The Downside to iPhone Success 15 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Smartphone applications are one of the biggest trends going, one that will only get bigger in 2009. Not exactly unexpected, especially for anyone who’s followed Salesforce.com’s (NYSE: CRM) AppExchange model. But despite how Google’s Android (NASDAQ: GOOG) foreshadowed the market, it’s taken the brilliance of Steve Jobs to get the ball rolling.
On the one hand, the dynamics are similar to ring tones
- Cheap. A few bucks each; some are free
- Easy. Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) sets the standard for ease-of-use, though with the usual drawbacks that come from its closed system. Android’s market will be a little more “wild west”, but probably more innovative for it.
- Not originated by the service provider. The best services never are, telcos are about as innovative as rocks.
- Customizable. Make your phone personal, whether it’s playing apps or having different ring tones for each caller.
- Cachet. Everyone wants the latest “cool” app, just like they wanted the most popular songs to sound out whenever their phone rings.
On the other hand, the mobile phone app phenomenon is also evolving into an analogue for the gaming industry, with developers writing apps for one of only a few “platforms” (e.g. iPhone, Windows Mobile, Android, etc.). I expect to see developers selling versions of their apps onto multiple platforms, especially for the more popular ones, just as happens with game consoles.
The last, and most ominous similarity, is with Windows. Despite the existence of Android, there’s a chance the iPhone could become the uber platform, with most apps being written for it (at least first), creating a Microsoft-like dominance of phone applications. All of which leads to the following prediction for the New Year:
The most widespread iPhone application in 2009 will be a virus.
Think about it. All the elements are already there:
- Rocketing platform/device popularity with a growing market share
- Viral growth in application number and complexity, providing plenty of ready vectors for the introduction of malicious code
- Existence of a large, dedicated, developer base
- A ready black market for both hardware and software–which means plenty of hackers.
Despite assurances to the contrary from its PR department, Apple software is not virus proof. It’s largely benefited from a lack of attention given its small (though growing) share of the desktop/laptop market. But the success of the iPhone changes those dynamics. Already, iphone dev team has unlocked the iPhone 3G, and is even now delivering its yellowsn0w software to the masses.
True, Android will undoubtedly be more vulnerable, given its marketplace model and the lack of a central control. But betting against hackers has always been a sucker play, and it will remain so even for the iPhone. Just ask the Blu-ray folks.
The predators are circling. And it’s only a matter of time.
Disclosure: The author holds no position in any of the stocks mentioned here.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 15 comments:
Very tired of all the vultures just waiting for something negative to lay on Apple. The minute the stock begins to recover, out they come.
The people who will have trouble with any potential virus on the iPhone will be those who jailbreak it. And protection is one of the reasons why Apple has such tight control over which applications it allows to be sold through their store.
The Android Platform have a much higher risk to be infected.
I am a contributor on thecreatingwealthblog....
Apple Mac OSX is a Unix system - industrial strength computing designed for communicatong with the outside world.
It is NOT Microsoft Windows which was only ever designed to work on isolated PC's on the desktop...
The REAL prediction is that there will be much more FUD like yours coming. Just as the predictions of Mac viruses on OSX would happen as soon as there were enough users. Five years later - still nothing, yet the target is the most affluent of computer user groups. Answer that one old fella...
iTunes and the App Store will only be surpassed when others start innovating and not copying Apple...
If the hack is aginst the App store, itself ('pro' hacker), Apple will force an immediate defensive download across all devices. Mac OS X and the App Store is not an easy target. And again, the Feds will have a great opportunity to arrest the hacker.
One of Apple's objectives w/ the App Store system is to prevent hacker heaven from appearing on the OS X platform. As implemented the system appears to be thoughtfully designed and has a chance of achieving its security and reliability objective.
I want disruption NOW. I don't want to wait. I'm quite sure that Apple can handle viruses as a technical issue. Apple will have a 1.5 BILLION downloads from its App Store by the time that RIM has one.
It's wise never to say never, so I won't say "Never!" But there have been long technical articles by Mac users tearing into the thesis that it's only the Mac's low market share that has made it so much less vulnerable to real-world malware attacks. Rather, it’s the OS’s basic architecture that protects it. (I printed out a couple of these articles many months ago but they're buried in my piles of printouts, so I can't provide a link.)
And there are inferential considerations that argue against OS X's vulnerability: For instance, There would be lots of back-slapping kudos and ego-boost in hackerdom to the guy who first infected the Mac in any serious way. So it's not as though the Mac isn't a tempting target. And there have been, I've read, more successes in attacking Linux PCs than Macs, despite the former's relatively tiny market share. So it's not as though a small share deters hackers either. Therefore, it's untrue to say, "betting against hackers has always been a sucker play." Over 90% of Mac users have between against hackers by operating without anti-virus software or other anti-malware utilities--they haven't been exposed as suckers yet.
Of course, I'm not saying there won't be some successful attacks on the iPhone. And there will probably be internal glitches that will come to light in time, like the leap-year bug that recently affected the Zune. But I think the threat-level to the iPhone is about 10% of what this article implies.
Good feedback from a few here. Others maybe ought to more carefully read what I read, and take off your AAPL-tinted shades. I'm not attacking the brilliance of Jobs or his engineers. Though I'm continually dismayed at the thin skins on some of his fans.
Frankly, I have nothing but respect for Apple's design and usability. In fact I said that. The point remains that no matter how good it is, they are now a MUCH bigger target (the iPhone, not Macs). And hackers aren't only interested in kudos or in attacking "affluent" markets. Just ask any of the many whose PCs have been co-opted to become spam generators.
Nowhere did I say hacking iPhones would be as easy as Windows, nor did I say it would be easy at all. Only that it would happen.
I also didn't state that anyone would be attacking the App store directly (though I suppose I did imply it, and am happy to be educated here) . There could be other entry points, particularly as people start using "non-certified" apps on unlocked phones. Regardless, there *will* be viruses striking iPhones. How frequent, how damaging, and how easy all remain to be seen. To suggest otherwise just isn't sensible.
And last, I'm not "pro-RIM" or "pro-Android" and "anti-Apple". Reread what I said. I expect Android to be much more vulnerable to viruses for the exact reason many commenters said--lack of central control of the market. However, there is no scale in either RIM or Android (yet).
I do believe strongly that there are disadvantages to Apple's closed ecosystem(s), but most of them accrue to users and to the device market, not so much to Apple's business. If the iPhone continues on the growth track that is making my thesis more likely, that can't help but improve AAPL's stock price, despite fallout from any virus issues.
Uhm, wasn't your original thesis that "The most widespread iPhone application in 2009 will be a virus." The question is HOW?
Your second stab at that seems to point to "unlocked phones". A 3G iPhone ver2.2 only JUST came out, and how many people will unlock? There's no financial advantage as 99% of iPhones sold must come with a contract. The only unlockers are people who need a different carrier.
Did you actually mean jailbreakers? That's a different group of people you know, and hurts your credibility if you don't know the difference between them. Jailbroken iPhones is also a tiny fraction of iPhones, and still doesn't explain how that could be the vector for the "most widespread iPhone application in 2009 [being] a virus".
If people are thin-skinned, you have to know the context. There have been tons of critical stories saying this or that, which have all been pretty much rubbish. Your commentary is coming after all of that.
Rewriting your story by saying there will be viruses, goes without saying, and is NOT what you wrote initially. Some responses have already pointed out why viruses won't get too far in the official App Store, as that is the largest population of users, your most widespread app being a virus seems highly suspect.
1. Apple is perfect and never allows anything *that could be susceptible to* a virus get through its store.
2. No iPhone ever accesses any content from any other iPhone or the Internet that might be used to infect a susceptible app or phone.
So which one is it? My point was simply that more phones + more apps + more connectivity = more viruses. It also means the virus is likely to be more widespread.
Your argument that "the most widespread iPhone application in 2009 will be a virus" is so patently impossible it does not take a fanboy to realise this.
Apple's central global remote "kill switch" capability combined with tight control over what programs are approved in the App Store as well as mandatory secure app certificate-signing and the iPhone's automatic app update notification mechanism makes it virtually impossible for a virus to even get out of the starting gate let alone replicate amongst a helpless public.
www.ipodobserver.com/s...
www.appleinsider.com/a...
In contrast Windows Mobile which lacks all of these security mechanisms already suffers from quite a number of viruses and trojans as does Symbian and Palm and it looks like Google's Android will suffer the same fate. With a wide-open distribution model without any editorial control and with the ability for users to easily get apps from sources other than Google's marketplace it looks like it will be Android following in Windows virus-ridden footsteps (160,000 viruses and counting) not the iPhone.
In the interests of responsible journalism, would you please post a retraction of this inaccurate article? Thanks!
-Mart
Your argument that "the most widespread iPhone application in 2009 will be a virus" is so patently impossible it does not take a fanboy to realise this.
Apple's central global remote "kill switch" capability combined with tight control over what programs are approved in the App Store as well as mandatory secure app certificate-signing and the iPhone's automatic app update notification mechanism makes it virtually impossible for a virus to even get out of the starting gate let alone replicate amongst a helpless public.
www.ipodobserver.com/s...
www.appleinsider.com/a...
In contrast Windows Mobile which lacks all of these security mechanisms already suffers from quite a number of viruses and trojans as does Symbian and Palm and it looks like Google's Android will suffer the same fate. With a wide-open distribution model without any editorial control and with the ability for users to easily get apps from sources other than Google's marketplace it looks like it will be Android following in Windows virus-ridden footsteps (160,000 viruses and counting) not the iPhone.
In the interests of responsible journalism, would you please post a retraction of this inaccurate article? Thanks!
-Mart
As far as your second response is concerned:
“Well, for my idea to be impossible, it seems at least one of the following have to be true:
1. Apple is perfect and never allows anything *that could be susceptible to* a virus get through its store.”
Scott, even if a malware author registered all their vital details with Apple (including financial information), paid their $99 entry fee, was approved by Apple into the iPhone developer program and then managed to get an app approved into the App Store that had undetectable malware hidden inside - as soon as it was discovered, Apple would flick the Kill Switch and bam, the app would be neutralised on every iPhone in the world.
“2. No iPhone ever accesses any content from any other iPhone or the Internet that might be used to infect a susceptible app or phone.”
Ah, but the sandboxed security model of the iPhone means no apps can be downloaded to the iPhone from the web or another iPhone and run without being securely signed by Apple through the App Store. Even social engineering won’t allow users to download any old app from the internet or another iPhone and run it - unlike a PC or Mac, or a Windows Mobile, Palm, Nokia or Android phone. (jailbroken iPhones are such a small percentage of the total that they do not count)
The easy infection vectors are just not available on the iPhone unlike virtually every other platform making it far more difficult for malware to survive let alone flourish.
-Mart