I am not sure Android sandboxes that well. (I dont have much knowhow of android sdk btw). But from the applications that are available on the android market - I know that people android apps can do more harm than on iOS, they have more power in android (for example, there are anti-virus apps on android! task killers!, apps can access your photos without you knowing it and upload them somewhere, app launchers, integrate with dialer, etc)
Android sandboxes far better than iOS. It has a more granular, integrated security system.
The existence of "anti-virus" and task killers speaks more about customer ignorance and the placebo effect than it does to the platform.
I think the App Store review process is actually dangerous because it implies something that isn't true. Apple makes zero guarantees about the quality of safety of the applications.
Granularity is good -- but as far as I know people ignore the security permissions warnings, because they are hard to understand, and its difficult to understand why would an app need them, and most people generally just click yes. So practically, it does not really help (thats the impression i got from reading online)
For anti-virus apps, its not about why people buy (customer ignorance), but their existence and feasibility implies apps have the power to monitor the system closely.
App store review helps ... when android store lists apps like these: http://photos.appleinsider.com/android.market.ios.002.jpg how can you trust the android store more or equal to the apple app store?
Those are completely irrelevant problems. The problem you cite is the nature of the beast with an open market. I think you'll have a hard time finding Android fans willing to sacrifice the open intentions of Android and Google's Market to prevent copyrighted apps from getting into the Market.
I find it funny, that image, as if some random bloggers "indictment" should motivate Google to action. They're handling it just as they handle Youtube, and I think it's brilliant. If you see your material in the Market, file a DMCA. Problem solved.
Yes, customers ignore permission warnings, but again, that's an unrelated issue, and surely you're not suggesting that Apple's lack of a permission list is better simply because users sometimes ignore it when offered.
In terms of security, both from a disclosure, per-permission level granting and sandboxing perspecitve, Android has a superior model.
I'm not quite sure why copyright infringement should make me concerned about the applications as a user. Though it's notable that there have been several noted cases of gross copyright infringement on the AppStore.
However I actually think there is a perfect medium somewhere in the middle: Granular permissions that allow for curation by an optional third party. That would be an ideal situation for the market, where Grandma or Joe User can select from a number of curation sources (or punching it in directly) where reviewers rate by quality, assess if the permissions are appropriate, etc.
> Apple makes zero guarantees about the quality of safety of the applications
An important point, considering "flashlight" apps that managed to sneak in SOCKS proxies. No doubt more nefarious things would be difficult to do as a non-super user, but it does seem a false assumption to trust App Store apps implicitly.
Antivirus apps don't do anything. Task Killers don't kill tasks anymore. Yes, apps can access your SD card, I don't see that as a disadvantage and I don't see the risk in optional, opt-in home replacments.
