thewayne: (Default)
Well, I think the subject pretty much says it all. A monitor doesn't have to be connected to the internet, and I can't really fathom why it would be aside from functionality like this. I don't think HDMI cables convey IP information. TVs: everyone wants you to connect their TV into to your WiFi so they can monetize what you're watching: LG makes more money off the data they collect from your viewing patterns than they do selling TVs!

You can "sign in to Microsoft for more personalized results". Or you can buy a different brand. And if you use a streaming device and DVD/BR player for your viewing, you don't have to buy a TV: you can buy a nice monitor and just ignore all the connectivity stuff. Or just not connect the WiFi, I've no idea if it will repeatedly beg you to connect to the mothership. My Sony BR player has Netflix and YouTube connectivity, but alas, it's not connected to my router in any fashion: I can access those through my Apple TV if I so desire.

Samsung has never been high on my list of preferred vendors, though I do have a nice little B&W Samsung laser printer that I bought just before HP finalized the purchase of Samsung's printer division.

https://www.theverge.com/news/767078/microsoft-samsung-tv-copilot-ai-assistant-launch
thewayne: (Default)
This is pretty disgusting. If you take your Samsung phone into Bob's Cellphone Repair Emporium, you've just given ALL your information directly back to Samsung! Bob is contractually-bound by Samsung to provide, among other things, "customer’s address, email address, phone number, details about what is wrong with their phone, their phone’s warranty status, details of the customer’s complaint, and the device’s IMEI number, which is a unique device identifier". Among many other things. Doesn't matter whether or not you bought the phone direct from Samsung or from a third-party, or even used. Bob is required to upload this information daily to Samsung.

But that's not remotely the worst part.

Let's say you dropped your phone and broke the screen. You can get a genuine Samsung screen for, I don't know, $300 or so? Or you can get a generic screen which functionally is just as good for $150 or so. Maybe the color isn't as good, but it works pretty much as well.

If you take that phone, with third-party parts into Bob's, Bob is required to remove ALL non-Samsung parts and DESTROY them. It's in Bob's contract with Samsung. He can lose his contract with Samsung, and thus his access to Samsung parts, tools, and repair manuals if he doesn't do it. So now you have to pay even more money for that new battery to get your phone fully functional again.

https://www.404media.co/samsung-requires-independent-repair-shops-to-share-customer-data-snitch-on-people-who-use-aftermarket-parts-leaked-contract-shows/

https://it.slashdot.org/story/24/05/23/1849224/leaked-contract-shows-samsung-forces-repair-shop-to-snitch-on-customers


The second part is bad for people who like to DIY repairs. I've talked about iFixit before, in fact I just bought a new toolkit from them (20% off sales are attractive). Samsung and iFixit had a partnership going that supplied the latter with parts and all sorts of things from the former. Unfortunately, as the CEO of iFixit puts it, "Samsung's approach to repairability does not align with our mission."

From the story: “Samsung does not seem interested in enabling repair at scale,” Wiens [co-founder of iFixit] tells me, even though similar deals are going well with Google, Motorola, and HMD.

He believes dropping Samsung shouldn’t actually affect iFixit customers all that much. Instead of being Samsung's partner on genuine parts and approved repair manuals, iFixit will simply go it alone, the same way it's always done with Apple's iPhones.

While Wiens wouldn’t say who technically broke up with whom, he says price is the biggest reason the Samsung deal isn’t working: Samsung’s parts are priced so high, and its phones remain so difficult to repair, that customers just aren’t buying.

Most importantly, Samsung has only ever shipped batteries to iFixit that are preglued to an entire phone screen — making consumers pay over $160 even if they just want to replace a worn-out battery pack. That’s something Samsung doesn’t do with other vendors, according to Wiens. Meanwhile, iFixit’s iPhone and Pixel batteries cost more like $50."


https://www.theverge.com/samsung/2024/5/23/24162135/ifixit-end-samsung-repair-parts-deal

https://yro.slashdot.org/story/24/05/23/1528236/ifixit-is-breaking-up-with-samsung
thewayne: (Default)
This is mind-bogglingly bad. "Samsung shipped an estimated 100 million smartphones with botched encryption, including models ranging from the 2017 Galaxy S8 on up to last year’s Galaxy S21."

FOUR YEARS they blew it?! And Samsung was supposed to be the flagship of Droid phones?! There were two major flaws, one was fixed after it was revealed, then the second, dealing with initialization vectors, which was also there from the beginning, wasn't fixed until another paper was published.

Sorry, I'll happily stick with my lovely walled-garden iPhone. But to each their own. It may have its own issues, but I think their attitude to security is better than the Android paradigm.

As a commenter on Slashdot points out, "... Apple just issued a Security Update in September, 2021 that patches iOS 12, covering models clear back to lhe iPhone 5s." Instead, Google just obsoleted the Pixel 3, released three years ago.

'Build things fast and break shit' indeed. Great paradigm when you have your life's history in a device in your pocket. And it's not secure.

https://threatpost.com/samsung-shattered-encryption-on-100m-phones/178606/

https://mobile.slashdot.org/story/22/02/24/222207/samsung-shattered-encryption-on-100-million-phones#comments

January 2026

S M T W T F S
    1 23
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 3rd, 2026 07:57 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios