Related
I have been a fan of XDA and appreciate the development and support the devs provide. But last few days a thought is bugging me continuously. We saw a lot of posts about S Voice and other apps being ported to other devices. Specially for S Voice, I believe that it's illegal as this could potentially cause Samsung to lose sales. My views:
1] We know that this is re-designed vlingo. vlingo is available in market, S Voice is NOT. Clear indication that they (as in Samsung) don't want the app to be used with other devices and they are not willing to sell it separately. Using vlingo from market is NOT same as using S Voice.
2] Did Samsung give us the permission to use/modify and distribute the app?
3] There is some infrastructure costs associated with running the services. It costs money to install and maintain servers and network. I work in enterprise storage management, so I am aware of costs associated with such massive infrastructure. Who pays for the non-SGS3 devices using the services?
4] Did Samsung every promise that SGS2/Nexus or other phones will get S Voice? So, why should we assume that other Samsung-device owners have the divine right to use a feature meant for SGS3?
5] It is one of the main USP for SGS3. Check here. This is listed as the top-most feature in the SGS3 product page. Hacking this app to be used with other phones is going to harm the phone sale. Is that not clear enough?
6] When Samsung started blocking connections from other devices - was that not an indication that they want the service exclusive for SGS3?
7] How is this different from movie piracy? The uploader never gains anything, but the studios/producers lose money.
8] What if Samsung starts locking their device in future with locked bootloaders/DRM/encryption because of such activities? Can we then blame Samsung for locking the devices?
9] Android is open source - but why assume that every feature in any Android is also open source? If someone can show me that S Voice is open source software, I will retract my statement.
It's sad that most people here equate freedom with piracy. Freedom and piracy are not same thing. Such act in the name of open source and community-feeling does not make it right. Maybe Samsung won't do anything about it -- but it does NOT make this act any better. It will just prove that Samsung considers this to be a petty nuisance (I am not using the word crime as I know nobody is doing this for any monetary gain).
Though I support open initiative with regards to Android, but I can't support such act.
Last check this statement from Samsung in VERGE
An initial test version of S Voice which was found online has been blocked as Samsung Electronics does not want consumers to judge the quality of the voice feature based on a test version. When the product is launched, users of GALAXY S III will be able to fully experience S Voice.
Exactly my thoughts. Though I am not sure what can be done to stop it.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
rd_nest said:
I have been a fan of XDA and appreciate the development and support the devs provide. But last few days a thought is bugging me continuously. We saw a lot of posts about S Voice and other apps being ported to other devices. Specially for S Voice, I believe that it's illegal as this could potentially cause Samsung to lose sales. My views:
1] We know that this is re-designed vlingo. vlingo is available in market, S Voice is NOT. Clear indication that they (as in Samsung) don't want the app to be used with other devices and they are not willing to sell it separately. Using vlingo from market is NOT same as using S Voice.
2] Did Samsung give us the permission to use/modify and distribute the app?
3] There is some infrastructure costs associated with running the services. It costs money to install and maintain servers and network. I work in enterprise storage management, so I am aware of costs associated with such massive infrastructure. Who pays for the non-SGS3 devices using the services?
4] Did Samsung every promise that SGS2/Nexus or other phones will get S Voice? So, why should we assume that other Samsung-device owners have the divine right to use a feature meant for SGS3?
5] It is one of the main USP for SGS3. Check here. This is listed as the top-most feature in the SGS3 product page. Hacking this app to be used with other phones is going to harm the phone sale. Is that not clear enough?
6] When Samsung started blocking connections from other devices - was that not an indication that they want the service exclusive for SGS3?
7] How is this different from movie piracy? The uploader never gains anything, but the studios/producers lose money.
8] What if Samsung starts locking their device in future with locked bootloaders/DRM/encryption because of such activities? Can we then blame Samsung for locking the devices?
9] Android is open source - but why assume that every feature in any Android is also open source? If someone can show me that S Voice is open source software, I will retract my statement.
It's sad that most people here equate freedom with piracy. Freedom and piracy are not same thing. Such act in the name of open source and community-feeling does not make it right. Maybe Samsung won't do anything about it -- but it does NOT make this act any better. It will just prove that Samsung considers this to be a petty nuisance (I am not using the word crime as I know nobody is doing this for any monetary gain).
Though I support open initiative with regards to Android, but I can't support such act.
Last check this statement from Samsung in VERGE
An initial test version of S Voice which was found online has been blocked as Samsung Electronics does not want consumers to judge the quality of the voice feature based on a test version. When the product is launched, users of GALAXY S III will be able to fully experience S Voice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung will have known about this,
If they explicitly didnt want it to be shared with other android phones they could have prevented this easy in one of 2 ways,
1. integrate it into touchwiz framework
2. link the phones imei or unique identifier to the app and set up a database on the servers, similar to siri's protection.
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution. I dont think they mind this because they have NO competitor in the Android market and are far superior to any other OEM that produces android phones.
PS. The Android OS is open source but there are many applications that have closed source to protect their business. Touchwiz source is never fully open sourced and neither is Sense.
I remember a year ago with the CM team asking for help from Samsung for little bits of protected code to get the camera fully functioning on the stock android rom (CM7 ROM).
JD
JupiterdroidXDA said:
Samsung will have known about this,
If they explicitly didnt want it to be shared with other android phones they could have prevented this easy in one of 2 ways,
1. integrate it into touchwiz framework
2. link the phones imei or unique identifier to the app and set up a database on the servers, similar to siri's protection.
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution. I dont think they mind this because they have NO competitor in the Android market and are far superior to any other OEM that produces android phones.
PS. The Android OS is open source but there are many applications that have closed source to protect their business. Touchwiz source is never fully open sourced and neither is Sense.
I remember a year ago with the CM team asking for help from Samsung for little bits of protected code to get the camera fully functioning on the stock android rom (CM7 ROM).
JD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My view is that we took the application and made it compatible with other devices, Samsung never explicitly gave the permission.
Maybe they thought it would be easier to upgrade the app if it's not integrated into the TW. But I fear such activity may force them to become less dev-friendly in future.
It's a different story if in future they make the code available for CM9 or other projects separately. I just hope not, but the way it's being spread over the internet, I fear they will react in some way. Also throws a bad light over XDA.
JupiterdroidXDA said:
Samsung wanted this app to be freely available as they have done nothing to protect its redistribution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They obviously didn't want it to be freely available because they have blocked it now.
Anyway, I don't get this mentality that if something is not impossible to take, it's ok to take it.
I will ask about the validity of ripping/porting the samsung apps and post back to this thread. If there is anything illegal about it (and im not sure there is unless the apps have been licensed specifically to the Galaxy S3) then any links on xda will be taken down.
I cant do anything about the rest of the internet though lol.
Mark.
mskip said:
I will ask about the validity of ripping/porting the samsung apps and post back to this thread. If there is anything illegal about it (and im not sure there is unless the apps have been licensed specifically to the Galaxy S3) then any links on xda will be taken down.
I cant do anything about the rest of the internet though lol.
Mark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Much appreciated. I wanted this to be brought to the notice of MODs. Nobody wants XDA to be in bad light for such a petty affair.
As for the apps (specially S Voice) being exclusive to SGS3, I think so. That's what I infer from Samsung's statement in Verge:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/22/3037943/samsung-blocking-s-voice-app-leak
But please do verify with relevant authorities and take appropriate actions (if required).
Mac OS X doesn't require a product key, but that doesn't mean my friend can just use my installation DVD legally, it all depends on the T&C's
The fact Samsung have blocked it for other devices should give an indication of their decision towards people using this software on another device. They may not send the FBI to kick down your door and arrest you, but cracking it to spoof a SGSIII for example would probably get a DMCA take-down notice pretty quickly. They almost certainly won't want all and sundry freely enjoying one of the big features of their new flagship device.
I have e-mailed Samsung PR dept on their views about this issue. Not sure if they check their Inbox
Unless we hear otherwise from Samsung, we will follow the normal site policy. In this case (though it is an edge case) for the moment we're allowing it.
If this is the case, then all devs who port roms from other models are in breach also.
Is this thread trying to stop dev work, and has the OP loaded the program, if he has shame on him for going against his beliefs, now let us and the devs get on with it.:what:
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Edit: phone model is Arc, now why did I change the prop build?
OP - Care to share how this is any different from all of the Sense ports to other devices? It's not.
I also like how you thanked Mark for checking into this - and that you were waiting to hear.... And then not even an hour later you go and contact Samsung PR? It sounds to me like you have an ax to grind.
I think everything that needs to be covered has been
"We've been listening closely to you, and many have expressed both interest and concern around the possibilities of facial recognition in Glass. As Google has said for several years, we won’t add facial recognition features to our products without having strong privacy protections in place. With that in mind, we won’t be approving any facial recognition Glassware at this time."
-- from ProjectGlass on Google+
I'm not sure that I see people being able to identify you as rising to the level of privacy-invasion.
I think that facial recognition would be very useful for people with face-blindness, as well as people (like me) who are always forgetting the names of those they meet casually.
That said, I can't think of a compelling use-case for allowing people to identify anyone and everyone. I would support limiting facial recognition to:
(A) those one has met and added personally,
(B) social network "friends", and
(C) public figures.
For (C), it would be easy for Google to provide optional downloads of facial-metrics; one for politicians, one for celebs, etc. For (B), there could be an app that scans the profile pics of your "friends" on Google+, FB, what have you. And for (A), I foresee a Glassware app that allows you to record an image and short audio clip whenever someone introduces himself/herself so that you can (1) have it replayed whenever you see that person again and/or (2) go back after the fact and tag that person with their name -- starting with the app's best text-to-speech guess/transcription -- and generate a facial-metric from the image so that the name will pop up as text whenever you see that person again.
(Going further, I can foresee people generating their own facial-metrics with attached metadata like a .vcard, and exchanging them via QR code on their business cards.)
I wonder if this limitation would assuage Google's privacy concerns?
Hello,
the suggestions you made are highly interesting! Imagining I am to wear a Glass within the next few years, an app which does exactly what you described would be a great addition to the features of G.G.
If this project meets success, it would change drastically the idea of the private zone of the people. When a person goes outside, it's normal to think that he's not "online" and that his personal information is protected by the fact, that he cannot be recognised on the street by people, who don't know him. This is about to change, because all of the options, which would be provided by the glass:
"The experience of being a citizen, in public, is about to change" /Mark Hurst/
I totally agree with this statement, because the glass contains a processor, which means it's a computer as well, and we all know about the possibilities of the computers. When a lot of our information is on the internet, it's possible, that this information could be used outside the net, which is related mostly to the face recognition features. Altough the privacy policy wants from the users to be correct using the glasses and not harm the others privacy rights, the google glass, as I said, is a computer so if a face is recognised, the owner could do with this information whatever he likes. This includes searching for information on the net and even changing it.
The other big problem is the feature for taking photos. Altough there would be a protection and a sign, that the glasses are recording video/ taking a picture, that could be easily hidden/hacked, as I said this is a computer. A owner of the glasses would have the possibility not only to get information on the internet for people, but to record and share a new one, which attack the people's privacy rights.
And to show the possible outlook of the society, I will post another quote:
"Our society will be surveillant society; it's up to us to make that a virtue, and not just another fear" /Devin Coldewey/
The problem, which I did not mention, was the problem, that google and respectively another companies would have the possibility to get additional information about us, to track our location, record our conversations etc.
So we should defenately think about the possible privacy problems, which google glass could cause!
#gsi
wear a mask on street then.
You don't have the right to privacy when you go out in the public.
Honestly google glass is about as stupid an idea as it gets...there gimicky..clumsy...rude...stupid looking....the list just goes on..and anyone who wears these will be made fun of for talking to themselves. ...that being said im sure ill pony for a pair and secretly hate myself.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app
This is just the testbed for putting the same sort of tech in contact lenses.
Unhived__Mind said:
Honestly google glass is about as stupid an idea as it gets...there gimicky..clumsy...rude...stupid looking....the list just goes on..and anyone who wears these will be made fun of for talking to themselves. ...that being said im sure ill pony for a pair and secretly hate myself.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hey look, another neo-Luddite who's going to fail in life.
Unhived__Mind said:
Honestly google glass is about as stupid an idea as it gets...there gimicky..clumsy...rude...stupid looking....the list just goes on..and anyone who wears these will be made fun of for talking to themselves. ...that being said im sure ill pony for a pair and secretly hate myself.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same was said when the cellphone was created.
We'll talk again in 5 years
You know this only means that the law enforcement agencies and feds are going to be outfitted with this thing first with unofficial cracked facial recognition software thus resulting in more tyrannical living conditions. Just recently Texas Instruments developed a chip that operates in the terahert frequency range that supposedly will give people the ability to see through walls.
To reiterate, I support the idea of banning a Glass app capable of identifying anyone and everyone on the street via facial recognition. That is, I think, an invasion of privacy. (Though I understand the counter-argument that there is no expectation of privacy while in public, and I think that a case can be made, but I think that it's sensible of Google to ban such things for now until people are more used to it.)
I see no reason why Google should ban all facial recognition, though. I should be able to take a facial recognition snapshot (henceforth "FRS") of my friends and tag them with their names and other metadata. I should be able to consent to giving my FRS to business associates, whether by orally agreeing and then standing still while their Glass scans my face or by providing a URL via QR or bluetooth that enables their Glass to download my FRS.
Going forward, I would like to have my FRS attached to my social networking account and be able to control who can see it. Maybe I want just one circle to have access. Maybe I want all of my circles to have access. Or maybe I want all of my circles plus one or more degree of separation. (Personally, I think that it would be useful to go out one degree of separation, so that friends of friends could "recognize" me in public.) Those who felt they had nothing to fear could crank it all the way up to 6 degrees of separation, effectively making them recognizable by the world at large.
It could be the enabler of Cory Doctrow's whuffie-based economy.
We might have seen what S8 now is / will be...
Let us discuss here, what is the most compelling feature/reason for you to buy a S8.
Hi Moderator,
can you move this thread to News & Discussion from Q&A section as this has been posted incorrectly and also poll list Bigger screen size into Moderate Screen Size (compare to S8+) and another poll entry with "Soft Key Navigation"
Revealed today.
There really is not enough new to warrant changing my 8 months old S7E.
Bring on the Note 8 or S9.
I just pre-order my S8+ !! Can't wait to get it the 22 april !!
The reasons I WON'T be getting the S8:
Facial Recognition (intrusive)
IRIS Scanner (intrusive)
Fingerprint Scanner (intrusive)
Bixby (Hal, Oblivion)
No IR Blaster (DSLR)
No SPen (Note user NECESSITY)
Enclosed Battery
What are the Pro's, then?
Screen
360
Processor
Camera
Water Resistance
The Phone Company said:
The reasons I WON'T be getting any phone:
Enclosed Battery
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good luck getting any future phone with a removable battery.
I am thinking of tracking down another Note Edge.... I feel like I am losing a number of useful features by buying an S8+ as a replacement for my old Note Edge.
MSK1 said:
I am thinking of tracking down another Note Edge.... I feel like I am losing a number of useful features by buying an S8+ as a replacement for my old Note Edge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, existing Note 4 user here, still going strong. Was a pre-ordered Note 7 customer and now look where we are today...
The live 'unboxing' presentation just made me nauseous. "Partnered with Google" "Working alongside Microsoft"
I see where this is going. I am done. Back to Nature.
Actual Reality > Virtual Reality all. day. long.
I voted the ones more important. But I'll tell you the ones that I absolutely do not find interesting: Bixby and Samsung Connect.
I have my own DDNS service running, so I do not need any cloud service from Samsung to get the status of my home smart devices. Bixby is replicating Google Assistant functionality, so it's more bloat added to the system and more companies with my life's metadata and data. As it wasn't hard enough to block such information leaks.
Dex, IP68, accessores, IRIS scanner and face recognition are cool.
All of the above items, but the S8+ 6.2 Screen is number one!
I am looking forward to Bluetooth 5.0 and better security logon. I hate the fingerprint reader. Whenever I golf, it can't read my fingerprint for a few days. Especially when I re-grip my clubs!!
Filiprino said:
I voted the ones more important. But I'll tell you the ones that I absolutely do not find interesting: Bixby and Samsung Connect.
I have my own DDNS service running, so I do not need any cloud service from Samsung to get the status of my home smart devices. Bixby is replicating Google Assistant functionality, so it's more bloat added to the system and more companies with my life's metadata and data. As it wasn't hard enough to block such information leaks.
Dex, IP68, accessores, IRIS scanner and face recognition are cool.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's actually the complete opposite of Google Assistant. It's embedded deep into the core functionality of the phone. Assistant is mainly for providing you information, with a few basic control features on top while Bixby allows much control over the device hardware and software via voice commands. It's a new feature that will need time to develop, Samsung wants to give you the option to do everything on your phone without having to touch it. One day you might not have to.
It's not for everyone though, you won't have to use it.
Highspeed123 said:
It's actually the complete opposite of Google Assistant. It's embedded deep into the core functionality of the phone. Assistant is mainly for providing you information, with a few basic control features on top while Bixby allows much control over the device hardware and software via voice commands. It's a new feature that will need time to develop, Samsung wants to give you the option to do everything on your phone without having to touch it. One day you might not have to.
It's not for everyone though, you won't have to use it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see how it can be completely the opposite. It has more control over your device to provide information.
the curve screen and the new specks
Highspeed123 said:
It's actually the complete opposite of Google Assistant. It's embedded deep into the core functionality of the phone. Assistant is mainly for providing you information, with a few basic control features on top while Bixby allows much control over the device hardware and software via voice commands. It's a new feature that will need time to develop, Samsung wants to give you the option to do everything on your phone without having to touch it. One day you might not have to.
It's not for everyone though, you won't have to use it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does the world really need another assistant? Fragmentation is already bad enough on Android. So expecting from app developers to implement voice commands for other assistants besides Googles own doesn't seem like a smart move.
not much improvement over the S7/S7Edge.. high price for a little bit extra. Fingerprint on the back, really?
Going for the HTC U (Ocean, SD835) or wait for Note 8
paranoid2007 said:
Does the world really need another assistant? Fragmentation is already bad enough on Android. So expecting from app developers to implement voice commands for other assistants besides Googles own doesn't seem like a smart move.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do see your point and you are right about the fragmentation. That's the problem with open source. Companies want to go their own separate ways with it. AI is the next logical step in technology though. In the far future I don't imagine people still tapping away on screens, we will have Robotics and very advanced AI systems providing us with all the information we need.
Googles Assistant is a great bit of software and I use it a fair bit. It just can't integrate deep enough with every device, because of the fragmentation you mention. If we only had Google devices it would become a lot more useful.
I won't have that much need for Bixby but Samsung saw the need in the Mass market, or else they would not have bothered. There will be many that do actually want it. Especially disabled people and for use while driving. Samsung can hook it deep into the core functionality and allow control over every aspect of the device...one day.
Apple can do what they want as they have full control over their software and hardware. Samsung are trying to do the same thing. As they are one of the only Android phone makers that actually make a profit, they might make a success of it. Who knows.
I think we will see some rival OS in the future, they come and go. I can't see Android and iOS lasting forever. Samsung will go their own way one day.
---------- Post added at 10:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:16 AM ----------
Filiprino said:
I don't see how it can be completely the opposite. It has more control over your device to provide information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe I exaggerated some what lol. What I meant is that Bixby is Samsung's attempt at allowing hands free control over their phones. It's the start, so I expect it to get better with time and allow for almost total control. It won't just be for information. You will be able to control the camera, edit photos via voice commands, turn things on and off and do most of the things you have to touch the screen for. Handy if you're disabled or unable to hold your phone at the time.
I doubt I'll be using it much but it's still nice to gain new features. There will always be those that do have a use for it. Hopefully those that don't, will have the option to disregard it entirely.
Screen and camera are my main reasons. Plus after about 9 years with HTC phones, since the fuze, it's time for a change. And 64gb internal is a nice bonus.
Sent from my SM-T520 using Tapatalk
if it came whit unlockable bootloader im in
altvolt74 said:
if it came whit unlockable bootloader im in
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a bad bet...
Hi guys!
The last Android device I used was Galaxy S2 and since then I have used iPhones and I my pre-ordered S8 should ship anytime now.
I wanted to ask if there's anything I should know about any significant feature changes that have happened over the years with Android?
While I haven't been living under the rock, I still feel there's got to be tons of minor features released which are useful but could very well be missed by someone who hasn't used Android for a while
Also I wanted to ask how the adoption of fingerprint scanning on Android apps is?
I used iOS' TouchID (fingerprint authentication) all the time for my bank apps, stock portfolios and placing online orders at restaurants, etc. Is the adoption the same with Android?
I've been using the fingerprint scanner since I got my S6 and you can use your fingerprint to unlock certain apps, like I use it to get into my bank app, carrier app, Samsung account. Not sure what other apps have adopted the use of the fingerprint scanner off the top of my head, as I've only had experience with the apps I've mentioned.
It's been a helluva long time since the S2 so you're damn right a lot's changed! In terms of the fingerprint scanning, most use them but it's not universal. I have sports betting apps for example that haven't adopted it yet. Banking apps / PayPal / Android Pay are all good to go though.
There is far more support for fingerprint scanning in apps on iOS since the feature has been available for a longer time. You have to pick the apps you need on Android with fps support.
Hi guys.
Does anyone know of a trust worthy app to store login details for different sites, banks ect? Even one I can store my card details for when I'm away without my wallet. Obviously has to he 100% trust worthy.
Cheers in advance.
Well, I do not think you will find one, that ist 100% trustworthy. Nevertheless, there are several Passwordmanagers, that are used by a lot of people.
Here is a link to an article, where the most used ones are introduced. Sorry, it's german, you can translate it with DeepL
Or you can google the managers, mentioned in this article to find out more yourself.
The basic qustions are: Do you trust your passwords to the Cloud? Do you want it to be open source or not? What kind of encryption should be used?
Hope it helps
Try LastPass https://lastpass.com
I love this app. I set all my credentials and logins with it.
I store all my data with google. Since they are basically a part of everyones life right now, I think that security for them is the no. 1 priority.
I'm using SafeinCloud app. There is no any problem with that.
bitwarden. Same as LastPass but open source.
I use keepass, it's open source and you can keep it local or use cloud storage like Google drive. There's a decent app in the play store and app for Windows.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=keepass2android.keepass2android
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Samsung pass and Samsung pay should be enough. I won't go for logmein or last pass as they have had security issues in 2017!
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Lastpass for sure. Been using them forever...
They, like keepass, and a few others had potential security issues which were not found to ever be explored. The issues were fixed months before public release, so no harm no foul...
Judging a software by having potential security issues alone is a garbage policy, BTW....
Karlinski said:
Lastpass for sure. Been using them forever...
They, like keepass, and a few others had potential security issues which were not found to ever be explored. The issues were fixed months before public release, so no harm no foul...
Judging a software by having potential security issues alone is a garbage policy, BTW....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I don't think it's a rubbish policy to judge commercial software's on security issues. Especially if you are planning to hand over your banking details! Plus the ones i have mentioned are proprietary so others can't even audit it unlike open-source applications. I will be wary of using them.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Samsung pay is closed source
Samsung pay gets security updates
Samsung pay has not been released to be verified
What's the difference....
1password. The large internet company I work for trusts it's passwords to it. They were exposed by cloudbleed and did not get compromised becsuse they had the foresight to not trust ssl.
I use VeraCrypt on my desktop. Creates an encrypted partition and I have an Excel file with my passwords. I just remote in to open the file if I need a pwd when I'm not at home.
I believe their are mobile apps using their API: https://www.veracrypt.fr/en/Android & iOS Support.html
Thanks for all the suggestions guys, will check them all out