Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2012 July 25#HTC Rhyme browser.3F
{{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}}|Special:Undelete| |{{#if:|
Verifying Android app publishers
Hi, at the Android market, or Play or whatever it's now called, the apps' publishers are all listed under the app name, but how do I know that these are genuine? For example, if I see the publisher "XYZ Inc.", then XYZ Inc. may be a company that I know and trust, but how do I know that this is the "real" XYZ Inc. and not someone masquerading as them? Who does that checking, and is it reliable? 86.129.16.51 (talk) 02:25, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:There is hardly any checking. You give Google your $25, think up a name, and you're in. (In contrast, Apple requires developers to send in some proof of (corporate) identity) Unilynx (talk) 06:45, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
::So I could pay $25 and publish apps under the name Adobe, for example? 86.128.4.88 (talk) 11:40, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:::You could try, but Adobe would certainly protest~this trade mark infringment. OsmanRF34 (talk) 12:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
::::But only if after they noticed or found out, and even then such things can take ages to resolve. Meanwhile, there could be a fake app that purported to be from Adobe sitting there for weeks? So basically I can't trust any publisher names on the Google app store? When it says "Adobe" or "BBC", or any other well-known name, the app could actually be made by any impersonator, assuming the peeople impersonated have not yet noticed and managed to successfully go through the process of trying to get someone to remove it? 86.128.4.88 (talk) 13:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:::::I would personally suspect Google to have some sort of automated process to weed out the odd names, because that's what they're good at (automating everything to avoid the need for human intervention) - hopefully they block auto-approval but forward to the relevant department any attempt to "use a company name where any part of the name matches a .com name in our top 10000 of sites", which should probably block your attempt from signing up as Adobe Inc. But if even the SSL certificate providers can't get the process of vetting people right [http://www.amug.org/~glguerin/opinion/revocation.html], I definitely would view a mostly-automated system like Google Play's developer approval with suspicion. Unilynx (talk) 17:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:::::I somewhat doubt it will take ages once someone in BBC or Adobe or some other well known name takes action. On the other hand, if you have a company and fairly worldwide trademark for IP86Anon for selling computer software or portable devicxe applications and someone uses your company's name on Google Play, I wouldn't be surprised if it does take ages. Nil Einne (talk) 04:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
ISO = VMware?
If some software (Backtrack, for example) is offered in an ISO version and a VMware version to download, can you just download the ISO and use it through VirtualBox? OsmanRF34 (talk) 12:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:If you mean .iso extension, no it's not vmware, iso it's just the image of a CD, see ISO_image — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.49.68.173 (talk) 13:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
::I just wanted to know if they are equivalent. Now it's clear that VMware have its own file format. But I can run this ISO through VMware?OsmanRF34 (talk) 15:46, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Virtualbox supports the .vmdk format which VMware uses, so you should be able to use both the ISO and the VMware version with virtualbox. You would need to create a new virtual machine and have it use the .vmdk file as its hard disk. AvrillirvA (talk) 15:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:Why does VMware have its own file format? Isn't the program meant to mount ISOs? Wouldn't issuing an ISO be always the best choice? If you don't have VMware or prefer to use Virtualbox or prefer to run it from the live CD, the ISO would work just fine. OsmanRF34 (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
::VMware does mount ISOs, but .vmdk is a different format. An ISO is a CD image, but .vmdk is a hard drive image. The .vmdk is presumably for testing how the OS behaves when installed to a hard disk, which is different from running it as a live CD. They are offering both the ISO and the VMware version, so if you don't need the VMware version then just use the ISO, it will still work in VMware AvrillirvA (talk) 16:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:They are different things.
:The VMware version is a complete installation of Backtrack in a VMware virtual machine (done by someone else). If you have the VMware product installed, you can then bring it up and running with the minimum fuss, without having to do any installation, although you will be stuck (maybe at first) with the virtual hardware configuration and OS configuration that the person who created it decided on when they installed it.
:With the ISO version, you will need to do your own installation whether on real or virtual hardware. You then get to choose all the settings (language, keyboard, disk partitioning, and so on). It will take a lot longer to get going but might be more suited to your intended purpose. Additionally, some virtulization software is able to mount an ISO file as if it was an optical drive; otherwise you will need a disk burner to create the physical optical media.
What is this bar?
When you type
lspci -v | grep Network
in Linux, how do you call this |? OsmanRF34 (talk) 16:33, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:The vertical bar is generally known as a "pipe"; see pipeline (Unix). Incidentally, you've been asking a lot of questions -- could you try to limit yourself to one or two per day, please? Looie496 (talk) 16:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
::What are you talking about? Can't you count? Just look at my contribution and you'll discover that if I ask 1 or 2 questions/day that would INCREASE the number of question that I'm asking. If you don't feel like answering there is no need to it. Besides that, you should know by now that such comments belong on talk pages. OsmanRF34 (talk) 16:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:::"...that would INCREASE the number of question that I'm asking..." :D Try taking a look at the "advanced bash scripting guide"[tldp.org/LDP/abs/abs-guide.pdf][tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/]. I found it awfully useful as a beginners (:P) guide too. It has detailed explanations, exercises and examples. "The linux documentation project" has several other good guides too.Staticd (talk) 05:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
32/64 bit problem when running an ASP.NET web application in Microsoft IIS
I faced an interesting problem today at work. I had been developing an ASP.NET web application on Windows 7 on a 64-bit computer. When running the web application directly from Visual Studio, everything worked fine, but when I installed it under Microsoft IIS and accessed it from there, I got an error about an invalid architecture or something. It turned out that setting "Allow 32-bit Applications" to True in the application pool properties in Microsoft IIS solved the problem. I thought that this was because the web application was 32-bit code, but the computer was 64-bit, so IIS had been set to run 64-bit code by default. But now my coworker said that it's not because of that, .NET code should be compiled to MSIL and run under an MSIL interpreter, so it should be bitness-agnostic. He said that the reason was that a server process, which the web application communicates with through WCF, is 32-bit code, because it calls Managed C++ libraries compiled as 32-bit code, which in turn call Windows native C++ libraries. But isn't WCF communication simply sending SOAP messages through TCP? There isn't a direct procedure call involved anywhere. This way the client and server processes can even be on separate computers. What is the reason here? JIP | Talk 18:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
aa3
Will aa3 run on win 7 64-bit with intel pentium 2.7 ghz and 5 mbo/s internet and intel HD graphics card.TheAnnoymousUser (talk) 18:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
:Presuming you mean America's Army 3, you can find the system requirements at http://www.americasarmy.com/support/requirements_aa3.php. Looie496 (talk) 18:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
HTC Rhyme browser?
What's the... I dunno, "platform," I guess, of the default browser (entitled "Internet") that comes with the HTC Rhyme? It supports WikEd, if that helps at all. - Purplewowies (talk) 21:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
: The Rhyme runs Android, and that article describes the standard Android browser as "based on the open-source WebKit layout engine, coupled with Chrome's V8 JavaScript engine." One might be tempted to call that "Mobile Chrome", but Google also has (on Google Play) a full [https://www.google.com/intl/en-GB/chrome/browser/mobile/android.html Chrome for Android]. So if one wanted to characterise the standard browser, I think the best one can say is WebKit+V8. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 21:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
::Thanks! - Purplewowies (talk) 03:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)