-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What's the most interesting small town you've visited in South Africa?
Document folder for common use
- Thread starter sajunky
- Start date
- Status
I read in many places that devices with 512MB RAM are sluggish with iOS7. iPhone 4 have probably 512MB, iPhone 4s 1GB. The later runs fine. It is why I don't plan to upgrade OS for now.
This is what I was trying to do, from iTunes - it downloads the latest version, no asking. Will try again with device plugged-in, otherwise from the device itself (forgotten about!).
Last edited:
Once you've downloaded the latest version via iTunes go to your iPhone and download it on there from your purchased apps. It should give you a similar message to the screenshot I posted earlier.
![[)roi(]](/forum/data/avatars/m/8/8711.jpg?1563828683){kind=avatar}
4S has 512Mb? Objective-C (iOS's programming language) is able to function effectively with far less RAM than Android's Java.
Apple is certainly focusing on improving the performance of iOS 7 with 7.1; much like they did with the previous versions.
Last edited:
I didn't finish downloading (I stopped downloading), as I knew it would be incompatible version (it happened with some other app). Will try to not download twice.
I wrote that 4S has 1GB. It is why 4S is performing well, while 4 do not. There is not much difference between these models other than RAM size.[)roi(];11800156 said:
I finally got through downloading older version of iBooks app directly to the device (as suggested by bwana, as iTunes didn't do it right, but I didn't go through the route downloading twice using purchased apps section. Thanks for this tip anyway.
This means I don't have backup on PC (other than by doing full device backup). It looks like iTunes do not associate AppStore account with device, as received eMail shortly after downloading app:
@[)roi(] Sandbox concept is for protecting OS and other applications from misbehaving application. If you think that restricting access to generic user documents (other than special areas containing private user or application data) is a part of sandbox concept (and it is why iOS doesn't have viruses), you are wrong. It can be easily bypassed by transfering files to the http/ftp server or cloud and transfering it back to the other application. It doesn't serve any purpose other than promoting cloud services. This is where business is. Cloud is to let others to inspect your data, constantly monitor your behaviour and create marketing profile.
Now I have a piece of beatiful hardware (despite 2 years old it is still great) and fancy OS which restricts my productivity more than (10 thousand times slower) first Apple computer circa 1978. I cannot focus on selecting optimal application for specific job, I have to search among multifunction combo apps containing (in addition to desired function) number of other features like file sharing. No single application shines in all areas, so I do waste 10 times more time and resorces finding a right one. A single shared data folder would change a picture.
I see many file managers breaking your 'sandbox' concept. There is DataCase (http/ftp sharing), FileMagnet (now also on PC). There are file managers dedicated to exploring various phone areas: iExplorer, Awesome Files, Phone View, DiskAid, OrganiDoc. Some free apps like Documents_by_Riddle, FileApp, RiddleDocs, FoxitMobilePDF, FileMaster. Most of them contain document viewer.
I downloaded Files app, it use iTunes file sharing it also has PDF viewer. Possibly inferior to Aji_Reader, but it can transfer files from PC, Aji_reader is unable to.
Imagine how one shared folder would solve all these issues and make useles many apps designed solely for problem avoidance.
This means I don't have backup on PC (other than by doing full device backup). It looks like iTunes do not associate AppStore account with device, as received eMail shortly after downloading app:
@[)roi(] Sandbox concept is for protecting OS and other applications from misbehaving application. If you think that restricting access to generic user documents (other than special areas containing private user or application data) is a part of sandbox concept (and it is why iOS doesn't have viruses), you are wrong. It can be easily bypassed by transfering files to the http/ftp server or cloud and transfering it back to the other application. It doesn't serve any purpose other than promoting cloud services. This is where business is. Cloud is to let others to inspect your data, constantly monitor your behaviour and create marketing profile.
Now I have a piece of beatiful hardware (despite 2 years old it is still great) and fancy OS which restricts my productivity more than (10 thousand times slower) first Apple computer circa 1978. I cannot focus on selecting optimal application for specific job, I have to search among multifunction combo apps containing (in addition to desired function) number of other features like file sharing. No single application shines in all areas, so I do waste 10 times more time and resorces finding a right one. A single shared data folder would change a picture.
I see many file managers breaking your 'sandbox' concept. There is DataCase (http/ftp sharing), FileMagnet (now also on PC). There are file managers dedicated to exploring various phone areas: iExplorer, Awesome Files, Phone View, DiskAid, OrganiDoc. Some free apps like Documents_by_Riddle, FileApp, RiddleDocs, FoxitMobilePDF, FileMaster. Most of them contain document viewer.
I downloaded Files app, it use iTunes file sharing it also has PDF viewer. Possibly inferior to Aji_Reader, but it can transfer files from PC, Aji_reader is unable to.
Imagine how one shared folder would solve all these issues and make useles many apps designed solely for problem avoidance.
Last edited:
Nope you're wrong!
Transferring files to / from an external source still doesn't break the sandbox.
Really? I doubt you even realize how ridiculous that is.
Nobody said the Sandboxing environment is perfect; this is an evolving platform (much like Windows and other OS systems evolved -- they certainly weren't perfect from day 1); the tide for iOS will ultimately turn.
Btw I didn't invent Sandboxing...
Again you're wrong in believing that these any of these apps break the Sandbox model.
You really don't seem to understand that the Sandbox prevents any app from misbehaving, and uploading a malicious app / file is certainly not going to change that.
You're preaching to the converted... We all would prefer something simpler, but at the same time, We all prefer the security that the Sandbox affords us, I certainly wouldn't want to deal with viruses, malware and Antivirus software on my phone.
Apple is known to be a company who will choose to swim against the stream -- tackling a new paradigm (one now proven to work) is of course going to take time to perfect, in as much as it took time for the Desktop OSs to perfect their models.
Yet you could easily argue that the Desktop OS manufacturers naïvely prioritized accessibility over security, as who'd at that time ever think that we'd have dedicated groups writing viruses.
Unfortunately their only answer to stem the tide was to add on antivirus programs that consumed unnecessary system resources in what has proven on more than one occasion to be a fail attempt.
Antivirus programs certainly didn't stem the tide, and you could easily argue they created a bunch of problems all of their own making.
With that in mind and with a device of limited system resource, it's fairly easy to see why Apple chose to take a different approach.
Last edited:
Please explain.[)roi(];11803066 said:
However you don't need to put mission statements like this. It doesn't work.
No, it doesn't, as explained in previous message. It attracts some market segment with fireworks, yes, but for how long? Even these peaople are growing, competition is not sleeping.[)roi(];11803066 said:
A sandbox much like the one kids play in; helps to keep things contained.
In the context of an app, it ensures that apps can't affect anything outside of their private sandbox (it's certainly not a shared sandbox) -- which means that it doesn't matter how an app or file app was put into the sandbox; once those apps or files are in the sandbox they cannot affect the system or any other app.
Now please keep in mind that sandbox is not a physical system entity; it a system design paradigm i.e. the allowable APIs are architected in a way that respects this design, not forgetting that all original Unix commands / APIs are also restricted.
Jailbreaks essentially remove / disable many of these safeguards; but without a JB the protection has proven to be quite resilient.
Another thing to not be confused about is that the sandbox paradigm does not automatically encrypt all the data, files, resources, communications streams, ...
There are varying levels of encryption keys available (system complexities control when each key can be used and the level of protection afforded by each key, encryption strength typically aligns one to one with implementation complexity); yet the choice about whether to use encryption or not is always left up to the developer.
So that all being said; data that is readable, adjustable by 3rd party tools is due to a choice made by the App developer; i.e. you'd have to address the securing of these files with the developer. The only exception is files stored on iCloud are encrypted both in stream and in the cloud by default.
huh? mission statements? I've tried to provide some insight into some of the challenges underpinning their choices.However you don't need to put mission statements like this. It doesn't work.
As I've said before, it's certainly not perfect but then neither is Android.
As far as I am aware they haven't had any virus incidents.
So if you consider the quantity of iOS devices (~700 Million) & that's there's no antiviral software for iOS: you should be able to acknowledge that something in iOS security is working better than Windows, at least in that regard.
Now before you lose the plot again: iOS as I said before is not perfect. Apple's approach being a new one, is definitely going to take time to mature,
So you have a choice: wait and adapt (Apple), or sell up and leave for something like Android.
Last edited:
First things, you must understand that sandboxing concept had been invented with a mind of running applications on unsecured system. This invention didn't come from Apple, but it was used in much broader concept of portable application environment, running entire OS with its own API in foreign environment, see Sun's Java VM. And sandboxing didn't work well for Java to be honest.
On secure operating system sanboxing doesn't make sense at all as is to restricive. OS has many other mechanisms to run applications in secure enviromnment. MAC OS doesn't restrict common folders and doesn't have viruses, right?
Second and more important, I asked the question and you seem you try to avoid it.
I see no difference between above and common folder. If you see a difference, you must explain why.
On secure operating system sanboxing doesn't make sense at all as is to restricive. OS has many other mechanisms to run applications in secure enviromnment. MAC OS doesn't restrict common folders and doesn't have viruses, right?
Second and more important, I asked the question and you seem you try to avoid it.
So I asked you to explain why I am wrong. No answer.[)roi(];11803066 said:
I see no difference between above and common folder. If you see a difference, you must explain why.
Last edited:
Clearly you have some type of agenda, one to seemingly invent "facts" that support your negative take on iOS.
Trying to equate Java's sandbox implementation to that of iOS reveals either a lack of understanding or a general disinterest in how things actually work on iOS.
OS X didn't have a huge amount of viruses for one simple reason -- it was a small fish in a bigger pond, one where an attack on Windows would be far more news worthy. Since then OS X has also adopted the Sandbox model (incl. developer certificates); basically as a start to emulate what had proven to work on iOS.
Btw Here's a reminder of where you were wrong, you said:
Clearly you don't know what you are talking about; you imply that it's simple to bypass file transfers and thereby expose iOS to risks -- that's of course where you're wrong. Unless you have proof (not of your own imagination), proof of a security / news report detailing how this type of intrusion would work, and for the risks it posed.
Ps. I struggle to understand with such a negative view on iOS / Apple why you would choose to buy one of their devices? Explain?
Last edited:
I can't really discuss issue of "my agenda" with the person who takes any correction to the assumption or saying that Apple didn't invent 'something' as an attack on the Apple. This issue is closed.[)roi(];11804904 said:
Twisted, not my statement. It was in response to your statement:[)roi(];11804904 said:
You say that "shared folders" things is a security risk for Apple. I say from the beginning that you are wrong assuming that shared folders things is a part of sandboxing security concept. This is essence of our discussion.[)roi(];11796858 said:
To support my view I asked you a simple question twice but you keep to avoid answering. So I repeat: How it can happen that:
- Common Folders (or shared folders) things breaks Apple sandbox security concept, while
- transfering files to the Cloud and back to another application do not.
Nothing more. Simple question.
Last edited:
If you expect me to answer your questions, which I will, then at least have the common decency to do the same.
To reiterate:
Why did you choose to buy / obtain an iPhone when you clearly do not seem to like anything about Apple? Really why the hell would you ever choose Apple over Android; when an operating system like Android clearly meets your ideals re a perfect OS better?
Now let me answer your question:
What's at question is the general accessibility of Files, KVOs and databases; it is of course this that primarily differentiates an iPhone owned by you vs. one owned by me.
In short our personal data, that which we cannot easily recreate, hence we back it up to either the cloud, iTunes or both.
Writing a malicious program to target elements that can be recreated / reinstalled would be pointless; as a simple system restore would undo all of the damage -- naturally this would seem silly.
To have any real impact you have to affect the data that can not easily be recreated; this is of course what happened in the Windows world.
So after that bit of context, let's get back to your question: by allowing apps to access data that they did not create (by way of either a traditional file system or shared folder) in essence becomes an enabler for the development of malicious apps.
Now let's get a bit more technical re iOS security; if correctly implemented according to Apple recommendations, all app data should be encrypted with a combination of App & System unique encryption keys, meaning that only that App on that user's device using that user's password would be able to decode the data anyway.
Not all apps have implemented encryption as of yet, because it was not initially available, and then was quite complex to implement. That's all changed and it's now very easy to add strong encryption to any App.
The benefit for the developer is clear; they certainly don't want to be appear in the media or be sued re exposing a user's private data.
So as I said the answer is not as simple as you believed; placing files in a common location that is accessible by all apps would enable the development of malicious apps, secondly with encryption, 3rd party apps would anyway not be able to decode the data of another app -- so the sandbox design is definitely not as simplistic as you claim it to be.
Whatever the final solution that Apple arrives at, it'll have to respect both of those fundamentals.
Ps. You really need to work on presenting your questions more clearly; I really only understood what you were asking in your last post.
Last edited:
I posted here for help and I received it in all my questions. I do appreciate help, including yours, I will certainly try FileConnect.[)roi(];11805368 said:
However you seem to keep advertising official brainwashing material full of lies and so far you are unable to support your theories.
Once again the same rubbish. Common folder is security risk, but transfering files to the cloud and back to a different application is not![)roi(];11805368 said:
It would be simple answer if you would take as follows:
1. Stop taking about data encryption, as our discussion is about data sharing.
2. Stop talking about sensitive data. It is obvious that shared folders are not about storing user sensitive or application private data, but data intended to share.
I presented these condition quite clearly here (highlighted):
These are published APIs; so on what basis can you make such baseless claims i.e. That this is "material full of lies"
Honestly please stop this high level and theoretical garbage talk -- either provide details or accept that you are wrong.
You seem to prefer to alter reality to support your beliefs; if the documents / files to be stored in a shared folder are not private user data, then what exactly are these?
Give me some examples?
Surely the only non private data is the app's typical default metadata -- and I don't understand why anybody would need access to this?
If you ever did need this metadata then surely it would be far easier to access it by unzipping the .ipa file.
All the design components have to taken as a whole -- I don't get why are you insisting to ignore those that don't fit with your beliefs. If you disagree, then please by all means refer me to some Apple or even 3rd party documentation that supports this.
Btw I regard any documents / data I create as my personal data (and I'm fairly sure I'm not the only one with this belief) -- I certainly don't want any of this data to be accessible by any application as allowing this would imply any 3rd party app could the data; including a malicious app.
For example: a new document created in the pages app is by default restricted to only the pages app; however you can choose to share this with other apps. This "sharing" leaves the original file unaltered by sending a new copy to the designated target app -- this is for example the way the "Files Connect" app works.
Last edited:
Definition you are looking for is in the subject of this thread. Files intended to share. As I wrote I wanted to use Aji Reader to read PDF file already downloaded from Internet to my PC. I don't want to download again. I know I can upload to the Cloud and download again. I know (you told me) that I can use third party utilities to download from PC. I want operating system to give me such flexibility to decide what I want to do with such file. You keep telling me bull**** that shared folder presents security threat to Apple, it breaks 'sandbox' concept, etc. On the other side uploading to the cloud and downloading back to the other application (or using third party utilities) does not.[)roi(];11806208 said:
This is reality you are facing. And what is your answer? Your answer is that all your data is private. It could be, but what it has to do to the subject? If you have nothing to say, better admit you have no base to support what you wrote, or stop posting in this thread.
Those answers were provided at the start of this thread; the fact that you don't have access to a credit card and/or money is certainly not our problem. As both the solutions recommended would have made it possible for you read PDF files and to transfer them from your PC + even the Internet.
The issues however started when you claimed to understand the logic behind their sandbox design, and as much as I've tried to clear up your misunderstanding I've garnered that debates with you are no more fruitful than pissing in the wind.
Ps. Here's some reading material:
- https://developer.apple.com/library...x.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40011183-CH1-SW1
- https://developer.apple.com/library...uide/TheiOSEnvironment/TheiOSEnvironment.html
- http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/docs/iOS_Security_Oct12.pdf
and when you don't agree with this, please inform them of their mistakes here:
Alternatively sell that iPhone and go pester the guys on the Android forum.
Last edited:
PDF's can be saved from Safari to iBooks directly. If you don't have iBooks, then use GoodReader (Paid) or Acrobat Reader (free).
If you want to share files wireless from PC to iPad/iPhone, then use GoodReader or setup WebDAV on your network shares and use any free WebDAV compatible app to access those shares from the iPad/iPhone.
If you want to share files wireless from PC to iPad/iPhone, then use GoodReader or setup WebDAV on your network shares and use any free WebDAV compatible app to access those shares from the iPad/iPhone.
It became a problem to you, as you have nothing to say construtive. You don't realise it is rude unethical, it is your problem, but when I am asking you to stop posting in this thread, you should listen at least.[)roi(];11808496 said:
@vinodh I am busy evaluating various options, thanks. How can I transfer PDF file from PC to Aji Reader?
Last edited:
The "constructive" comments were provided in the beginning, so why didn't you use it?
Ps. You really have to work on stringing your sentences correctly together; as you have experienced before, we often get confused by your grammar or general lack thereof.
Why do you keep on about Aji Reader, the solution has been given to you more than once; buy GoodReader, or use iTunes with iBooks or get File Connect or a combination of all 3.
Btw Aji reader is not even available in the US iTunes store, which means it's most probably crap, and best avoided, secondly their website doesn't seem to exist, and finally the app was purposefully ham stringed in that you can only download PDFs via a URL (one that you have to know)
What this means if you didn't get it, is that the developer has chosen to not support any mechanism other than URLs (web site addresses) to load PDFs. In this case it's not Apple's fault, blame the developer; Aji?
For example: they haven't supported loading files via iTunes, or WebDav or via the iOS forward features. Basically it's crap, find another one.
You could in theory host your own PDFs from a local web server (but only attempt this is you really can't live without Aji Reader)
Ps. IBooks is free, use it.
Last edited:
- Status