Does Version 7.0.4 work with Xcode 6.3.1?

[Richmond]

On 25/04/15 20:12, Richard Gaskin wrote:
> Richmond wrote:
> > Microsoft Windows is flaky round the edges; hence viruses. Apple is
> > bound round with steel; hence next to no viruses, and extremely
> > difficult to "talk to" from anywhere else.
>
> In all fairness to both sides there, the deep kernel revisions in 
> recent Windows versions have greatly improved security there.  The UI 
> is another story, but I find Nadella interesting and so for now it's 
> hard to tell where it'll go but seems likely to be radically improved 
> over the next year or two.
>
> And as for Apple, there's a reason Ahrendts is apparently being 
> groomed as Schiller's replacement:  Schiller seems to have run out of 
> positive things to say about Apple's platforms in recent years, 
> focusing instead on perceived security risks with competing OSes. But 
> as this brief sampling of news findable in this morning's Google News, 
> no OS is ever without risk and it can be dangerously counterproductive 
> to mislead one's users into believing they don't need to be mindful of 
> security:
>
> http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/22/technology/mac-security-flaw/
> http://bgr.com/2015/04/22/os-x-yosemite-rootpipe-security-vulnerability/
> http://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-os-x-security-features-easily-bypassed-says-researcher/ 
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/04/22/apple_no_ios_zone_bug/
>
> It may be safe to say iOS has fewer *potential* exposures than 
> Android, but that number is far from zero and despite the number of 
> *attempts* that keep getting headlines the actual number of affected 
> Android devices is very small and almost exclusively limited to users 
> who alter the default protections provided by the system to download 
> apps from strange unknown sources - the same sorts of things that tend 
> to affect iOS users, often requiring jailbreaking.
>
> With its seven layers of security that extend back to 2.3, Android as 
> ships is not much more dangerous than iOS, and far more secure than 
> any Mac, but if you're trying to pay the bills at a news site you're 
> less likely to garner ad impressions with "Billions of People Used 
> Their Phones Without Incident Today" than "OMG the Sky is Falling!", 
> so the press tends to focus on attempts alone and generally completely 
> overlooks the small number of devices actually affected.   We do, 
> after all, sometimes see disproportionate press for iOS security 
> exposures as well, and only when you read down into the details of the 
> article do you find that, like most Android exploits, you need to 
> alter something in the OS to become vulnerable.
>
> With a 75/25% market share split between Android and iOS it's accurate 
> to say there are fewer compromised iOS devices, but not zero.  Just 
> ask any celebrity trying to keep their pics private. :)
>
>
> > Of course . . . one could develop LiveCode standalones for iOS to be
> > loaded through Cydia on Jail-broken iPhones and iPads, and
> > one wouldn't have to "share one's spit" with Apple . . . but I guess
> > that that is just too wild for most would-be iOS developers: don't
> > know why.
>
> Most developers go where the audience is. Both Android and iOS are 
> much safer to use when not jailbroken, so most folks leave 'em alone 
> and enjoy a reasonably safe experience.
>

I've always found a "safe experience" tends also to be a boring one, so 
I always try to stretch whatever equipment
I can lay my hands on as far as I can, but then I'm not "most folks", 
and very glad that I'm not!

Richmond.