Browser WWII is coming? The struggle between Apple attempt to let IOS a closed ecosystem and the push of its competitor is leading to a new version of the “browser war”. Google, in fact, is pushing to have an Ipad version of Chrome, while Apple is trying to avoid it. Is this the re-issue of the Microsoft vs Mozilla and rest of the world battle? Microsoft lost it, and Explorer is no longer the only Internet navigator available for its operating system. If history means something, I do doubt that Apple succeed in preventing Chrome to be installed on IOS devices.
About Apple vs Samsung tablet legal quarrell
I’m diddling since a couple of weeks with the new Samsung Galaxy Pad 10.1v, equipped with Android 3.0 Honeycomb.
The whole thing is crappy.
There is no support for OS X, no information on how to factory reset the machine when hangs on boot (the only option, as I sadly discovered, is to send the tablet back to Samsung even for a trivial hard-reset), no native file-manager, no native (working) multimedia player, no native task killer. The internal disk is painfully slow and Android crashes more often that it should be supposed to do. Working MP4-econded videos streamed from a DLNA server don’t play when copied locally.
If I were Apple, I wouldn’t care about Samsung Galaxy tablets. They’re far, far, far away from becoming a viable Ipad alternative
Computer search and seizure. An odd law is coming…
The Italian center-left wing has proposed a bill (currently passed in Senate, and now to be examined in the other chamber) that allows the law enforcement to obtain the use of computer seized during computer-crime related investigation, early before the final judgement comes to an end.
The “idea” backing the proposal (that will likely become a full-force law in a few time) is that there is no harm for the defendant if the police uses his computer waiting for the trial. At the end of the day, if the defendant will be acquitted – says the accompaining text to the draft law – he will get his computer back, and will start using it as if nothing happened. The reason for this law – this is clearly stated – is to give the brand new computers used for criminal purposes to the law enforcement agencies that still use old and crappy technology at no cost.
This is the very same approach adopted for houses and vehicles used by drug dealers and mafia mobs so in principle there shouldn’t be a particular concern for this new law.
Personally I disagree from this statement, since a computer is something different than a car or some other premises. It stores information often unrelated to the investigated crime, and/or information related to innocent third parties.
Why should these people be exposed to a mass infringement of their personal life?
Italy, Wikileaks and the disappearing journalism
As every country with “something to hide”, Italy (better, the Italian government) is concerned of what might be soon disclosed on Wikileaks.
As a preemptive strike against possible Wikileaks’ fallback yesterday an official press-release said – without explicitly mentioning Assanges’ website – that “the forthcoming pubblication of confidential reports about the USA politics, with possible negative side effects on Italy tooo – imposes a though determination to defend the Italian reputation as well the protection of economic and political interests of the country” (the translation is mine, I apologize for any mistake.)
I bet my ten cents that when the Italian File will be disclosed the first reaction will be to call for a new law to control the flow of information that endanger “national security” or whatever they name it.
Another interesting issue to remark is the (non)role of the Italian journalists in the whole story. It is, at least, odd that a remote-located website news service, with no apparent connection with the country, is able to get sensitive information about the Italian government, while the local journalists – and especially those who write about politics – don’t.
This is a bad blow to the role of the press as powers’ watchdog.
EU:a State-approved professional to connect a router to a socket? Italy already got it
The “discovery” that Italy is going to enforce the EU directive 2008/63/CE by imposing that only a State-approved professional can connect a router to a socket has generated some sort of ? hype among those who’re not familiar with the Italian legal system. Since 1992, in fact, ? the decree of the Ministry of communication n.314 already establish such burden (and sanction those who don’t comply.)
The true news is that – should the government actually revise the old regulation – things can only get worse…