[Curtman]

Android Approved By Pentagon For DoD Usage, Major Setback For iPhone

Quote:

The Pentagon has approved a version of Android running on Dell hardware to be used by DoD officials, along with the BlackBerry. The approval of Android by the DoD is a major setback for Apple's iPhone.

This doesn't mean that DoD employees can use any Android phone. The Pentagon has approved only Dell's hardware running Android 2.2. Interestingly Dell recently discontinued its Streak phone which runs Android 2.2. Dell is now offering Dell Venue which runs on Android 2.2. So, this is the phone which DoD employees can use.

Why the DoD chose Android?

The reason was simple: open source. Starts & Stripes repots, “Android, developed by Google and other companies, is open source software meaning it can be easily configured by uses – including DOD tech whizzes who want to install security measures.”

The Army is already doing widespread testing of prototype smartphone-like devices for use in combat, These devices could change the Army's tactics, reports Stars & Strips.

iOS has not been approved probably due to Apple's tight control over the platform.

Why Governments Enterprises Should Not Use iOS

Using Apple's iPhone or iOS by government officials is a risk, especially when used by non-American officials. Apple tracks your movement through the built-in GPS chips. When the UK minister uses his/her iPad in the parliament, everything she puts on her iPad using the iTunes goes through Apple servers. If she is using iCloud all of her data is residing on Apple servers and Apple knows about everything that she does. So, it is a potential security risk for government officials to use Apple products as they are simply telling Apple everything they do.

Android on the other hand doesn't have anything similar to iTunues which tracks and keeps record of your data. Since Android is open source it is far more secure and experts go through every line of the code to find if there are any holes and fix it immediately. There is no way of doing the same with iPhone/iPad. Apple is also slow at fixing security holds in its products leaving users vulnerable to attacks.

[Mr_Canada]

I wonder if Apple will still be with us in 10 years

[Curtman]

Mr_Canada wrote:

I wonder if Apple will still be with us in 10 years

That's what we were saying about Apple 10 years ago.

I saw that you got a tab for Christmas? Which one?

I picked up the Galaxy Tab 10.1 for the Mrs.. I haven't been brave enough to try an ICS build on it yet, but it runs great on my phone.

[Guy_Fawkes]

I dont think for one second that Apple had any aspirations for a government contract.

[Curtman]

Guy_Fawkes wrote:

I dont think for one second that Apple had any aspirations for a government contract.

Some do..

Scape wrote:

I'm not convinced we are talking about the same concept though. The question was originally that brought the thread to this point was why big firms and organizations are picking up IOS devices in large quantities. The argument I am making is their ubiquity is based upon uniformity from the end user through the service provider and back to the manufacturer. All of those elements need to play by the same set of rules to induce a climate of stability that these larger organizations will sign off on. Being able to mod your phone because the manufacture has an OS that allows you to do that created by the manufacture is one thing but if the carrier is not signed off on that process (and I brought the example of tethering here to illustrate) means the whole construct falls apart like a house of cards.

For example, if you deal with a great deal of sensitive information that is subject to the privacy act and ongoing audits you want to be sure not everyone on the these devices are downloading virus ridden, keylogging riddled programs that will not be subject to some form of cross reference. I am not fear mongering here, there is a lot of education based applications that can be applied on these platforms but if there is no trust they can not function. This is the primary reason for the IOS 'walled garden' approach.

[Mr_Canada]

Curtman wrote:

Mr_Canada wrote:

I wonder if Apple will still be with us in 10 years

That's what we were saying about Apple 10 years ago.

I saw that you got a tab for Christmas? Which one?

I picked up the Galaxy Tab 10.1 for the Mrs.. I haven't been brave enough to try an ICS build on it yet, but it runs great on my phone.

It's an Acer Iconia Tab A100. Has Android 3.2

Holding this thing makes me feel like a total asshole

[raydan]

I have a contract with the Federal government and work from home. Since I'm handling sensitive information, I'm not even allowed to use a cell phone nor work on a wireless network. They gave me a laptop to do the job... when I have to transmit reports and info, it's through a telephone connection. I can use a cell when on the road, but I have to be careful what I say.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Curtman wrote:

Guy_Fawkes wrote:

I dont think for one second that Apple had any aspirations for a government contract.

Some do..

Scape wrote:

I'm not convinced we are talking about the same concept though. The question was originally that brought the thread to this point was why big firms and organizations are picking up IOS devices in large quantities. The argument I am making is their ubiquity is based upon uniformity from the end user through the service provider and back to the manufacturer. All of those elements need to play by the same set of rules to induce a climate of stability that these larger organizations will sign off on. Being able to mod your phone because the manufacture has an OS that allows you to do that created by the manufacture is one thing but if the carrier is not signed off on that process (and I brought the example of tethering here to illustrate) means the whole construct falls apart like a house of cards.

For example, if you deal with a great deal of sensitive information that is subject to the privacy act and ongoing audits you want to be sure not everyone on the these devices are downloading virus ridden, keylogging riddled programs that will not be subject to some form of cross reference. I am not fear mongering here, there is a lot of education based applications that can be applied on these platforms but if there is no trust they can not function. This is the primary reason for the IOS 'walled garden' approach.

I still dont see where that shows Apple wanted a government contract. Apple has made it clear they will not give access to its software, something RIM and Android were quite willing to do in order to get the corporate contracts. The article claims it was a major setback for Apple, to me that's like saying a new Honda lawn mower is a major setback for Nissan.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Curtman wrote:

Mr_Canada wrote:

I wonder if Apple will still be with us in 10 years

That's what we were saying about Apple 10 years ago.

I saw that you got a tab for Christmas? Which one?

I picked up the Galaxy Tab 10.1 for the Mrs.. I haven't been brave enough to try an ICS build on it yet, but it runs great on my phone.

Apple was circling the drain in '97.

[Curtman]

Guy_Fawkes wrote:

I still dont see where that shows Apple wanted a government contract. Apple has made it clear they will not give access to its software, something RIM and Android were quite willing to do in order to get the corporate contracts. The article claims it was a major setback for Apple, to me that's like saying a new Honda lawn mower is a major setback for Nissan.

Well it's a setback for the folks who claim that Android is insecure and vulnerable to attack by design. The problems with Open Source software are in fact its strengths, and this decision by The Pentagon confirms that.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Curtman wrote:

Guy_Fawkes wrote:

I still dont see where that shows Apple wanted a government contract. Apple has made it clear they will not give access to its software, something RIM and Android were quite willing to do in order to get the corporate contracts. The article claims it was a major setback for Apple, to me that's like saying a new Honda lawn mower is a major setback for Nissan.

Well it's a setback for the folks who claim that Android is insecure and vulnerable to attack by design. The problems with Open Source software are in fact its strengths, and this decision by The Pentagon confirms that.

No it doesnt, it just shows that the DoD and others are willing to take a risk; Apple wont play ball so they decided to go with Android. Really this is a setback for RIM, not Apple.