in the market today…Particularly, smartphones with pre-loaded apps tend to be more likely to have explicit capability leaks.”

The researchers’ tests found that the HTC EVO 4G was the most vulnerable, leaking eight functions that include text messages, audio recorded and precise geographic location finder. The second most vulnerable was the HTC Legend with six leaks – making HTC a particular manufacturer to avoid. The Samsung Epic 4G has three leaks, including the ability to clear applications and data from the phone. Part of the problem is that the Android Market does not perform any security checks on the applications that come pre-bundled with certain phones; Google’s way to deal with this was the permission-based security model – where users have to agree to an app’s wants and needs before it runs for the first time. However, the enhancements supplied by the manufacturers offer a way to get around this security feature. According to the researchers, Google and Motorola (now owned by Google), have confirmed these vulnerabilities. By contrast, HTC and Samsung “have been really slow in responding to, if not ignoring, our reports/inquiries.”

The researchers who found this problem are the same ones that found other security vulnerabilities in Android, including the presence of at least twelve malicious apps in the Market. The apps, which stole data, remained in the Market for months and were downloaded hundreds of thousands of times before they were removed, which only happened after the researchers informed Google.

Are these concerns over privacy reason enough to avoid Android?

 

Privacy Campaigner Files Claim Against Google For Privacy Infringement

WMPowerUser reports that “Alex Hanff, a prominent privacy campaigner based in Lancaster, England, has filed a claim against Google at the small claims court for around £400 to replace his HTC Desire.”

The reason for the claim is that since purchasing his Android phone Google has adjusted its privacy policy to collect data across Google’s services, including the location data stored on its mobile operating system, to sell the profile to advertisers.

Hanff states that “The changes are a significant infringement of my right to privacy and I do not consent to Google being able to use my data in such a way” and he believes that the changes go beyond what is reasonable within a contract period.

Google’s initial response has been that those concerned can use the phones without logging into their Google accounts, essentially turning the expensive smartphone into a basic feature phone, which for many would make the purchase redundant and therefore not a valid method of response.

Whether this case will succeed or not remains to be seen, but it’s an interesting turn of events and, quite honestly, unsurprising. Google has been pushing its luck for a length of time regarding how it treats the private data of its users, and if this case gains a high enough profile it could potentially cause a chain-reaction from other users turning into a backlash against the company.