I think you're probably in a very small minority. YouTube alone accounts for 40% of the video marketshare, and most blog videos come from YouTube.

http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/01/22/...09-in-numbers/

That's not counting all the major news outlets, and Vimeo, Netflix, TED, etc.

How much is viewable on other cell phones/tablets?

That's fair for YOU, but it's obvious that you're not Apple's target audience... so something that may apply to you probably isn't necessarily generalizable to the rest of the internet surfing population.

Most of it is Flash, so Android 2.2 supported. I agree that I am a minority.. BUT for the mainstream user, it's still a NOTICABLE problem not having Flash as even an OPTION.

Well it works for me, because I have tons of documentary and badass educational shit that I watch... and being able to stream it is quite handy.

I agree it's noticeable.

At least you corrected your mistake in the next post, which was the exact mistake I was pointing out.


Correct, they don't support it now. But honestly it just got opened up 2 weeks ago. :rolleyes:


And, of course, those sites = majority of the video on the web. :rolleyes:

I think Silock is right. You are the master of hyperbole and I keep biting on your inane hyperboles because they're incorrect.

Right, the iPad has been out for 3 months and because they haven't converted all their video, they're just flat out refusing to. Jiminy.

Then you have Scribd who just dumped flash completely and is going HTML5.

That's why there's sooooooo much complaining on online video watching from iPad owners. Soooooooo much.

I know a reputable site that said your numbers are full of shit.

Also, if they're already h264, they need not wait for HTML5. They can simply put them up as a quicktime file and they're good to go.

It's only noticeable because of the firestorm. I bet a lot of people, especially the non tech-savvy - don't even notice.

LMAO... shirt.woot today....... Poison Apple...

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/9...jstandard2.png

Evidently, at least 2 million iPads have been sold. That's crazy.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=127292959

Ahh, I get it know. I-P-A-D is set to become iTouch senior citizen's edition. I thought this was some new meme that had sprung up that I didn't know about. Now I just see it AustinChief being a hater. :p

Wasn't me! I swear... but I do find it hillarious

Apple's iPad: Adobe works with publishers to create apps without Flash

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...nclick_check=1

It's really irritating - it makes this thread very annoying to read...

Morphius did it, I think. I forgot he did it though and when I read it in this thread, I started thinking that Apple had released a new product so I googled it and was surprised at the "coincidence" that the first hit was a ChiefsPlanet page. Duh.

Doh! Hacked by Goatse...

The article is overblowing the issue a bit, but still...

Apple's Worst Security Breach: 114,000 iTouch Senior Citizen Edition Owners Exposed

Apple has suffered another embarrassment. A security breach has exposed iTouch Senior Citizen Edition owners including dozens of CEOs, military officials, and top politicians. They—and every other buyer of the cellular-enabled tablet—could be vulnerable to spam marketing and malicious hacking. The breach, which comes just weeks after an Apple employee lost an iPhone prototype in a bar, exposed the most exclusive email list on the planet, a collection of early-adopter iTouch Senior Citizen Edition 3G subscribers that includes thousands of A-listers in finance, politics and media, from New York Times Co. CEO Janet Robinson to Diane Sawyer of ABC News to film mogul Harvey Weinstein to Mayor Michael Bloomberg. It even appears that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's information was compromised.

It doesn't stop there. According to the data we were given by the web security group that exploited vulnerabilities on the AT&T network, we believe 114,000 user accounts have been compromised, although it's possible that confidential information about every iTouch Senior Citizen Edition 3G owner in the U.S. has been exposed. We contacted Apple for comment but have yet to hear back. We also reached out to AT&T for comment. A call to Rahm Emanuel's office at the White House has not been returned.


The specific information exposed in the breach included subscribers' email addresses, coupled with an associated ID used to authenticate the subscriber on AT&T's network, known as the ICC-ID. ICC-ID stands for integrated circuit card identifier and is used to identify the SIM cards that associate a mobile device with a particular subscriber.

AT&T closed the security hole in recent days, but the victims have been unaware, until now. For a device that has been shipping for barely two months, and in its cellular configuration for barely one, the compromise is a rattling development. The slip up appears to be AT&T's fault at the moment, and it will complicate the company's already fraught relationship with Apple.

Although the security vulnerability was confined to AT&T servers, Apple bears responsibility for ensuring the privacy of its users, who must provide the company with their email addresses to activate their iTouch Senior Citizen Editions. This is particularly the case given that U.S. iTouch Senior Citizen Edition 3G customers have no choice in mobile carriers — AT&T has an exclusive lock, at least for now. Given the lock-in and the tight coupling of the iTouch Senior Citizen Edition with AT&T's cellular data network, Apple has a pronounced responsibility to patrol the network vendors it chooses to align and share customer data with.

But it will also likely unnerve customers thinking of buying iTouch Senior Citizen Editions that connect to AT&T's cellular network.

It will also do so at a pivotal moment, with the iTouch Senior Citizen Edition 3G early in its sales cycle. Brisk sales for the original wi-fi iTouch Senior Citizen Edition had promised to turn the 3G model into a similar profit machine. But further questions about AT&T, already widely ridiculed for its bad service, are going to make people think twice about spending up to $830 and $25 per month on the iTouch Senior Citizen Edition 3G.

Breach details: Who did it, and how

The subscriber data was obtained by a group calling itself Goatse Security. Though the group is steeped in off-the-wall, shhhh-style internet culture—its name is a reference to a famous gross-out Web picture—it has previously highlighted real security vulnerabilities in the Firefox and Safari Web browsers, and attracted media attention for finding what it said were flaws in Amazon's community ratings system.

Goatse Security obtained its data through a script on AT&T's website, accessible to anyone on the internet. When provided with an ICC-ID as part of an HTTP request, the script would return the associated email address, in what was apparently intended to be an AJAX-style response within a Web application. The security researchers were able to guess a large swath of ICC IDs by looking at known iTouch Senior Citizen Edition 3G ICC IDs, some of which are shown in pictures posted by gadget enthusiasts to Flickr and other internet sites, and which can also be obtained through friendly associates who own iTouch Senior Citizen Editions and are willing to share their information, available within the iTouch Senior Citizen Edition "Settings" application.

To make AT&T's servers respond, the security group merely had to send an iTouch Senior Citizen Edition-style "User agent" header in their Web request. Such headers identify users' browser types to websites.
The group wrote a PHP script to automate the harvesting of data. Since a member of the group tells us the script was shared with third-parties prior to AT&T closing the security hole, it's not known exactly whose hands the exploit fell into and what those people did with the names they obtained. A member tells us it's likely many accounts beyond the 114,000 have been compromised.

Goatse Security notified AT&T of the breach and the security hole was closed.

We were able to establish the authenticity of Goatse Security's data through two people who were listed among the 114,000 names. We sent these people the ICC ID contained in the document—and associated with the person's iTouch Senior Citizen Edition 3G account—and asked them to verify in an iTouch Senior Citizen Edition control panel that this was the correct ICC ID. It was.

Victims: Some big names

Then we began poring through the 114,067 entries and were stunned at the names we found. The iTouch Senior Citizen Edition 3G, released less than two months ago, has clearly been snapped up by an elite array of early adopters.

Within the military, we saw several devices registered to the domain of DARPA, the advanced research division of the Department of Defense, along with the major service branches. To wit: One affected individual was William Eldredge, who "commands the largest operational B-1 [strategic bomber] group in the U.S. Air Force."

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets...ak_inside2.jpg

In the media and entertainment industries, affected accounts belonged to top executives at the New York Times Company, Dow Jones, Condé Nast, Viacom, Time Warner, News Corporation, HBO and Hearst.

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets...eakinside3.jpg

Within the tech industry, accounts were compromised at Google, Amazon, Microsoft and AOL, among others. In finance, accounts belonged to companies from Goldman Sachs to JP Morgan to Citigroup to Morgan Stanley, along with dozens of venture capital and private equity firms.
In government, affected accounts included a GMail user who appears to be Rahm Emanuel and staffers in the Senate, House of Representatives, Department of Justice, NASA, Department of Homeland Security, FAA, FCC, and National Institute of Health, among others. Dozens of employees of the federal court system also appeared on the list.

Ramifications

There are no doubt other high-profile subscribers caught up in the security lapse, along with ordinary users who now have reason to worry that AT&T might expose more of their iTouch Senior Citizen Edition data to hackers.
At the very least, AT&T exposed a very large and valuable cache of email addresses, VIP and otherwise. This is going to hurt the telecommunications company's already poor image with iPhone and iTouch Senior Citizen Edition customers, and complicate its very profitable relationship with Apple. Exacerbating the situation is that AT&T has not yet notified customers of the breach, judging from the subscribers we and the security group contacted, despite being itself notified at least two days ago. It's unclear if AT&T has notified Apple of the breach.

Then there's the question of whether any damage can be done using the ICC IDs. The Goatse Security member who contacted us was concerned that recent holes discovered in the GSM cell phone standard mean that it might be possible to spoof a device on the network or even intercept traffic using the ICC ID. Two other security experts we contacted were less confident in that assessment. Mobile security consultant and Nokia veteran Emmanuel Gadaix told us that while there have been "vulnerabilities in GSM crypto discovered over the years, none of them involve the ICC ID... as far as I know, there are no vulnerability or exploit methods involving the ICC ID."

Another expert, white hat GSM hacker and University of Virginia computer science PhD Karsten Nohl, told us that while text-message and voice security in mobile phones is weak "data connections are typically well encrypted... the disclosure of the ICC-ID has no direct security consequences."

But that didn't mean he thinks AT&T is off the hook:

It's horrendous how customer data, specifically e-mail addresses, are negligently leaked by a large telco provider.

We suspect many AT&T customers will agree.

Update: The New York Times has emailed all staff suggesting they "turn off your access to the 3G network on your iTouch Senior Citizen Edition until further notice" while the newspaper's engineers and security staff investigate the issue.

How is this Apple's fault? It's AT&T that got hacked. It even says so in the article. Misleading title is misleading.