Mobile devices bring people considerable convenience, enabling them to access diverse services and applications on demand, including online shopping, internet surfing, and mobile media. Appliances such as phones, laptops, and desktops require software and media from developers to work effectively. Terms such as possession, ownership, and control relate to the operation of these applications. Ownership relates to whom the rights of the software and media used in modern mobile devices belong, while possession concerns the person who purchases and operates the gadget. In contrast, control specifies those who own administrative rights to the applications. Similarly, these features differ between Apple iOS and Android appliances.
Ownership, control, and possession of media and applications on modern mobile devices demonstrate crucial features of contemporary computing and differ between a computer and a smartphone. To illustrate the difference between these features, consider a user called James. James has virtually complete control after purchasing a mobile device, such as a laptop. He owns the gadget, keeps it in his possession, and comprehends its administrative keyword (Smith, 2021). James can create and run personal software and may adjust or delete any program or folder in the personal computer. Additionally, he can unscrew the appliance and change the hard disk, connect wires to monitor, or alter the data inside.
While James can almost entirely own, possess, and control a laptop’s programs and media, these features differ from those of a smartphone. Mobile phones limit what James can execute. The manufacturing firms manage the devices’ software and hardware so that they function correctly on the gadget’s network (Smith et al., 2020). Furthermore, the supplier installs an App Store where users, such as James, can choose programs to download (Smith, 2021). The developers design these applications to prevent interference from third parties. While James can install any application he desires on his computer, this freedom is limited to a smartphone. Although he owns and possesses the mobile appliance, it does not permit him unlimited control and access. These restrictions prevent the spread of malware on phones than on ordinary computers. Otherwise, legitimate applications can monitor the owners and report the location and other information to the programs’ authors. Marketers and other advertising firms value this data.
Possession, ownership, and control features differ between Apple iOS and Android devices. Buyers have possession and ownership rights after purchasing an iOS or Android operating system. However, the control of the applications is stricter for iOS systems than Android. For example, Android permits customers to modify, reutilize, remix, and repurpose the documentation content in their creations. In contrast, iOS does not authorize its operators to utilize its intellectual property and documentation to design, create, license, and distribute third-party accessories. In addition, iOS software developers grant the users limited non-exclusive rights, prohibiting them from spreading the software over a network where multiple devices can access it.
Furthermore, Apple device owners require an Apple ID or a unique hardware identifier obtained from an iOS Device to verify the eligibility of their request for preinstalled applications through the App Store. Conversely, Android users only require a Gmail account to access applications from the Play Store. Similarly, they can access the Store through other gadgets, such as computers and laptops. The system enables users to share and install the applications in other appliances without additional purchases or unique account identification details.
References
Smith, R. E. (2021). Elementary Information Security (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Wang, C., Wang, Y., Chen, Y., Liu, H., & Liu, J. (2020). User authentication on mobile devices: Approaches, threats, and trends. Computer Networks, 170, 107118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2020.107118
write