Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Nov 2013 09:01 UTC
Google

Dieter Bohn, for The Verge:

So for a long time now, we've found ourselves asking the two questions again and again: what exactly is Google trying to accomplish with the Nexus program and what's the strategy with these Android updates? We sat down with three of the four main leaders of the Android team to ask those questions yet again. "Nexus stands for high specs at a really fair price," says Hiroshi Lockheimer, vice president of engineering for Android. "The other thing is the updates come directly from Google. Those are the attributes of Nexus that I think people have really enjoyed and we're not changing that strategy."

Yet while Google's answers to these two questions have been remarkably consistent over the past couple of years (and remains consistent today), the Nexus 5 and KitKat themselves seem to give us a different answer than their predecessors. The hardware and the software tell a more ambitious story: older Nexus devices were Android phones, but the Nexus 5 is the first true Google phone.

Something is happening in the Android world.

Thread beginning with comment 576281
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Radio
by Radio on Wed 6th Nov 2013 14:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Radio"
Radio
Member since:
2009-06-20

Uncritically reporting the outlandish claims of a security researcher who sat on this incredible and extremely dangerous piece of code for three years.

The audio part, especially, is bullshit, as he could have proven it by using a goddamned microphone. But no, he instead says "I sometime hear it".

http://www.metafilter.com/133398/Meet-badBIOS-the-multi-platform-ma...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Radio
by WereCatf on Wed 6th Nov 2013 14:46 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Radio"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Uncritically


They did say several times that no one else has so far verified the claims.

reporting the outlandish claims of a security researcher who sat on this incredible and extremely dangerous piece of code for three years.


And? That's the researcher's own fault, not Ars's. They only reported on the fact that there's this well-known researcher making these outlandish claims, what the claims are, and since it's an ongoing situation they'll be reporting more on it once other researchers have voiced their opinions and findings on it. As such what else do you want them to do? I mean, it's an ongoing situation and they'll be reporting on it when there's more to report.

I don't get this kind of complaining.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Radio
by Morgan on Wed 6th Nov 2013 16:49 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Radio"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Indeed, here's an Ars article following up on the growing skepticism:

http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/11/researcher-skepticism-grows...

Looks like balanced reporting to me, just like the first article.

Reply Parent Score: 3