Slashdot Mirror


Apple Bans Jailbreakers From the App Store

Hugh Pickens writes "Adam Mills writes in the Examiner that Apple has been cutting off access to the iTunes App Store for iPhone hackers and jailbreakers. Sherif Hashim, the iPhone developer who successfully hacked the iPhone OS 3.1.3 and unlocked the 05.12.01 baseband for iPhone 3GS and 3G devices, discovered he'd been cut off and twittered: '"Your Apple ID was banned for security reasons," that's what i get when i try to go to the app store, they must be really angry.' Another hacker, iH8Sn0w, who is behind the Sn0wbreeze tool, confirms that his account has also been deactivated even though iH8sn0w's exploit had only been revealed to Dev Team, the group responsible for the PwnageTool. 'It is kind of surprising that two people associated with jailbreaking have had this happen to them so soon after one another, but it's too early to say if this is a campaign that Apple is starting up,' writes Mills."

507 comments

  1. I don't believe it by amorsen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We'll need a bit more evidence than 2 cases.

    Anyway, that would be an effective way to encourage people to try out alternate ways to acquire the same software...

    --
    Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    1. Re:I don't believe it by netruner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or it would be an effective way to encourage people to go Android.....

      It's the 80's all over again......

      --



      DISCLAIMER: This post was not checked for speling and grammar- if you complain- you're a whiner
    2. Re:I don't believe it by Buelldozer · · Score: 1

      Your comment that you don't believe it made me chuckle. WHY don't you believe it? This seems to me to be precisely the kind of thing that Apple would try and get away with.

    3. Re:I don't believe it by Weezul · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple doesn't mind chasing away all the hard core developers who'll tweak the underlying system. The iPhone, iTouch, iPad are only really useful for video games, music/movies, and basic communications and information services, ala maps, sms, etc. Apple just doesn't need developers. Anyone interested in developing more serious applications should really look into Maemo/MeeGo or Android.

      --
      The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    4. Re:I don't believe it by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Christ almighty, it is 1986 all over again. "Yeah, Apple doesn't need all those people who just want to plug in any all video card. We aspire to a higher class of user." which, roughly translated meant "Okay, IBM and clone manufacturers, we seed 90%+ of market share to you to assure our purity."

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    5. Re:I don't believe it by s73v3r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Perhaps. I wouldn't be surprised. Its just gonna take more than 2 cases to be convincing.

    6. Re:I don't believe it by snowraver1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't see any problem with it. I'm no Apple supporteer, but how is this different than MS banning hacked consoles from XBL or Blizzard banning cheaters from their servers.

      If you want to use a service, you have to play by that service's rules. Don't like the rules, don't use the service.

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    7. Re:I don't believe it by Pete+Slash+Work · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Okay, IBM and clone manufacturers, we seed 90%+ of market share to you to assure our purity."

      So its Apple who are behind all those OSX torrents!!

      /cede

    8. Re:I don't believe it by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      You are mistaking his statement that he doesn't believe it for a statement that he believes it to be not true. All he is saying is that 2 cases are insufficient to draw a conclusion from. There are too many reasons why any one person might possibly be banned from Itunes to assume that the one thing (we know of) that two people who have been banned have in common is the reason they have been banned.
      On the other hand it is entirely consistent with previous Apple behavior, so it may be true.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    9. Re:I don't believe it by poetmatt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      MS hasn't exactly changed in the last 10-15 years, why would anyone think Apple has either?

      hint to folks(not aimed at you mighty): for a corporation to change at it's core is exceedingly difficult and feared by both a corporation's own management and their stakeholders in various forms. It almost never happens.

    10. Re:I don't believe it by sakdoctor · · Score: 1

      And they would have gotten away with it, if it weren't for those meddling DEVELOPERS!

    11. Re:I don't believe it by SadButTrue · · Score: 3, Insightful

      not a single cede/seed joke in a story about apple.. what has happened to my slashdot

      --
      grape - the GNU free, open source rape
    12. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      XBL and Blizzard are services. If I hack I can cheat and degrade the experiences of others. The iPhone is a device. It's mine. No one else should care what I do with it.

    13. Re:I don't believe it by Pojut · · Score: 2, Interesting

      how is this different than MS banning hacked consoles from XBL

      See, that whole thing really pissed me off. Instead of banning hacked consoles from Live entirely, why not just ban them from having a Gold account and allow them to keep a silver account? That way, people with hacked consoles can still pay Microsoft for downloadable games and DLC, yet can't "cheat" during multiplayer.

      To what purpose does it serve to ban people from Live ENTIRELY instead of putting them on permanent silver account status? I can completely understand banning hacked consoles from multiplayer, but why ban them from the store as well?

    14. Re:I don't believe it by idobi · · Score: 1

      I think the far more likely explanation is that these high-profile individual with public email (which also serves as their appleID) had people attempt to hack into their accounts. Enough failed passwords, and all accounts get locked out.

    15. Re:I don't believe it by Xiterion · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except you're not buying the device. You're buying the ability to interact with their software ecosystem.

    16. Re:I don't believe it by qoncept · · Score: 1

      And that clearly didn't work out for them.

      --
      Whale
    17. Re:I don't believe it by courtjester801 · · Score: 1

      The Xbox is a device. XBL, App Store are both services.

    18. Re:I don't believe it by Kagato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They aren't turning off the device, they are removing your access to the iTunes store. Which is a service. Apple has a real and growing problem with people stealing the paid apps. It would be one thing if jail broken phones were just used for loading free software. But it's not.

    19. Re:I don't believe it by atdt1991 · · Score: 1

      Fixed.

      "If you want to use a service, you have to play by that service's rules, unless in your outrage you find a cheaper, easier solution that costs the service profits."

      I mean, let's not be idealistic here, this is what happens.

    20. Re:I don't believe it by bertoelcon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you want to use a service, you have to play by that service's rules. Don't like the rules, don't use the service.

      XBL and Blizzard are services. If I hack I can cheat and degrade the experiences of others. The iPhone is a device. It's mine. No one else should care what I do with it.

      But the App Store is a service. The device is yours but you play by their rules to use the services for it.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    21. Re:I don't believe it by Waste55 · · Score: 1

      I don't either. Since I bought an App last night on a jailbroken iPhone.

      But seriously, do they actually want to discourage buying apps legitimately? That would be the one thing that makes me sell my iPhone. I did it for use on alternate carrier, I like having the categories, and wallpapers.

    22. Re:I don't believe it by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except long term I have a feeling the carriers are going to be hijacking Android and only allowing apps from "their" app stores. There is simply too much money in apps and the carriers are going to muscle their way in some how. They don't want to be just dump pipes. We've finally seen unlimited voice plans fall to what I had been paying for 700 minutes of family talk.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    23. Re:I don't believe it by Plunky · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple has a real and growing problem with people stealing the paid apps.

      So wait. People jailbreak their phones because they want to do things that Apple doesn't encourage. But, they still want to buy stuff from Apple but Apple says "No, we don't want you guys buying stuff from us" and thus the only way they can get apps is to copy them illegally? That seems like a great way to create a massive illegal copying network..

    24. Re:I don't believe it by Waste55 · · Score: 1

      I think a key difference is that on Xbox live the cheaters interfere with the other user's experience by cheating.

      Me having a jailbroken phone and me still buying apps legitimately does not effect other iPhone users.

    25. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is it's way too easy to hijack it back.

      It was one of the things I loved about Windows Mobile 5.0 and 6.0 The Cingular branded and crippled version was brain dead easy to flash back to normal with the tethering tools. Ignore that it's a PITA to develop for, it's stable as their other OS's (reboothing my phone weekly is NOT cool)

      android is the same way, you can reflash any android phone back to a dev version. Granted you lose the official app store but who cares.

      Plus writing an app for android is 800X easier than WM5/6 and iPhone.

    26. Re:I don't believe it by Totenglocke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Really? Because I'd swear I paid a few hundred for my iPhone, not for "iPhone software useage rights".

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    27. Re:I don't believe it by Trent+Hawkins · · Score: 1

      What I don't get is how this will this hurt hackers? Jail broken i-phones can just as easily download any moderately notable program from a torrenting site and run it for free. So it seems that they'd rather slightly inconvenience hackers then sell the few apps that the hackers might have consider paying for.

    28. Re:I don't believe it by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      Microsoft loses money on the hardware sales. If you're hacking your XBox and pirating games (last time I checked their wasn't a homebrew scene for the 360, and the only reason to hack is to pirate games), then Microsoft lost money on the hardware, and can't make it up with game sales.

      Why should Microsoft then cater to you and help you out?

      I hacked my original XBox because I could, and because I wanted to try out XBMC. I also finally jailbroke my iPhone. I have no qualms paying for apps, but I wanted some functionality that Apple is reticent to every provide (customzing the springboard, customizing alert tones, running Google Voice, running NES emulators).

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    29. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is very different. When MS bans a hacked console, it means that other players can play without having to worry about somebody they play against cheating (e.g. seeing through walls). However anybody who's banned can just buy a fresh Xbox 360 and play.

      In this case they're banning a person. That means they can't just buy a new iPhone or whatever. Presumably they could make a new user ID, but Apple would eventually figure out who it belongs to and ban the new ID too.

      dom

    30. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how is this different than MS banning hacked consoles from XBL or Blizzard banning cheaters from their servers.

      It's not in that it's all equally wrong?

      If you want to use a service, you have to play by that service's rules. Don't like the rules, don't use the service.

      But they're the ones breaking the rules. A rule for selling people products is that once money and product has exchange hands, the money is now theirs, and the product is now the property of the person who paid for it. They now have the right to do whatever the fuck they want to it. Once they broke those rules by attempting to remain in control of product which is no longer theirs, everyone else gets to break the rules to regain control.

    31. Re:I don't believe it by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      why not just ban them from having a Gold account and allow them to keep a silver account?

      If you are going to ban them in the first place (which I absolutely support), why 'allow' them to continue using the free portion of the access? It's all or nothing in this case: either they are banned or they are not. Just preventing them from paying for the upgraded service makes no sense.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    32. Re:I don't believe it by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

      "how is this different than MS banning hacked consoles from XBL or Blizzard banning cheaters from their servers."

      Because it's not cheating. That's the first thing that comes to mind. I'm sure there are other ways this analogy falls apart.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    33. Re:I don't believe it by Kagato · · Score: 4, Informative

      As of oct 09 38% of jail broken iPhones had pirated apps on them. The number is rising. It's more or less a case that the pirates ruined it for the free software folks.

    34. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw what the company wants us to think. It's my bloody device and I'll hack it if I want to. Personal computing was built by hackers. There would be no IBM clones, no Apple I, without people pushing the limits of what they could get their hands on. Without a hacker ethos Apple wouldn't even exist. People refusing the accept the limits given to them are why we have DOS, Linux, the modern Web. Trying to fight hackers, proper hackers, is like trying to fight progress.

    35. Re:I don't believe it by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      Sounds more like someone was trying to brute force their accounts. Slashdot, what does everyone keep telling you about inflammatory headlines?

    36. Re:I don't believe it by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      Piracy was the real reason. A hacked XBox or jailbroken iPhone are both able (in theory) to copy purchased content. Both companies want to prevent this flow of marketplace content to devices capable of pirating it.

      Banning the cheaters on XBL was more of a side-effect, as MS targets cheating specifically in other ways.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    37. Re:I don't believe it by painandgreed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Christ almighty, it is 1986 all over again. "Yeah, Apple doesn't need all those people who just want to plug in any all video card. We aspire to a higher class of user." which, roughly translated meant "Okay, IBM and clone manufacturers, we seed 90%+ of market share to you to assure our purity."

      Back in 1986, there was no 'any ol' video card' as each platform was separate hardware and most home computers probably still had built in chips and connected to the TV. Microsoft was an insignificant player who was starting to screw over IBM in favor of the clone manufactures. As for the Macintosh back then, it was built to do graphics so its no surprise that they were different from IBM clones that only did text. They did things like have two monitors for more desktop space for desktop publishing. I think you are inflicting 1996 on 1986.

    38. Re:I don't believe it by Pojut · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft loses money on the hardware sales. If you're hacking your XBox and pirating games (last time I checked their wasn't a homebrew scene for the 360, and the only reason to hack is to pirate games), then Microsoft lost money on the hardware, and can't make it up with game sales.

      But they CAN make it up with online sales of XBLA and DLC purchases....sales made impossible by completely banning hacked consoles instead of just banning them from Live Gold. So the question still stands...what does Microsoft have to gain by preventing hacked consoles from paying for XBLA and DLC?

    39. Re:I don't believe it by Dan667 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I cannot believe Apple did not learn this lesson the last time in the 80s. They were in the drivers seat with the PC and they refused to let anyone develop any software for it. Well, everyone gave them the finger and now almost everyone uses a Microsoft OS (although I am glad that is finally changing). Looks like Apple's need to control every thing and try to sell all the software themselves is catching up with them now that Android is out.

    40. Re:I don't believe it by ashridah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except they didn't ban the people. they banned the hardware from live, since it's untrustworthy. The people still have their gold status, and can sign in on another unhacked console, and use xbox live the way they always did.

      Putting people on silver status would involve taking away a service they paid for. The fact that the device they were using is no longer considered kosher to use to access that service is a related, but seperatable issue. They still have all of the stuff they owned, and can use it on another console if they transfer the rights to that console. MS didn't steal money from them.

      Personally, if I was going to mod an xbox, I'd have a second, unmodified one for normal usage nearby. Anyone who decided to take the risk also has the old owner onus applicable.

    41. Re:I don't believe it by Pojut · · Score: 1

      It makes perfect sense. If you have an Xbox Live Silver account, you can still buy XBLA games, TV shows, movies, or DLC...i.e. give Microsoft money. I can understand them banning hacked consoles from playing multiplayer games, but why ban them from being able to buy XBLA games, shows, etc? Microsoft already loses money from people hacking their consoles...why lose even more by not allowing those people to buy download-only content?

    42. Re:I don't believe it by ViViDboarder · · Score: 1

      It's not.

      I think it's totally in their right to do so... If I get banned, I'm selling my iPhone and buying a Nexus One and I expect that if Apple drops the Banhammer on the entire jailbreak community we will see a sharp upward spike in Google's Revenue. Possibly even in the new Windows Phone 7 Series.

    43. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yet another reason to have an android

    44. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually if you look at the support site on Apple.com, the exact message they reported is given ways to fix it. It could be that someone tried to hack their account & thus it was disabled. The fact that they happen to be jailbreakers could just be coincidence. Put away the tin foil hats till you are sure it's actually an issue.

    45. Re:I don't believe it by psydeshow · · Score: 1

      It's not *cheating*. It's just life. The only reason my iPhone has a jailbreak is so that I can use it with a T-Mobile SIM. Aside from patching the baseband so that the phone isn't locked to AT&T (and this is long after my two-year commitment to that provider has expired) I don't install any software from outside of the iTunes ecosystem.

      So what possible reason could Apple have for forcing me to use unpatched firmware on my own, well-out-of-contract device?

      None. And there's a large enough class of other iPhone owners in a similar situation to ensure that if they ever do, their lawyers will be pretty busy for a while.

    46. Re:I don't believe it by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      Two reasons. First, it enables hacked consoles to pirate that purchased content for other hacked consoles. Secondly, Silver access enables a bunch of other stuff that you don't need to pay a dime for, making it possible that the hacked consoles will just cost them that much more money.

      For a bonus reason, they also stand to make a lot more money by forcing those with banned consoles to purchase new hardware and new copies of the games that they had previously pirated.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    47. Re:I don't believe it by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 4, Informative

      And you can still use your iPhone. You just don't get access to iTunes.

    48. Re:I don't believe it by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Christ almighty, it is 1986 all over again. "Yeah, Apple doesn't need all those people who just want to plug in any all video card. We aspire to a higher class of user." which, roughly translated meant "Okay, IBM and clone manufacturers, we seed 90%+ of market share to you to assure our purity."

      Yeah, it's *just* like 1986 where Apple has ceded 90% of the market to it's competitors, the only difference being that they are leaders in market share (iPod), leaders in software available (iPhone) and by no means ceding market share to their competitors.

      Other than that, though, it's exactly the same...

    49. Re:I don't believe it by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Or it would be an effective way to encourage people to go Android.....

      It's the 80's all over again......

      Right, because Android is doing *so* much better than the iPhone...

    50. Re:I don't believe it by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Except you're not buying the device. You're buying the ability to interact with their software ecosystem.

      Um, no. I'm pretty sure I bought both of those things.

    51. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What free software for iphones? Did you mean the pirate software?

    52. Re:I don't believe it by node+3 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Fixed.

      "If you want to use a service, you have to play by that service's rules, unless in your outrage you find a cheaper, easier solution that costs the service profits."

      I mean, let's not be idealistic here, this is what happens.

      Except, not in this case. Apple doesn't make any notable profits from the iTunes Store. They have rules which make the App Store such an excellent experience (even with the occasional app that isn't allowed). That's the secret sauce of the App Store, and amazingly, all of the other stores are trying their hardest to *not* do that one thing that they could do to provide a similarly great user experience.

      Of course, playing the logic out, Apple *is* protecting their profits of their iPhone and iPod touch by locking down their App Store, but they are not simply trying to protect their immediate profits, which is what you're getting at, and the same mistake far too many people make.

      Apple doesn't steer you into the iTunes Store for profit, they steer you into the iTunes Store for the superior user experience, which leads to profit. The distinction is huge.

    53. Re:I don't believe it by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Informative

      Personal computing was built by hackers. There would be no IBM clones, no Apple I, without people pushing the limits of what they could get their hands on.

      The IBM PC clones weren't built by hackers (I doubt the PC would have been the most attractive machine to a hacker-type anyway), it was built via a clean-room reverse engineering of the original PC BIOS.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    54. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus writing an app for android is 800X easier than WM5/6 and iPhone.

      Is that why apps for Android tend to be 800x shittier than apps for WinMo?

      Seriously, I've been trying to find a decent video/audio player for my wife's cliq and there are no good ones out there. Even the ones that cost money are complete shit. It's been very frustrating.

    55. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If apple has a problem with "people stealing the paid apps", as you said, banning them from the official online store will only increase that issue since they aren't stealing from that store...

      Fred obtains his illegal (in the US) cuban cigars down in little havana.
      His local, and only, cigar store bans him for theft, even though he stole nothing from his local cigar store, but did make the occasional purchase there.
      Now he gets everything at little havana, his local store is out 1 or more customers. (people hear and get pissed at this kind of stupidity)
      So is that really a good business plan?

      You kick people out of the 'official' store for whatever reason, they will go to the others, and there are always others...

    56. Re:I don't believe it by iksbob · · Score: 1

      >What free software for iphones? Did you mean the pirate software?

      The legitimate software made available for free through Cydia or Icy perhaps?
      Software can only be pirated if the creator expects to be compensated for it.

    57. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A company can act like Apple and still succeed, but it must constantly innovate. Apple's latest 10 years of success attests to this.

      Here's a What If: What if Jobs hadn't been ousted from Apple in 1985? Do you think the 1986 - 1996 would have played out the same?

      Here's another What If: What if Jobs dies? Do you think 2010 - 2020 will play out like 1986 - 1996?

    58. Re:I don't believe it by e4g4 · · Score: 1

      Free as in libre, not free as in beer - he was referring to the wealth of free as in libre (offered for free as in beer) software available from the Cydia (and others) repository.

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    59. Re:I don't believe it by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      This is true. If people would actually boycott Apple and not use their product it would send a stronger message. Instead they gave Apple their money, Apple banned them and they win since they don't need to pay for any bandwidth or support to that person.

      All they're doing it making a fuss and talking more about the iPhone and enforcing the idea that everyone has one which will just make more people buy one.

    60. Re:I don't believe it by Edzilla2000 · · Score: 1

      Actually, you can't flash any device, my motorola milestone's bootloader only allows signed roms :(

    61. Re:I don't believe it by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Of course Android is doing better than the iPhone. It's not like the iPhone had a headstart of several years or anything.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    62. Re:I don't believe it by j-turkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      I cannot believe Apple did not learn this lesson the last time in the 80s. They were in the drivers seat with the PC and they refused to let anyone develop any software for it. Well, everyone gave them the finger and now almost everyone uses a Microsoft OS (although I am glad that is finally changing). Looks like Apple's need to control every thing and try to sell all the software themselves is catching up with them now that Android is out.

      Perhaps I don't understand you right, but when did Apple refuse to allow anyone to develop software for their PC's?

      --

      -Turkey

    63. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, so how many iPhones are jail broken? The only estimate I can find online suggests about 7%. So that's about 2.7% of all iPhones have pirated apps on them. I'll bet you that apple desktops have a higher application piracy rate than that. I somehow fail to work up any care about this problem.

    64. Re:I don't believe it by j-turkey · · Score: 1

      As of oct 09 38% of jail broken iPhones had pirated apps on them. The number is rising. It's more or less a case that the pirates ruined it for the free software folks.

      Citation requested (or in wiki's less polite terms, [citation needed])

      --

      -Turkey

    65. Re:I don't believe it by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Insightful

      ARe you a moron, or do you just play one on TV. I was talking about iPhones, not iPods. Look, I know that you, being a mentally retarded Apple fanboy, probably has a hard time following conversations longer than about three or four words, but come on, do try to keep up.

      Or, alternatively, continue applying lube to your iPad to see if it fits in the same place you've stuck your iPod.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    66. Re:I don't believe it by Duradin · · Score: 1

      "Software can only be pirated if the creator expects to be compensated for it."

      If this is true why do F/OSS zealots get their collective panties in a bunch when some corporation profits on something that uses some open source code?

    67. Re:I don't believe it by toadlife · · Score: 1

      All phones are like that. You have to have a hacked bootloader (or have your phone "rooted") to flash custom ROMS. I believe your particular phone has been "rooted" and custom ROMS will be or already are available for it. Here is a forum where you might be able to find some info.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    68. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all hackers are amateurs. Some are professional, some are corporations themselves.

    69. Re:I don't believe it by Edzilla2000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thank you very much, but no. My phone has been rooted, but that has NOTHING to do with customs roms. Contrary to what motorola has done with the droid, where the bootloader allows any rom to be flashed, or contrary to what HTC has done with the nexus one, motorola designed the milestone's bootloader so that it would only allow roms digitally signed with their own key to be flashed. One of motorola employee even said that people looking to use custom roms should buy an HTC dream or an google nexus one... http://community.developer.motorola.com/t5/MOTODEV-Blog/Custom-ROMs-and-Motorola-s-Android-Handsets/ba-p/4224

    70. Re:I don't believe it by rocket97 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Don't point out the obvious to the iZealots, they only believe what Jobs tells them.

      --
      "The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
    71. Re:I don't believe it by Urza9814 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hah...I jailbroke my iPod...but the app store has _never_ worked with it. Even when it's not jailbroken, on several different firmware versions, the app store app on the iPod itself just causes the whole device to lock up, and the app store on iTunes just makes iTunes crash. If I wanted a paid app I wouldn't have much choice but to pirate it...I never have, and it's even less likely that I will now as the hardware of the thing's already going to shit (I have 3rd generation original iPods that still work perfectly, but the friggin' touch won't last more than two years. WTG Apple.)

    72. Re:I don't believe it by toadlife · · Score: 1

      That's a bummer.

      Of course all HTC phones come with a bootloader that only allows ROMS signed by the carrier too, but that doesn't stop people from xda-developers from cracking them within weeks of the phones' release.

      I would bet that someone ends up cracking the milestone bootloader soon.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    73. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So yeah, stop them from being able to PAY for apps. That'll make them stop pirating for sure.

    74. Re:I don't believe it by data2 · · Score: 1

      When you turn off access to the app store, it will be 100%.

    75. Re:I don't believe it by TheGreek · · Score: 1

      So what possible reason could Apple have for forcing me to use unpatched firmware on my own, well-out-of-contract device?

      Apple's not forcing you to use unpatched firmware on your own device.

      Apple's not even, at this point, denying you access to the App Store if you've jailbroken your device.

      Apple is, however, denying access to the App Store to some people who have written software to jailbreak the iPhone.

    76. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I goto a school in WI, USA. We own 14 iPod Touches and (the iPod I was assigned at least) was locked out prompting this /error/.

      I don't think we jailbroke them (I'm not IT haha.)

    77. Re:I don't believe it by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      And your "debate" tone really doesn't do you any favours.

      If your argument has no merit, just resort to name calling. It's a tried an tested method, but it is getting dull.

    78. Re:I don't believe it by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      The unveiling of the Android distribution on 5 November 2007 was announced with the founding of the Open Handset Alliance, a consortium of 47 hardware, software, and telecom companies devoted to advancing open standards for mobile devices. The first phone to run the Android operating system was the HTC Dream, released on 22 October 2008.

      Apple announced the iPhone on January 9, 2007,[18] after months of rumors and speculation.[19] The (retroactively labelled) original iPhone was introduced in the United States on June 29, 2007 before being marketed in Europe.

      Yeah, "several years" head start indeed, but don't let the facts get in the way.

    79. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we seed[sic] 90%+ of market share

      cede

    80. Re:I don't believe it by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Well Apple can care. They can choose not to sell to you if you jailbreak your phone. Perhaps they are concerned with the way your jailbroken phone interacts with the store, perhaps they just choose arbitrarily.

      The point is, it is entirely up to them. It's no different to a store requiring you to wear shirt and shoes when you come in. This is just virtually - they just want non-rooted (clothed) phones accessing the store.

    81. Re:I don't believe it by morningstar8 · · Score: 1

      Christ almighty, it is 1986 all over again....

      1986? More like 1984! Except the heroine has now become Big Sister.

    82. Re:I don't believe it by deisama · · Score: 1

      Well said. If there's one thing Apple knows how to do, its sell stuff. So I really don't believe they'll actually do this.

      But for the sake of argument, and killing time, I'll reply anyway.

      I have an app on the appstore thats heavily pirated, so I hope it carries more weight when I say this:

      Banning jailbroken phones from the appstore would be a very bad idea.

      1st reason: You don't need a jailbroken phone for access to your apps: just go to My Documents\My Music\iTunes\iTunes Music\Mobile Applications and you'll see all the ipa's you've bought.

      2nd Reason: The goal is always to sell more copies, not punish those who didn't buy it. If you put a copy protection method in your code, the user has 3 choices: Stop using your app. Pay a couple bucks for your app. Or spend a significant amount of time to crack your app.

      90% of the people will just stop using your app. But for the remaining few, its very important that you make buying app the easier choice. Because at the end of the day, we're much more lazy than we are cheap. Cracking an app beyond what a typical script can do is a LOT of work. Its hours and hours of using a hex editor, trying to find a specific value. Loading up the modified version, and waiting to see if message box will popup or if you were successful. Its tedius and boring, and no where near as glamourous as the movies make it out to be.

      Its for this reason that cracking on the iphone hasn't really progressed. The technology has improved, but the adoption rate hasn't. My latest version was cracked using the same old version of crackulous that my first version was. I'm not going to pretend I understand why hackers do what they do, but after reading the forums with my cracked version one thing seems clear: They really don't give a crap about saving you a couple dollars. The typical response is: "it works fine on mine, just buy the app if it bothers you"

      BUT if apple banned jailbroken phones, that would change EVERYTHING. If you take away the easy option, than you're forcing them into the hard one. If the only way for me to use one of my favorite apps was to spend several hours going through its assembly code, you can bet I would! Plus you'd start generating a lot more attention and interest from serious hackers. Its one thing to crack to save cheap people money, but its much different, much more noble if you're allowing people who can't use the program otherwise to be able to do so.

    83. Re:I don't believe it by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Are AT&T still refusing to unlock iPhones? Here in the UK, after the O2 exclusive deal ended O2 announced a program that would unlock your iPhone so you could take it to a new network if you wanted. Is it still tied to AT&T in the US?

    84. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're missing the point. If jail broken iPhones CANNOT access the app store, then 100% of them will have pirated apps, not 38%, and before you claim that it'll be 100% of a much smaller number (thus being a net win), there's no chance of that.

    85. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me thinks you doth protest too much.

      If you were a real hacker, you would be hacking instead of wasting time on /.

    86. Re:I don't believe it by jim_v2000 · · Score: 1

      In other words, all of the evidence that you don't have is much more convincing than the evidence presented?

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    87. Re:I don't believe it by Fmuctohekerr · · Score: 1

      Hmm, not sure what you are getting at... the mac II came out in 1987 without on-board video and was a very closed platform (remember those expensive Radius cards?)... at the same time the VGA standard came out. If you were there, his description of the market (and Apple's strategy) back then sounds about right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vga

    88. Re:I don't believe it by Dan667 · · Score: 1

      Read up on the Macintosh.

    89. Re:I don't believe it by grub · · Score: 1

      I bought 2x 3GS models. Mine is broken, her's isn't. I've spent a good amount of money at the AppStore. If Apple banned me, then I'd just have to steal all the stuff I would normally have paid for.

      Silly move on their part.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    90. Re:I don't believe it by Swift2001 · · Score: 1

      Let's see: IBM PC was 1982, and a competitor for the Apple II. In response, Apple brought out the Mac in 1984. Jobs's successors knew there would be a GUI challenger, but they did... nothing. Then, when it was nothing but a money-losing move, they brought out the clones and a thousand different models.

      Jobs, meanwhile, made a linux box that worked with Intel.

    91. Re:I don't believe it by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Except you're not buying the device. You're buying the ability to interact with their software ecosystem.

      No, you aren't...that's just so wrong.

    92. Re:I don't believe it by Swift2001 · · Score: 1

      Oh, lots of early PCs were built by guys with neck beards in their garages. The recipe was pretty simple. You could either become a hardware hacker for fun or a small company. There were literally thousands of PC companies, the great majority of them failing in a few years.

    93. Re:I don't believe it by j-turkey · · Score: 1

      Yeah - did that. As far as I could tell, anyone could develop software for the mac.

      --

      -Turkey

    94. Re:I don't believe it by j-turkey · · Score: 1

      Thanks!

      --

      -Turkey

    95. Re:I don't believe it by macs4all · · Score: 1

      The iPhone, iTouch, iPad are only really useful for video games, music/movies, and basic communications and information services, ala maps, sms, etc.
      ...
      Anyone interested in developing more serious applications should really look into Maemo/MeeGo or Android.

      And what, exactly, do you want to do with an iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad that you feel is beyond the App Store or built-in offerings? How "serious" of an app were you envisioning? Gene folding? CAD? Video editing (oh, wait, you can sorta do that)? Multitrack audio recording?

      From what I can tell, there's an app for just about every frakkin' thing which the hardware is reasonably capable. And then some.

      So, what's your point, exactly? Have you even looked at the depth and breadth of applications available in the App Store?

      I thought not.

    96. Re:I don't believe it by BobMcD · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, "several years" head start indeed, but don't let the facts get in the way.

      Quantify this for me. Your dates above show eighteen months of a head start, do they not? If the term 'several years' is indeed invalid, is the point somehow not the same? In fact would it not be a disadvantage to be comparing products that are 'several years' apart? Would not the newer product be expected to have superior features?

      Are you going to put your rebuttal into a point within the context of the discussion, or did you merely get off on a tangent there?

    97. Re:I don't believe it by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Just iTunes or the whole software ecosystem? Are there other sources of software for the iPhone just as there are other sources of music for it? Or did you accidentally omit that angle?

    98. Re:I don't believe it by Chrontius · · Score: 1

      They make buying used hardware an unacceptable risk to many people.

    99. Re:I don't believe it by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      the policy does suggest that the app store has swiss cheese security and a stealthily rooted phone could possibly download apps without paying for them or do damage to the store itself.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    100. Re:I don't believe it by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      more like apple needs excuses to go after jailbreaking, so they push the piracy rate high then try cracking down.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    101. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By banning the console but not the account Microsoft has provided a large encouragement for the person caught hacking to go buy another console.

    102. Re:I don't believe it by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Well, the point is that the iPhone didn't have "several years" head start, it only had 18 months head start at most, if we look solely at release dates.

      There is no way that 18 months could possibly be described as a "several year" time duration. It is 1 year and 6 months.

      Thus, the original poster's point, that the "several year" head start is the reason that the iPhone is selling far better than Droid is not really valid. There are doubtless some sales benefits from the 18 month earlier release, but the actual announcements about the two platforms were only 9/10 months apart in 2007 (January 9th and November 5th).

      Google have said that they are shipping 60,000 Android phones per day, Apple sold approximately 6 million iPhones before they went to the 3G model in July 2008, so that's 11 months since release (June 29th 2007 was the original release), which is 18,181.8 phones per day. In this respect, if Google's numbers are accurate (and they say shipping, not sold - but they could be sales) then Android is actually doing better in its initial release, despite the "several year" [sic] head start of the iPhone.

      That was my point.

      (although, after the release of the 3G version, they sold 7 million alone in Q4 2008, which ends in September for Apple's fiscal year, which is about 77,000 per day - guess people really were waiting for the 3G model)

    103. Re:I don't believe it by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      the policy does suggest that the app store has swiss cheese security and a stealthily rooted phone could possibly download apps without paying for them or do damage to the store itself.

      So Apple is saying they want their customers to provide credit card and other personal information to a website they have failed to make secure or robust.

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
    104. Re:I don't believe it by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Or it might not be policy at all - it could just be that someone has tried to brute-force their Apple IDs and got them temporarily suspended. So far this seems to only be related to two people, since it seems silly that a jailbroken phone could obtain content with no security barrier. Stranger things have happened though - iTunes only did relatively weak authentication to determine whether an iPod/iPhone was connected, hence the original kefuffle with the USB id and the Palm Pre.

    105. Re:I don't believe it by adarn · · Score: 1

      I have a jailbroken device which I use to install apps that Apple will not approve. I don't run any pirated apps.

      If I have a jailbroken device and can't access the iTunes store the only way I can get new apps is to pirate them.

      I've spent more money on apps for my iPhone than I've spent on software in the last 15 years - I really don't see how this will help them.

    106. Re:I don't believe it by socsoc · · Score: 1

      Yes, right now AT&T doesn't allow unlocks even after your commitment. But they are the only official provider in the states too.

    107. Re:I don't believe it by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      So how does removing access to the store from hacked handsets *reduce* piracy?? Won't this force everyone with a jailbroken handset to pirate more?

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    108. Re:I don't believe it by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      I cannot believe Apple did not learn this lesson the last time in the 80s. They were in the drivers seat with the PC and they refused to let anyone develop any software for it.

      Errm, what?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    109. Re:I don't believe it by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 2, Informative

      I cannot believe Apple did not learn this lesson the last time in the 80s. They were in the drivers seat with the PC and they refused to let anyone develop any software for it. Well, everyone gave them the finger and now almost everyone uses a Microsoft OS (although I am glad that is finally changing).

      What?

      I don't remember that. The Apple ][ was pretty open, and I had absolutely no problems developing for it nor finding software. Hell we even had Apple clones in our user's group.

      What gave Microsoft DOS the market share were all those cheap IBM PC clones (even cheaper when the manufacturer went bankrupt) and the pirated copies of WordStar, WordPerfect, and Lotus 1-2-3.

      The number one selling point for the IBM PC clones (back then they were called PC compatibles, and thanks to the crappy clones provided by Sharp "MSDOS Compatible" was coined) was why spend your hard earn money on a toy computer when you can buy a computer that would run all the programs you used at work.

      By the way, the mistake Apple made in the 80's was not courting over any big software firms to make products that were compatible or at least similar to the software on the PC. Apple is not making this mistake, since they created a App marketplace first. Remember they had a VC firm seed the new software companies that made the apps for the iPhone OS 1.0.

      You have confused Apple's inability to attract big software firms (and their titles) to the Apple II platform in the 80's with the "wall-garden" of the present. If anything, Apple is ensuring their market share. If the ability to have an open software market was the key ingredient for success, then all the articles on CNET, Slashdot, etc would be calling all the new phones the next "Windows Mobile Killer".

      Instead of trying to astroturf the Android OS with these sensational stories, or flaming the iPad, or anything else from Apple. Maybe we should wonder why it's hard to find an Asus EEE netbook in the US that comes preinstalled with something other than Windows XP or Windows 7 Starter Edition?

      Now get off my lawn!

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    110. Re:I don't believe it by mfnickster · · Score: 1

      And what, exactly, do you want to do with an iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad ... Multitrack audio recording?

      Funny you should mention multitrack...

      I was really, really hoping that the "Apple tablet" would be basically a keyboardless laptop with a multitouch interface, so that I could use Main Stage or Abelton Live or some such performance-oriented software to play/record in a live setting.

      Using a laptop to play music is cumbersome, but if I had a multitouch "control panel" running multitracked softsynths, that I could plug MIDI controllers into, and even switch to a mixing board with a single tap, that would be SUBLIME!

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
    111. Re:I don't believe it by Lars+T. · · Score: 0

      Of course Android is doing better than the iPhone. It's not like the iPhone had a headstart of several years or anything.

      Less than a year between announcements, a little over three months between introduction of the App Store and availability of the first Android phone.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    112. Re:I don't believe it by caitsith01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And you can still use your iPhone. You just don't get access to iTunes.

      ...and, as a consequence, you don't get access to any software produced by any legitimate software developer for the iphone.

      It would be sort of ok (well, still debateable) if this only affected Apple's own software. What you fail to acknowledge is that Apple has established a system which allows them to prevent iphone users from using software from anyone, or at least anyone who wishes for their software to reach a mainstream audience of iphone users.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
    113. Re:I don't believe it by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      So you are telling me that people who pirate games want to pay for DLC? You must mean "one out of the group, and the rest gets it for free", right?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    114. Re:I don't believe it by caitsith01 · · Score: 1

      They aren't turning off the device, they are removing your access to the iTunes store. Which is a service.

      Which is a service, which controls access to all legitimate software for the device, which is one of its primary functions.

      You can't diminish the significance of banning people from using a "service" when that service happens to be the only way to use a significant portion of the device's functionality. If Apple hadn't intentionally established a monopoly over legitimate iphone software then your argument would have some merit.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
    115. Re:I don't believe it by Trogre · · Score: 1

      That's not pirating. If they don't release the source to a derivative of GPLd code then it's copyright infringement, to be sure, but very different from making copies of commercial (read: non-free) products without paying.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    116. Re:I don't believe it by Blackjack+Joe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're missing the point. If jail broken iPhones CANNOT access the app store, then 100% of them will have pirated apps, not 38%, and before you claim that it'll be 100% of a much smaller number (thus being a net win), there's no chance of that.

      It's not people that jailbreak their iPhones that are being blocked from the app store, it's the people that make the software to jailbreak iPhones that are being blocked.

    117. Re:I don't believe it by mjwx · · Score: 1

      but how is this different than MS banning hacked consoles from XBL

      Because a banned Xbox can still play 100% of Xbox games, a banned iphone can install 0% of approved applications.

      In my country, the Xbox banning is OK as the product still works as advertised afterwards, the iphone banning is not OK as the product is no longer as advertised (banned? well there isn't an app for that, NEXT).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    118. Re:I don't believe it by mjwx · · Score: 1

      As of oct 09 38% of jail broken iPhones had pirated apps on them. The number is rising. It's more or less a case that the pirates ruined it for the free software folks.

      How?

      Piracy does not affect the free (beer or speech) software people what so ever. In fact a jailbroken iphone is better as they don't have to keep paying Apple US$100 per year to keep their apps available, that US$100 is a loss as no income is made from the software sale.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    119. Re:I don't believe it by mjwx · · Score: 1

      But the App Store is a service.

      But here's where it gets messy, Apple have made it legally impossible to get applications from any other source. By tying iphone to the itunes app store and having no other legal method to load applications they have given up the right to separate the two.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    120. Re:I don't believe it by snowraver1 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm pretty sure that DLC is a lot more difficult to pirate than you suggest. I believe that DLC has two signatures. One that authenticates it as official MS content, and another that ties it to the console. Taking a HDD with DLC from one xbox and inserting it into another will not work. MS will require you to re-download the DLC. I'm pretty sure it's locked down. You can SHARE dlc by downloading at one location, then signing on at another and downloading again which will allow the first xbox to have an authoritative copy, while the second plays "online" only.

      Generally I do agree though, hacked consoles should be banned. There isn't really a homebrew scene, so the only reason for a hacked console is to pirate.

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    121. Re:I don't believe it by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      ...and, as a consequence, you don't get access to any software produced by any legitimate software developer for the iphone.

      Boohoo. You play by the rules of the providers of the service or they cut you off.

    122. Re:I don't believe it by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      So let me get this straight:

      The Mac II came out March 1987, Apple offered a card that at least matched VGA in specs, you could buy even better graphics cards for the Mac II from several other vendors, you could put 6 of them into the Mac II and drive 6 monitors with them, fully supported by the OS.

      IBM introduced the VGA card in April 1987, it could only be used in their new PS/2 range of PCs with the new Micro Channel Architecture bus. VGA compatible cards with ISA bus came much later, and you could only use one at a time (unless you used specially written apps that could handle one color card and one mono card).

      But the Mac II was the closed system - Mkay...

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    123. Re:I don't believe it by Weezul · · Score: 1

      Nokia's Maemo and IBM's Moblin projects are merging as MeeGo. I'd hope they'll have all the multitouch stuff despite needing to maintain stylus compatibility for business users. So presumably you'll have a full linux system with your multitouch interface. If so, the people could add the multitouch support to linux based live performance software.

      I think the only real obstacles to live performance software on the iPad or Android are Apple's fanatical application control and Java's speed issues. You could imagine aftermarket or jailbroken ipad being used for live performances, or Android tablets that had additional low level libraries installed.

      In any case, you could write an interface application that controls the desktop version, provided the desktop version is open enough to allow low level controls, probably again restricting you to open source live performance software.

      --
      The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    124. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citation Needed

    125. Re:I don't believe it by Lars+T. · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not people that jailbreak their iPhones that are being blocked from the app store, it's the people that make the software to jailbreak iPhones that are being blocked.

      Or that is what they claim - the message they get is the same one gets when somebody has tried to login with the wrong password too many times. Gee, what are the chances that giving out your email adress (which happens to be your Apple ID) among a group of hackers could lead to one of the guys trying to hack your account?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    126. Re:I don't believe it by Weezul · · Score: 1

      Any device without a keyboard and/or strong stylus support is off limits for most business applications. A terse email could get you fired. Blackberry nailed this market perfectly.

      Academic users need a stylus or keyboard for note taking too. A few serious users need obscure syntax handled through ssh or sql clients. Again the on screen keyboard fails it.

      A large number of normal users want full skype and sip integration, which Apple cannot provide without pissing off AT&T.. and business users require this feature.

      Apple won't distribute pornographic apps either.

      What's left? Mostly games, movies, music, and basic info delivery like maps.

      Apple sells consumer electronics, ergo they don't care about business needs, nor other serious users. Fair enough, there's a market for that.

      --
      The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    127. Re:I don't believe it by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

      You don't actually know what you're talking about, do you? It's okay, a lot of stuff happened back then, and a lot of people either weren't around, or have since forgotten.

      Let me help you:

      Anyone could develop for the Mac.

      Anyone at all. Apple did nothing whatsoever to stop them. In fact, they encouraged them. They sold development books (the classic Inside Macintosh series) to anyone at all. Even Microsoft, who had an acrimonius relationship with Apple back then, were premium developers.

      Your point (and I'll make it for you, since you're failing to do it) is that Apple refused to licence the OS to other manufacturers. By closing the hardware, you could only get a Mac from Apple.

      All that is unrelated to the issue at hand, although it'd be great if you expanded on the hint that you had a point. You know, by actually making it.

    128. Re:I don't believe it by h4rdc0d3 · · Score: 1

      Why was the parent modded troll? He/She has an excellent point. The *ONLY* result from blocking access to iTunes is a loss of revenue from the blocked user(s). Apple has nothing to gain by doing so and would only force said user(s) to pirate apps, since they would no longer have a legitimate method to acquire them.

      Mod parent +1 Informative/Interesting.

    129. Re:I don't believe it by Fmuctohekerr · · Score: 1

      Well, you are not "straight" yet. The poster said that in 1986 "most home computers probably still had built in chips" and that talked about "IBM clones that only did text." I corrected him about that (by 1987 you had the Mac II and VGA)

      Yes, Macs were closed systems. Are you disputing this? That's nuts. Microchannel? Really? I get that you might be one of these rabid Apple fanbois I've heard about, but that doesn't make me an IBM apologist. What does MCA have to do with this discussion? Ease up. I've owned an Apple II, TI 99/4a, Trash 80, PCs, Mac, a VAX in the basement at one point, and even a Mac Mini... computers are computers, and corporations do what corporations do...

      It is true that IBM never intended the PC to be "open" - that was an accident. The MCA was an attempt to go back. At first the VGA may have been MCA-only (way to miss the point) but CGA and EGA were very popular open standards and the VGA standard became the most popular of all. The ISA bus was a mistake as far as IBM was concerned. But by this point in time, the "industry" (the "I" in ISA and EISA) had gotten together to clone all the BIOS and create open standards. Apple did not (and doesn't) have open standards, and I remember leaning towards PCs because of that. Everybody knows this, and many people feel like this hurt Apple in the late 80s and 90s, regardless of their "superior video cards". Some people (me) think that while Apple may have done some very cool things lately, this very old (and common) attitude ("it's just like 1986 again") will hurt them, and even if it doesn't hurt Apple it will hurt consumers and the industry. And so far, we've only been talking about hardware. Don't even get me started on software development.

      Oh, and the point?

      Open >> Closed

      Apple==closed

      PC industry==open

      PC industry != Microsoft or IBM

      Facts, facts, and more facts.

      Thanks

    130. Re:I don't believe it by MacDork · · Score: 1

      They aren't turning off the device, they are removing your access to the iTunes store. Which is a service. Apple has a real and growing problem with people stealing the paid apps. It would be one thing if jail broken phones were just used for loading free software. But it's not.

      Allow me to quote a pretty smart guy:

      Why would the big four music companies agree to let Apple and others distribute their music without using DRM systems to protect it? The simplest answer is because DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy. Though the big four music companies require that all their music sold online be protected with DRMs, these same music companies continue to sell billions of CDs a year which contain completely unprotected music. That’s right! — Steve Jobs

      So, what's good enough for music isn't good enough for the App store? DRM hasn't worked, and may never work to halt piracy. How did Apple win in music? Easy: They took down all the bullshit barriers. Guess what happens when Apple starts erecting bullshit barriers around their own products? Hello Android!

    131. Re:I don't believe it by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      You==wrong&&youknowit

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    132. Re:I don't believe it by Fmuctohekerr · · Score: 1

      Sorry, just to clarify

      PC industry == kind of open

      I can't honestly say that things are where I'd like them... we still have patent issues and even the EISA bus had to be licensed... chips are very closed usually... so we are a far cry away from a truly "Open PC".

      I'm not suggesting that these companies do anything for any other reason than profit. And I'm not saying that Apple stuff isn't better than PC stuff.

      But Apple still stands out as a poster child for proprietary hardware and software, even over M$ and IBM, which is an accomplishment.

      :)

    133. Re:I don't believe it by Fmuctohekerr · · Score: 1

      Oh, you got me. I stand corrected.

    134. Re:I don't believe it by plover · · Score: 1

      A company can act like Apple and still succeed, but it must constantly innovate. Apple's latest 10 years of success attests to this.

      Here's a What If: What if Jobs hadn't been ousted from Apple in 1985? Do you think the 1986 - 1996 would have played out the same?

      Here's another What If: What if Jobs dies? Do you think 2010 - 2020 will play out like 1986 - 1996?

      At least that's a testable hypothesis.

      --
      John
    135. Re:I don't believe it by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Or it would be an effective way to encourage people to pirate the apps instead of paying for them...

      If Apple actually follows through, they will cut off a goodly chunk of their userbase on principle.

    136. Re:I don't believe it by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      They don't want to be just dump pipes.

      But they're so good at shitting all over their customers!

      (I think you meant dumb pipes.)

    137. Re:I don't believe it by Macrat · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I don't understand you right, but when did Apple refuse to allow anyone to develop software for their PC's?

      Pascal was easy!

    138. Re:I don't believe it by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Let's see: IBM PC was 1982, and a competitor for the Apple II. In response, Apple brought out the Mac in 1984. Jobs's successors knew there would be a GUI challenger, but they did... nothing. Then, when it was nothing but a money-losing move, they brought out the clones and a thousand different models.

      Not exactly right, but close enough for this discussion.

      This is exactly my point. What Apple is doing now is very much *not* how they acted in the late '80s and throughout most of the '90s. The formula that led to MS Windows, after many years, finally surpassing the Mac OS market share is not in play today with the iPhone.

      Apple has learned from their mistakes. Or really, they just got Jobs back, who learned from other mistakes, or whatever. Point being, Apple is most definitely *not* going down the same road as before.

      Jobs, meanwhile, made a linux box that worked with Intel.

      Umm.... Nextstep predates Linux by many years. You're thinking of BSD, perhaps, although even then, calling OS X "BSD" is woefully incomplete.

    139. Re:I don't believe it by Nazlfrag · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So a clear majority of jailbroken phones have no pirated apps at all, or as the article states "There are more people who just want extra control over their device and not an opportunity to steal apps." And of those who do pirate, they used paid apps more frequently than the pirated ones.

      Removing access to the store would result in 100% piracy rate on jailbroken phones. So exactly how is removing store access combatting piracy?

    140. Re:I don't believe it by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      Apple II and the macintosh were completely different beasts.

      Apple II is about as open as you can get in basically every regard, the macintosh is about as closed as you can get. The main difference between them? who was in charge of making them. The apple II was the brainchild of steve wozniak, the macintosh was jobs. Jobs has always been about an extremely controlled experience.

    141. Re:I don't believe it by walshy007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If this is true why do F/OSS zealots get their collective panties in a bunch when some corporation profits on something that uses some open source code?

      Redhat makes millions of profits from their linux distro and nobody cares, what they do care about is when they don't follow the license requirements, which turns it from legitimately using it for free to pirating, essentially.

    142. Re:I don't believe it by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      (last time I checked their wasn't a homebrew scene for the 360, and the only reason to hack is to pirate games)

      There is a slight homebrew scene but it's very fledgeling, the hacks involved to run your own software are a lot more involved than that to just play burnt games, involves making your own NAND dumper etc, I bought an old 360 just for this purpose when I figured out how to do it, just been too lazy to finish it.

    143. Re:I don't believe it by djrobxx · · Score: 1

      If they ban jailbreakers from the app store, that percentage can only go up. As it stands I have no pirated apps, but I won't lose sleep over pirating them if Apple removes my ability to pay for them.

    144. Re:I don't believe it by imhennessy · · Score: 1

      I don't see any problem with it. I'm no Apple supporteer, but how is this different than MS banning hacked consoles from XBL or Blizzard banning cheaters from their servers. If you want to use a service, you have to play by that service's rules. Don't like the rules, don't use the service.

      I think the better way of putting it is:

      If you try to hack the system, don't whine when the system retaliates. You knew it was a risk when you made your choice.

      ivan

      --
      Like to brew? Want to talk about it? Brattlebrew: groups.yahoo.com/group/brattlebrew
    145. Re:I don't believe it by tooyoung · · Score: 1

      I hadn't been aware that it was against the law to jailbreak an iPhone.

    146. Re:I don't believe it by ps2os2 · · Score: 0

      Well we didn't say MS was a paragon of virtue either...

      But to get back to the main point about the HACKS. there doesn't seem to be any good reason not to allow the IPHONE to work on any other network unless it would cause problems. I have yet to hear what problems that it might cause. Mostly speculation.

      Myself I would probably get an IPHONE except AT&T's network sucks major time, almost from A-Z are the reasons.

      BUT, at the same time VERIZONS ads are misleading and I am surprised that AT&T has not come out swinging.

      I guess I would pick any other network than the above 2. If and when IPHONE stops its pettiness people will not opt for it.

      I can sort of understand about any hacking of APPS as I am beginning to wonder when someone is going to have to write an anti virus package for ZUNE. I am hoping that this will not be an issue for IPHONE.

    147. Re:I don't believe it by caitsith01 · · Score: 1

      ...and, as a consequence, you don't get access to any software produced by any legitimate software developer for the iphone.

      Boohoo. You play by the rules of the providers of the service or they cut you off.

      This reasoning would make sense, except that apart from setting themselves up as the artificial gatekeepers, Apple isn't the provider of the services in question - the app developers are.

      But enjoy your monopoly controlled, anti-competitive future in which physical objects you own can be rendered useless by the cancellation of "services" at the whim of a self-interested corporation with whom you have no actual need for an ongoing relationship...

      --
      Read Pynchon.
    148. Re:I don't believe it by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Yeah - did that. As far as I could tell, anyone could develop software for the mac.

      Actually, it was originally much harder to become a registered developer. You had to submit a business plan, jump through other hoops, and there was only one (expensive for hobbyists) "level" of developer program.

      But, even then (which was back in the mid-80's), IIRC, that was only true if you wanted a "creator code" assigned, and wanted to be on the "developer network" for seeded betas, monthly dev. CDs, tech support, etc. So, Apple had some real costs in supporting those devs. too.

      Of course, you could also buy third-party API documentation (the "Inside Macintosh" series, etc.), and purchase the CodeWarrior IDE, so, other than the absence of a "Creator Code" (which simply meant that the Finder would have to use your "Type" code to associate your docs with your app), you were free to develop (and sell) apps for the Mac. Contrast that with their policy with OS X (for desktop/server apps): FREE dev. suite. Three levels of "registered developer" (including a FREE level). You are totally free (pun intended) to create/sell any app you choose. This has been the case since OS X first appeared in January, 2000.

      For the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad, the situation is a little different: Developer tools are still FREE, but the lowest-level of dev. registration is $99; but the tradeoff is that you have a one-stop-shop where customers KNOW where to find your app, where you are free to distribute your app for any amount of money (including free), and in turn, the customer KNOWS that your app will not try to turn your phone into a botnet zombie (or worse!).

      I dunno, but it seems like the publishers of those 140,000 (and counting!) apps in the iTunes App Store would tend to make me think that the whole App Store thing IS a viable business model for devs, customers, wireless carriers (who really do have to worry somewhat about an app misbehaving), and Apple.

      The marketplace has spoken, and it tends to agree. Wholeheartedly.

    149. Re:I don't believe it by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Funny you should mention multitrack... I was really, really hoping that the "Apple tablet" would be basically a keyboardless laptop with a multitouch interface, so that I could use Main Stage or Abelton Live or some such performance-oriented software to play/record in a live setting. Using a laptop to play music is cumbersome, but if I had a multitouch "control panel" running multitracked softsynths, that I could plug MIDI controllers into, and even switch to a mixing board with a single tap, that would be SUBLIME!

      I couldn't agree more!

      In fact, I spent an entire evening about a week ago, fantasizing about iPad applications for multitrack recording, live audio mixing, stage lighting control (already avail. for the iPod Touch/iPhone), and software synths. Even more applications (tablature/musical score display, for example).

      However, I think that the iPad is best suited as a control surface, and not actually doing the heavy lifting. That would be done with another machine over Wifi, etc. Apple has WAY optimized the GUI performance on this thing, so control actions would be fluid and responsive.

      But, how long do you think it will be before a Logic and Mainstage "remote" is available for the iPad (probably from the mothership herself)? I give it six months, tops!

      Now, something like that, with a similar (user-configurable) live interface for Spectrasonics Omnisphere... MMMMmmmmmMMMMMMM!!!!!

      I fully believe that Apple will eventually expand the multitouch touchscreen to the laptops, now that they've conquered some of the mechanical problems with doing same; but that day isn't today. So today, we have to still haul around that laptop, but why wait on the control-surface part (which is what you REALLY want, isn't it???). And I submit that the iPad is damn-near perfect for that application right now.

      So see? We have more in common than either of us thought! But, if you just wanted to "gin up" something on your own (and have the skillset); it doesn't seem too onerous to pony up the $99 to get a dev. license. That way, you can develop for yourself to your heart's content. No, it isn't a perfect solution; but in the scheme of things, $99 isn't the end of all existence.

      Besides, it really looks like this ("banning" thing) is not actually "retaliation against jailbreakers" on Apple's part, but rather a login script just doing it's job of disabling an account after too many failed login attempts. So, you could likely just pay the $99 once (for the dev. tools) (or, ahem, find them somewhere), and then jailbreak your iPad (you know it will happen!), so that you can dev. your own stuff.

      BTW, I have been thinking about these applications, and how to do a _USEABLE_ GUI for same, for about 28 years now (no fooling!). If you'd like to chat about it, I'd love to do so, too!

    150. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that is a perspective I haven't thought of... so Apple is actively banning potential customers?

      If I was selling a program in the iStore, I would be pissed off... of course I was selling a program in the iStore, I am sure I would have been hit by Jobs distortion field, so I may even be glad that Apple prevented such dirty customers from buying my software.
      LOL... Applers

    151. Re:I don't believe it by fractoid · · Score: 1

      They're planting the cedes of revolution, and they don't even know it!

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    152. Re:I don't believe it by fractoid · · Score: 1

      I saw this on hackaday.com a week or so ago. Maybe it's sort of what you're after, if a little bigger?

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    153. Re:I don't believe it by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      Does your phone still work? Do the apps on it still work? Then what's the problem, Apple is only refusing access to the iTunes service, everything you bought and paid for is still yours and working as far as I understand.
      I can understand if Apple just chooses not to do business with jailbreakers again because jailbroken phones have been giving them bad press. Like a few weeks ago there was this "rickrolling on iPhone", where almost all media coverage glanced over the detail that it could only happen on jailbroken phones. Apple's main asset is their brand, and everything they do is based around marketing and protecting that. Hurt them there and they will lash out.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    154. Re:I don't believe it by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Well the reason I didn't mention the Macintosh is because in the 80's it was in a niche market of Desktop publishing due to its cost and the insistence of Jobs to keep the Mac monochrome for WYSIWYG.

      Apple learned its lesson with the Apple II and had developer workshops for the Mac starting in 1986. By the way, the insistence of Jobs to keep the Mac monochrome (OK maybe his type-A personality) was probably one of the main reasons Sculley replaced him in 1985. So there goes your theory of Job's "extremely controlled experience". He was creating Next and Pixar at the time.

      What made Apple lose it's chance for market share in the 80's was the board of directors ousting the only executive that had a "vision". Luckily for Apple, he regained his seat on the board and the rest is history....

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    155. Re:I don't believe it by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm pretty sure that DLC is a lot more difficult to pirate than you suggest. I believe that DLC has two signatures. One that authenticates it as official MS content, and another that ties it to the console. Taking a HDD with DLC from one xbox and inserting it into another will not work. MS will require you to re-download the DLC. I'm pretty sure it's locked down.

      Right, it's not as simple as copying the file and 'ta-da' it works. However, a modded XBox could modify its console ID to match the pirated DLC, or edit the DLC file to match the new console ID.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    156. Re:I don't believe it by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      Luckily for Apple, he regained his seat on the board and the rest is history....

      The ceo before him towards the end was responsible for the majority of the things that went right with apple after his immediate return, these things take time and companies don't do a 180 overnight it takes planning etc.

      So there goes your theory of Job's "extremely controlled experience".

      You make it sound like I was implying it was a bad thing? I sure don't like it but the apple fans love the level of control apple puts on it's products, it has always been beauty (with jobs defining what that is) over function.

      As for how controlling he can be, here are a few examples

      I don't know about you, I consider crap like that to be rather controlling, plenty more stories where those came from on folklore.org, the more you read the more you'll see about jobs' personality

    157. Re:I don't believe it by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      No I don't think Steve's control was a bad thing. I think he's entitled to it. Jobs and Wozniak created Apple and they can operate it any way they see fit (well as long as they made money for their VC investor Markkula who retained 1/3 share). Of course, when you go public the majority share holders always think differently but that's another topic all together.

      Sculley's skill, which he learned at Pepsi, was to market everything Apple had in its arsenal and see what sells. He had no "vision" (long term plan for the Mac). Apple was selling a bunch of different models of the Mac (and Apple even got into markets it shouldn't have. Most of Apple's flops were during Sculley's reign.

      Sculley was pushing Apple products (like they were soda's), and Jobs sells an Apple platform (The user friendly computer) and an Apple brand.

      Jobs did the 180 for Apple (and it didn't happen overnight) by pruning Apple down to its original core market and bringing Apple back into the high-end (or boutique) computer market.

      I also think that Jobs being a control-freak is what keeps Apple from being a generic commodity computer. I see that quality as leadership and the insistence to make a product that he wants to associate with Apple. Those that disagree with him see that quality as petty or over demanding. But hey if it was so bad they can work at Dell...

      But Jobs' story isn't unique, people just think so because the computer press worship him. Most public companies go astray when the founders leave the company. In Apple's case it's said that Markkula picked Sculley over Jobs to replace him at the helm of Apple, because of he thought Sculley would be able to make more money for the shareholders. This turned Apple into just another computer company making a buck in the 80's and remember in the 80's there used to be a lot of them.

      An example outside of the computer market is Home Depot. Home depot lost its way (hopefully temporarily) when Bernie Marcus and then Athur Blank left Home Depot. Arthur was replaced by an outsider named Robert Nardelli who almost ran Home Depot into the ground. The board finally replaced him with Frank Blake (who I like). Robert Nardelli moved on the Chrysler and well....

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    158. Re:I don't believe it by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      I was a little unfair to Robert Nardelli. He did double Home Depot's earnings when Home Depot was expanding into new regions. However, he killed the corporate culture that existed under the former bosses and once Home Depot's expansion hit critical mass the revenue growth plateaued.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    159. Re:I don't believe it by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      Most public companies go astray when the founders leave the company.

      which in my opinion happened when wozniak left the company, wozniak designed all the hardware and software for the product that built the company - the apple II, jobs was and always has been, just a very good business man with dreams of being artistic. There is no doubt that the direction jobs took apple was completely different than that which the company started as.

      Back when apple was first being put out to the public, certain employees had been promised shares in the company from jobs for various things, in the end they got naught and woz had to give them some of his share. It's that kind of ruthlessness that can make a businessman excel, but I don't consider it very moral.

      Jobs did the 180 for Apple (and it didn't happen overnight) by pruning Apple down to its original core market and bringing Apple back into the high-end (or boutique) computer market.

      I do believe in a single year (1997) gil amelio took the company from billion dollar losses to an actual profit... to say that things weren't already on the upturn (and considering the products that came out after jobs became ceo were already in the pipeline) is a bit strange.

      amelio cleaned the fat from the company (1/3rd the workforce and a bunch of hardware lines), made it profitable while having couple higher quality products in the line, if that isn't improving the company for the long haul as opposed to short term, I don't know what is.

      I also think that Jobs being a control-freak is what keeps Apple from being a generic commodity computer. I see that quality as leadership and the insistence to make a product that he wants to associate with Apple.

      To an extent, but the main problem is when people go, 'you know what, your product is almost there, but we want to do x instead of y' they are met with more or less 'no, you must do it our way' no tinkering allowed more or less, except where it would be extremely cost prohibitive to allow tinkering. (i.e. more cost to reinvent their own bsd than to just use it)

    160. Re:I don't believe it by snowraver1 · · Score: 1

      [Citation needed]

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    161. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, I think that the iPad is best suited as a control surface, and not actually doing the heavy lifting. That would be done with another machine over Wifi, etc. Apple has WAY optimized the GUI performance on this thing, so control actions would be fluid and responsive.

      I thought about that too, but I can't see how you could do it without having to write a separate iPad app for every module you are controlling.

      If I understand the architecture correctly, every VST or AU plugin provides its own GUI to the host program, and would have to be running on the iPad to provide it there. :(

    162. Re:I don't believe it by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      I have no idea exactly how. But having modified the console would certainly make it easier than trying to run pirate DLC without mods. Keep in mind this assumes a modification capable of changing the console ID, just putting in a new HDD or DVD drive likely wouldn't make a difference.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    163. Re:I don't believe it by mfnickster · · Score: 1

      > I saw this on hackaday.com a week or so ago. Maybe it's sort of what you're after, if a little bigger?

      That is way cool! :)

      It's also encouraging that they have it running on a Mac. It does look a bit laggy, though.

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
    164. Re:I don't believe it by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      In terms of the original meaning of "hacker", and the motivations and ethics associated with it, corporations are doing it for the money, which is pretty much the antithesis of that.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    165. Re:I don't believe it by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they were. But the *original* PC clone which made it all possible wasn't.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    166. Re:I don't believe it by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      WTF does merit have to do with it? The topic is iPhones, some fucking moron mouths off about iPods, and suddenly my argument doesn't have merit? Learn to fucking read.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    167. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect you are correct, unfortunately.

      I didn't say it would be particularly easy; but the result would be, as you said earlier, sublime!

    168. Re:I don't believe it by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I want one too! :) As for the speed, I'd guess it's because they're using an IR webcam and software tracking, so you'd have 200+ms latency for frame capture and then another 100+ms for processing. You could probably build a much faster FTIR multitouch system from a wiimote (those things are goddamn amazing for the price; they're basically a high rez IR camera with a hardware multipoint tracking system, plus the accelerometer and bluetooth). Check out Johnny Chung Lee's Wii hacks page.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    169. Re:I don't believe it by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I hadn't been aware that it was against the law to jailbreak an iPhone.

      Depends which country you're in. US courts have upheld EULA's as legal documents whilst Australian courts did the opposite. Apple operates in the US and forces that kind of legal thinking on the rest of the world.

      In any case it is illegal to run an application store that runs on the iphone, if through nothing else patents. This Aspect Apple has well and truly covered, no-one may run applications on an Apple device that are not approved by Apple.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    170. Re:I don't believe it by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      I'm talking about the merit of your argument. Whether you have a valid point or not, name calling makes your position look weak. It is the last refuge of the person who has nothing of value to say. You might as well append "and you have stupid hair and you're a stupid head!" to the end of every post; it makes you look like you're 5.

    171. Re:I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using a laptop to play music is cumbersome, but if I had a multitouch "control panel" running multitracked softsynths, that I could plug MIDI controllers into, and even switch to a mixing board with a single tap, that would be SUBLIME!

      So it would change to a gaseous state without changing to a liquid first?

    172. Re:I don't believe it by mfnickster · · Score: 1

      > So it would change to a gaseous state without changing to a liquid first?

      Nope, it would bring Brad Nowell back from the dead. :)

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
  2. Figured it'd happen by Coopjust · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's why I've told anyone who jailbroke to use a separate account for apps on jailbroken devices.

    Kind of silly, IMO. You're going to ban people from possibly paying for apps? Not every app is jailbroken, some are cracked incorrectly (some of the antipiracy mechanisms in apps I've seen are nothing short of hilarious trolling), and some are out of date. Additionally, if an app is really good, a user may buy the app to support the dev.

    So you ban people and what happens? People jailbreak all the free apps too.

    Seems like a bad move on Apple's part.

    1. Re:Figured it'd happen by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      Seems like a bad move on Apple's part.

      What are you talking about? They're half way there!

      All they need to do now is Ban the non-jailbroken phones from the Appstore as well, and soon the world will be a better place.

      (kidding)

      (... Well mostly kidding)

    2. Re:Figured it'd happen by sopssa · · Score: 1

      They didn't ban everyone with a jailbroken phone and most likely wont do so, but only the two guys who originally released the hacks to jailbreak iPhone.

    3. Re:Figured it'd happen by Graff · · Score: 5, Informative

      Get a grip people. There haven't been any reports that Apple is banning people who jailbreak their own personal phones, they have banned TWO people who are involved in discovering and propagating exploits for the iPhone. Yes, these hacks are being used to jailbreak but it's a much different thing to ban someone who is actively seeking new ways to break into the iPhone OS than it is to ban someone unlocking their own phone.

      If Apple starts banning en-masse people who have jailbroken their iPhones then we can break out the torches and pitchforks. Until then it's a company saying "no more soup for you" to a couple of hackers who are looking to exploit the company's secure system. And yes, I'll be right there with the rest of you if Apple does start pushing around joe average over this issue.

    4. Re:Figured it'd happen by Mwahaha · · Score: 1

      These aren't your everyday jailbreakers, they're the people that found the exploits that allow jailbreaking. There's no indication that they're banning everyday jailbreakers, or AFAIK that they know which devices have been jailbroken. It seems all they did is search though apple ids for some dev team handles.

    5. Re:Figured it'd happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can happen. I'm sure a lot of XBox 360 users were thinking the same thing before Microsoft did their mass bannings from XBL. If Apple did a push for Warden-like functionality to detect jailbroken phones, then did a mass ban, nobody would be complaining -- nobody Apple cares about. Plus, Apple gets more cash in the app store when people create new accounts and re-buy their apps.

      So, mass-bannings are a win/win for Apple, as it keeps their closed ecosystem healthy, and people booted out re-buy their stuff.

      Customers of course, are boned.

    6. Re:Figured it'd happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why I've told anyone who jailbroke to use a separate account for apps on jailbroken devices.

      Kind of silly, IMO. You're going to ban people from possibly paying for apps? Not every app is jailbroken, some are cracked incorrectly (some of the antipiracy mechanisms in apps I've seen are nothing short of hilarious trolling), and some are out of date. Additionally, if an app is really good, a user may buy the app to support the dev.

      So you ban people and what happens? People jailbreak all the free apps too.

      Seems like a bad move on Apple's part.

      I don't think you understand what jailbreaking is. It doesn't refer to pirating applications. It refers to "breaking" the iPhone out of the "jail" of Apple approved applications. i.e. being able to load apps that don't come from Apple's store onto your phone.

    7. Re:Figured it'd happen by Kagato · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't people jailbreak phones to install free apps. The problem is the very real and growing problem of pirated paid apps on jailbroken phones.

    8. Re:Figured it'd happen by Graff · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It can happen. I'm sure a lot of XBox 360 users were thinking the same thing before Microsoft did their mass bannings from XBL.

      Of course it can happen. Google could also start arming its employees with Armalite AR-10 carbine gas-powered semi-automatic weapons and send them out in the streets causing mischief and mayhem but I don't think too many people are losing sleep over that possibility! ;-)

      The point is that only fools panic over what COULD remotely possibly maybe happen. Keep an eye on the issue, yes. Respond if it gets out of hand, yes! But don't make the assumption that two incidents equals a mass ban. That's just jumping the gun and overreacting.

    9. Re:Figured it'd happen by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      There's an app for that.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:Figured it'd happen by ashridah · · Score: 1

      The difference being that microsoft banned the console, not the account. the accounts used on that console, and the content purchased through them can be transferred to a working console. Does apple allow that?

    11. Re:Figured it'd happen by tkrotchko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "The problem is the very real and growing problem of pirated paid apps on jailbroken phones."

      This doesn't fix that problem, unfortunately.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    12. Re:Figured it'd happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so in summary, they are banning the jailbreak creators, not jailbreak users. Basically, they are too smart and can not use their service ... and you are OK with this? What is next? Skin colour not right and no service?

    13. Re:Figured it'd happen by ktappe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Apple starts banning en-masse people who have jailbroken their iPhones then we can break out the torches and pitchforks. Until then it's a company saying "no more soup for you" to a couple of hackers who are looking to exploit the company's secure system.

      So you're willing to protest when you get cut off but not when the guys whose software freed your phone get cut off? That's mighty neighborly of you.

      --
      "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
    14. Re:Figured it'd happen by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      I'm jail broken but I haven't pirated any app from the app store

    15. Re:Figured it'd happen by adolf · · Score: 1

      Eh?

      What makes these guys any different than any other customer? That they happen to be clever?

    16. Re:Figured it'd happen by Zordak · · Score: 1

      Get a grip people. There haven't been any reports that Apple is banning people who jailbreak their own personal phones, they have banned TWO people who are involved in discovering and propagating exploits for the iPhone. Yes, these hacks are being used to jailbreak but it's a much different thing to ban someone who is actively seeking new ways to break into the iPhone OS than it is to ban someone unlocking their own phone.

      If Apple starts banning en-masse people who have jailbroken their iPhones then we can break out the torches and pitchforks. Until then it's a company saying "no more soup for you" to a couple of hackers who are looking to exploit the company's secure system. And yes, I'll be right there with the rest of you if Apple does start pushing around joe average over this issue.

      First, they came for the people actively seeking new ways to jailbreak the iPhone, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't actively seeking for new ways to jailbreak the iPhone. Then they came for the people who were pirating apps, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't pirating apps. Then I got tired of smug, sanctimonious, "slipper slope" quotes that people use to try to sound insightful without having to think, and I went and bought another phone.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    17. Re:Figured it'd happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      since when did anyone buy software later to 'support the dev'

    18. Re:Figured it'd happen by Graff · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So you're willing to protest when you get cut off but not when the guys whose software freed your phone get cut off?

      It's a matter of scale and purpose. Someone hacking their own device and keeping that action to themselves is a single event. Someone making tools and enabling others (most likely people who couldn't do it in the first place) to hack their device is a manifold increase in the number of hacks, possibly also enabling further, deeper hacks of the device and network security.

      There's no hard and fast cutoff as to what I would consider a reasonable degree of a company's ability to defend its closed system. When we are talking about cellular networks it wouldn't take much to cause major problems, even legitimate users can bring down the system. Add in people changing the software in unanticipated ways and then DISTRIBUTING those changes and you can easily cause havoc. On the other hand, stuff like DeCSS which enables a person to make backups of their DVDs has a less direct effect upon other users. It can still cause problems with piracy and such but it's not going to suddenly make everyone's DVDs unusable.

      In this case I think that perhaps the iPhone hackers broke the terms of service of the iTunes Store and they had their accounts terminated. Apple has a right to do this, it's spelled out in the TOS. As long as they use it selectively for major infractions I'm not too worried about it, it's when they use it to ban every single little violation that I'll be worried. Is that arbitrary? Perhaps but everyone draws the line somewhere.

      Finally, I don't jailbreak. If I didn't care for Apple's rules I wouldn't have bought the iPhone in the first place. If I wanted a more open device there are some out there and I would have gotten one. My iPhone works just fine for me without hacking anything.

    19. Re:Figured it'd happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no hard and fast cutoff as to what I would consider a reasonable degree of a company's ability to defend its closed system.

      There's a very hard and fast cutoff as to what I would consider reasonable. If someone is trying to make a piece of their hardware do what they want it to do, and a separate entity (say, the company that manufactured that hardware) is trying to stop them, then that's wrong.

    20. Re:Figured it'd happen by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, stuff like DeCSS which enables a person to make backups of their DVDs has a less direct effect upon other users. It can still cause problems with piracy and such but it's not going to suddenly make everyone's DVDs unusable.

      True. In fact, deCSS made a lot of people's DVDs usable.

      Remember those times where it was terribly annoying or even impossible to
      play DVDs on non-Windows computers?

      Blu-Ray is still in this state. Not being able to play BRs on my computers is
      actually the reason why I still haven't bought a BR drive and not a single BR disc.
      Congratulations to the MAFIAA for successfully preventing me from giving them my money.

    21. Re:Figured it'd happen by L1feless · · Score: 1

      If you read Graff's comment below his response says it all in the last line. Basically he/she has not need for a jail-broken device therefore cannot appreciate why others do. It is an unfortunate stance to take but so many people are in the same boat. If I recall correctly Apple when they were 1st making their attempt at re-entering the market in a big way released a version of the macbook that had an auto shut off shock censor in the HDD. There was a hacker who modded the laptop to have the screen turn with the laptop as it was rotated using those censors. Steve Jobs reverted back to his original days in the garage if but for only a few minutes in the press conference and said how much he loved this innovation. Apple took (bought) it and this innovation is now a staple in most Apple devices. Almost immediately after that I remember Apple pulling a 180 on community innovation such as the screen mod. I see this story as no different.

  3. So they should by DavidR1991 · · Score: 1, Troll

    Jail-breaking facilitates piracy

    I could possibly understand if app store apps were at crazy prices or forced you to bend over backwards in order to use them. But the majority of them cost, what, £5? Maybe £7 or £9?

    1. Re:So they should by amorsen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The vast majority of jail-breakers don't pirate apps. Well that or I hang out with the wrong people -- jailbreaking is extremely common, but I haven't seen an iPhone with a pirated app yet.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    2. Re:So they should by poetmatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      where do you come up with this? Jail breaking exists because there is a demand for features that apple refuses to provide. It's no different than rooting a google phone, and for the same reasons.

      Easy examples: Flash, multitasking, tethering.

      I'm an apple hater, someone who doesn't even have an iphone, and even I know this. Basically, there wouldn't be jailbreaking if apple was actually giving their customers what they want.

    3. Re:So they should by Grond · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Jail-breaking facilitates piracy

      So how is banning jailbreakers from the app store going to help with that? It seems like it would just force the jailbreakers to use pirated apps exclusively.

      And assuming Apple limits the bans to the authors of jailbreaking tools rather than end users, it won't do much to deter the development of such tools. You don't need access to the app store to write the tools, and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the authors of the tools have no problem pirating apps themselves.

      I think jailbreaking isn't a great idea, and Apple is within its rights to deter it through security improvements and the like, but this just seems counterproductive.

    4. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a lot different than rooting a Google phone.

      You don't need to break the law to root a Google phone.

    5. Re:So they should by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'll add my experience:

      I've jailbroken my phone, and I have not placed a single app that was available on the appstore on my phone without purchasing it from the appstore.

      I jailbroke my phone so I could get into the file system of the phone because I absolutely hate using iTunes to get files on and off my device. I also liked to be able to multitask and not have my preferred music player stop working because I wanted to look up something on the internet.

      In fact, if I couldn't jailbreak my phone I wouldn't have purchased it in the first place since in its default state, it's a pretty crappy device for my needs.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    6. Re:So they should by selven · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And this punishment just happens to only be effective against people who don't pirate.

    7. Re:So they should by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Jail-breaking facilitates piracy

      Jail-breaking facilitates a lot of things, like SSH daemons. If Apple wants to stop piracy of digital media, they should stop selling digital media devices, because they facilitate piracy too.

    8. Re:So they should by scubamage · · Score: 1

      While I agree that jailbreaking could potentially facilitate piracy, you're missing one major flaw with your theory. The app store is the primary/only *legitimate* source for iphone applications. By banning the users, they force them to resort to piracy for applications, since they have no alternate way to purchase them. I do however wonder what the US government has to say about this, since punishing users for jailbreaking is what the legislation about locking a device so a single network was designed to prevent. You have to jailbreak to use TMobile. So are all tmobile users going to be prevented from using the app store?

    9. Re:So they should by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      there's no law broken in jailbreaking an iphone either, so what's your point? Yes, you had a contractual agreement, but that's not law (nor would it hold up in court if apple tried to sue jailbreakers)- this is well established in the mod-chip cases in the US, which are legal.

    10. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      I jailbroke my phone to get these features:

      1. A bash shell and openssh so I could have scripts for maintaining servers with me at all times.

      2. Multitasking - why should GPS apps suspend and lose location info when someone calls? Why should Rhapsody not be allowed to run in the background? (Note to Apple: offer a Rhapsody-like streaming service please)

      3. Steve Jobs may like how the iPhone GUI looks, but I don't worship Jobs and have my own ideas how my iPhone theme should look. Jobs is a brilliant guy, but he is a bit narcissistic. Why should he lock down my phone because I choose to use it differently than he uses his?

      4. To enable tethering, which I haven't used other than to test it, but to know it's there if I am in a pinch and need internet access from a laptop immediately while on the road

      And yet, I've not "pirated"[sic] a single application. I know people who don't jailbreak who claim to "pirate"[sic] apps, by syncing friends' phones to their macs (I don't know if it can be done as I'm not interested in "stealing"[sic] apps). I download plenty of apps from the app store - and some music (I'm mostly happy with my CD rips, but I do want to buy some tracks on occasion). I even purchase paid apps, such as TomTom, bejeweled, and quite a few others. Funny thing though, aside from TomTom, Defend Your Castle, and bejeweled, I don't bother with the apps I paid for all that much. I've found that many of the free ones are better, or just about as good! Why buy "fastlane" when the only real improvement over the free version is additional scenery?

      I don't "pirate"[sic] apps or music, and have no desire to. And yet, I jailbroke my phone. In fact when I mistakenly downgraded to 3.1.3 (and did not have my hashes on file) I figured out a way to upgrade generate the hashes and upgrade from 3.1.3 back up to 3.1.2.

      Posted anon since I figured out how to successfully revert back to 3.1.2 and I do not want Apple to ban me from the app store, since I actually LIKE giving Apple money in exchange for product on occasion.

    11. Re:So they should by pushing-robot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But the majority of them cost, what, £5? Maybe £7 or £9?

      More like £1.

      From Apple's point of view, jailbreaking is a means of piracy and exploiting AT&T's bandwidth for things like tethering, and a possible vector for attack.

      From free software advocates' point of view, jailbreaking is the freedom to install software that Apple/AT&T wouldn't approve.

      From everyone else's point of view, it's a non-issue.

      I can definitely relate to those who'd like to run any code they want on their phone, but IMHO they should really just cough up the money for a dev license. $99 isn't that much if you're already spending $1000/year for service.

      On the other hand, I can't see how Apple or anyone else would benefit by blocking jailbreakers from App Store. Maybe Apple canceled their developer accounts, which are attached to Apple IDs, and blocking the App Store was just a side effect.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    12. Re:So they should by s73v3r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Jailbreaking isn't actually that common. And I would believe the amount of people who jailbreak with the intent of pirating games to be less so. I have a jailbroken iPod Touch, but I'm not entirely sure why I have it jailbroken anymore. It used to be because I didn't pay for a dev certificate, but since then, I guess I've just been too lazy to revert it. Or too lazy to keep up with the Cydia community to see what's cool.

    13. Re:So they should by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Even if the iPhone had those (and it does have tethering, just not in the US :( ), there probably still would be jailbreaking, simply because people love to tinker with their gadgets. Hell, I remember hearing about some small, handheld IM client device, and people were hacking it to expose the full Linux functionality beneath it. Its a little texting device, aimed at little girls, and people were hacking it. So jailbreaking might not be as prevalent, and might not be as useful if it had those things you mentioned, but it'd still happen.

    14. Re:So they should by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Ummmm, the iTunes DRM doesn't preclude you from doing either of those things. All the iPods and iPhones will play unprotected MP3 files, which is what Amazon sells, and you can buy a CD from Walmart, rip it, and put it on your device.

    15. Re:So they should by Korbeau · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The vast majority of jail-breakers don't pirate apps. Well that or I hang out with the wrong people -- jailbreaking is extremely common, but I haven't seen an iPhone with a pirated app yet.

      You probably don't hang out with any high school or college kid ...

      Anyway, I like how someone that starts a debate is now modded as "Troll" and an army of knights in shiny armors having the same kind of single-sided argument get modded Informative and Insightful.

    16. Re:So they should by Gusfm · · Score: 1

      I think you don't get it. The iPhone without jail-breaking is just a useless brick. With jail-breaking you can install ssh, install mplayer (more video formats supported), and many other useful cydia apps.

    17. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Valid point - but,

      1. If you have jailbroken phone, you potentially could circumvent protections that Apple is obligated to provide its content providers (music etc.)

      2. Content & software is what makes an iPhone so special. So please dont muck it up for everyone else. You may not use apps for free - but with jail broken phones, it can be done. As an iPhone App Developer, I dont want you using my apps on a jailbroken phone, and am ok with losing the associated revenue. There are apps stores that allow jailbroken phones to download apps - use those.

      3. Apple provides us with a great platform to sell useful goods. This is not like the recording industry where the artists make a small fraction of what the companies makes. Apple gives me more than 65% of the revenue - and we are glad. If you dont like DRM, dont want 'Walls' great... create your own community and your own content.

    18. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a jailbreaker myself I wholeheartedly agree. I jailbroke my iPhone for the functionality I wanted which was only available outside of Apple's little bubble. I've only "pirated" one app in the time I've had it and that was for all of 5 minutes. I was considering a game in the app store which was rather expensive so I installed it to see if it was worth the money. 5 minutes later it proved to be complete shovelware and was uninstalled, had it been good I would have uninstalled it and bought it through the store.

      The biggest reasons I see for jailbreaking are Backgrounder with Proswitcher and SBSettings. All of them are provided free by their developers and quite frankly they make the phone usable. If apple forces me to choose between the apps I've paid for and the jailbroken apps that make the thing work the way it should I'll be looking for a new phone.

    19. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      vlc4iphone is why I have mine jailbroken. watching live tv anywhere is what did it for me.

    20. Re:So they should by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

      $99 isn't that much if you're already spending $1000/year for service.

      Three problems with your argument:

      • iPod Touch owners spend $0/year for service.
      • It's not $99 if your current PC is not a Mac; it's $698: $99 for the certificate and $599 for the Mac mini. Or are the development tools for jailbroken iPhones also Mac-exclusive?
      • You have to have a company to sign up for ADC; the form won't let you continue if you leave the "Company" field blank.
    21. Re:So they should by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      There are SSH Apps for non-jail broken phones...
      There is even an RDP app.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    22. Re:So they should by GasparGMSwordsman · · Score: 1

      Every person I know who has a iPhone has had it jail broken. The most often reason is that they wanted to install a program that was available but not through the Apple store (mainly open source, emulation programs or VoIP) the second most common reason was to restore the external hard drive abilities that Apple devices used to offer. This is obviously not a statistically relevant group (only about 15-25 persons) but since I have yet to meet someone who has not had their iPhone jail broken it does seem suggestive.

    23. Re:So they should by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      Your points are 100% invalid.

      1: You can still follow apple's DRM/obligations on a jailbroken phone. The way DRM is set up, you can't even use DRM'd products without observing what is in essence apple's policies on music.

      2: content doesn't make the iphone special. It's the developers which make the phone special by creating usage. Content is simply the end conduit of that talent. Also, a lot of apple "app store content" is a bunch of crap. I'm sure your product, Mr developer, is no exception.

      Just because you can jailbreak and use apps for free, doesn't mean that's why people do it. You are clearly a bad developer if you focus on a single negative aspect of the result as a reason to rationalize off all the other positive uses of jailbreaking. For that reason we may as well ban oxygen since it can be used for explosions. See how faulty that is?
      Also, app store revenue? Give me a fucking break. Nobody makes serious cash on apple apps any more than android apps. A few companies got super lucky and hit it big but you'll never make a living off apple apps. It's not a perpetual sales deal by any stretch. Make some money, enough to offload some bills? Absolutely Make a living? Not likely.

      3: Apple provides you with a horrible platform for your goods. People already do make their own content because neither consumers nor developers want walled gardens. This is why jailbreaking exists. Again, a demand not met by apple, is being forced to be met by a non apple source.

      Apple's agreement already gets the ire of plenty of developers, I can point to their refund policy on that as an easy example.

      I know you don't want to feel bad about your decision to support the apple app store, but that doesn't mean other people want to support you, or your decision. Try not selling out and using some ethics and you'll get a lot more sales.

    24. Re:So they should by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      Process backgrounding, custom themes, bluetooth tethering, unlocking the 3g restrictions, bittorrent, and video game emulators are all good reasons to unlock your iPhone. Pretty much everything that people always bitch about as problems with the iPhone have been solved for anyone willing to take the ~15 minutes of time and dedication required to unlock their phone.

      I still spend maybe 20 dollars per month at the app store.

      I am still looking for a good obex client and a2dp support, but as I understand it, android is still pretty far away from that as well. I think we are still in the age where all phones suck.

    25. Re:So they should by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      I don't know anyone with an iPhone that doesn't have it unlocked. It's trivial to do and the benefits are endless.

    26. Re:So they should by Balthisar · · Score: 1

      I have a jailbroken iPod Touch as a well as a jailbroken iPhone 3GS. Not a single pirated app on either of them. In the case of the iPhone, I'm a good AT&T customer who pays all of his bills on time, although in one respect I'm a bad AT&T customer in that I put in a Telcel SIM while working/traveling in Mexico. Oh well, AT&T still gets my subscription.

      All told (looking at my iTunes store receipts going back to only July), I've spent over $500 at the app store (granted, the two GPS apps alone make up a large chunk of that). A non-jailbroken phone wouldn't have the same utility to me, and as a consequence, I'd not have spent nearly that much, if anything.

      So why jailbreak? Even if not for the need of the Telcel SIM, jailbreaking lets me do great stuff like run SBPreferences and a cool switchboard program I can't remember the name of. It's also great having my Outlook calendar on the lock screen. Having access via SSH isn't all that practical, but it's still pretty danged cool. Having a terminal so that I can SSH into my home computers, though, is very practical.

      On my PC's (Mac and Windows), I'm not so pure. And maintaining working versions of some apps is a lot of work. I do end up buying them if I find that I actually use them (as opposed to "collecting"). But I don't want those headaches on my telephone; I just want the sucker to work. Ergo, no pirated apps.

      (Plus, well, iPhone apps are generally so very cheap, I'm not even afraid to pay an insignificant amount and find out that I don't like a program.)

      --
      --Jim (me)
    27. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      restore the external hard drive abilities that Apple devices used to offer

      http://www.iphone-explorer.com/

    28. Re:So they should by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Is it "Company" as in "Company Name", or "Corporate Tax ID"? If the latter, then you require a business entity; the former is just an informal label, if you don't actually own a company. It could be something like "Tepple's Kewl SoftCo". This is typically termed a D.B.A, or "Doing Business As".

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    29. Re:So they should by Kagato · · Score: 1

      The move isn't designed to scare people who are already do regular pirating. It scare off mainstream users who may only be casually interested in pirating the apps. At $0.99 to 3.99 an app they just have to have a bar, they don't have to make it all that high.

    30. Re:So they should by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Anyway, I like how someone that starts a debate is now modded as "Troll" and an army of knights in shiny armors having the same kind of single-sided argument get modded Informative and Insightful.

      Except you didn't "start a debate", you made a fallacious argument claiming that just because someone doesn't want Apple controlling what software they run on their phone that they are pirating software. At best you were just guilty of being uninformed, at worst, a troll. Given that you have a slashdot account, most people will guess that you know enough about technology to know that wanting to be able to choose what apps you want to run has nothing to do with piracy, thus you were modded a troll. I have mod points (not using them so I could post in this topic) and I'd have modded you troll too - and no, I haven't jailbroken my iPhone.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    31. Re:So they should by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      In fact, if I couldn't jailbreak my phone I wouldn't have purchased it in the first place since in its default state, it's a pretty crappy device for my needs.

      Here's a rather silly question - why did you buy it in the first place?

    32. Re:So they should by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      You have to have a company to sign up for ADC; the form won't let you continue if you leave the "Company" field blank.

      Well that's easy - put "*your name here* Inc." They have no way to prove that you're not starting up your own company / 1099 gig.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    33. Re:So they should by AaronW · · Score: 1

      I have found that there's little reason to root my Android phone. Background apps? No rooting required. Bluetooth file transfer? The app works just fine without root. Even for tethering there's at least one app that does not require root (though you have to bypass the app store in the US).

      There are a few times when root access is useful. There are some tethering apps that do require root and if you want to access some of the system files you need to be root. In general though, it's not required because there's a lot fewer restrictions for non-root users.

      There's almost no restrictions on what apps can be in the app store either. The only cases of apps not allowed are tethering apps in the US and apps that have been found to be malicious. I have even downloaded apps from the store that can take advantage of the root access.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    34. Re:So they should by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's a rather silly question - why did you buy it in the first place?

      In its default state, I wouldn't have, and I didn't. I waited until it was possible to hack the device, then I purchased it once I saw that it wasn't a flakey hack and it was established that I wouldn't brick the device by breathing on it the wrong way. At that point, when I considered the total package (jailbroken iphone), it WAS what I wanted in a device since the alternatives (Verizon, Tmobile, Sprint) were not actually viable alternatives.

      So in short, the unjailbroken iPhone was not something I wanted. The Jailbroken iPhone was.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    35. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there's no law broken in jailbreaking an iphone either

      DMCA.

    36. Re:So they should by Binary+Boy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nonsense - I signed up for the iPhone Developer Program as an Individual, as have many. It's one of the first questions asked, as it determines how you're listed in the App Store.

    37. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can listen to music on my iphone and browse the web with out jail breaking it. Was yours preventing you from doing that?

    38. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Jail-breaking facilitates piracy

      Let me get this straight: if a seller suspects that a potential customer doesn't pay, they should refuse to sell? Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me. Reminds me of cable TV.

      Me: I want to pay you money every month, to watch HBO or Showtime content on my MythTV.

      Comcast: No. Fuck you. Keep your fucking money, you fucking fuck.

      Me: Ok (firing up Transmission), let me know if you ever change your mind and open for business.

    39. Re:So they should by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      There's 1000 of these apps, and they all suck. They can't get around the fact that the phone is locked. It isn't the same as having the device be a USB device.

      - They don't give you access to the entire iPhone. You can only get files in and out of specific locations, usually that app's own directory.
      - You can only do it through this app, so it won't work on just any computer you plug into.
      - You have to have iTunes installed for this application to even work.
      - So it won't work on Linux
      - It won't copy files to another iPhone, or a flash drive, etc.
      - Can't access emails, address book, etc. From the page you linked to:

      (Optional) If you jailbreak your iPhone you can access the real root of your iPhone and recover your address book, SMS, e-mails and more.

    40. Re:So they should by Cynonamous+Anoward · · Score: 1

      Confirming this. In my experience, most jailbreakers do it to run "illicit" apps, rather than to "pirate" legitimate ones. You want to run an emulator? You want to customize your phone in a non apple-approved way? you want to run an X rated app? Jailbreak. Note that I have seen jail broken phones doing all of those things, and in most cases, the apps were all paid for.

      If apple allowed an open market, or, at most, did some basic sanity checks (to filter out malicious or incompetent apps that can cause harm), there would not be a jailbreaking problem.

      --
      "The GPL is viral by design, like any good religion."
    41. Re:So they should by node+3 · · Score: 1

      This is obviously not a statistically relevant group (only about 15-25 persons) but since I have yet to meet someone who has not had their iPhone jail broken it does seem suggestive.

      It only suggests that the people you know are not typical iPhone users.

    42. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basically, there wouldn't be jailbreaking if apple was actually giving their customers what they want.

      Exactly. I rob banks because, even as a customer, they're not giving me what I want, which is free money.

    43. Re:So they should by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Basically, there wouldn't be jailbreaking if apple was actually giving their customers what they want.

      If they gave users "what they want" (flash, multitasking (actually, the iPhone does this very well, I think you mean background apps), tethering (actually, the iPhone does this as well)), then they would be taking away what users *really* want, the thing which makes the iPhone such a hit, which is the refined user experience.

      Trust me, the moment you add a process viewer, you instantly turn off more users than you lost by not having background apps. As for flash, while people want it, even if Apple put flash onto the iPhone, it would *not* be what people are thinking. It would not be like flash on their desktop, but instead a clunky, broken, crashy, battery hog, incompatible mess.

      And tethering, really? Apple provides this. Carriers, on the other hand, disable it. It's their network and their terms. This sucks, and I don't support their decisions, but it's their decision to make.

    44. Re:So they should by GasparGMSwordsman · · Score: 1

      To my knowledge there has been no hard scientific study of iPhone usage. My experiences could be typical, there is no reliable data to prove one way or the other.

      Therefor you are partially correct, it could suggest that everyone I have met has not been a typical iPhone user.

      It could also suggest that the typical iPhone user does jail break their phones.

    45. Re:So they should by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      How do you put music onto your phone without iTunes? Even the 3rd-party apps that let you "copy" files to the iPhone still require iTunes to be installed, and still can only copy files that iTunes permits, into locations iTunes allows.

    46. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my god! You mean that you aren't able to use it as an external hard drive by copying files to it, and then to another computer? Granted, you're right about not being able to use it on Linux, but you can still use it on most computers out there.

      So let's see...you have to install the application, that's tough. You have to have iTunes - if you have an iPhone, you have iTunes. You can't copy files to a flash drive...what? You can definitely copy to a flash drive, you just need to use a computer to do it, as the iPhone DOESN'T HAVE A USB PORT.

      Whine more? Or come up with a new excuse for why iPhones are evil, Jobs is the devil, and anyone with anything Apple is going to hell.

    47. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to point out that BiteSMS, Backgrounder + ProSwitcher are reasons enough to JB your phone.

    48. Re:So they should by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Jail-breaking facilitates piracy

      There are a lot of things that "facilitate piracy". Having a PC with an Internet connection does that, for example. Having an IQ over 100 kinda does, too.

      Well, anyway, it's Apple's choice - and not exactly a surprising one at that. I do hope, though, that it will shut up the people on /. who, in any thread which mentions openness of Android and other competing platforms (as in ability to freely install apps), reply "it doesn't really matter cuz it's easy to jailbreak iPhone and then it's just as open". There's your openness, guys. Hope you enjoy every cent you've spent on it.

    49. Re:So they should by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

      I've never pirated any apps on my iPod Touch or iPhone. I jailbroke my Touch so I could run MobileTerminal, grep, rsync, Categories, change my background, kill apps to free memory etc.

      There are a CONSIDERABLE number of excellent apps available only if you jailbreak. Those same apps are simply not available in the App Store -- I've looked. There are some knock-offs (at ridiculous prices) but that's not the same.

      One of the weak points about the App Store is if you want to try something and there's no trial version, you're stuck. Once you buy it, you can't get a refund if it doesn't do what you want it to do. There are some very costly apps that I would never buy for that reason. Give me a time-limited trial, or limit the number of records I can add, or some other sane limited version -- this protects the developer and the purchaser. I'm not so naive to believe that simply refunding money to the purchaser is the only solution, because it would be abused.

    50. Re:So they should by Rufty · · Score: 1

      I jailbroke my iPhone so I could use a bluetooth keyboard...

      --
      Red to red, black to black. Switch it on, but stand well back.
    51. Re:So they should by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

      Ummm you've never used wireless to transfer files to/from an iPod Touch / iPhone? You've never rsync'd data from there either?

      Maybe you need a GUI button to press to do these things, but some of us don't. Things like: setup a cron job on a PC to search for the iPod Touch / iPhone, and if detected, rsync files to/from it automatically. Do a "real" backup of the device, which is handy when trying to figure out which files were modified when installing program y. Use nmap for iPod Touch / iPhone to check the security of a device (PC or whatever) when accessed through the wireless network. SSH into another machine on your wireless network. SCP files to another machine on your wireless network. Ping other devices. "Dig" for the egress IP address.

      There are considerable number of things you can do with an unlocked iPhone / iPod Touch that you can't do with an unlocked model.

    52. Re:So they should by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

      Your same arguments could be used to provide reasons why you should only use DRM-enabled applications on your computer. Be careful what you wish for. A locked-down ecosystem is healthy for no one. You don't want to be forced into which word processor you use, do you? You don't really want to remove choice do you?

      So long as devices exist, they will be hacked. They will be disassembled. Their software will be modified. This is one of the ways people learn, and one of the ways that many of us started in our careers. A healthy bit of curiosity coupled with some intelligence has started many companies. We won't be shackled into a no-choice situation. Ever.

    53. Re:So they should by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      How do you put music onto your phone without iTunes? Even the 3rd-party apps that let you "copy" files to the iPhone still require iTunes to be installed, and still can only copy files that iTunes permits, into locations iTunes allows.

      Initially I used SSH and created a directory where I just dumped my pre-arranged/sized music folder. Then I used one of the applications from Cydia (can't remember the name sorry). It could play files from a directory and didn't rely on Apple's absurd directory structure/database.

      Since then, I've found another program (Sharepod? Podshare? something like that) which I don't know if it requires iTunes, but it seems to manage the files on the iphone quite well.

      My main complaint with iTunes comes from actually using it. If another program uses it while remaining transparent to me I don't really mind as much. Of course I'd prefer not to have it on my machine at all.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    54. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll add my experience:

      I've jailbroken my phone, and I have not placed a single app that was available on the appstore on my phone without purchasing it from the appstore.

      I jailbroke my phone so I could get into the file system of the phone because I absolutely hate using iTunes to get files on and off my device. I also liked to be able to multitask and not have my preferred music player stop working because I wanted to look up something on the internet.

      In fact, if I couldn't jailbreak my phone I wouldn't have purchased it in the first place since in its default state, it's a pretty crappy device for my needs.

      Uh you can use the internet and ipod at the same time without jailbreaking.
      Do you really have an iphone???

    55. Re:So they should by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

      But the cost for development is still steep. I have a MacBook Pro running 10.4 and I cannot develop apps for the iPhone or iPod Touch without upgrading.

      And before you tell me how cheap it is to upgrade, let me inform you that I have 10.4-compatible software that is NOT compatible with 10.6 without paying upgrade fees. For me it's not a $139 upgrade, it's closer to the cost of a Mac mini.

    56. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SSH: In general they seem to suck compared to MobileTerminal, they're relatively expensive and I haven't found any with a free trial.

      RDP/VNC: I have the Mocha tools. Barely usable, for emergencies only, which is why I won't buy their paid versions. I haven't found anyone else with a "real" non-jailbroken VNC/RDP app.

    57. Re:So they should by Korbeau · · Score: 1

      Except you didn't "start a debate"

      Just to set things straight, I'm not the original poster and simply commented on the situation.

      If you want my personal opinion, I agree the original post is very short-sighted if not trollish and would probably have modded him so as well, I don't want to argue with that. But the replies are also sohrt-shighted and trollish - saying that "almost no person jailbreaking their phone use unauthorized and/or pirated apps" is as absurd as the OP - that was my point.

    58. Re:So they should by xlotlu · · Score: 1

      Jail-breaking facilitates piracy

      Blah, blah straight out of the *AA indoctrination manual. BitTorrent facilitates piracy. Control over the content you buy facilitates piracy. Control over your hardware facilitates piracy.

      Got news for you: crossing the street facilitates getting run over by a car. Drinking water facilitates choking to death. Guns facilitate... you get the point.

      Of course jail-breaking facilitates piracy, because it facilitates freedom. And freedom of the little person facilitates corporations making less profit. You see, when the customer is in control you have to do things deeply annoying to your shareholders, like staying competitive without vendor lock-in, spending money on R&D, and providing quality products.

      For some freedom-loving nerds, the iPhone is a quality product only if they can do whatever they please with it, not what the turtle-necked Jesus dictates. Hardware-wise it's an excellent product, but that doesn't change the fact that it's artificially crippled to maximise profits.

      One app at a time, lack of bluetooth profiles that could be available in software, locked tethering, impossibility to install whatever application you wish, impossibility to use whatever application you want on your computer to access the device, the list goes on. Some people find such artificial crippling just as unethical as IP piracy. But hey, screw ethics, right?

    59. Re:So they should by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Uh you can use the internet and ipod at the same time without jailbreaking.
      Do you really have an iphone???

      What about all those other apps which are not the built in ipod music player?

      I'm not sure if it is the case now (since I've had my software working perfectly since I first jailbroke it) but programs like Pandora and last.FM were not permitted to run in the background if you closed them. It is possible that isn't the case now, but that is truly beside the point.

      It didn't work, and jailbreaking it fixed that. If Apple is catching up now, that's not exactly a selling point.

      "The Apple iPhone, now it works!"

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    60. Re:So they should by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      My iPhone has bluetooth tethering and it is not jailbroken, nor do I pay my carrier for the privilege.

    61. Re:So they should by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      My iPhone has tethering and it is not jailbroken, nor do I pay my carrier to enable it.

    62. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jail-breaking facilitates piracy

      I could possibly understand if app store apps were at crazy prices or forced you to bend over backwards in order to use them. But the majority of them cost, what, £5? Maybe £7 or £9?

      That sounds awfully expensive compared to here given the exchange rates. Most Apps cost $0.99 here in the US with some at $1.99 or $2.99. Very few Apps sell for much more than that.

    63. Re:So they should by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      You can turn off that "absurd" directory structure, which is simply Artist>Album>Track, in iTunes. The way the phone stores the music shouldn't really be an issue, unless you want to pull the files off onto another machine from the iPod, but it was never really designed to do that, just to sync to your main machine's music, which iTunes lets you manage as you wish.

    64. Re:So they should by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      My non-jailbroken iPhone is a very, very long way from a "useless brick" - just because you find it useless without SSH apps (which are available for non-jailbroken iPhones btw) does not make it useless.

    65. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You have to have a company to sign up for ADC; the form won't let you continue if you leave the "Company" field blank.

      Just use Cirius Cybernetics, like I always do. It's not like they check your D&B rating, ya know, or ask for bank references.

      For people who are willing to circumvent copy protection on a whim, you sure aren't very resourceful...

    66. Re:So they should by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      reason to root your android phone is simple: apps on SD card. Why?

      Because otherwise you share the same flash rom for applications as you do for storing said applications, and their respective caches and whatever they keep in memory while running. Yes, all 3 are shared. Meaning if you install more than 5-10 apps (and some people like having 20-30 apps for crap - good luck with games, btw) - you'll run out of ram real fast. Considering that the ram is the only improvement in most android phones other than the droid and the nexus one, that means that installing some apps and games will result in your phone running no faster than an HTC Magic (g1), as they all have the same ~500ish megaherz (since all are underclocked) processors.

      Oh, and every single app in the app store (paid including) will still work - you won't lose any.

      Average users with apps on the SD card use approximately 100-200MB of flash. The most a phone has available for android, including nexus one, is 256MB. That means you have 50mb for both a: running apps (in the background) and things such as browser cache (which don't clear on exit).

    67. Re:So they should by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      please. taking physical property is related to jailbreaking how, exactly? Oh right, anon, appletard, etc.

    68. Re:So they should by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      Just because a carrier tries to disable it doesn't mean you have to pay the extra $30-$60 a month they'd like to charge you for paying the same service as now. aka net neutrality issues all over again aka double dipping.

      This is why smart users jailbreak. Why pay extra for an artificial scarcity? This concept is at the forefront of many an economic failure. Yes, it's not apple's fault. However, it's in apple's hands what to do with it too unless you jailbreak.

      I have no clue your point with the process viewer. Yes, flash won't be the same as the desktop, and HTML5 support will eventually be fine once HTML5 gains some traction and loses some proprietary (h264). HTML5 will not likely gain a lot of traction with h264 behind it.

      Also, the tethering options you have are not the same when the phone isn't jailbroke.

    69. Re:So they should by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      Initially I used SSH and created a directory...applications on Cydia...

      We were talking about a non-jailbroken iPhone.

    70. Re:So they should by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      I would say that 90% of their customers are happy with what they are getting out of a stock phone + itunes. The other 10% would never be happy.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    71. Re:So they should by c4t3y3 · · Score: 1

      Jail breaking exists because there is a demand for features that apple refuses to provide. Easy examples: Flash, multitasking, tethering.

      I'm an apple hater, someone who doesn't even have an iphone, and even I know this.

      FYI

      • Flash: not made for mobile devices because it lacks hardware support. See firefox for maemo, or 1 FPS flash on HTC Hero.
      • Multitasking: 80% less battery life. Push notification: 20% less.
      • Tethering: Not allowed by carriers because their networks are not able to cope. See AT&T on NY.

      Apple is doing right.

    72. Re:So they should by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Basically, there wouldn't be jailbreaking if apple was actually giving their customers what they want.

      You're wrong about this. Hackers will always hack things, just for the sake of hacking things. C'mon, this is slashdot, you should know that. Hacking doesn't need to fulfill any need other than curiosity.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    73. Re:So they should by dangitman · · Score: 1

      So how is banning jailbreakers from the app store going to help with that?

      There is no evidence that these users have in fact been banned. Accounts get locked automatically all the time, it's a temporary security measure. Until there's something more substantive showing that people have been banned for being jailbreakers, I remain skeptical.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    74. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jailbreaking isn't common in the least.

      Its something that young, money is harder to come by than time geeks do, its something that some friends of a geek will do. As a rapidly approaching middle age, all friends have kids and real life to live, and knowning probably 10 geeks with iPhones ... None of them are jailbroken. Some of then have been jailbroken at one point, but went back to normal due not being worth the effort.

      On the contrary, I know of 4 different registered iPhone developers with device certs.

      I'd be willing to bet a weeks pay that there are twice as many paid iPhone developers who have sold enough apps to pay for their yearly fees to be an iPhone dev, as their are jailbroken phones

      Yes you will find younger geeks and your friends have jailbroken. Once you get perspective and realize how incredibly small of a demographic you represent, you'd have a slightly different stance on how many jailbroken phones there are.

    75. Re:So they should by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      So you bought it so you could replace the software on it because you didn't like any of it?

      Seems to me like a smarter idea would have been to buy a phone that suited your requirements rather than buying something else, then bitching about how it wasn't what you wanted.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    76. Re:So they should by adolf · · Score: 1

      For some reason, your post makes me think that an upgrade path consisting of XP Pro to Windows 7 Ultimate is, ultimately, very inexpensive.

      The Windows people have all of their software working just fine for at least nearly a decade, or perhaps lots more, between upgrades. The Mac people often get to reinvent the wheel with new point releases.

      (Disclaimer: I write this from a 7 box, but I'm not a great fan of any current desktop operating system, including the *NIXes.)

    77. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep in mind that "point releases" on OS X represent entirely new OS's. These aren't service pack upgrades. Going from 10.4 to 10.6 is the same as going from XP to Windows 7. There is only one consumer version of OS X for each version, unlike Windows where you have a bunch of crippled versions and one "real" one to choose from.

      Also consider Visual Studio isn't cheap. Add in your antivirus costs and time spent patching the OS and unless your time is free the Mac solution is cheaper.

    78. Re:So they should by adolf · · Score: 1

      I think I was referring more to "releases that break stuff and therefore cost extra money" per decade, than "major releases per decade." At my advanced age (ha!) I find I'm looking for minimum pain-in-the-ass and expense as time marches on. I've got plenty of interesting things that I like to do with computers of all kinds, but playing version-wars is my most hated of them.

      But thanks, AC, for making my point a little more pointier.

    79. Re:So they should by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      wow, that's so many facts. you know, that battery life part doesn't matter considering that someone who is listening to music while doing something else might have it....oh, whats the phrase? plugged in? Able to plug it in later? irrelevant? Nice try.

      try any of those.

      tethering and carriers is bullshit. Why would they offer tethering plans if they can't handle it? Please remind me what

      Smartphone Enterprise plus Tethering Add-on for BlackBerry Connect, Good, Microsoft Direct Push, or BlackBerry Enterprise Service8

      are again, exactly? Remind me why the tethering plan is twice the cost of a data plan with exactly the same 5GB maximum allotment?

      Flash: 1fps flash has nothing to do with it. I don't want flash on my device, but that was a big apple selling point was "we'll get flash one day" and one apple fans use frequently. I'd rather see HTML5 with ogg vorbis and yahoo using ogg vorbis. Decent flash support could be done if the companies (including adobe) take up the task. Again, I don't want it, but others do.

    80. Re:So they should by node+3 · · Score: 1

      To my knowledge there has been no hard scientific study of iPhone usage. My experiences could be typical, there is no reliable data to prove one way or the other.

      Therefor you are partially correct, it could suggest that everyone I have met has not been a typical iPhone user.

      It could also suggest that the typical iPhone user does jail break their phones.

      No, it can't.

      I realize it's not proven, so using words like "could" might seem logical, but it implies a sense of "could go either way, really", not "technically, it is one possible outcome, until proven otherwise".

      Simply put, for the typical iPhone to be jailbroken, the typical iPhone user would either need to have a certain level of technical sophistication far in excess of what is reasonably expected for such a mass market product, or have both access to someone with those skills and the desire to have them jailbreak their iPhone.

      In other words, it's a bit of a long shot to think that 50%+1 of all iPhones are jailbroken.

      It would be like thinking all Wiis are hacked because you and all your friends hacked yours. Assuming a scenario where this is true for you like your iPhone example, do you really think that extrapolates to all those millions of Wiis out there?

      I'm telling you right now, most people can barely use their devices as it is, let alone go through the process of hacking them (and then going on to take advantage of any of that hacking).

    81. Re:So they should by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Just because a carrier tries to disable it doesn't mean you have to pay the extra $30-$60 a month they'd like to charge you for paying the same service as now. aka net neutrality issues all over again aka double dipping.

      While there's some potential net neutrality issues involved, this is definitely not the straightforward, "blocking or slowing access to sites that don't pay up" type issue. I definitely disagree with how AT&T is handling this, but I can also understand it. Their network probably isn't up to handling even a fraction of iPhone users suddenly using their notebooks through their iPhone.

      This is why smart users jailbreak. Why pay extra for an artificial scarcity? This concept is at the forefront of many an economic failure. Yes, it's not apple's fault. However, it's in apple's hands what to do with it too unless you jailbreak.

      Apple is just about to sell their 10 billionth song. So, artificial scarcity isn't exactly something that people won't stand for.

      As for "smart users jailbreak", that's absurd. For the specific topic of tethering, "smarts" doesn't play into it, it's more about willingness to violate the terms of your contract with AT&T. The propensity towards breaking a contract so arbitrarily is not strongly correlated with intelligence one way or the other.

      In more general terms, I'd say it's smart to *not* jailbreak, which can lead to all sorts of issues like low memory, degraded battery life, and it also avoids the various hacks that have come out that have only affected jailbroken phones. But even there, I wouldn't go out of my way to say something like, "smart users don't jailbreak", as again, it's not so much about intelligence.

      I have no clue your point with the process viewer.

      I'm saying that if you give people a system where they will now have some need to keep track of what processes they are running, it better be *very* straightforward, or most people will just ignore it, having no idea really what to do.

      Yes, flash won't be the same as the desktop, and HTML5 support will eventually be fine once HTML5 gains some traction and loses some proprietary (h264). HTML5 will not likely gain a lot of traction with h264 behind it.

      Sorry, but HTML5 is already gaining a lot of traction and it does have h.264 behind it (not really an apt phrase, as h.264 is solely used for the video tag). But even with regards to h.264 (vs. Theora, I assume), it's already over for Theora. The issue will not be whether html5 will succeed without Theora, as it will do just fine, but whether Firefox will succeed if they remain steadfast against supporting h.264.

      Also, the tethering options you have are not the same when the phone isn't jailbroke.

      That's neither here nor there. If AT&T were to allow tethering today, at zero additional cost, a lot of people would would otherwise have jailbroken their iPhone will not do so, as the Bluetooth and USB tethering will be just fine. WiFi tethering is pretty handy, but not a universal deal breaker.

    82. Re:So they should by macslut · · Score: 1

      "Jail-breaking facilitates piracy" Well it's a step that one must take before being able to pirate an iPhone app. Of course buying an iPhone is a prior and more critical step. Jailbreaking also facilitates the selling of 3rd party apps through an additional store (Cydia). I've jailbroken. I've pirated apps. I've never not then purchased an app that I ended up liking/using. In a couple of cases I've purchased the app, and then pirated it so that I could modify the plist file and customize the app to my liking. It's *very* easy for developers to check if the app is pirated and then disable it. The piracy of apps is a hole that could be easily plugged without closing off jailbreaking. Many developers are starting to do this, but I'm also seeing where developers are putting nag messages in for pirated copies of apps, or figuring that the piracy is ok since they're then seeing people pay for add-ons to the app. My guess is that Apple, AT&T, and developers are all better of with allowing jailbreaking to occur.

    83. Re:So they should by Rexdude · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that despite the risks of bricking the device or getting locked out, people still prefer to buy a locked down iPhone and go through the hassle of jailbreaking it rather than look to other devices that offer you the same features without having to resort to hacks. If I put this down to the fact that people are really crazy about the iPhone- this only proves that if the iPhone were sold over the counter like every other handset at full markup, people would STILL clamor to get it. Apple has nothing to lose by making their handset more open- it might even increase sales. But pigs may as well fly.

      --
      "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
    84. Re:So they should by Rexdude · · Score: 1

      To you my question: Is it really worth the hassle? You've made it clear that you don't like the walled garden, handholding and controlled user 'experience' of the iPhone. Why not look to an unlocked handset like oh, so many- which would cost you less in the long term, not require jailbreaking to install apps, have multitasking and a host of other features out of the box? You clearly are not a n00b who's only interested in a flashy UI and you want full control over the experience. So why buy an iPhone at all? You can get all the mobile SSH clients and multitasking you want with Blackberry/Palm/WinMo/Symbian/Android.
      As for Symbian, well..there was this little handset that was the iPhone of its day around 7 years ago- the Nokia 6600.. It had all the features- multitasking, bluetooth (audio as well as file transfer), video recording, copy/paste (:P) and customizable themes. There were sites with millions of themes, wallpapers, ringtones (MP3/MIDI) and video ringtones and you could customize it to the extreme. (And every S60 handset since then- but this was the first one to start the craze).
      I even recall seeing a TV remote control app that used the infrared port on the device! The 6600 was immensely popular here (India) and even today I see a few people carrying it around.
      And speaking of contemporary devices, the N900 runs Maemo Linux-infinitely customizable and hackable, and has a decent 5mp camera with Carl Zeiss optics (standard on Nseries devices anyway)

      --
      "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
    85. Re:So they should by DrStoooopid · · Score: 1

      And most of the pirated apps are Jailbreak apps, so I really don't know what Apple is worried about. Maybe it's a pre-emptive step in case jailbreaking AppStore apps becomes commonplace.

      --
      There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
    86. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you went through the trouble of jailbreaking the phone to have an open platform that you could use to SSH and administer servers, to have multitasking capabilities, and to change the basic UI because you didn't like the iPhone UI, then um - why didn't you just buy an open phone to begin with?

    87. Re:So they should by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that despite the risks of bricking the device or getting locked out, people still prefer to buy a locked down iPhone and go through the hassle of jailbreaking it rather than look to other devices that offer you the same features without having to resort to hacks.

      At the time, there weren't other devices with the same features without having to resort to hacks. There were some that got close, and I owned a HTC6700. Today I might not make the same decision.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    88. Re:So they should by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      We were talking about a non-jailbroken iPhone.

      Didn't notice that until later. I've got to mess with Slashdot's settings as it collapsed that post. It would be nice to know what he used.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    89. Re:So they should by GasparGMSwordsman · · Score: 1

      Simply put, for the typical iPhone to be jailbroken, the typical iPhone user would either need to have a certain level of technical sophistication far in excess of what is reasonably expected for such a mass market product, or have both access to someone with those skills and the desire to have them jailbreak their iPhone.

      Your point is that it is hard to jailbreak an iPhone, the average person would have trouble doing so and would need non-existent outside support. The problem with your argument is that it is (or at least has been at several points) ridiculous easy to open the phone and many people offer the service. Not one of your foundational arguments hold up.

      There are at least 3 shops in my area that offer jail breaking service for a fee. These are brick and mortar company sights which do standard computer service/repair what have you. You can also find ads for people offering to unlock the phone all over the place. So there is a plethora of technical support even for non-technical people.

      As for how complicated it is to jailbreak the phone, in many cases the steps to jailbreak the phone include 1) download a executable file 2) run the file. There is no step 3. It is actually easier to follow those steps than to use the phone.

    90. Re:So they should by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Seems to me like a smarter idea would have been to buy a phone that suited your requirements rather than buying something else, then bitching about how it wasn't what you wanted.

      That might be smart, if I had access to several million dollars to design and produce my own phone that met all of my requirements. Or I could find the system that met most of my requirements, and didn't require me to go to some magical fairy land to buy.

      Did you just never use a phone until the perfect model came out? No you made due with what you had and what was available.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    91. Re:So they should by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that battery life part doesn't matter considering that someone... might have it....oh, whats the phrase? plugged in?

      Most people use a phone as a phone. They are unlikely to be plugged in, so multitasking will shorten battery duration to a couple of hours. Is multitasking important enough for this to happen? Should a product include features that make no sense? Most consumers will be better served without being able to accidentally suck dry their battery. You can claim your freedom to shot yourself on the foot but it will have to be with a different device.

      Remind me why the tethering plan is twice the cost of a data plan with exactly the same 5GB

      Carriers overbook their capacity. Tethering is twice the cost of a data plan because you are most likely to use the full 5GB.

      a big apple selling point was "we'll get flash one day" and one apple fans use frequently

      You are imagining things. Maybe because Adobe CEO said that Adobe and Apple were collaborating to bring Flash to the iPhone. Apple never said a positive thing about Flash or promised they include Flash. The problem is that vector graphics need hardware acceleration and that's something that can't be fixed with software. That's why today there is no usable Flash support in any phone at all.

    92. Re:So they should by dissy · · Score: 1

      Simply put, for the typical iPhone to be jailbroken, the typical iPhone user would either need to have a certain level of technical sophistication far in excess of what is reasonably expected for such a mass market product, or have both access to someone with those skills and the desire to have them jailbreak their iPhone.

      You do realize it is not beyond even people with little computer experience to jail break an iphone/ipod/.

      Google "jailbreak my iphone" and click the first link
      download blackrain
      run it and click the only single button in the window

      Most all commercial software application installers have a more complex procedure than jailbreaking does.

  4. You hacked an apple product? by Moheeheeko · · Score: 1

    .....cooler, 8 weeks.

  5. Dear oh dear... how about some fact checking? by Shuntros · · Score: 5, Informative

    3.1.3 hasn't been "hacked". The chap discovered a specific crash which could trigger a crash in the baseband software, potentially being one day developed into an unlock. Long way off..

    The other guy cobbled a VB front-end onto a load of other people's utilities to make a questionably legal Windows version of an existing OSX program for creating custom firmware bundles.

    Bit of an overreaction on Apple's part if you ask me.

  6. The Apple Experience by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is a lot like the experience you have after having a few too many drinks and wandering into a dark alley at 3AM.

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re:The Apple Experience by Snocone · · Score: 5, Funny

      You mean, an overpriced blowjob?

      Hmmm ... I suppose that's not too far off the mark, actually.

    2. Re:The Apple Experience by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, but the hooker at least looks stunning!

      The cynic in me would say she's wearing way too much makeup.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:The Apple Experience by Minwee · · Score: 5, Funny

      The cynic in me would say she's wearing way too much makeup.

      And a black turtleneck.

    4. Re:The Apple Experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cynic in me would say she's wearing way too much makeup.

      And a black turtleneck.

      Only if you've been hanging out in the alley behind the gay bar... Again.

    5. Re:The Apple Experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cynic in me would say she's wearing way too much makeup.

      And a black turtleneck.

      Only if you've been hanging out in the alley behind the gay bar... Again.

      Or the alley behind an Apple store... Again.

    6. Re:The Apple Experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cynic in me would say she's wearing way too much makeup.

      And a black turtleneck.

      And you're paying to blow her.

      Wait...

      OMG!

    7. Re:The Apple Experience by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Still better than the alternative. If it was MS, you'd prolly just be asked to bend over.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  7. A Word to the Wise by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    Sounds like it's time for a little spoofing. One account for access to the app store, another to give the Apple security thugs some red meat to chew on. Time to teach Mr. Jobs some manners.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  8. "Banned for security reasons" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who thinks that this line is disturbingly Orwellian?

    1. Re:"Banned for security reasons" by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Of course you would not be the first person to make that connection.

      Apple has turned into just the sort of company they were criticizing when they introduced the Macintosh.

      That girl even looks Scandinavian...

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  9. Closed Ecosystem by zeromorph · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That is one of the huge drawbacks of such a closed ecosystem.

    However, the original post is less agitate than the summary:

    Is Apple starting to ban those associated with jailbreaking?

    The answer is probably not. [...] however it definitely would put an iron grip on those who pirate free software. The details of what is going on remain extremely murky but maybe they are taking down some of the bigger players.

    --
    "Hannibal's plans never work right. They just work." Amy/A-Team
  10. I can't wait for my contract to expire by maynard · · Score: 1, Troll

    Hi Apple! Been a big fan since I dumped Linux in '04 or so. I've really enjoyed MacOS X and my laptops. You sold me a good UNIX with support for Microsoft Office - which I need. But you know what? Ever since you started making money hands over fist with iTunes, you've started REALLY SUCKING as a company. I don't want to buy from you any longer. My next phone will NOT be an iPhone. My next laptop will NOT be another Macbook. I think I'll be perfectly happy with an unlocked Nexus and a laptop running FreeBSD. So... FUCK OFF, Apple. For me, your time has come and gone. -M

    1. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ever since you started making money hands over fist with iTunes...

      Ummm... Apple has never started making money hand over fist with iTunes. Income from iTunes and the iPhone app store together are a negligible portion of Apple's revenue. Seriously, they both barely make more than the operational cost.

    2. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by maynard · · Score: 1

      Cite that please. You're arguing that they make little to no money from content distribution through iTunes? I think you're full of it.

    3. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ummm... Apple has never started making money hand over fist with iTunes. Income from iTunes and the iPhone app store together are a negligible portion of Apple's revenue. Seriously, they both barely make more than the operational cost.

      It must suck for a company to have a component of its business operating at a profit.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    4. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Ever since you started making money hands over fist with iTunes, you've started REALLY SUCKING as a company. I don't want to buy from you any longer. My next phone will NOT be an iPhone. My next laptop will NOT be another Macbook.

      And they'll be okay with that, just so long as you keep using iTunes for your media and software needs. New! Order Chinese food through iTunes!

    5. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by maynard · · Score: 1

      And they'll be okay with that, just so long as you keep using iTunes for your media and software needs.

      Excellent point. Fortunately, iTunes doesn't install on FreeBSD. -M

    6. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Cite that please. You're arguing that they make little to no money from content distribution through iTunes? I think you're full of it.

      Sure. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/steve-jobs-tries-to-downplay-the-itunes-stores-profit/ ...is an article where a NYT pundit postulates that despite Apple having publicly stated they make little money on the operation, he thinks they might actually be making a billion dollars a year (they make 25 billion or so a year as a company). Be sure to read the update at the end where he acknowledges he was mostly wrong after someone explained to him how much credit card transaction fees cost.

    7. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by dancingmilk · · Score: 0, Troll

      Ummm... Apple has never started making money hand over fist with iTunes. Income from iTunes and the iPhone app store together are a negligible portion of Apple's revenue. Seriously, they both barely make more than the operational cost.

      [Citation needed]

    8. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by maynard · · Score: 1

      You didn't read the article you cited, did you? It made the exact opposite point of what you argue - that iTunes is immensely profitable for the firm. Read the link you posted.

    9. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You didn't read the article you cited, did you? It made the exact opposite point of what you argue - that iTunes is immensely profitable for the firm. Read the link you posted.

      Actually I did read it as you should know if you even read my comments telling you which portions you needed to pay attention to. Please go reread what I wrote. The article mentions the long standing position of Apple and belief of analysts that Apple makes little or nothing on iTunes. Then, it proposes Apple could make a billion dollars a year, which is to say, still less than all the other divisions of Apple make. It bases that upon the theory that Apple's margins could be slightly better than for other products they sell, which the author admits in the update was incorrect. He further admits he failed to take into account the cost of running the servers and the bandwidth costs. his end conclusion is, "But I still think that with the scale it has, I still think that iTunes is a better business than Mr. Jobs makes it out to be." in reference to Jobs saying it doesn't make much money. Seriously, reading comprehension goes beyond just scanning the title, slacker.

    10. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Don't let me get in the way of your pro-FreeBSD rant, but they probably aren't making a huge profit from iTunes. You think they are when you hear that they keep 30% of the revenue from software sales, but remember credit card companies charge a minimum of around $0.25 for a transaction, so if your software sells for a dollar, that takes most of it. The profit margins on song sales are even smaller, so it is possible they are losing money on most song transactions.

      Apple claims they aren't making much money from iTunes, and there is no reason to believe they are blatantly lying about it.

      --
      Qxe4
    11. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You seem to be having a normal ego threat response. I pointed out that your comment about Apple making lots of money on iTunes and your implication that they have changed business practices to cash in on that instead of on the businesses where they are making most of their money, was misinformed. Even the pie in the sky estimates of Apples iTunes revenue make it about 4% of their income, while more enlightened estimates put it probably below 1%. I cited an article from one of those pie in the sky people, who realized his mistake when corrected, in the hopes that you'd see not only the logic, but where people that make that assumption went wrong.

      Instead of rationally revising your opinion with the input of this new data (as the author largely did), you got emotional and defensive. As if being wrong makes you less of a person, you instead chose to irrationally defend that incorrect opinion, in effect being a less intelligent person. I'm not pointing this out because I want to make you feel bad or look bad. I don't know you and don't really care that much. I just hope you can impartially consider your decision making process and truly consider if you are being reasoned and logical in future.

    12. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said. I was a huge Apple fan back in the day and you could probably trace a nice sized revenue stream from me and the people I persuaded to go Apple. These days I use a Nokia N900 because it is free and open and not locked down. I still have a macbook but I think I will be installing one of the many distros of linux on it sooner rather than later. Thanks Apple. Thank you for not focusing on your core ideals that you claimed was your main focus for so long. I am glad that a locked down media store will be your legacy for years to come. You used to be revolutionary but now you are sub-par.

    13. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      I think maybe you do need it interpreting - I thought it was pretty clear myself. He made assumptions, and then scaled them back when people in the industry (not Apple) called him on it.

      While I am sure the iTMS makes money, it's not Apple's meat and potatoes.

    14. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, what's going to happen to "needing" a good UNIX with support for MS Office if you're going to run FreeBSD?

    15. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Fuck off, little bitch. Here's some text from the blog post you cite: 1)

      But he downplays how good a business the iTunes store is. Here's what the iTunes store has: margins that are better than the best e-commerce companies around;

      Yup, which later on in the update he, himself, refutes:

      So I’m probably wrong that iTunes is Apple’s best business. (The company’s overall gross margin, after all, is 34 percent.)

      You continue to cite:

      Sales of nearly $3 billion a year in its existing business; and a new $1 billion business on the way.

      Which just shows you know nothing about business. You can lose money or break even with billions in sales, if you don't have good enough margins. The point being, Apple does have billions in sales, but if each sale nets little or no profit, that doesn't change anything other than making a portion of the overhead costs more spread out. You second quote, again, speaks to number of sales not profits.

      So, you use a single sentence in the article which quotes Apple representatives has claiming that they don't make much money, then the blog entry goes on to dispute that claim.

      If you read all the way to the end of the article you'll see the author refutes much of what he wrote after getting input from people more knowledgeable. More importantly, it wasn't just an Apple representative. It was the CEO repeating comments he's made several times during shareholder financial results reports. So your claim to the contrary, would require Apple to be lying in a forum where the SEC will actually fine them if they are found out, all that over a market that even the pie in the sky estimate here said could be 4% of Apple's profits? I think not.

      Here, also from 2008, is an article from Wired which claims that the firm had posted a $500M profit (not gross).

      First, if you're citing something you need to provide a URL or link. Second, do you know what the words you're using mean? Gross what? Apple does not break out iTunes sales in their financial reports, so there are no publicly available sources for how much profit they make. Further, Apple regards the profits breakdown on songs to be a trade secret because they don't want competitors to know what the efficiency of their credit card transaction algorithm is, or what bulk deal they have from the credit card companies. Thus, all we have are estimates based either by subtracting estimated ipod sales, or by calculating approximate costs. A good approximation, however does not leave out the substantial cost of credit card transactions or bandwidth and hosting; which the author of the cited article admits in the update that he forgot.

      You are absolutely full of shit. But so what? My original top post was simply an opinion expressed lament.

      So? Does that mean people should not point out when you have your facts wrong?

      You are the motherfucker who made an issue of whether iTunes is or is not profitable.

      Yes, people who point out when you are wrong are motherfuckers. If only people would shut up and ignore when you spout off in public when you are clueless about the topic.

      Regardless, the firm is engaging in anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices.

      In light of that, I won't bother to tell you what the last terms you used actually mean or why you're full of it.

      I won't give them my money any longer. As is my right.

      Why would I care. I'm not an advocate for Apple. I was just commenting with a correction so people were not misinformed by your assertions. You can buy turnips and try to put them in your urethra if you want. It's none of my concern.

      Suck it.

      Yeah, generally vulgar insults are the refuge of the intellectually inferior. Have fun with that.

    16. Re:I can't wait for my contract to expire by BertieBaggio · · Score: 1

      I applaud your restraint and patience in trying to inform; but I don't see this guy admitting being wrong or having a bad attitude now. Shame, really. Of course, it'll eventually bite him hard in the bum if he responds like that to everyone who tries to help him. Hopefully the wakeup he gets won't be too harsh.

      --
      If all you have is a grenade, pretty soon every problem looks like a foxhole -- MightyYar
  11. You've a right to hack hardware you own... by Spencerian · · Score: 1

    ...But do not expect the hardware/software's creator to give you carte blanche access to the resources to do it.

    And heaven help you should you do what they fear you or others could do if your code has a serious bug; spam or interrupt the cell network or a local wifi network. The onslaught of Apple's lawyers, not to mention the FCC and other international communications regulators, would by a iPocalypse in itself.

    --
    Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
    1. Re:You've a right to hack hardware you own... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are these "rights" you speak of? All I see are privileges.

    2. Re:You've a right to hack hardware you own... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If I can mess up the cell network with a phone then I should be given a medal because little thought has been given to the network.

      If I can defraud people out of their money, I should be given a medal because these people are obviously too easily duped, no matter how complex my scam was.

      If I can bankrupt a local restaurant by shooting out the tires on the small-time food delivery truck that services them, I should be given a medal because I pointed out the fatal flaw they have in depending on one supplier, never mind that they can't afford an international multiple-points-of-failure distribution chain.

      If I can murder someone, I should be given a medal because they obviously gave little thought to their safety if I could kill them.

      If I can poison an entire city, I should be given a medal because, really, they should be thankful that I pointed out these flaws in their city.

      If I can disrupt cell towers and stop vital services from communicating properly, I should be given a medal because, after all, it's not MY fault that I decided to fuck with everyone's life just because I'm a sociopathic solipsist. That's THEIR problems! They don't matter to me!

      Hey! Why are you taking me away? You should be building a statue in my honor! Geez! So your mother died because health services couldn't get her call after my cell phone experiment! You can't honestly expect to blame ME for HER being worthless and weak! Ungrateful plebs!

    3. Re:You've a right to hack hardware you own... by bnenning · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And heaven help you should you do what they fear you or others could do if your code has a serious bug; spam or interrupt the cell network or a local wifi network.

      Which explains the constant cellular outages caused by thousands of rogue apps on Android phones. That's pure fear-mongering by Apple and the carriers to keep their lock-in.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    4. Re:You've a right to hack hardware you own... by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Windows Mobile phones are as open as it gets without the operating being open source software. They exist since 2002. They are quite popular here in Germany (iPhone not so). The networks are still there and offer excellent service (the phenomena of dropped calls exists only in the first and the last hour of a year). Viruses are also unknown.

      Jobs' reality distortion field must be very strong in the USA.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    5. Re:You've a right to hack hardware you own... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Android isn't 100% open either, contrary to popular belief, there are aspects of the devices to which you can't modify in the 'standard' way when it comes to Android. Which is the same as Windows Mobile, mostly open to anything except some very specific important bits that are critical to making the device play well with others.

      The main difference is that Android (and WinMo) has one less barrier protecting that code. Both devices are most certainly capable of taking down cellular service over their cell given a little bit of effort.

      It is FUD as its true for any phone really, its just a matter of how difficult it is to accomplish and how effective its going to be. But its also a true possibility. Still FUD though.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  12. Hugs My Gorgeous Android Nexus One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We'll need a bit more evidence than 2 cases."

    That Apple is taking actions that try to tighten their control and limit consumer choice?

    Yeah, that would be something extraordinary and unprecedented...

    1. Re:Hugs My Gorgeous Android Nexus One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea it's this sort of thing that keeps out those pesky bits of malware your "Gorgeous Android Nexus One" got.

      Half-dozen of one, etc, etc.

    2. Re:Hugs My Gorgeous Android Nexus One by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 0, Troll

      To be honest, I would rather have the choice of installing malware on a phone I own, than not having any choice at all. Guess that is why I have a G1. Do you really want a company to assume you are a moron, and hold you hand every time you want to use your device? If so, buy Apple.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    3. Re:Hugs My Gorgeous Android Nexus One by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      But you are an anomaly in the world of users. You know what you're doing and, if you make a mistake, you'll probably be relatively sanguine about it.

      Most users are not like that. (And most Slashdotters complain endlessly about "stupid users" who will blindly click on every little web animation and then are surprised when they get hijacked.) Locking a system down is a protective measure; it helps avoid a rash of nonsense phone calls to the support line.

    4. Re:Hugs My Gorgeous Android Nexus One by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Again, why I bought a G1. Why anybody that knows what they are doing would want to be locked down like that is beyond me.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
  13. Consumer protection? by redalien · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure where these people are based, but many countries would have them protected here. The iPhone is pretty much useless without the app store and apple are very clear that it is the main selling point in their adverts. By cutting people off from a monopoly store they have changed the functionality of the device which is still being paid for.

    I'd stop paying my contract fees immediately until the access is restored, personally.

  14. Serves right. that much fanboism eventually had to by unity100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    have a price tag with it. in this case, price is freedom.

    apple users should face the distasteful truth. the company which is providing them 'stylish' and 'hip' products that 'just work', is just wanting to keep them as cash cows without any consumer choice.

  15. Re:Mod me down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree. I've been waiting so long for this, just getting to know the thing exists felt like a Christmas present.

  16. Silver lining by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This obviously sucks for the people involved, but I can't help but feel this is actually superb news. Maybe this will finaly drive home that the ability to jailbreak your devices does not excuse manufactures for making locked-down closed devices. Far too often I've heard arguments of the form: "[DEVICES] are not locked down, because you can jailbreak them if you want to."

    --
    "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
  17. Re:Mod me down by tsa · · Score: 1

    Yeah, everything was better in the olden days. I remember when we could just bash everything but Linux, but now freakin' COMPANIES sometimes do things right! What is the world coming to...

    --

    -- Cheers!

  18. Not just for jailbreakers by tomasf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I got the exact same message a couple of weeks ago when I tried to log in to ADC. Here's a screenshot: http://tomasf.se/other/appleid.jpg

    I'm not a jailbreaker, though, so either Apple made a mistake in my case, or this has nothing to do with jailbreaking. Now to figure out how to resolve this... :-/

    1. Re:Not just for jailbreakers by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      I got the exact same message a couple of weeks ago when I tried to log in to ADC. Here's a screenshot: http://tomasf.se/other/appleid.jpg

      I'm not a jailbreaker, though, so either Apple made a mistake in my case, or this has nothing to do with jailbreaking. Now to figure out how to resolve this... :-/

      It's pretty easy to resolve. Buy an Android phone.

    2. Re:Not just for jailbreakers by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's pretty easy to resolve. Buy an Android phone.

      Really? Wow, so Google doesn't lock people out of accounts that have had too many bad login attempts?

      Because that is exactly what has happened here; nothing sinister.

    3. Re:Not just for jailbreakers by tomasf · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the pointer! My account now works properly again.

    4. Re:Not just for jailbreakers by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      It's pretty easy to resolve. Buy an Android phone.

      Really? Wow, so Google doesn't lock people out of accounts that have had too many bad login attempts?

      Because that is exactly what has happened here; nothing sinister.

      So what, exactly, does that have to do with buying an Android based phone? Buying one will still solve that problem as well as solve a number of other problems not mentioned in this thread.

      Regardless, the solution is still valid.

    5. Re:Not just for jailbreakers by ^_^x · · Score: 1

      Yes. Google doesn't make much effort to hide the fact that they can shut your phone down or remove apps from it remotely, so there's no surprised outrage.

    6. Re:Not just for jailbreakers by daveschroeder · · Score: 1

      So what, exactly, does that have to do with buying an Android based phone?

      Touché.

      (And in case you're missing this, your suggestion to buy an Android based phone indeed was completely irrelevant to the original poster's question.)

      Buying one will still solve that problem as well as solve a number of other problems not mentioned in this thread.

      Regardless, the solution is still valid.

      Hardly. That's like saying that, oh, refraining from using computers entirely, or perhaps committing suicide, would also "solve" the problem.

      But actually, that's not even comparable, because even though you're trying to salvage your utterly irrelevant suggestion with semantic justifications, it's still not a solution to the problem: the poster was unable to log into his Apple Developer Connection account using an Apple ID for reasons completely unrelated to which phone he might have. An individual with an Android based phone might still have a legitiamate reason to have ADC account and/or an Apple ID, and might still encounter an account lockout due to bad login attempts.

      Similarly, someone with no Apple services whatsoever, and only Google/Android services, might encounter the exact same problem as this user; namely, being locked out of an account due to bad login attempts. This user's problem was benign, and he confirmed that the simple suggestion to reset his password as described in the support article in fact solved the issue. He could have encountered that same issue with Google, even if he owned dozens of exclusively Android based devices and shunned Apple like the plague.

      Thanks for playing.

    7. Re:Not just for jailbreakers by dangitman · · Score: 1

      I get this message sometimes. It seems to happen when I log in with just my ADC username, or with my whole email address (I forget way around) - all I need to do is swap, and I can log in fine. I think it's a bug.

      The funny thing is the terrible reporting - the error message actually says that your account has been "disabled" - but in this story it's been changed to "banned."

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  19. No proof by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Indeed, and see this Apple KB article:

    For your protection, your Apple ID is automatically disabled (partially) if your account password is incorrectly entered numerous times. This affects some services you may access with your Apple ID, such as your accounts with: Apple Photo Services, iTunes Store, and MobileMe.

    When you try to use some online services and your Apple ID has been disabled, the following message appears:

    "This Apple ID has been disabled for security reasons."

    So who's to say it's not someone just messing with these guys? All it takes is a few bad login attempts to temporarily disable ANY Apple ID.

    And even if Apple was disabling just these Apple IDs, it's clearly not of all people with jailbroken devices, else we would know about it; instead it's specific, individual people (who are probably in violation of Apple's terms of service for Apple IDs).

    1. Re:No proof by Graff · · Score: 1

      So who's to say it's not someone just messing with these guys? All it takes is a few bad login attempts to temporarily disable ANY Apple ID.

      That's an excellent point. I guess we'll all have to wait for Apple to make a statement if they are instituting a policy against jailbreakers. Until then maybe knee-jerk reactions are a bit over the top? What an amazing concept...

      I'm all for holding a company's feet to the fire when they step over the line but 2 isolated examples with no independent corroboration or statements by the company tends to make me skeptical of the whole story. Even then, Apple has every right to cut off access to these hackers. It's right in the iTunes Terms of Service which you have to agree to before you use the service:

      You agree not to attempt to, or assist another person to, circumvent, reverse-engineer, decompile, disassemble, or otherwise tamper with any of the security components related to such Usage Rules for any reason whatsoever.

      Termination by Apple. If you fail, or Apple suspects that you have failed, to comply with any of the provisions of this Agreement, including but not limited to failure to make payment of fees due, failure to provide Apple with a valid credit card or with accurate and complete Registration Data, failure to safeguard your Account information, violation of the Usage Rules or any license to the software, or infringement or other violation of third parties' rights, Apple, at its sole discretion, without notice to you may: (i) terminate this Agreement and/or your Account, and you will remain liable for all amounts due under your Account up to and including the date of termination; and/or (ii) terminate the license to the software; and/or (iii) preclude access to the Service (or any part thereof).

    2. Re:No proof by Graff · · Score: 1

      You might want to go back and re-read my statement in context and in its entirety. Cutting-and-pasting two small blocks of text out of several different sentences can be very misrepresentative of what was actually said.

      If you have a real, cogent argument to make then by all means go for it if you have the ability. Otherwise all you are doing is adding to the noise level here.

    3. Re:No proof by Cloud+K · · Score: 1

      Agreed, although I doubt we'll hear a statement... Apple are very tight-lipped at the best of times. Their actions (or lack of) will just speak for them.

      To me it seems more likely that these people have used their Apple ID in a forum and someone's been trying to get into them or something like that, but even if it's Apple's direct actions it's nothing new or particularly bad for them to be protecting their own security by going after the specific individuals breaking it.

      If they go after the actual consumers, then yes they're pulling a MAFIAA move and can go to Hell and I'll stop buying their products etc etc. Especially since they'd probably be denying rights to use the applications that you've paid a lot of accumulated money for. But I wouldn't go jumping to conclusions just yet and I doubt they're that stupid. This is just a typical "shock factor" headline (as much as I love Slashdot, I've always said that if they were British they would be one of the tabloids, probably The Sun).

    4. Re:No proof by Fred_A · · Score: 3, Funny

      You mean

      You might want to

      be very misrepresentative of what was actually said.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    5. Re:No proof by Antiocheian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fine.

      I'm having a problem understanding what you mean by "holding a company's feet to the fire when they step over the line" in the context of this article which deals with 2 hackers being cut off because of jailbreaking, when you justify Apple by stating that "even then" they have "every right" to do so.

      I understand the point of each sentence separated, but in the same paragraph I do not.

    6. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, please. First you say, "it didn't happen! I don't believe it!"

      Then you say, "but if Apple did it, they have every right!"

      I love how the psuedo-libertarian circle jerk here on /. reverts to "mommy knows best!" when mommy is one of their sacred cows (yes, I called mommy a cow).

    7. Re:No proof by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Selective quoting and word twisting is second only to talking at the movie theatre.

    8. Re:No proof by Graff · · Score: 1

      I'm having a problem understanding what you mean by "holding a company's feet to the fire when they step over the line" in the context of this article which deals with 2 hackers being cut off because of jailbreaking, when you justify Apple by stating that "even then" they have "every right" to do so.

      I may not like it when a company does something and I'll complain to that company about it but that doesn't change the fact that they have the right to do it. These hackers agreed to the terms of service (you HAVE to in order to use the store in the first place) and then they broke those terms. The remedy as spelled out in the agreement is termination of service.

      This doesn't mean I agree or disagree with either party, it just means that I acknowledge Apple's right to terminate service under these circumstances. If I think that some part of the terms of service is unfair or is being enforced unfairly then I will protest with letters to Apple, posts in public forums, avoiding the service, etc. Apple may be in the right but that doesn't necessarily affect my opinion of their actions.

    9. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess the lesson is (assuming their claim is correct) is to have a separate developer ID and iTunes ID with separate credit card details. If they get pwned for jailbreaking their iPhone, they'll still be able to buy App Store apps. And the app store lock-in isn't quite like the 1980s hardware lock-in. My Nokia 6070 has had 4 viruses in 3 years. Yes, a factory defaults restore fixes it, but, it's too easy to write malware for java platform phones. My iPhone is rock solid, not because it's a more expensive phone with better or different technology, but because it has a human firewall around its ecosystem. The app store /approval-of-product model keeps malicious apps out of the system. I manage a "fleet" of Windows Mobile PDAs at work and I'm running at a rate of a contract defaults restore once per month, per unit. Partly because it Doze Mobile, but a good half of the restorations are due to virus infestation. All these things do is record audio at media conferences and send them back to an FTP server where I attach the audio to radio scripts. Not a single virus on my iPhone yet. Yes, this is all anecdotal evidence, but it's an effective illustration of what Apple are ***trying*** to achieve.

    10. Re:No proof by Antiocheian · · Score: 1

      You are a conscious consumer, obviously, but I fail to see the point where you either criticize Apple or approve Apple in relation to the topic. The legal rights of Apple are not in question. The extend of pursuing them is.

      In simple terms, does this whole story affect you in any way from buying Apple products in the future ?

    11. Re:No proof by Graff · · Score: 1

      I fail to see the point where you either criticize Apple or approve Apple in relation to the topic.
      ...
      In simple terms, does this whole story affect you in any way from buying Apple products in the future ?

      That's why I said this:

      I'm all for holding a company's feet to the fire when they step over the line but 2 isolated examples with no independent corroboration or statements by the company tends to make me skeptical of the whole story.

      So, no it doesn't stop me from buying Apple products at this point. If there are a lot more reports of this sort and Apple goes after people who have done far less than these two then I'll re-evaluate. Until then this is just two out of millions of users.

      Who's to say what the real story is here anyways? Allegedly these two guys got banned and because they are iPhone hackers they are supposing that's the reason for the ban but several other good theories have been proposed. For example, it would be trivial to discover these guys iTunes accounts (one admitted his was firstname_lastname@yahoo.com) and then just make a bunch of failed login attempts and get the account deactivated. Some malicious person could have easily done this.

      There's just too little information and these incidents are too isolated for it to affect me one way or the other. It tells me to pay attention but not to come to any snap judgements.

    12. Re:No proof by jasonwea · · Score: 1

      "... you're going to burn in a very special level of hell. A level they reserve for child molesters and people who talk at the theater."

  20. Re:Mod me down by DebianDog · · Score: 1

    Umm I do not have an iPhone but at least 13 MILLION people do. They expect to sell another 15 million or so this year and I would bet on it if the 4G is released.

    You may not like the "lock in" from Apple or the "lame" AT&T service but it is FAR from "crap" or "stupid". The iPhone DOMINATES the worldwide smartphone market. http://theappleblog.com/2010/01/22/iphone-dominating-worldwide-smartphone-usage-report/

    The N900 has it own limitations the biggest being having to use AT&T or T-Mobile and large upfront cost.

  21. Misleading Summary, jumping too conclusions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Adam Mills writes in the Examiner that Apple has been cutting off access to the iTunes App Store for iPhone hackers and jailbreakers"

    Actually, that's not what the article says. Maybe Apple is seeking these accounts out to ban, but there is certainly little evidence to suggest this and the anecdotal evidence provided is weak. Wow Slashdot, the downward spiral continues. What is this reddit or something?

  22. Nice. by Tumbleweed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Keep digging that hole for yourself, Apple. It'll save Android from having to do the heavy lifting.

  23. Good ol' FUD by f4k3r · · Score: 0

    Is it that hard to ask your favorite search engine? Their Apple ID was disabled, so what do you do - how about just resetting your password? http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2446 They weren't "banned" because they got jailbroken phones, sheesh...

  24. Re:Mod me down by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    For goodness sake, who gives a crap about the stupid iphone?

    I care not because I own one (I do, but it's not jailbroken), but because according to Jobs, this is the computing wave of the future. Apple is trying to prevent any usefulness for jailbreaking before they release their latest computer, the iPad. They're scared of what freedoms users can have with an iPad if jailbreaking them becomes common, so they need to make it very undesirable. The next step is an OS kill-switch, and I believe it will happen now. I thought for sure they wouldn't go _this_ far.

  25. Irony by digitalloving · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hey, at least Microsoft didn't do this. Then it'd be downright evil.

  26. Technically they are right. by drolli · · Score: 1

    A manipulated verification procedure for software to be installed *is* a security problem. If the procedure is manipulated, then it is imaginable that binaries transferred from the appstore to the phone get manipulated on the way and that apple is liable for the damage from that. If the promise is a safe delivery of an application, then, as a customer you probably can sue them if you can prove that apple got knowledge about this and did *not* inform you. So technically speaking, an jailbroken iphone is a system which is damaged in a way which prevents a security feature (the use of is -for whatever reason- mandatory) needed for the safe use of the app. store from working. That the "Security" coindcides with Apples best interests and that Apple did not give a possibility to turn off this feature, is written on another sheet of paper.

    And-actually-i highly doubt that it is a legal right of a iphone owner to use the app store forever. Nobody stops you from using the iphone as you wish, i mean that was the primary purpose of jailbreaking, wasnt it?

    BTW: My Nokia E63 has a way of turning the certificate checking off and on in a controlled way.

  27. Re:Mod me down by icebraining · · Score: 1

    You're an idiot. That's smartphone online usage, not market share. In market share, the iPhone has little more than 10%, while Nokia has 36% and RIM has more than 20%.

  28. Re:Not surprised... by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is why I do not buy anything from Apple. I will not be forced into a little bubble like all of you cattle out there. I have missed nothing as the result. By the way, my phone dose multitasking and I am not banned from anything (except Apple).

    --

    Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
  29. I can't help mysef. by sammy+baby · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...we seed 90%+ of market share to you to assure our purity."

    cede , not seed.

    1. Re:I can't help mysef. by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      ...we seed 90%+ of market share to you to assure our purity."

      cede , not seed.

      Perhaps he was talking about Apple seeding OSX torrents? ;)

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    2. Re:I can't help mysef. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but "Apple cedes" just doesn't have the same visual ring to it.

    3. Re:I can't help mysef. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You can't help yoursef?

    4. Re:I can't help mysef. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I figured it was send.

    5. Re:I can't help mysef. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, when you are talking about Apple it is seed as in Appleseed!

    6. Re:I can't help mysef. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see a predicate in that sentence fragment.

  30. As an iphone developer.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this would really really suck if true - it will only drive all jailbreakers to pirating all apps instead of purchasing them legitimately ....

    At least I personally don't see jailbreakers as all pirates - I personally have a jailbroken phone (as I couldn't use it in my country otherwise when I first got it) but don't pirate, and till now haven't seen piracy as an issue (I've not bothered putting piracy checks in my apps as I figure the small portion of users that do pirate mostly wouldn't buy the app otherwise anyway, and if they really want to go that effort to just save $1 then they probably need the money more than me) .... but if every jailbreaker is forced into piracy that would change things a long

  31. Re:Serves right. that much fanboism eventually had by dotgain · · Score: 1

    ...except for the bit where they're free to abandon Apple's products the instant they get sick of them, and find something they perceive to be better.

  32. Easy way to lose money by Chardish · · Score: 1

    Ban jailbreakers from the app store. Then you don't get the 30% cut of the apps they would be legitimately buying anymore, and instead they'll just be forced to learn how to pirate the apps they want.

    1. Re:Easy way to lose money by drolli · · Score: 1

      The jailbroken iphones/ipods i have seen up to now did *not* have 30% apps from the app-store

    2. Re:Easy way to lose money by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

      None of my apps are pirated. If Apple is truly banning jailbroken devices, they're imperiling themselves to lose what money I do spend, which seems silly and petty.

    3. Re:Easy way to lose money by socsoc · · Score: 1

      My unlocked and jailbroken has only purchased apps (some expensive ones) and a few free ones from elsewhere, but GP was referring to the 30% of each app's sale that Apple takes for themself. He wasn't referring to the percentage of apps on a jailbroken phone that are pirated.

    4. Re:Easy way to lose money by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's much closer to 100% from the appstore in my personal experience. People unlock not to pirate, but to access features like multitasking.

  33. Re:It's the 80's all over again...... by mandark1967 · · Score: 1

    If that's the case I'ma stock up on T.P. since I'm about to discover porn all over again!

    --
    Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
  34. Re:Serves right. that much fanboism eventually had by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amen brother.

    Lets take the other company everyone says is such a lock in MS. XP which has been out since 2001 still has some support left in it. The iPod I bought 3 years after that in 2004 0 support. Same thing with many OSX versions out there. Apple has about a 3 year support timeframe. Dont expect anymore out of them. MS has bent over backwards to make things from 1985 still work on their OS. MS has show time and time again that they are 'out of it'. But they have decent support you have to give them props for that. That they recently cut off the old XBox actually somewhat shocked me considering their track history.

  35. Folks? Could we wait for a reply from Apple? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's a possible other side: Someone learned their login credentials, or at least the name, and tried too many times to log on as them. Poof, account locked for security reasons.

    I'm usually not the first to come to Apple's defense (personally, I try hard to avoid their products exactly for the same reason I avoid Sony, I'm not a big fan of vendor lock-in), but I think we should first of all wait 'til it's verified that this is due to their jailbreaking.

    Then there's still enough time to give them the verbal smackdown they (then) deserve.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Folks? Could we wait for a reply from Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bad day, bad mood?

    2. Re:Folks? Could we wait for a reply from Apple? by yabos · · Score: 1

      Especially since these "hackers" admit their email addresses match their screen names so it'd be pretty trivial for someone to screw with them.

    3. Re:Folks? Could we wait for a reply from Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a fucking shill. How much does Jobs pay you?

    4. Re:Folks? Could we wait for a reply from Apple? by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      I think you're right, especially since Apple has this KB support article on the topic: http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2446

    5. Re:Folks? Could we wait for a reply from Apple? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So anyone who stops for a moment to think before resorting to knee jerking is a shill?

      I start to understand mainstream media now. Constant knee jerking increases your credibility and objectivity in the minds of people, it seems...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  36. The stats from October by Kagato · · Score: 4, Informative

    Back in Oct 09 there were 4 million jailbroken iphones, of those at 38% have at least one pirated application. The numbers are real and growing. In order for the app store to be a viable business Apple has to protect the IP of the app holders. It's really sad, because there are great free uses of jail broken phones. It's too bad the pirate community ruined things for the free software community.

    http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/new_iphone_app_piracy_statistics_reveal_try_before_you_buy_myth.php

    1. Re:The stats from October by nolife · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've tried to follow along in this thread but I have missed something or the conversation gradually changed as it went on.

      Are you implying that Apple is protecting the IP rights of software developers by blocking access to the only store to buy the applications that those software developers make? If so, can you explain that logic?

      If I was selling applications there and Apple really was blocking jailbroken phones as this article speculates, using just your numbers, that is 4 million less people that have NO chance of ever paying for my software even if they wanted to.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    2. Re:The stats from October by Kagato · · Score: 1

      Well, let's break this into a couple concepts. Starting from the end, the conversion rate of pirate to legitimate software is 0.043%. If the number of people pirating software keeps growing I'm not sure how much of a loss they are to App sellers.

      I would say Apple protecting IP is entirely about self interested of the iTunes store. I don't think the blocking about thwarting hard core pirates. I think it's about the creation of a barrier to discourage casual users from jail breaking the phone.

      Is it a perfect solution? Far from it. But it's the expected corporate solution to a problem like piracy.

      I'm quite sure that if pirating wasn't so prolific with jail breaking it wouldn't have been worth Apple's time to take counter measures.

    3. Re:The stats from October by beakerMeep · · Score: 1

      In order for the app store to be a viable business Apple has to protect the IP of the app holders.

      Oh? Google doesn't ban people installing outside apps in Android. Steam doesn't ban people pirating PhotoShop. New Egg doesn't ban customers with pirated versions of Windows. Please tell me what business school is teaching this concept that a viable retail software business must also police its customers, so that we may more easily recognize you people. ;)

      --
      meep
    4. Re:The stats from October by StuartHankins · · Score: 2, Insightful

      0.043% > 0%, assuming that the first number is even close to accurate. And no I don't condone piracy but this is just silly. There are very large numbers of users which means an Apple decision to prevent jailbroken devices from purchasing legitimate apps affects a large segment of the iPod Touch / iPhone community. This move will encourage piracy, not discourage it, because once "banned" the user has little choice but to pirate the apps they want.

    5. Re:The stats from October by Kagato · · Score: 1

      I'm talking Apples, you're talking Oranges. NewEgg? Seriously? Why would they care? Maybe you could make a case for Google but they don't have nearly as many customers in the Android Marketplace as Apple has in iTunes store. Fact is Apple makes a lot of money from the iTunes store. They have a vested interest in making sure people buy stuff not steal it.

    6. Re:The stats from October by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in Oct 09 there were 4 million jailbroken iphones, of those at 38% have at least one pirated application. The numbers are real and growing. In order for the app store to be a viable business Apple has to protect the IP of the app holders. It's really sad, because there are great free uses of jail broken phones. It's too bad the pirate community ruined things for the free software community.

      http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/new_iphone_app_piracy_statistics_reveal_try_before_you_buy_myth.php

      So I suppose you support DRM too. Sheesh

    7. Re:The stats from October by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh? Google doesn't ban people installing outside apps in Android. Steam doesn't ban people pirating PhotoShop. New Egg doesn't ban customers with pirated versions of Windows.

      Yes, and Apple doesn't ban people who jailbreak their iPhones from the App Store, at least not so far. RTFA: they banned two hackers involved in developing the jailbreaking exploits, not regular users with jailbroken iPhones.

    8. Re:The stats from October by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      In order for the app store to be a viable business Apple has to protect the IP of the app holders.

      ...Please tell me what business school is teaching this concept that a viable retail software business must also police its customers...

      While you're making a bit of strawman argument, there is a very valid business case to Apple's protecting of App developer's profits. If Apple can reduce piracy on iPhone Apps, more app developers are motivated to create more applications. As more applications are made, the platform is better for users than other platforms with fewer apps. Thus, more people buy iPhones, making Apple more money. Currently a lot of people buy iPhones because they like the large selection of games and other apps they can buy for it, compared to other phones.

      So assuming Apple did ban people from the store for running jailbroken phones as an anti-piracy measure, it could theoretically net them more longterm profit.

    9. Re:The stats from October by IKnwThePiecesFt · · Score: 1

      I think the point that the parent is making is that banning jailbroken users is not an attempt to make them "go legit" but rather to discourage current legitimate users from jailbreaking their phones.

    10. Re:The stats from October by DrStoooopid · · Score: 1

      Apple was trying to put a stop to jailbreaking with or without the pirate community. It's just now the pirate community is giving them legitimacy.

      --
      There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
  37. Or earlier by nightsweat · · Score: 1

    Lotus 1-2-3 has an unassailable market position! Now please insert the master license disk from your copy of 1-2-3 and Press Any Key to Continue...

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
  38. Re:That's what you get by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 1

    Yeah, poor guys aren't able to buy any legitimate software...now they'll be forced to download them for free on sites like thepiratebay.

  39. Re:Not surprised... by ViViDboarder · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Hey! What a coincidence! Same with every jailbroken iPhone user!

    They can do multitasking and are not banned from anything (maybe even except Apple because this is only two cases).

    First... All Apple products don't exist in an "Apple bubble". Only the iPhone and iPod Touch, UNJAILBROKEN do. Even this is a moot point for you to make since the choices are vastly greater in the "Apple Bubble" than on any other phone. Since when has more choices been bad? The only reason I have an iPhone is because I have more apps to dl than any other phone, at the moment. When this changes I'll change phones.

    I think you're just as bad as any Apple Devotee's with your Anti-Apple attitude. Really, just because it's made by Apple is a stupid reason to reject the technology. How about making an open decision about the product as it stands in the market? How about a powerful phone with full touch screen and more apps than any other device? Android is catching up and as soon as my contract is up I expect Android to have a better dev platform. At that point I'll probably switch. How about thinking about things before you blindly bash Apple? K?

  40. No, apple ruined it for 62% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    No, apple ruined it for 62%.

    1. Re:No, apple ruined it for 62% by Swift2001 · · Score: 1

      Didn't ruin it for me. Or for the great majority of people.

      By the way, you seem to think that "38% of jailbroken phones have pirated apps" means "38% of iPhones are jailbroken." Actually, if it's more than 2%, I'd be surprised. Of that 2%, 38% were found to have pirated software. Which means 62% of the hacked phones have no pirated apps on them.

    2. Re:No, apple ruined it for 62% by drkim · · Score: 1

      BTW: The reference said "38% have at least one pirated application installed"
      That's a singular, not always plural, pirated app.

  41. Re:Not surprised... by NiceGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe it was the "cattle" comment. Sounds like a flame to me.

  42. You mean apple ruined it for 62% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    You mean apple ruined it for 62%.

  43. Re:That's what you get by ground.zero.612 · · Score: 1

    So... when did it become legal for businesses to keep a blacklist in the USA? Can I open a store and ban all Apple fanbois from making purchases from me?

    --
    "Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
  44. Re:Serves right. that much fanboism eventually had by dontmakemethink · · Score: 1

    Who says it's Apple cutting the strings? Apple has plenty of licensing agreements that surely require Apple to intervene when interests are compromised. They crippled iPods for the sake of record labels for the iTunes store, i.e. disabled iPod-to-iPod transfers and recording capabilities. That's the only reason two iPods can't be linked and synchronized over Firewire (yes they could do that without a computer as host), otherwise they could only sell one copy of a song to each high school at best. I imagine Verizon doesn't want iPhones using VOIP over 3G either.

    I think it's a bad move. 95% of people willing and able to jailbreak an iPhone are also willing and able to pirate apps. All this does is assure that they do. I bet more than half the jailbreakers buy apps legitimately, even those using VOIP over 3G. It's like they're treating a rash by amputating the leg.

    --

    War as we knew it was obsolete
    Nothing could beat complete denial
    - Emily Haines
  45. Re:That's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since any business can reserve the right to service anyone?

  46. Re:That's what you get by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 1

    When did it become illegal?

  47. Re:Mod me down by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

    he iPhone DOMINATES the worldwide smartphone mark

    as determined by requests made by devices for ads on AdMob’s extensive mobile advertising network.,

    In other words this has nothing to do with market share , or even usage - only usage of apps that interact with AdMob's network. (Presumably this is more than just the web browser - which would limit the significance of this even further - but I don't have time to look it up.)

  48. Good for Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let the hackers build their own business and see how they react when someone tries to crash their party. On another note, Apple uses these guys to improve the security on their products. Free security testing.

  49. Re:Not surprised... by node+3 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is why I do not buy anything from Apple.

    Nothing wrong with not buying Apple. Your logic is a bit flawed, but it's your money to spend, so it's your logic, for better or for worse.

    I will not be forced into a little bubble

    There are only two bubbles Apple "forces" you into:

    1. Mac OS X only runs (without hacking) on Apple hardware.
    2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.

    Everything else is very open.

    like all of you cattle out there.

    Does name-calling factor into your logic?

    I have missed nothing as the result.

    I'll suggest that your phone has fewer apps available than the iPhone (ironic that the more free device offers fewer choices). Also, you're missing out on a more refined user experience.

    Not that you may care about such things, being a non-bovine entity yourself, and far superior to anyone who ever buys Apple products.

    and I am not banned from anything (except Apple).

    Interestingly, neither am I, *including* Apple.

  50. Another reason not to buy Apple by Snaller · · Score: 1

    Apple where data goes to die

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  51. Re:That's what you get by Chaos+Incarnate · · Score: 2, Funny

    No later than when they passed the ADA.

    --
    Benford's Corollary to Clarke's Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
  52. HEY! I've seen that message! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've had the exact same message!

    OMG! Apple is punishing me for NOT jailbreaking my iPhone, and NOT doing anything illegal with my machine and MobileMe account!

    Keep digging that hole for yourself, Apple.

    Sheesh. So somebody figured they'd try and log into some fairly prominent hackers' MobileMe account, and three incorrect passwords disabled the ID.

    And now, it's all over the net, because these morons are known by their real names and dumb enough to sense massive paranoia (OMG it's almost like they feel they're doing something wrong innit?)

    FWIW: Give me your MobileMe username - i.e. your email addy, or even just a reasonable guess, and I can make you see that very same message in a few seconds. Wanna bet?

  53. Re:That's what you get by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Funny

    So being an Apple fanboi is a disability? :-)

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  54. Re:That's what you get by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 4, Funny

    With a reply like that you don't need to point out that you aren't a lawyer, really.

  55. I confess. by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 1

    It was me. (Or it would have been, had I thought of this.)

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  56. Re:I don't believe it (Obligitory citiation) by networkconsultant · · Score: 1
  57. You don't "jailbreak" apps! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You jailbreak the phone, not the apps. A jailbroken iPhone or iPod touch is one that has been freed from Apple's grasp so that apps outside of the App store may be installed on it, themes may be used, etc.

    The thing Apple needs to realize is that just wanting to have full control over your iPhone OS is nowhere near the same thing as using pirated apps on it.

    For people to get banned from the App store just because they want control over their phone is preposterous ! If anything, that's going to ENCOURAGE people to download pirated apps from the Internet (cutting them off from the App store gives them no way to make legitimate purchases!) DUHH Apple, let friggen go already!! Stop letting the power go to your head!!

  58. Re:That's what you get by j-turkey · · Score: 1

    When did it become illegal?

    Well, IANAL, but I would guess the very moment I was granted the right to pursue happiness. You see, putting my name on a list to prevent me from purchasing something is an obstruction to my pursuit of happiness, and would thus be unconstitutional, and thus illegal.

    Where in the Constitution were you guaranteed the right to pursue happiness? The only US document that I know of with those words are in the Declaration of Independence, which does not grant any rights.

    --

    -Turkey

  59. Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have gotten the message before "this Apple ID has been disabled for security reasons.".
      Its not permanent and apple isnt targeting hackers.

    I think there ego's are a little to big, they get a message and immediatly think apple is after them.

    LOL maybe next time they will google search it first and see that other people have gotten it before as well.

  60. First They Banned the Jailbreakers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First they banned the jailbreakers, and I did not speak out—because I was not a jailbreaker;
    Then they banned the crackers, and I did not speak out—because I was not a cracker;
    Then they banned the script kiddies, and I did not speak out—because I was not a script kiddie;
    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to write iPhone apps.

    Captcha: repress

  61. Re:That's what you get by Guido+del+Confuso · · Score: 1

    1) You weren't granted the "right to pursue happiness".
    2) That "right" isn't mentioned in the United States Constitution.

    The Declaration of Independence states that "the pursuit of happiness" is one of the inalienable Rights endowed to men by their Creator. The Declaration of Independence, however, carries very little legal weight in itself. Anyway, the government doesn't really give a damn about how happy you are. You may be born with the right to pursue happiness, but ain't nothin' says you're entitled to actually find it.

    And even if there were a Constitutional right to "pursue happiness", your legal reasoning is faulty. It is well established that businesses have the right to refuse service to anybody for any reason, except on the basis of discrimination against a protected class of people. And phone hackers most certainly do not fall into any such class.

  62. Re:Serves right. that much fanboism eventually had by nine-times · · Score: 1

    Right, all Apple users are fanbois. I hate them SO MUCH! And people who use Microsoft products too! Windows fanbois are almost as bad as FOSS fanbois. When will all you fanbois realize that you should be using real computers, like my Commodore 64?!

  63. Those who would give up essential liberty... by kalpaha · · Score: 0, Troll

    Well, what do you expect, from a company that allows the speeches of a known fascist and disallows any mention of their competition?

  64. Believe it by starcraftsicko · · Score: 1

    In today's market, most people just want to be like everyone else. Apple has a monopoly power over their market segment and they are happy with that. Their policies may push away 90% of the developers, hackers, and enthusiasts. Unfortunately, this stopped being an important market segment years ago.

    1. Re:Believe it by MBGMorden · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think you overestimate Apple's market position. Sure, in portable music players, iPod is king. HOWEVER, in mobile phones? iPhone is popular but it has a LOT of stiff competition. Android is rising fast - there are still tons of people who still prefer BlackBerries. Even more just take whatever is one sale. Apple isn't the behemoth in this market that some people believe them to be. They are exactly what they were back in the 1980's computer market: a solid competitor with good market share. Close-mindedness and a cocky attitude took that position and flushed it back then. They are starting to show the same signs again. This is NOT the Apple that rose from the ashes back in 2000. This is a different beast that has emerged and if they misstep, people will dump them once again.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    2. Re:Believe it by Weezul · · Score: 1

      Blackberry rules the business world because you're most likely to send a meaningful email on a large tactile keyboard. A small touch screen keyboard will likely get you writing shorter emails and cost you sales or get you fired.

      Apple does know their market. They've got the teenager market and gamer market who'll buy all the games on their App Store. Apple doesn't care about others whose needs might include tough issues like a bulkier phone, sip integration, etc.

      --
      The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
  65. ADA!? by KharmaWidow · · Score: 1

    What the hell does that have to do with this situation? A private business has the right to refuse service to anyone as long as it is not institutionalized racism, sexism, ageism, or to the disabled.

  66. Re:What are the security risks? by KharmaWidow · · Score: 1

    Although, I am curious what a security risks a jail broken phone poses in a download only app/community.

  67. Let's not jump to conclusions now by Killeryugi · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is the exact warning you get when your password is entered several times incorrectly, it is possible somebody got a list of developers apple ID's and was trying to brute force their way in. A quick trip to iforgot.apple.com would solve this pretty quickly.

  68. This isn't the whole story... by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

    Gee, two HIGH profile developers are locked out of their accounts - with the SAME error message Apple send when they suspect someone has been trying to break into an account. Golly, you don't think maybe someone has been trying to brute their account passwords do you? Wake me when it's more than two and some unknown guy who has no reason to be targeted gets the error and Apple tells him to blow off when he calls them. So far all I've read on this seems to indicate that someone tried to get into their account - have they even asked Apple to reactivate their accounts?

    --
    Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
  69. Not to mention a few others by phorm · · Score: 1

    Like even USING the damn phone on the network of my choice. Mine was network-locked before being hacked, so whenever I upgrade the firmware I need to rehack it to unlock the baseband.
    Other things that probably *REALLY* piss off apple are awesome apps like Cycorder, I think that initially you had to get a 3Gs to record video (although I believe there's app-store stuff for that now), cycorder worked from day 1.

    Ah well, my Milestone is in the mail. Screw you Apple you're not getting my business anymore.

  70. Shocked! by LaminatorX · · Score: 1

    So Apple decided that the people who discover and publicize ways to exploit cracks in the wall around Apple's garden that they were no longer welcome in said walled garden?

    I don't know that it'll accomplish anything, but I can't say as I blame them.

  71. Thanks Apple by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    I'm currently looking to upgrade my phone.
    Thanks for helping me to shorten my list by giving me a solid reason to not consider iPhone.

    1. Re:Thanks Apple by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Actually, this is not correct: http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2446

  72. Re:Serves right. that much fanboism eventually had by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

    But I have consumer choice. I can buy a non-Apple device if I ever find Apple's system too restrictive. Please don't assume what my priorities are when it comes to computer systems.

  73. Not always piracy by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

    I jailbroke mine for a couple of reasons.

    1- lifting the stupid Rogers 10MB limit on 3G. I have a 6GB/mo plan, I want to use it as I want. (Skype works now on 3G)
    2- Better tethering from PDAnet than from Apple. faster too
    3- Background apps
    4- I can customise and remove unneeded icons from the springboard
    5- Allows me to install *FREE* apps that are not available in Canada's store but elsewhere (kinda stupid restriction)
    6- Homebrew software.
    7- better control over the device
    8- can now use it as a USB key
    9- many others...

    Guess what device will be jailbroke next by those guys? iPad.

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  74. I don't even care if this one is true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It all helps my Android based business and I hate Apple.

  75. Signing up for ADC vs. signing up for SDK by tepples · · Score: 1

    I signed up for the iPhone Developer Program as an Individual

    There are three steps to signing up for the iPhone Developer Program:

    1. Sign up for an Apple ID.
    2. Add ADC to your Apple ID.
    3. Add the iPhone Developer Program to your ADC account.

    You say you selected individual on step 3. I imagine that years ago, a company name may not have been required for step 2, and that you may have completed step 2 then. But when I tried step 2 around September of last year when I bought a Mac mini, a blank Company field was not acceptable.

  76. derp by Akira+Kogami · · Score: 1

    I'm seeing the logic here as this: You didn't pay for our software, so we're not going to let you pay for our software. How exactly does that make sense?

  77. Re:Serves right. that much fanboism eventually had by Legion303 · · Score: 1

    Pfft, you kids and your shiny bleeding-edge gadgets. My PDP-11 works fine and I don't have to worry about losing all my data when I leave the program cassette on my dashboard like you do.

  78. Re:Mod me down by Kensai7 · · Score: 1

    The N900 has it own limitations the biggest being having to use AT&T or T-Mobile and large upfront cost.

    Not in Europe. Actually, this side of the Atlantic the 3GS 32GB costs some €700 and the N900 about €600. Unsubsidized by telcos of course. I prefer to pay up front and then choose my own network according to my voice/data needs. When my contract is done they give me a huge bonus (according to my plan) to buy the phone I want.

    --
    "Sum Ergo Cogito"
  79. Re:That's what you get by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

    The right is not mentioned in the constitution. But, the constitution enumerates ways that the government (federal) can impinge on the people's (and state's) rights. It never grants specific rights to people, rather says that all rights are inferred upon people unless otherwise stated here. Of course that has been debated very much, especially with the right to bear arms (I like the Family Guys take on that one). I agree with most of the rest of what you say, except for the "very little legal weight" that the Declaration of Independence has. If by very little you mean absolutely none, then I do agree.

  80. Re:Not surprised... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.
    >
    > Everything else is very open.

    I believe this is the common point of contention, and many would consider it 'not open'.

    As for the shear number of iPhone apps, that falls into the 'who cares' category to me, as I find the vast majority of the apps available (for free and for pay, iPhone and other-phone) to be useless crap. Incidentally this is why I'm not a App-ionare, as I personally can't fathom why someone would want an app for their phone that makes the shotgun 'chink-chink' sound or simulates a Zippo lighter. (nor can I fathom why anyone cares that you're currently twating while drinking a mocca-latte or whatever..).

  81. Re:That's what you get by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 1

    O NOEZ! I is an evil iPhone hacker and can no longer spend money on appz in the appz store! Now I can only get pirate appz for free! O WO IZ MI!

  82. bad idea by luther349 · · Score: 0

    theirs 4 million jailbroken devices out there and they say 38% have pirate apps on them but what does apple consider pirate if its just 1 apps out of 50 that tosses in that number.. do they conserder any home brew stuff pirate like enabling flash video and safari downloads. see thats what you gotta looks at when apple says stuff like that. yes my i touch 2g is jailbroken but mostly to enable flash and direct downloading on my ipod. to the point if apple starts banning jail broken devices there all there doing is losing money. iphone users do it to get away from at@t and use the career they like and can you blame em. and others users do it to unlock features apple refuses to put in. then you got the pirates. so banning the large group if jailbroken devices that still use itunes store = lost money and i bet alot of it. most ipohnes are jail broken every one i ever see anyways. i bet it would even make itunes market share go down.

  83. Well it IS their store by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Sure, you can hack your device as you please and give apple the middle finger, but with Itunes they are providing a service, so they set the entrance rules.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  84. Re:Not surprised... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anything that you see on Sourceforge can be freely compiled, modified and run on an Android phone. That kills your little Apple application pool right there.

  85. Re:That's what you get by geekmux · · Score: 1

    So... when did it become legal for businesses to keep a blacklist in the USA? Can I open a store and ban all Apple fanbois from making purchases from me?

    Uh, if you really think about it, this kind of control has gone on for decades in the legal gambling arena. You've probably heard of horror stories regarding card counters and cheats being caught in Las Vegas. This is basically the same thing. Chances are they DID violate either a EULA, TOS, or both when "cracking" away on products, so it's not like Apple doesn't have a leg to stand on here...

  86. So where is the tool? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Some of us accidentally upgraded ours and would like to get our hands on it.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  87. Re:Not surprised... by geekmux · · Score: 1

    This is why I do not buy anything from Apple. I will not be forced into a little bubble like all of you cattle out there. I have missed nothing as the result. By the way, my phone dose multitasking and I am not banned from anything (except Apple).

    Hrm...Much like traveling the world, how do you know what you've missed when you've never been?

    The interesting thing about this "bubble" here? Everything seems to just WORK...You know, kind of in the opposite direction that so many Linux distros ran for YEARS, with scores of people struggling to get a damned driver to work properly without having to read four books on C and PERL scripting.

  88. Re:Not surprised... by Psymin · · Score: 1

    | There are only two bubbles Apple "forces" you into:
    |
    | 1. Mac OS X only runs (without hacking) on Apple hardware.
    | 2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.
    |
    | Everything else is very open.

    Not quite accurate:

    * To write code for the iPhone, you essentially need XCode running on Apple hardware.
    * Code written for the iPhone (ObjC) is a PITA to port to any other OS other than OSX.
    * I still can't sync music to my iPhone from Linux on the new firmware.
    * I still can't play ogg files on the iPhone

    So this 'Everything else' must not include much that I care about.

  89. Re:That's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If ever a comment warranted the addition of a "-1, Idiot" moderation option, it would be yours.

  90. Very open! Except for the closed parts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Mac OS X only runs (without hacking) on Apple hardware.
    2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.

    Everything else is very open.

    Yes, it's very open except for all the parts that are very closed. That makes perfect sense. But a gilded cage is still a cage. I just wouldn't be happy in one. I don't like having someone who decides what I can and can't do with my phone, telling me that my dictionary app can't have naughty words in it (what if a kid saw them!?), or that I can't make applications that compete with Apple's (at least on the iPhone), or anything else they decide to throw into the endless hell of waiting for approval (like they did with that Google application that they're putting under endless "review" so that they don't have to admit to banning it).

  91. False by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    This was proven wrong in the Firehose. You'd think given the flood of comments that maybe /. would issue an update/correction. Don't let that jerking knee hit you in the chin.
    Apple's KB article on the topic: http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2446

  92. Bogus article by PishiGorbeh · · Score: 0
  93. customization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the only reason my phone is jailbroken is for cosmetics. the iphone doesn't have a lot of customization built into it as far as visual menus.
    that's it.
    every app i have, i paid for.
    if you wanna ban me for modifying my own hardware for my own purposes, then go for it.

  94. Re:That's what you get by bmk67 · · Score: 1

    Well, IANAL, but I would guess the very moment I was granted the right to pursue happiness. You see, putting my name on a list to prevent me from purchasing something is an obstruction to my pursuit of happiness, and would thus be unconstitutional, and thus illegal.

    A few points -

    - The Constitution doesn't grant you the right to pursue happiness. In fact, it grants no rights at all, it recognizes existing rights. You're thinking of the Declaration of Independence, which has zero legal weight.

    - You have the right to pursue happiness, not to achieve it. You're free to pursue it all you want, but no one else is required to help you achieve it or not hinder same.

    P.S. It's obvious that YANAL.

  95. Re:That's what you get by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeh, if you put an apple sticker on the dash you can park in disabled spaces!

  96. Re:Mod me down by Lars+T. · · Score: 0

    Gee, I wonder why you quoted an article almost a year old...

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  97. Re:Not surprised... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    There are only two bubbles Apple "forces" you into:

    1. Mac OS X only runs (without hacking) on Apple hardware. 2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.

    Everything else is very open.

    I think you forgot:

    3. iPod music players that only work with iTunes (Dont even think you can hack these to be straight drag/drop mp3 players either)
    4. Apple TV (without hacking your own codecs in so it can play anything)
    5. The new iPad probably has its own little bubble as well

    hmm.. I think that about covers everything they sell, or did I miss something

    Apple like their bubbles, even if you don't realise they are there..

  98. Re:Not surprised... by mjwx · · Score: 1

    There are only two bubbles Apple "forces" you into: 1. Mac OS X only runs (without hacking) on Apple hardware. 2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.

    Ummm...

    You forgot how the Iphone OS locks you into Apple's distribution channel. That is pretty much it, no apple controls the supply of the Hardware, Software and Application stack from end to end so it is pretty much the dictionary definition of a vertical monopoly, where one company controls the entire product until the end of its life. In short, Apple is trying to and in most cases suceeding in controlling what you do

    If you think the walled garden is not coming to regular OS X then think again. Apple is changing from X86 to ARM with proprietary Apple extensions. Apple have learned from the Hackintoshes that using stock standard hardware will just make it easy for hackers to get around their walls. Apple also learned from the iphone that many consumers will happily take any kind of abuse and lockdown so long as the device is "cool". They will bring this knowledge into their computer line, very soon Macbooks and Imacs will be running the Iphone OS on ARM Processors.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  99. Re:That's what you get by X0563511 · · Score: 1

    "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  100. Re:Mod me down by icebraining · · Score: 1

    You're right, but it wasn't on purpose. Still, the iPhone doesn't have the largest market share, let alone "dominating" the market: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20100202/tc_nf/71423

  101. Re:What are the security risks? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

    Although, I am curious what a security risks a jail broken phone poses in a download only app/community.

    http://www.tipb.com/2009/07/03/jailbroken-iphones-security-risk/ Ask Jonathan Miller - but what does he know, pft.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  102. Re:Not surprised... by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

    * Code written for the iPhone (ObjC) is a PITA to port to any other OS other than OSX.

    Only for an amateur developer.

    A real developer writes the majority of their app in C++, and writes a wrapper for every system the app is ported to.

    For Windows, the wrapper would be in C++, and control the app launch, window set-up, graphics calls, etc.
    For Linux, the wrapper would be in C++, and control the app launch, window set-up, graphics calls, etc.
    For iPhone the wrapper is in Obj-C, and controls the app launch, window set-up, graphics calls, etc.

    No serious developer should post that the wrapper is too hard for them. It's a non-issue.

    How do you imagine that companies like PopCap get all their software out for so many platforms? Trivial example, but valid nonetheless.

  103. Re:Not surprised... by node+3 · · Score: 1

    | There are only two bubbles Apple "forces" you into:
    |
    | 1. Mac OS X only runs (without hacking) on Apple hardware.
    | 2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.
    |
    | Everything else is very open.

    Not quite accurate:

    * To write code for the iPhone, you essentially need XCode running on Apple hardware.

    Sort of. Objective C is the iPhone's native language. However, this falls within the App Store software item I mentioned.

    * Code written for the iPhone (ObjC) is a PITA to port to any other OS other than OSX.

    Not at all. However, code written against the Cocoa and Cocoa Touch frameworks are. But it's a silly argument, as Cocoa Touch is what the iPhone OS uses. And again, this is an App Store requirement.

    * I still can't sync music to my iPhone from Linux on the new firmware.

    That OS lacks drivers for the iPhone. On the topic of being forced into a bubble, I don't think it's all that valid. People don't complain about other companies forcing people into bubbles simply because their product doesn't work on one OS or another.

    * I still can't play ogg files on the iPhone

    Incorrect. There are apps to do just that.

    So this 'Everything else' must not include much that I care about.

    I don't know what you're getting at here. I was talking about being forced into bubbles. You're just listing your dislikes and the fact that it doesn't support your preferred OS. I don't complain that Linux forces me into a bubble because it won't run my favorite software, or support my preferred hardware. In fact, if I did, I'd get flamed quite thoroughly, I'm sure.

  104. Re:Not surprised... by node+3 · · Score: 1

    There are only two bubbles Apple "forces" you into:

    1. Mac OS X only runs (without hacking) on Apple hardware.
    2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.

    Ummm...

    You forgot how the Iphone OS locks you into Apple's distribution channel. That is pretty much it, no apple controls the supply of the Hardware, Software and Application stack from end to end so it is pretty much the dictionary definition of a vertical monopoly, where one company controls the entire product until the end of its life. In short, Apple is trying to and in most cases suceeding in controlling what you do

    Ummm, I highlighted the part you quoted where I said just that (well, except for the part of Apple "controlling what I do").

    If you think the walled garden is not coming to regular OS X then think again. Apple is changing from X86 to ARM with proprietary Apple extensions. Apple have learned from the Hackintoshes that using stock standard hardware will just make it easy for hackers to get around their walls. Apple also learned from the iphone that many consumers will happily take any kind of abuse and lockdown so long as the device is "cool". They will bring this knowledge into their computer line, very soon Macbooks and Imacs will be running the Iphone OS on ARM Processors.

    You are insane.

  105. Re:I can't help mysef [sic] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    myself, not mysef

  106. Re:That's what you get by NateTech · · Score: 1

    You can pursue happiness. You're not guaranteed to get it.

    Pursue all you like.

    --
    +++OK ATH
  107. Re:What are the security risks? by KharmaWidow · · Score: 1

    LOL - OK so Apple is blocking people for "security risk" when the risk is to the user, not Apple? That's absurd. The entire internet should be blocked if we embrace that logic.

  108. Re:Not surprised... by he-sk · · Score: 1

    If you think the walled garden is not coming to regular OS X then think again. [...] Apple also learned from the iphone that many consumers will happily take any kind of abuse and lockdown so long as the device is "cool". They will bring this knowledge into their computer line, very soon Macbooks and Imacs will be running the Iphone OS on ARM Processors.

    Never gonna happen, for the simple reason that they need the independent Macintosh developers to provide them with the 140000+ apps to fill their app store. You need XCode to write iPhone apps and for XCode you need a full computer.

    Where I live, around 5 years ago more and more Apple laptops appeared in computer science university classes, b/c apple managed to marry a complete Unix stack to a nice and functioning GUI. It's a joy to develop on OS X. Of course, as soon as Apple closes up their OS X line, these people will be the first to jump ship. And after a while the masses will follow.

    Apple would shoot themselves in their own foot should they ever close up OS X.

    --
    Free Manning, jail Obama.
  109. To summarize.. by lmnfrs · · Score: 1

    There are only two bubbles Apple "forces" you into:

    1. Mac OS X only runs (without hacking) on Apple hardware. 2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.

    Everything else is very open.

    This and all the counter arguments should be summarized by Apple's old description of its customers; they "think different". If you understand English or somehow fit into the normalcy of current society, you do not think different and are outside of Apple's bubble. And are a treated as a second-class citizen.

  110. I believe it after all Ive been through with Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously. This is so screwed up, I dont know where to begin.
    First, AppStore is filled to the brim with small apps that almost doesnt do anything, and too often doesnt even do what is advertised properly.
    Many dont even have a trial, and those small chunks of money starts to add up when you find out none of the apps have any real sense of quality.

    I still dont have MMS or Smileys on my 1st gen iPhone (no SwirlyMMS doesnt cut it, far from it). 1st gen is somehow cut off from using MMS by some hacks by Apple that clears out the MMS settings when you put in your provider`s configuration there.. Ive tried everything (damn that night was long), and still no dice.

    It seems nobody, not Apple, not AppStore devs, not freeware devs, are able to make something I find useful, for the 1st gen iPhone.
    Yesterday, I searched for 2 goddamn hours for an app that could meter network traffic, both wifi and edge - nothing. Just a massive bunch of other do-nothing apps that could measure golf ball sizes, or whatnot.
    Everyone and their dog has ported *something* to iPhone, just not much useful stuff other than another alarm clock, a few office tools you can be without and a bunch of tiny apps that almost doesnt do anything. WTF do I want VNC on the iPhone for? The screen is horrible for VNC. I mean it could be useful once in a year, but its not very useful for everyday work (unless you want to fake working..)

    NEVER EVER will I buy from Apple again. If I buy a phone, I expect the kinks to be worked out in a sane upgrade path, but this is just ridiculous. I also own a Macbook Pro. Luckily, it can play XP 80%, which is good enough for my use. Just too bad Bootcamp doesnt utilize the hardware 100%.. Again, shortcomings from a company claiming to bring design and perfection, but which is just a FAD and a much worse provider than even Microsoft.. What kind of tools do these chimps think we customers are??

  111. Wholeheartedly by garote · · Score: 1

    Every time I see that word in a tech context, I immediately think of those full-page magazine ads for the Transwarp Apple II accelerator cards, with the little halftone picture of Steve Wozniak grinning in the corner, and the quote beneath the picture, reading: "I endorse Applied Engineering products wholeheartedly!"
    Even after 25 years that is wedged in my brain. :/

  112. Unfair but I belive it by DaitanGio · · Score: 1

    I think the apple position is unfair but in Apple rights..
    If you jailbreak the iPhone and try to connect to iTuneStore, you cna harm the DRM iPhone Apps.
    Apple has the right to ban some iPhone serials if this can be a security risk.

    Doing so, the iPhone becomes the less free-to-use device I have never see

    --
    -- Giovanni Daitan Giorgi http://gioorgi.com http://www.siforge.org
  113. Re:What are the security risks? by Lars+T. · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Ermm what? You asked what risk a jail broken IPhone poses to yourself. Live with it.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  114. Re:What are the security risks? by KharmaWidow · · Score: 2, Informative

    I am not sure you are replying to the correct /. post

  115. Re:Not surprised... by mjwx · · Score: 1

    2. iPhones OS only runs (without hacking) App Store software.

    Ummm, I highlighted the part you quoted where I said just that (well, except for the part of Apple "controlling what I do").

    NOTE: Bolded parts were not part of my original post. So basically you're saying I'm right. Apple does control what you do unless you break the device via hacking, which Apple expressly forbids in the EULA.

    You are insane.

    Because Apple has never changed processor architecture arbitrarily in the past. Nor has Apple ever ignored good business sense or the feedback of it's own customers.

    Whatever you need to tell yourself, time will tell and Apple's history says this is not just plausible but likely.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  116. Re:Not surprised... by mjwx · · Score: 1

    Never gonna happen, for the simple reason that they need the independent Macintosh developers to provide them with the 140000+ apps to fill their app store. You need XCode to write iPhone apps and for XCode you need a full computer.

    Two things wrong with that statement.

    1. Apple needs independent developers.

    Apple has shown wanton disregard for independent developers, the sheer number of rejections from the app store over trivial reasons (mentions Android, has "i" in the name, duplication of functionality) should be enough to prove that. Once large developers like EA start signing contracts Apple will happily ignore the independent developers completely in favour of iFishville or whatever. The app store is all about lock in, it's easier to control a few large devs then it is to control many small devs.

    2. You need XCode to write iPhone apps and for XCode you need a full computer.

    This is as simple as porting the SDK to ARM. Nothing more to it. I'm not doubting that the ARM Imac's will not be full computers, (an Android smart phone is a full computer, just a very small one) but they will be ARM based with proprietary hardware and a locked down OS. Putting the SDK on here would only permit you to develop applications, with mandatory signing or activation enforced by the SDK Apple can easily restrict your applications to your computer only.

    Setting up a Linux dev environment on an ARM processor is already possible, GCC and many other tools are already there. It's not a stretch of the imagination that Apple can do the same, they've already got a whole OS (albeit a locked down OS) running on ARM.

    Apple would shoot themselves in their own foot should they ever close up OS X.

    Re-examine your history (the real one, not the one Apple approves of), Apple's discharged the anti-podiatry artillery this badly at least twice in it's past. The last time it took a 150 Million USD cash injection from Microsoft just to keep them alive.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  117. Re:Not surprised... by he-sk · · Score: 1

    I have to disagree. The app store lock-in is about "protecting" the consumer not screwing the developers. In fact, for a lot of independent developers it offers a sweat deal. Unfortunately, with every bureaucracy comes abuse. My bet is that the (current) app store concept will fail, just as iTunes DRM failed.

    IHMO Steve Jobs supports the app store is in large part based on a fear that a completely open system would be a huge target for malware. Now a good OS would mitigate against this, but this is a new market for Apple and so he's playing it safe. Understandable, because first impressions matter, especially if you're the "cool kid."

    I could be completely wrong of course. But Jobs built the Next station for pete's sake, a developers dream station at the time.

    --
    Free Manning, jail Obama.
  118. Re:Not surprised... by Psymin · · Score: 1

    I'll rephrase a bit. The bubble that Apple forces you into if you are a developer, is to write your code in XCode.

    I'd be surprised if any approved apps in the AppStore were not written using XCode. XCode only runs on OSX. OSX only runs on Apple hardware.

    The two bubbles you mention are valid, but there are more than two bubbles.

    To get an app into the AppStore you must be developing using Apple hardware running OSX.

    Regarding the 'Everything else is very open.' statement. If that were true, it would be easy to sync my mp3s over to my iPhone under linux. It would be easy to sync my oggs over the iTunes in the iPhone using linux. It would be easy to change cellular providers. It would be easy to play my movies purchased through iTunes under linux .. It would be easy to buy media through the iTunes store under linux .. It would be easy to save a document as an .odt in at least one Apple product .. iTunes would support OGG media without modification ..

    In summary: Apple at every turn chooses the path that locks their customers into using their products.

    Apple does make slick products, but they are not 'open'. I'd love to hear ways in which they are open though.

  119. Valid :) by Psymin · · Score: 1

    Valid :)

  120. Re:I can't help mysef [sic] by sammy+baby · · Score: 1

    myself, not mysef

    Thanks, but I don't need the hep...