Cell phones survey
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
I also cannot find any apps that "are" malware.
Well, do you see apps? There you go. The store was easily over 99% malware when I had it. Any search for anything would turn up loads of hits, not a single one was normally the "real" app, just fakes (fakes are malware by definition.) On the off chance that the actual app existed, it was rarely the top or obvious hit.
I have Duolingo installed. Is that malware? You are definitely being irrational now...
-
@tim_g how do you KNOW that that is DuoLingo? When I had a Windows Phone, all kinds of apps that I wanted to use were listed and let me install them. But they weren't really the apps.
You called me irrational before I showed you all the references to it. I think we are past that point. Maybe, MAYBE, Microsoft learned the error of their ways and stopped promoting malware on their platform. Or mabye they didn't. I learned my lesson and won't trust their phone again. It wasn't a mistake, it went on as long as I owned the phone, it was common knowledge and impacted every user at the time, it was widely discussed as a massive shortcoming of the platform and it obviously made the trades and they even discussed the marketing rationale as to why MS was willing to sell out their customers in that way.
Whether MS has fixed that now... that's up to you to take your chances with.
-
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
I also cannot find any apps that "are" malware.
Well, do you see apps? There you go. The store was easily over 99% malware when I had it. Any search for anything would turn up loads of hits, not a single one was normally the "real" app, just fakes (fakes are malware by definition.) On the off chance that the actual app existed, it was rarely the top or obvious hit.
I have Duolingo installed. Is that malware? You are definitely being irrational now...
I think that you posted this image with the implication that it proves something, proves my point. When the Windows Store was full of malware, this is exactly what it looked like. You must not understand how fake store entries would work - they look as legit as can be. They use the official logos, company names, screen shots and everything of real apps, taken from other platforms. In some cases, I assume, the malware even behaved like the originals but also had stuff to steal your data or to spy on you built in. I tried not to install them to find out exactly what they were up to.
But since the entire point was that things you'd want to see would have the names of things that you wanted, like DuoLingo, and would come listed as being from the vendor of said software, and would have the logos and everything of that software... that you then post a screen shot of exactly what I just described, either you are just joking or you totally missed what we are discussing. And you called me irrational while doing so?
I get that NOW, MAYBE this is really DuoLingo. But we've established, I think, that you are on a platform with a track record of using the exactly thing that you are using to verify the validity of the app as a ploy to deploy malware AND you used that exact ploy as your explanation for how you didn't get fooled by the ploy. That thinking, that having an app with the name, company and logo of a legitimate app was a verification of being the actual app was the exact behaviour tha they preyed on.
And now you see why it worked for so long and was so effective. People would call you irrational and crazy if you pointed it out. But you saw others in their thread mentioning it too, like @momurda - the famous examples were apples like Norton AV, Avast, Google Chrome, Google Maps, Google Earth, etc. Those all had totally scam apps in the store that your screen shots would have looked just as legit as your DuoLingo screenshots.
-
@scottalanmiller I'm doing a lot of searching and I cannot find any screenshots of these fake apps showing they are really from google, etc.
Even the Avast screenshot you posted shows a fake author. It's obvious its not from Avast.
I get a few years ago there were a lot of those in the store. I'm not saying you're irrational about that. You're being irrational about it in present day. I had this phone for almost 2 years and I haven't seem that. And when looking at old screen shots, the authors are clearly illegitimate.
-
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
@scottalanmiller I'm doing a lot of searching and I cannot find any screenshots of these fake apps showing they are really from google, etc.
Even the screenshot you posted first show
But they weren't from Google, they just looked that way. The company name would be Google, or Google Inc. or Google Co or whatever to make a normal person unable to tell if it was the real Google or not.
-
here are some examples, these are really poorly done and are not even remotely as good as the ones that we use to get. This screenshot was done specifically so that people would understand that they were fake, so I assume that they did not pick the most convincing ones.
https://i1.wp.com/musicphotolife.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/WindowsPhoneApp-1024x614.jpg
-
http://musicphotolife.com/2014/07/nokia-lumia-930-review-a-better-windows-phone/
"Apps like “Gmail”, “YouTube”, “Google Search” do not come from Google. The only giveaway is the app developer name. Such is the problem with Windows Store: these big brands aren’t creating apps for Windows Phones, leaving a gap for these opportunistic app developers to take advantage of consumer naivety."
Here they act like the vendor name was always different. But they leave out that it was often only different by ways an end user could never know - like does Google use "Google", "Google Inc", "Google Corp" and so forth. Sometimes they were obvious if you paid attention. Sometimes, there was no way to know at all other than knowing that said vendor wasn't on that platform.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
here are some examples, these are really poorly done and are not even remotely as good as the ones that we use to get. This screenshot was done specifically so that people would understand that they were fake, so I assume that they did not pick the most convincing ones.
https://i1.wp.com/musicphotolife.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/WindowsPhoneApp-1024x614.jpg
I see, I didn't experience that. It must have been while I was still on the Android bandwagon.
It's not like that now and hasn't been for a very long time. That's why I was so surprised how you were talking about it like it all happened yesterday and is still happening.
I know Win10 Mobile is during and Microsoft is killing it. But the same store exists on Win 10. The OS is great, and the store is now good too obviously... They are shared.
-
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
here are some examples, these are really poorly done and are not even remotely as good as the ones that we use to get. This screenshot was done specifically so that people would understand that they were fake, so I assume that they did not pick the most convincing ones.
https://i1.wp.com/musicphotolife.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/WindowsPhoneApp-1024x614.jpg
I see, I didn't experience that. It must have been while I was still on the Android bandwagon.
It's not like that now and hasn't been for a very long time. That's why I was so surprised how you were talking about it like it all happened yesterday and is still happening.
I know Win10 Mobile is during and Microsoft is killing it. But the same store exists on Win 10. The OS is great, and the store is now good too obviously... They are shared.
I tried using the Windows store with Windows 8 and it was really bad. Not like the phone bad, but pretty bad. No way to search, no way to tell what things were. It was the same era as the phones, so I simply don't trust it and literally have not opened the store since that time as I consider it a vulnerability of the platform. Microsoft burned their integrity, to the ground, with those moves and I've seen them do nothing to earn it back. Maybe their store is okay now, but I stopped using Windows. On the rare time that I use it, they have ads for their store pushed into the menu and stuff and do all that they can to make me upset with their store system. I use Chocolatey on Windows which has always provided me a reliable, safe and useful store system so no need to take risks with their store for me. I don't even know what it is really for, back when I tried it, it had nothing useful in it. It was all useless junk, shallow copies or mimics of apps that were normally useful in other forms.
Does anyone really use the Windows Store on Windows 10? I truly thought it was just a platform for duping consumers and tricking them into buying crap, not a way to legitimately get anything good.
-
Skype, for example, has traditionally had a half working, broken version of itself in the Windows Store, but the real one would mostly work fine.
-
And Minecraft, the Windows Store has a crippled "PE" version of Minecraft, not the real deal.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
http://musicphotolife.com/2014/07/nokia-lumia-930-review-a-better-windows-phone/
"Apps like “Gmail”, “YouTube”, “Google Search” do not come from Google. The only giveaway is the app developer name. Such is the problem with Windows Store: these big brands aren’t creating apps for Windows Phones, leaving a gap for these opportunistic app developers to take advantage of consumer naivety."
Here they act like the vendor name was always different. But they leave out that it was often only different by ways an end user could never know - like does Google use "Google", "Google Inc", "Google Corp" and so forth. Sometimes they were obvious if you paid attention. Sometimes, there was no way to know at all other than knowing that said vendor wasn't on that platform.
Understood, but more than 3 years ago before the release of Win10 Mobile, which is what this whole thing is about. IDGAF about anything prior, it's dog poo, and I'm glad I didn't have the misfortune of experiencing it.
-
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
http://musicphotolife.com/2014/07/nokia-lumia-930-review-a-better-windows-phone/
"Apps like “Gmail”, “YouTube”, “Google Search” do not come from Google. The only giveaway is the app developer name. Such is the problem with Windows Store: these big brands aren’t creating apps for Windows Phones, leaving a gap for these opportunistic app developers to take advantage of consumer naivety."
Here they act like the vendor name was always different. But they leave out that it was often only different by ways an end user could never know - like does Google use "Google", "Google Inc", "Google Corp" and so forth. Sometimes they were obvious if you paid attention. Sometimes, there was no way to know at all other than knowing that said vendor wasn't on that platform.
Understood, but more than 3 years ago before the release of Win10 Mobile, which is what this whole thing is about. IDGAF about anything prior, it's dog poo, and I'm glad I didn't have the misfortune of experiencing it.
Burned bridges are burned bridges. Have they taken steps to amend the lost faith? Or have they just depended on their customer base turning over and forgetting that they aren't to be trusted?
That you've not seen it doesn't imply it isn't there, just that they've made it less obvious to you or cleaned it up some. That's not the same as a public apology, making amends and taking actual steps towards prevention.
-
From what I've seen, Microsoft is depending on short memories and new customers. This works because their mobile user base is so small. Effectively no one would have stayed with the Windows Phone from the era that I tested it. It was so bad that it was unthinkable to keep trying to get it working. So basically all modern users are new users, Microsoft got a fresh start and a chance to just act like the past didn't happen. I have a feeling that that is what they did.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
http://musicphotolife.com/2014/07/nokia-lumia-930-review-a-better-windows-phone/
"Apps like “Gmail”, “YouTube”, “Google Search” do not come from Google. The only giveaway is the app developer name. Such is the problem with Windows Store: these big brands aren’t creating apps for Windows Phones, leaving a gap for these opportunistic app developers to take advantage of consumer naivety."
Here they act like the vendor name was always different. But they leave out that it was often only different by ways an end user could never know - like does Google use "Google", "Google Inc", "Google Corp" and so forth. Sometimes they were obvious if you paid attention. Sometimes, there was no way to know at all other than knowing that said vendor wasn't on that platform.
Understood, but more than 3 years ago before the release of Win10 Mobile, which is what this whole thing is about. IDGAF about anything prior, it's dog poo, and I'm glad I didn't have the misfortune of experiencing it.
Burned bridges are burned bridges. Have they taken steps to amend the lost faith? Or have they just depended on their customer base turning over and forgetting that they aren't to be trusted?
That you've not seen it doesn't imply it isn't there, just that they've made it less obvious to you or cleaned it up some. That's not the same as a public apology, making amends and taking actual steps towards prevention.
I care how it is now, when I use it. It's good and safe now, not at all how you think of it (anymore). So, I will use it. MS wants to make money from the store that's shared across all the Win10 based platforms. It's not what it was when Balmer was pushing that crap.
I
-
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
http://musicphotolife.com/2014/07/nokia-lumia-930-review-a-better-windows-phone/
"Apps like “Gmail”, “YouTube”, “Google Search” do not come from Google. The only giveaway is the app developer name. Such is the problem with Windows Store: these big brands aren’t creating apps for Windows Phones, leaving a gap for these opportunistic app developers to take advantage of consumer naivety."
Here they act like the vendor name was always different. But they leave out that it was often only different by ways an end user could never know - like does Google use "Google", "Google Inc", "Google Corp" and so forth. Sometimes they were obvious if you paid attention. Sometimes, there was no way to know at all other than knowing that said vendor wasn't on that platform.
Understood, but more than 3 years ago before the release of Win10 Mobile, which is what this whole thing is about. IDGAF about anything prior, it's dog poo, and I'm glad I didn't have the misfortune of experiencing it.
Burned bridges are burned bridges. Have they taken steps to amend the lost faith? Or have they just depended on their customer base turning over and forgetting that they aren't to be trusted?
That you've not seen it doesn't imply it isn't there, just that they've made it less obvious to you or cleaned it up some. That's not the same as a public apology, making amends and taking actual steps towards prevention.
I care how it is now, when I use it. It's good and safe now, not at all how you think of it (anymore). So, I will use it. MS wants to make money from the store that's shared across all the Win10 based platforms. It's not what it was when Balmer was pushing that crap.
I
I guess what I don't understand is...
- Now that you know that they were using their store as a way to trick customers, why do you think that they won't do that again. You've identified a bad actor working in a bad way. What makes you trust them now.
- Now that you know how they were doing this, you know that you can't be confident that they are not still doing it. Given that you can't trust your eyes, what makes you confident that things have actually changed rather than they've just improved how well they hide it?
I'm not saying they are still doing bad things. I'm saying that given their track record and behaviour, what makes you confident in them?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
From what I've seen, Microsoft is depending on short memories and new customers. This works because their mobile user base is so small. Effectively no one would have stayed with the Windows Phone from the era that I tested it. It was so bad that it was unthinkable to keep trying to get it working. So basically all modern users are new users, Microsoft got a fresh start and a chance to just act like the past didn't happen. I have a feeling that that is what they did.
Yeah that sounds accurate.
Bridges can be rebuilt, you know. I feel it's worth while if you like the Win10 platform. It's definitely worth a test run now if you pass a MS store sometime.
-
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
It's good and safe now, not at all how you think of it (anymore).
But could be at any second, and now you know that they are willing to do that.
-
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
@scottalanmiller said in Cell phones survey:
From what I've seen, Microsoft is depending on short memories and new customers. This works because their mobile user base is so small. Effectively no one would have stayed with the Windows Phone from the era that I tested it. It was so bad that it was unthinkable to keep trying to get it working. So basically all modern users are new users, Microsoft got a fresh start and a chance to just act like the past didn't happen. I have a feeling that that is what they did.
Yeah that sounds accurate.
Bridges can be rebuilt, you know. I feel it's worth while if you like the Win10 platform. It's definitely worth a test run now if you pass a MS store sometime.
Right, which is why I asked if they had rebuilt them, or left them burned. And what I'm hearing is, they left them burnt. They've done absolutely nothing, that I know of, to regain confidence or even apologize. They've worked to burn their old audience and depend on a new one that wasn't aware of the past.
-
@tim_g said in Cell phones survey:
It's definitely worth a test run now if you pass a MS store sometime.
I've never seen one in person. I was referencing the MS Store on Windows 10, though. Not the box store. No idea what they sell there.
