Posted on 12/29/2014 6:08:35 PM PST by Swordmaker
That one was hilarious. The guy who claimed to have hacked it with a photocopy 48 hours after release?. . . He used his own finger as the test subject. . . And pressed the copy to the phone with the same finger! The iPhone read his finger through the photocopy.
Do you really think that if TouchID was as trivially easy to crack as these guys claim, Apple would have gotten all the major credit card companies and 90% of the banks to sign on for Apple Pay after their security people TESTED it??? No way.
That's what this guy says. Do I believe him? No. Apple waited until the first update of iOS after the iPhone 6 came out BEFORE implementing ApplePay. . . and one of the things listed in the update were improvements and security updates in TouchID, which were not described. ONLY THEN did they activate ApplePay.
If the update was to improved scanning technology, then Apple should have asked its iPhone 6 users to re-scan their fingerprint after the update.
Unnecessary. The scan was already done. It was to prevent the spoofing of the scan.
My point was that this blogger does not know what is being used in the iPhone scanner. . . he assumes it is not in there even though Apple owns the company that developed the technology.
Are you saying that the update fixed the vulnerability? You suggest that the update did not improve image capture, but rather added anti-spoofing features
Oh yes, I believe it.
I've written credit card gateways, and you'd be shocked at how loose that is. The "system" is remarkably sloppy.
I believe the Apple technology, even with it's flaws, is better than credit card security. Almost anything will look like an improvement.
In a real sense the most conservative approach to computing, IMHO, would be to buy a used Mac. But you want to consider all the factors in perspective. Not only do you buy the computer, you also pay for internet access. And you should support FR, too.Thanks, Swordmaker, for keeping us older users informed about the facts regarding the spin, FUD, and tiresome efforts to manipulate public opinion. It really helps.I recently made a prodigal - not “liberal” - decision to buy a 5K iMac, spending $$ I had but really didn’t need to spend. I just figured that it basically is the last word in desktop computing, in the sense that its display is as big as you want on your desk, and its resolution is as good as I at my age can see. Absent a new killer app for intensive number crunching - such as a AI app - I don’t need any more CPU/GPU processing power than this. If I ever decided that additional RAM was useful, I have open slots to double the RAM to 16G. It boots up quick because of the fusion drive. So I basically decided that there would never be any point in ever buying a new computer if I didn’t get this one. But since I spend a lot of time on FR, I decided it did make sense to get this one.
Hear, hear!
Apple degraded their computer line (see mac mini and iMac) to the point that unless you just want to surf and email half their line is useless to a professional...anything.
I love my Macbook to death but I am never going to run a recording studio with it. Nor can I will a 2.2ghz Haswell iMac. The Mac Mini was a KILLER studio computer. They ruined that line by taking the CPU down to a 2 core. Ram is soldered in so upgrading your Mini is now impossible. Same thing with the 21” iMacs (didn’t used to be so).
I’d rather lick a cat’s rear than run windows but Apple has pushed me and others like me who can’t afford to drop 2.5k on a box to get the same work done I can on a $750 self-built computer. I hope they experience a severe loss in sales that forces them to re-examine their computers. Otherwise, outside of looking for a good deal on a used Mac Pro, I am done with them.
I am not happy about the degrading of the entry Mac Mini either, but I understand the marketing reasoning for it. We are using a four year old Mac Mini Server in my office.
For an entry Mac, the new $499 1.44 GHz Mac Mini is not bad. . . but for our purposes, it will not do the job we need. We have to step to the next level up. . . either the $699 2.6GHz Mac mini dual-core Intel Core i5 with either 8GB or 16GB memory and a 1TB hard drive, or the $999 2.8GHz dual-core Intel i5 upgradable to a 3.0 dual-core Intel i7, also with either 8GB or 16GB of 1600MHz LPDDR3 memory and a 1TB Fusion Drive. . . or upgradable to a 2TB Fusion Drive. These Mac Minis are fast. Either of those can run OS X Server and the latter price is what we paid for our Mac Mini Server four years ago.
You think that you need four cores for music software? I don't think you do. I frankly doubt much of the music software out there even is multi-core aware. What you need is excellent multitasking. . . which the two upper model Mac Mini's can supply. .
And on and on. Look it up :)
I won't work without a minimum i7 4 core with hyperthreading and at least 16 gb ram. Especially when using VSTi's as is common.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.