iOS 11’s Control Center buttons don’t fully turn off Bluetooth or WiFi

If you’ve updated to Apple’s new iOS 11, you might have played around with the new Control Center. You also might think that toggling Bluetooth and WiFi “off” in the Center might actually, you know, turn them off. Turns out, you’d be wrong. As noted over at Motherboard, hitting these buttons really only disconnects you from any WiFi or Bluetooth devices you might be connected to.

To be fair, Apple says this in its own documentation, but that doesn’t mean the toggles aren’t confusing to many users. The idea is that when you use the Control Center toggles, your iPhone will still be able to connect for AirDrop, AirPlay and Location Services. It can also stay connected to Apple’Pencil, Apple Watch and use Continuity features like Handoff and Instant Hotspot. If you want to turn off WiFi and Bluetooth for real, something that can help your iPhone use less battery and avoid some security bugs, you’ll need to drop into the Settings app.

We’ve reached out to Apple for comment on this matter and will update the post when we hear back.

Via: Motherboard

Source: Apple

Engadget RSS Feed

I don’t regret being an iPhone early adopter

Do you remember where you were when Steve Jobs first introduced the iPhone, more than 10 years ago? It’s a pretty nerdy thing to admit, but I do. I spent the day glued to my computer, at my desk — theoretically hard at work. But I was actually devouring Engadget’s liveblog, after which I watched and rewatched video of the event so I could see the mythical device in action. And then I spent the next 12 months waiting for my Verizon contract to expire, hating my Moto RAZR the entire freaking time. (No, I wasn’t a day-one adopter, but I definitely stopped in an AT&T store to play with their demo phones.)

The first iPhone wasn’t a world-beater in terms of sales, and many have pointed out that it was the classic “first-gen” Apple product. It lacked important features like 3G connectivity and any third-party apps, you had to hook it up to iTunes to activate it, and it was wildly expensive — $ 500 for a paltry 4GB of storage (or $ 600 for 8GB), and that was with a two-year contract.

None of that mattered to me, and that’s in large part due to Jobs’ presentation, one that’s widely considered the best he ever gave. I’d agree with that assessment, because he so clearly outlined the benefits of the iPhone over the phones that most consumers (including me) were using. Some of my colleagues fondly remember the Windows Mobile devices they used before the iPhone and noted how they waited a few years for Apple to fix those first-gen issues before getting on board.

But the 2007 smartphone market was wildly different, particularly in the US. BlackBerry and Palm Treo devices dominated, but they were business-focused and didn’t resonate with the people buying iPods. Jobs’ presentation was the complete opposite. The first feature he announced and demoed was iPod functionality — before even bothering with the phone part. Nearly everything he showed off was focused on consumers, from photos and movies to looking up restaurants on Google Maps.

Of course, Jobs tied it all together at the end, showing a sequence where he listened to music, took a call, sent a photo over email and looked up a movie while still talking on the phone. He then hung up the call and the music automatically resumed. Right now, it seems laughably simple, but in the days of flip phones this seemed like magic.

Even the six-month gap between the iPhone’s announcement and its on-sale date worked in Apple’s favor. The company didn’t typically announce products that far in advance, but in this case it gave them crucial time to polish the device and make improvements (like adding YouTube support and using glass instead of plastic for the front screen cover). It also helped build up some serious hype and anticipation among the Apple faithful. Jobs’ presentation paid dividends over those months; it was something fans could rewatch and use to stoke their interest in the iPhone while they waited.

Jobs had made presentations like this before, and Apple has continued to do so long after he died, in 2011. The format has changed slightly, but Apple still focuses on selling you on the entire vision of its connected universe of products — all of its devices and services work better the more you use them together. When Apple makes a presentation like the one at this year’s WWDC, I often come away with the notion that my digital life would work better if I went “all in” on its software and hardware. It’s not just Apple, though — after Google I/O, I always consider whether things would be easier if I used Android for everything, and Microsoft has been doing a good job of selling me on the benefits of Windows everywhere lately as well.

The iPhone presentation was a bit different, because it was focused purely on one device — Apple hadn’t tied the phone so closely to the Mac just yet. But Apple did tie the iPhone to the Mac — before the cloud, it was home base for your phone and let you sync photos, movies, contacts, calendars and music, making it a mini-extension of your personal computer. And even though some aspects of the first iPhone did feel a bit beta (remember how you couldn’t send pictures via text message?), it also did exactly what Apple promised.

The relatively large screen and unique UI couldn’t have been more different from the garbage Verizon forced onto the Moto RAZR. There weren’t any third-party apps, but between Safari, YouTube, Mail and Maps, I could get to the most essential info on the internet while on the go … even if it took forever. I learned to accept that and use the phone’s more data-heavy features when on WiFi, which was fairly easy to find in 2008.

I still carried my iPod around for a while, but it wasn’t long before I started working around the iPhone’s limited storage space and leaving my iPod at home. Sure, the Windows Phone and BlackBerry crowd may have been doing many of these things for years, but for me (and millions of other iPhone owners), this was a huge step forward, even if there were caveats.

Looking back, the iPhone’s influence on the consumer electronics market is obvious. But that doesn’t mean it’s not worth reflecting on. It’s also worth considering Jobs’ performance to see how it influenced Apple’s competitors. Jobs made many similar presentations over the years, but after the iPhone became a success, Microsoft, Samsung and Google (among others) really started emulating Apple’s events. It’s common now to see companies sell you on their entire vision, not just a series of products or software features.

Ultimately, Jobs’ presentation is as much a part of the iPhone’s history as the product itself. The introduction was nearly a complete disaster, with shoddy prototype phones barely able to connect to the internet, running out of memory and crashing if they weren’t used very carefully. But that craziness only adds to the legend of the iPhone’s introduction.

Fortunately, the experience of actually using the iPhone was pretty seamless when it launched six months later. The first iPhone didn’t age very well (I had mine for only 18 months before grabbing a 3GS when it launched), but it made a good enough impression that I’ve been a repeat customer for nearly a decade. If Jobs’ introduction had gone as badly as it could have, things would have worked out very, very differently for both the iPhone and Apple as a whole. Yes, the first iPhone was basically a working beta — but it worked well enough to change an entire industry.

Engadget RSS Feed

Canada finds Apple’s carrier deals don’t hurt competition

France may think Apple is up to no good with its carrier deals for the iPhone, but you won’t hear similar gripes from Canada. The country’s Competition Bureau has determined that there isn’t “sufficient evidence” to show that Apple had illegally strong-armed carriers into deals that gave it preferred treatment. While there’s no question that the iPhone is a “must-have” for carriers, the regulator says, the terms only have a minor effect at most — there’s plenty of competition, and ditching Apple’s agreements wouldn’t significantly change the playing field.

The investigation started in 2014 after the Bureau received info hinting that Apple was placing a heavy burden on providers. As in other countries, there were concerns that carriers had to buy a minimum number of iPhones, agree to up-front retail subsidies and give Apple a “most favored nation” clause that prevented rivals from getting better treatment. What evidence exists suggests that carriers could easily “mitigate” these terms, according to the decision.

From first-hand experience, the findings appear to hold up. The Canadian market is big on the iPhone, but you’re just as likely to see carriers push the latest Samsung phone or the Google Pixel line. You’ll frequently see other flagship devices get more prominent treatment, or discounts that aren’t offered for Apple’s handsets. While this doesn’t rule out the possibility of overly strict deals, it’s clear that there’s no international consensus on Apple’s competitive stance — it largely depends on individual markets.

Via: AppleInsider

Source: Competition Bureau

Engadget RSS Feed

Don’t believe the ‘Pokémon Go’ privacy hype

When the Pokémon Go obsession reached full saturation this week, privacy-concern whispers became full-blown hysterical shrieks when a researcher’s blog post accused the game’s maker of taking over its users’ Google accounts. As it turned out, the app’s iPhone permissions were just poorly implemented, and fixed immediately.

Unfortunately that didn’t stop the privacy and security hysteria machine. All week long, headlines made a mountain out of a molehill, scaring some people into uninstalling the app altogether.

Pokémon Go, a phone game released by Niantic Labs and Nintendo, has been an astonishing success. The game is basically a GPS-guided treasure hunt using a smartphone camera. It sends people out into the world around them, gets them interacting with others, and has brought the U.S. some much-needed distraction and smiles.

The stories emerging through social media might be more entertaining than playing the game itself. Pokémon have been “caught” at gay bars and churches, people have been shooed out of police stations and courthouses trying to catch the little beasts. Someone found a dead body, people have been robbed, and some police departments have even been forced to issue safety guidelines. On the plus side, there are some mental health benefits. Meanwhile, Pokémon Go has added nearly $ 11 billion to the value of Nintendo since its release.

Naturally, a few hackers became interested in what was going on under the app’s hood. But before anyone had a chance to publish detailed findings, researcher Adam Reeve rushed to make a post that set off a chain reaction of hysteria.

Reeve wrote that if you signed into Pokémon Go with Google, the app was given full permission to access your Google account. He claimed that the company could read your Gmail, see your Google search and Maps history, access your private photos, delete things in Google Drive, and more.

He also indicated that it wasn’t possible to sign in alternately, by creating a Pokémon account, and sort of made it sound like something suspicious was going on. News outlets rushed to write hyperbolic headlines without bothering to note that this was only happening on iPhones.

That’s how we ended up with hysterical, misleading headlines like, “Pokémon Go is a major security risk for your entire Google account.” And it’s why we had people screaming white frothy rage on social media that Niantic was backdooring user accounts. It’s also how we ended up with Sen. Al Franken sending a letter to Niantic demanding answers about Pokémon Go‘s privacy practices.

To their credit, Gizmodo contacted Adam Reeve, who then backtracked on his claims, saying he wasn’t “100 percent sure” his blog post was actually true. He also admitted that he didn’t test any of the claims in his post.

In fact, it turned out that Pokémon Go was never able to read people’s Gmail or any of the really scary things that Reeve and some trigger-happy media outlets claimed. Dan Guido, CEO of security company Trail of Bits, did the deep-dive analysis that was needed before any digital ink was spilled in histrionic headlines.

Guido not only cast serious doubt on Reeve’s claims, he talked to Google tech support. Imagine that! They told him the “full account access” everyone was freaking out about doesn’t mean a third party (in this case, Niantic, Nintendo, or Pokémon) can read or send email, access your files or anything else being claimed.

It did mean that Niantic could read so-called biographical information, like an email address and phone number. What Trail of Bits also discovered was that Pokémon Go‘s Google authorization process was using the wrong permission “token.” Their post linked to another researcher who said, “I believe this is a mistake on Google and Niantic’s part and isn’t being used maliciously in the way that was originally suggested.”

Before the Trail of Bits post was even published, Niantic had reacted. The company put out a press release explaining that there had been a permissions snafu with the social login process, and they fixed the internal mistake in record time. Their statement said:

“We recently discovered that the Pokémon Go account creation process on iOS erroneously requests full access permission for the user’s Google account. … Google has verified that no other information has been received or accessed by Pokémon Go or Niantic. Google will soon reduce Pokémon Go‘s permission to only the basic profile data that Pokémon Go needs, and users do not need to take any actions themselves.”

Further, it turned out the mystery about Pokémon’s account signup process being suspiciously unavailable at the time of Reeve’s post wasn’t a conspiracy after all. To the surprise of no one, Pokémon’s servers were getting hammered by all the new traffic.

It’s quite interesting to see so many people wig out about an app’s overreach of permissions. Which is, incidentally, a big deal. And it’s about time.

But it’s really frustrating to watch the outrage flames get fanned and senators spring into action over something that feels more like crying wolf when there are flashlight apps that dubiously “need” to know where you are or must have access to write arbitrary code to your phone. Or, how about a little outrage and action over our recent discovery that popular running app Runkeeper records your location after you’ve turned the app off? (Runkeeper is in trouble for this in Europe but not here.) Better yet, how about a senator demand answers from Facebook over tracking user locations without consent and matching it with strangers’ locations? Because we sure as hell don’t know when Facebook did that, or to whom (or for how long) the company did that. Nor can we can trust that they’ve actually stopped doing this or won’t do it again in the future.

So this week, everyone we know basically joined a geocaching cult. We already knew that no one reads or understands the terms they agree to for apps and websites, even if they demand giving up your first-born child as payment. We learned that setting up social login permissions is actually really fussy and difficult to do right. And everyone learned that signing in with your Google or Facebook account means putting some kind of access to your personal stuff in someone else’s hands. Which, by the way, is why I recommend never, ever in a million years signing in to any app or website in this manner. Seriously, if you do that, just stop locking your front door and get it over with.

If only the entire internet, security’s brighter minds and our elected representatives would level this amount of scrutiny at all apps.

But as one forum commenter wisely explained, “iOS users using Google Account sign-up affected by Pokémon Go permissions bug, Android unaffected” just doesn’t make a sexy headline.

Engadget RSS Feed