iPad Jailbroken

A day after the release of Apple's tablet computer, a hacker claims to have gained root access to the iPad. "A well-known hacker of the iPhone, who previously defeated Apple's restrictions on developers, has claimed in a video to have hacked the iPad. Just a day after release, the hacker, who goes by 'MuscleNerd' online, said that he has gained root access to the iPad..."

Comments

Only Apple

[sopssa]

If you'd get a normal tablet or computer, you wouldn't need to jailbreak it. Apple is moving us towards closed computer environments. If Microsoft did this everyone would be angry about it, but now that it's Apple its all fine and classy.

Re:Only Apple

[rolfwind]

Try to get outside apps running on a kindle.

Re:Only Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Try to get outside apps running on a kindle.

Kindle Hacking: it's a lovely little linux box

What you see there is a Kindle 2 with the Ubuntu 9.04 port to ARM running in a chrooted environment. On the screen you see xdaliclock in front of an xterm with the remains of a "top" command and a few mildly embarrassing typos.

To open up the Kindle, I used the USB networking debug mode Amazon left hanging around when they first shipped the Kindle 2, a statically linked telnetd and a cross-compiler to bootstrap myself. From there, I built a daemon that can convert DRM-free PDFs and ePubs into something Amazon's reader on the Kindle can deal with.

After that, I started to get curious about what else might be possible. It only took a few evenings to get a moderately usable Ubuntu environment running.

Mostly, the Kindle is a lovely little Linux box. Getting X working took a bit of hacking, but everything else "just works" with very little configuration.

Re:Only Apple

[BradleyUffner]

ok
http://www.griffin.net/2010/01/hacking-the-amazon-kindle-dx-part-2-qt-and-sudoku.html

Re:Only Apple

[Concerned Onlooker]

"If Microsoft did this everyone would be angry about it, but now that it's Apple its all fine and classy."

That just goes to show you that without some numbers to back it up life is so ambiguous. In MY impression there is a preponderance of Apple-hating commenters here on Slashdot. Presumable those same Apple haters are not also running Windows, which is just as closed as anything Apple puts out, but consistency of thougt--even among so-called geeks--is not a major human trait.

Re:Only Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Where can I get a normal tablet computer for the price of an ipad?

Re:Only Apple

[0xdeadbeef]

> If the iPad doesn't work for you - don't buy it.

And help other people understand why they should't buy one either. Oh, wait, that's what he's doing, and you want him to stop.

Re:Only Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

"Microsoft officials Monday confirmed at the company's MIX 10 developers event in Las Vegas that native applications will not be allowed on Windows Phone 7 devices. Only applications running in the Silverlight runtime environment or games in the XNA Game Studio runtime will be allowed."

http://www.cio.de/news/cio_worldnews/2227933/ :o ?

Re:Only Apple

[v1]

I find it hilarious to see all the kindle owners ragging on the ipad for being overpriced and how they can get the same thing that's so much better for less in a Kindle. Then say one word about the features of the ipad and they run screaming in the other direction saying you can't compare the two since the kindle is "just an ebook reader". So, apparently we can compare them when talking about batter life and price, but we can't compare them when talking about app stores, color displays, games, etc etc etc.

For right now, cost and (extreme) battery life are really the only two things kindle has going for it. Give it a few months for the prices on ipad to come down and it will bury the kindle, or force them to drop the price on it quite a bit to maintain their edge. They're not in exactly the same market. The Kindle is in a subset of the ipad's market. Which usually means "it's cheaper" is the only thing they have going for them.

Re:Only Apple

[NitroWolf]

Because the OS on the Zune is so free and easy to modify.

Apple has a closed environment on the iPad/iPhone/iPod line, the rest of the hardware contains an OS that is just as open (more so in some respects) than Windows. A software platform that it continues to develop and open up. You don't need to jailbreak an OS X box.

There is nothing to suggest Apple are moving "us" towards closed environments. If the iPad doesn't work for you - don't buy it.

Whaaaaaa? Are you in some strange bizzaro world where Apple isn't the embodiment of a closed system?

The rest of the hardware contains an OS that is just as open ? What the hell are you talking about? Tried to boot OSX on a whitebox yet? Apparently not or you'd see how ludicrous your statement is.

There's nothing to suggest that Apple is moving "us" (why is "us" in quotes?) towards a closed environment? You mean other than the fact that every product they have is locked down and closed off? You are deluded if you think Apple wouldn't love to lock OSX users into an App store - the only reason they haven't is because Windows would regain most of the customers lost to OSX if that happened. Apple is way too far behind in the OS arena to try to dictate terms to it's users, whereas they are/were far enough ahead with the iPod/iPhone to dictate whatever the hell they wanted. The whole iPod/iPhone environment is a perfect example of exactly what Apple would do if it had the power to do so - and it's also a perfect example of why Apple should never be given enough marketshare to accomplish anything like it.

Re:Only Apple

[jo_ham]

It doesn't have to be open source for it to be friendly to the OSS community - the developments with Webkit and other projects that Apple has contributed to, as well as things it has created itself and released like libdispatch - are beneficial for everyone.

It doesn't have to be open source for it to be open - it's a posix compliant unix OS with a nice GUI on top (not just "unix like"), that can also support X (if you choose to install it) and numerous other OSS stuff. It's also based on a bit more than just "old BSD code" - it's not like they just nailed the lid shut and called it done - they continue to develop the code at the core (and push their changes back to the community).

It doesn't make sense *at all* for Apple to close up OS X into the same business model as the iPhone OS - they're just totally different markets. The iPhone OS market works because it provides a single, consistent store with a plethora of free or cheap apps (with the odd expensive one which tend not to be the norm). This is pretty much the polar opposite of the way they have positioned OS X, especially with regard to the open source *parts* of the OS that they continue to develop and push.

By your logic, since "it makes perfect sense", I assume that Microsoft is going to adopt the same model it uses for Xbox live and the Xbox 360 software for Windows. I mean, they're all about control right - it only makes sense!

Re:Only Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

As a long-time e-ink user I always laugh when anyone starts telling stories how another "LCD-powered gadget X" is the "ultimate reading apparatus".

For reading there is no display technology comparable to e-ink. Displays will make your eyes hurt, e-ink will not.

Tried reading on everything, from Nokia N810 to iPod Touch and TabletPC. After that decided to try Sony ebook reader (PRS-505).

Kindle DX would make a nice "home" ebook reader, big screen and stuff. Also you can load non-DRMed ebooks whenever you want too, no need to buy all of them - impossible with iPad.

Re:Only Apple

[Darkness404]

The Kindle has E-ink which is going to make for a better reading experience. Sure, its going to have a crappier web browsing experience, but ever try to really -read- anything on a LCD screen for a long period of time? It is terrible. While LCDs are fine for reading short amounts of text (a few pages), reading a book is painful on them.

LCD screens are superior in most aspects except for when reading lots and lots of text in which case the LCD screens are going to make your eyes cry out in pain while E-ink is just about the same as paper. The Kindle has its place, it isn't meant to be an iPad, tablet, laptop, toaster, etc. it is meant to let you read books without much eye strain which it does very well.

Re:Only Apple

[Culture20]

There is nothing to suggest Apple are moving "us" towards closed environments.

Other than the fact that they deployed the iPhone OS on a device that could(should) have used a better, generically useful OS. Other than the fact that Jobs thinks this type of computer will be the future of computing? Other than the fact that with the iTunes store being the sole provider of software for the iPhone OS, Apple gets a slice of every pie? No, check that, they already got a slice with the OS being locked to special hardware; now they get a sliver of every other slice by becoming the sole software distributer. Where do you get MS Office for the iPad? iTunes. Where do you get Microsoft's free RDP client for iPad? Well, there's already a fully functional pay version from another third party, and Apple won't make money from a free App with better functionality. Denied; no reason given.

Comment by Xeno 03/31/10 @ http://gizmodo.com/5506776/what-tech-nerds-think-about-the-ipad
I really hope that this is not the future of computing. It's kinda like how most of our economy went away from inventing and producing to consuming. The iPad takes away the making and doing from computers and makes consuming the whole point. I'm not saying that consuming is bad just that I hope it's doesn't become the whole picture.

Re:Only Apple

[gandhi_2]

I need a grammar nazi and a punctuation pedant on isle 4.

Re:Only Apple

[Idbar]

Where can I get a normal tablet computer for the price of an ipad?

Well, I have no idea. You can get them cheaper though.

Re:Only Apple

[PopeRatzo]

You can have a fully unlocked Windows installation and it's still useless for doing much of anything.

I know one thing I can do on a fully-unlocked Windows installation: I can go over to Sourceforge.net and download all sorts of free, open source programs, some of which are very very good, in every catagory. I can run Reaper and edit video. I can save to an SD card or USB drive. And if I should leave my Windows machine on the bus or drop it off of a pier, I can go back and get all those same programs.

I don't really care that it's not as pretty as an iPad. In fact, as someone who rides an aluminum-frame bike with full campy drive train, that's painted an ugly matte black and is absolutely beautiful in my eyes, I kind of like something that looks a little funky but gets the job done. I reject shiny.

Re:Only Apple

[EdIII]

That just goes to show you that without some numbers to back it up life is so ambiguous. In MY impression there is a preponderance of Apple-hating commenters here on Slashdot. Presumable those same Apple haters are not also running Windows, which is just as closed as anything Apple puts out, but consistency of thougt--even among so-called geeks--is not a major human trait.

I have to strongly disagree here. You cannot compare a DRM restricted hardware platform like the iPhone and iPad (and PS3, XBOX, PSP, etc.) and an OPERATING SYSTEM.

Microsoft may not be open source, or play well with standards, but you are still running an operating system (licensed right?) on hardware that you get to actually own. Of course you don't own the operating system. If you want a more open operating system choose Linux instead. Open source with hardware you really own feels really quite nice.

If I purchased an iPhone or an iPad I would feel justifiably pissed off that I don't have complete root access from second one. Preventing me from doing that is completely retarded, unethical, and downright shitty. I can feel the arguments starting, so I will just say this: If you don't want me to have root access on the hardware... then RENT THE BASTARD TO ME. Don't SELL it.

The same goes with any other piece of electronics. I feel perfectly justified and ethically correct to run custom firmware on the PSP, mod my XBOX whatever, and ultimately enjoy a completely 'cracked' and 'hacked' PS3.

Which is, btw, why you can't ever hack a piece of hardware to run a different operating sytem that you own. You own it. You did not do anything but enjoy your PROPERTY.

So consistency of thought? I think most of /. is remarkably consistent in this regard. 1) DRM sucks and is Defective by Design, and 2) You should be able to do anything you want with your property.

This issue is pervasive in our culture right now. The powers that be are fighting as hard as they can to prevent our effective ownership of anything. They don't want us to resell our books, our music, our movies, our games. They don't want us to do what WE want with our hardware, but what THEY want with *their* hardware. They want laws to punish us severely when get around the draconian restrictions they put into place on us.

Their ideal world is one in which we own nothing, lease everything, and pay by the minute to do so. That dog won't hunt will it? Yet they continue to try to make it happen. So let's not distract from the real argument here..... the fact the iPad which you purchased is not wholly owned by you when the expectations are that you really do.

Re:Only Apple

[GaryPatterson]

Extreme example shows the logical flaw: You buy a gun. You simply cannot do anything you like with it.

Okay, so now we're into the world of laws and rights, aka the real world.

You're talking about computers? Well, I can easily build a page turner for a shop-bought scanner, and set up a book scanning service. From there I can use OCR and finally distribute the resulting text files around the world.

Do you believe your rights extend that far?

You never had the freedom to do anything you liked with anything you owned. Ever. When you start to impinge upon the rights of others, your freedom ends.

Focus on the reality, not this hand-waving "I should be able to do anything!" crap. You never could, and never will.

Re:Only Apple

[lindseyp]

For 99% of people the universe of what apple lets you install is easily enough. With the added benefit of every app having been screened for malware.

It's easy to find an app that does what you want, in one place, relatively cheaply, and relatively well on the iPhone platform (I'm extending that to the iPad.. I don't own one of those yet). On the Windows platform you have to fish around for a whole bunch of apps just to get to the pre-installed functionality. And that is a bit of a slog, the road paved with malware and complete crap you have to search through from a multitude of different sources. Much of which is old versions that don't work on whatever version you happen to have.

On the Apple platform, if you really want to hack, they always make it relatively easy to jailbreak. I doubt this is an accident.

Re:Only Apple

[davester666]

"And if I should leave my Windows machine on the bus or drop it off of a pier, I can go back and get all those same programs."

Um, with the iPad, you just buy a new iPad, plug it in and sync. You get all the apps that you had in your lost iPad, along with the data for all the apps, so everything is configured the same as well.

For me, the main difference is that the UI on the iPhone/iPad has been designed from the ground up for Touch. Apple didn't start with a menu bar and all the regular widgets, then modify them so you could use them via touch, like WinCE and Windows Tablet. I still can't believe the Windows Office team crapped on the Windows Tablet team just because they could [ie, by screwing text input for example].

As a computer geek, you may find how the iPad works objectionable, but for the 99 other people around you on the street, they would much rather have the iPad, if you put both the iPad and a Windows Tablet machine down next to each other and let them try each out [IMHO, of course].

Re:Only Apple

[NitroWolf]

I have OS X running on a whitebox - next question. Just because they officially discourage it, doesn't mean it is not possible. They don;t even make it difficult. The install DVD is not encrypted, has no serial numbers, does not phone home, does not need online activation. While it technically infringes the licence to do so, it is not hard to do.

Dayy-um! You Apple fanbois are deluded! Because it's hacked/hackable to work on a whitebox somehow equates to the company supporting it or making it an open system. So by this logic, the iPhone is an open platform as well, because it can be jailbroken. Whoa... whatever!

"Every product locked down" - this is just nonsense. While OS X itself features closed source components, just because this is the case doesn't mean it cannot be open. Open and open source are not the same thing. OS X features a multitude of open protocols, codecs, standards and features that are designed to make it play well with other operating systems, as well as a continued commitment to open source projects that it includes and bases large parts of its systems on - CUPS, Webkit, libdispatch, OpenGL, OpenAL, GCC etc etc, just to name a couple.

Because they have appropriated open source software for their own use and are making a profit on it, while at the same time closing off parts of it and making it impossible to write drivers for or boot on white box systems somehow makes them open? It's the exact OPPOSITE of open. They are only as "open" as they have to be to keep customers. I'm not faulting them for taking open source software and making a viable business out of it, in fact I commend them for such and have absolutely no problem with it. What I do have a problem with is people such as your self that try to then claim that they are somehow open and "good" when they are purely out for profit and any way they can squeeze more profit out of their customers is a good thing.

If they were truly open, why not sell OSX for any whitebox? Because they don't want to - they want to keep a CLOSED SYSTEM. I mean, duh. Come on, can you really not see this? They want to maintain control over the entire environment, this is diametrically opposed to an "open" system.

If Apple wanted to lock people into an App Store for OS X they would have done so already - they will do what works for them in a business sense, nothing more, nothing less.

No, they wouldn't have. As I already posted, if they thought they could get away with it, they would have ... but if they tried it, their meager share of the OS market would dwindle to numbers not even worth tracking. The only reason they do NOT have a locked in environment, as I've already said, is because they don't have the power to force users into this. They have/had that power with the iPhone and look what they've done with it. You are insane to think they wouldn't love to do the same with the entire Mac line if they could somehow convince their users to do it... but it would leave too much to be desired at this point, since there is already a huge ecosystem built around a quasi-open standard that is the Windows environment. Trying to cut that off at the knees would be suicide for OSX.

It is a fallacy to suggest that because the iPhone business model was successful for Apple that they would try and shoehorn that onto the Mac business model.

I don't suggest any such thing. I'm saying they don't have the muscle to make it happen, and the iPhone is a perfect example of why they should NEVER be given that muscle.

You might as well say that now that Xbox live and the 360 are so well entrenched that MS will be moving that business model onto Windows.

Moving what business model to windows? You mean... oh I don't know ... Games for Windows Live? So... like, you mean moving the console model to Windows, which is EXACTLY what they have done/are in the process of doing? Are you trying to make my case or yours? Because you're succeeding very well in the former and failing miserably in the latter.

Re:Only Apple

[roman_mir]

you are absolutely wrong and are trying to pull a fast one. Murdering someone is illegal whether you are using a gun or a stone or a knife or a computer.

On the other hand you can take your gun and use it to open food cans and that is an example of use that the gun was not intended for. You can smelt the gun and make a knife out of it. You can make it into a flute. You can make it into a paperweight. You can take it apart and use parts to put together some other machine. There is no legal argument against you using your hardware, except in ways that are criminal. Of-course, again, US is crazy - thus DMCA happened there.

You're talking about computers? Well, I can easily build a page turner for a shop-bought scanner, and set up a book scanning service. From there I can use OCR and finally distribute the resulting text files around the world.

- in your world you believe this is illegal or wrong, most people in the world do not care about what you think, they are doing what you are describing every single day, have you ever visited the real world?

Do you believe your rights extend that far?

- I don't believe in imaginary property that much, I don't particularly care if someone's copyrights are violated, that's an artificial construct and also it does not kill anyone, no moral problems at all.

Focus on the reality, not this hand-waving "I should be able to do anything!" crap. You never could, and never will.

- you certainly can do anything, you are brainwashed not to understand this. You can even kill people, just make sure that other people, who don't like you doing it don't catch you. However I don't consider this to be polite behavior.

On the other hand there is no argument that can be made against you using your computer for purposes that do not cross legal boundaries. Buying thing and then doing whatever you wish with them, that's your right to give up.

Re:Only Apple

[jo_ham]

Ah, the legal obligation part - that old chestnut. How can you say that Webkit is "one of the uninteresting parts" when it is emerging as a very powerful contender as a rendering engine that is going far beyond where KHTML would have been without it - both camps benefit, even if Apple is "legally obliged" - they chose KHTML rather than rolling their own. They could have gone a different route, with a more liberal (for them) licence, but they did not.

They have also released a lot of their code to the community, and continue to support and encourage OSS development - even stuff they are not "legally obliged" to support.

The burn support thing is to ensure compatibility. Ones that come up with "supported: Apple Shipping" are assured to work since they have been tested, but this doesn't mean that other third party drives *don't* work - have you actually tried it? I tend not to use Disk Utility to burn CDs though, I usually use the open source "Burn.app" which works with anything you chuck at it, and offers more options.

The Airport interface is there to support the Airport cards - if you have a third party one, of course you need a driver and config utility. I'm amazed I can't configure my ATI graphics card with Nvidia's tools - oh the humanity! The beauty of the system preferences window is that you can easily make a pane for your app/device/thingy, since it is designed to be easy to develop for, with open documentation, and human-readable preference files (which you can muck about with at the command line level if you prefer). If you put in a Broadcom card though, which the Airport cards are based on, the Airport interface config works, since the cards are essentially the same. They didn't need to add any code or drivers to support third party cards because they don't ship any - they only ship Airport cards, for every model they make. If you want a third party wireless card, you can use the third party driver that comes with it.

They are "open" in a very meaningful way. Their continued support for open standards, protocols and codecs is very important in the industry as a whole - GCC, OpenGL, OpenAL, NFS, CUPS, AAC, H.264, Webkit, CSS, HTML, HTML5 to name just a few.

Re:Only Apple

[EdIII]

No he's not.

Yes he IS.

He's trying to spin some FUD that this product somehow will affect his (and our) freedom in computer choices, which it will clearly not. In fact, it offers more choice and will hopefully spur competition in an otherwise quiet niche.

FUD is Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.

1) The fear is justified. This a move towards a more closed environment in which you freedom is in fact limited. You seem to want to argue that, but if I don't have root access by default, I am NOT FREE.
2) Uncertainty. I do feel uncertain right now. I honestly wonder how much longer in my lifetime I will get to enjoy hardware that I own, operating systems that I can modify, and computing sessions that are unmonitored by government agencies.
3) Doubt. I do doubt Apple's intentions here. I have always, always, always, doubted Sony's intentions starting from their infamous Root CD's in which no executives went to Federal Pound Me In The Ass Prison's.

This is 100% crystal clear a move towards 'closed' hardware that prevents you from full ownership. The iPhone was no different, The XBOX was no different, the PS1, PS2, and PS3 are no different. Basically anything with DRM in it was no different either.

Whereas before most of the devices that were limited in these ways were being marketed to children and as entertainment devices, this is more sinister. I don't need a PS3 to survive and can do so quite nicely without it. I already do.

However, I require a computing device to function. It is my trade, it is my livelihood, and most of my hobbies and passions revolve around it. I don't want to live in a world that is illegal for me to own my hardware and do with it what I wish. I am reminded of the Carterphone decision in a way, because AT&T at the time fought very hard to control your telephone even though you purchased it. Courts called it 'silly' and 'ridiculous' and slapped AT&T and the FCC very hard for trying to do so.

The iPad is not a choice. It is a limitation in pretty packaging designed to entice users into purchasing and using it, all the while, distracting them from the horrible truth. They paid for something they don't own.

This issue is not FUD, it is not Apple bashing (Sony is equally vile, if not more so, in this regard), and it does affect our freedoms. Perhaps imperceptibly so at first, but it is affecting our freedoms nonetheless.

What the original poster was saying, which needs to be said, MUST be said, and said as often as possible, is that we should all choose to send a message to these companies that we will not settle for anything less than total ownership when they are selling us a device. Any attempts to control our usage of that device should be fought, and fought as hard as any war we have fought for freedom, because, ultimately that is what it is really about.

You may not see this yet, but our world is rapidly changing to incorporate another dimension. It is real, and actions that occur in it have immediate and serious effects on the world around us now. Who will control it, our access to it, and what privacy we have in it is a very very very serious matter.

That is not Tin Foil Hattery I speak of, but practical truth. So you can say, "Well you have a choice to not by it and you don't need to bash Apple and make wild claims". Well that poster and I can also speak out about WHY you should not buy it, and not be accused of spreading FUD.

Re:Only Apple

[node 3]

N.B. The iPad is fully legible in full sunlight.

Good luck, however, reading your Kindle in the dark.

Re:Only Apple

[jo_ham]

So, my question: will this stop projects like Android?

Will this kill Linux?

Will this stop open source?

Of course not - you will always have choice, and there will always be other options. All this can do is a) make money for Apple (or not) and b) encourage competition.

The rise of the iPhone spurred the rise of numerous open competitors and everyone is better off.

You can avoid Apple (and the PSX, and the Xbox 360 etc) all you want, and stick to open alternatives. The market can only get stronger with the addition of competition. That was my point here, that this is just another entry into the arena, not the death of everything else and every other business model.

Re:Only Apple

[linzeal]

Big difference between reading websites and reading 100-200 pages of technical PDFs. Yeah, I agree, you don't really need the Kindle or any E-ink display for reading unless you are consuming massive amounts of text information per day. You may think you are reading a lot browsing the web and the like but if you add it up I would doubt you would even begin to approach 100 pages typed, even after 8-10 hours.

Re:Only Apple

[PopeRatzo]

As a computer geek, you may find how the iPad works objectionable, but for the 99 other people around you on the street...

I don't claim to be or strive to be like "the 99 other people" around me on the street.

I'm OK with that.

I also do not want to rely upon a single source for all of the computer applications I use. Too often, I find that some little-known open source free app is exactly the tool I need to get the job done, and sometimes the only tool that will get the job done. I'm not going to take the chance on being reliant on Apple to make available everything I need to do my work.

I like more open systems, and don't mind the little bit of fiddling that is required to make it work. Like my bike, and my musical instruments, and my 1963 Norton Commando, sometimes there is meaning in the little fiddling that I have to do.

I don't need, nor do I want, every single thing to "just work". That's just the kind of hairpin I am.

But don't hate on me just because I'm not planning to fly the same shiny tech flag as you and your 98 friends "on the street".

Re:Only Apple

[The Clockwork Troll]

The Kindle DX is the closet thing to an iPad in the Kindle line, and costs about the same as an entry-level iPad.

Comparing the two:

With the Kindle DX you get a reflective screen that's readable in intense daylight, free included 3G in perpetuity (so you can ... buy more books wirelessly), and 4 days of battery life (with wireless on; 2 weeks with it off). It's a reader's device through and through.

Unless I'm mistaken, that's about where the advantages of the Kindle end. In every other dimension, I think the iPad owns it pretty hard.

Re:Only Apple

[BobPaul]

I think the backlight is the problem. That's why LCDs are hard on the eyes. You're essentially staring into a lamp and if you turn down the brightness you have to strain to read.

e-ink, otoh, is great. I borrowed a kindle to read a book a coworker was pushing on me and it was awesome. Significantly better than my computer monitor, N800, or Palm Pilots I've used in the past. If the e-ink was harder on my eyes do to low contrast, I'm really curious what metric you used for that. Reading on LCD screens makes my eyes sore and I need to look away at regular intervals, close my eyes for a bit, etc. I didn't experience this with the kindle.

Re:Only Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

HA-HA-HA-HA!!!

First of all, that's not a tablet, that's a laptop with a swiveling screen ... Seems pretty brittle to me, and certainly looks like it was designed during the darkest days of Soviet Russia, but more importantly, did you even read the specs of that? Copy/pasting:

        * 8.9-inch touchscreen-enhanced Eee PC
        * Panel rotates 180-degrees into tablet mode for ultra mobility
        * Energy-efficient Intel Atom Z520 processor
        * Long-lasting battery life with 5 hours of interrupted use*
        * Exclusive touch-optimized software suite
        * 52GB Hybrid Storage (16GB SSD + 16GB SD Card + 20GB Eee online Storage**)
        * Complete wirless connectivity with Bluetooth v2.1 and Wi-Fi 802.1 b/g/n
        * Complimentary stylus for ultimate precision

My face started to contract in a smirk when I got to the "5 hours of interrupted use*" (note the asterisk pointing to some caveats), but then I cracked in a loud laugh when I got to the "Hybrid Storage": 52 GB including 20 GB of ONLINE STORAGE??? Gimme a fscking break, at least Apple has the good taste to wrap their reality distortion with beautiful visuals! If this is the best cr*p you can come up with (and if it isn't, epic fail!) then the iPad is a better buy than I had thought!!

(And "complimentary stylus for ultimate precision"? As in "our touch interface is really not that finger-friendly, and is multi-touch only in the sense that if you touch it once then you can touch it again and again, multiple times in succession!!"??? The most laughable counter-example I've seen in a while!)

Re:Only Apple

[roman_mir]

Well, people who create nothing of value generally don't care about copyright. Perhaps you're one of them.

- you are right, I am creating nothing of value. I don't care about copyrights. If you think that you are creating something of value you are wrong. My FF extensions are used by about 250 thousand people, but I still do not consider that of too much value. The code that I have created over the past 15 years at work for a number of companies is used across the world. I still do not consider that of too much value.

I am not being facetious, I really mean that whatever it is I am doing for money or as Free source is not that important that I should be fighting people about violating the copyrights. You are probably overestimating the importance of whatever it is you are doing.

Re:Only Apple

[notknown86]

N.B. The iPad is fully legible in full sunlight.

Good luck, however, reading your Kindle in the dark.

Is the screen is better than a normal LCD? Otherwise, I suspect that your interpretation of "fully legible" differs somewhat from mine...

Re:Doesn't surprise me.

[notgm]

i would be even less surprised if some of the jailbreakers had insider information to help them unlock the apple devices. as well thought out as apple's info-release schedules are (sanctioned leaks on upcoming products?) it totally makes sense for them to have two versions of the ipad on the market:

1, typical user experience, customer buys it and it does what it says it will

2, enhanced user experience, customer buys it and hacks it to do something else

in either case, a customer buys it, and in the relatively small second subset, the group who would normally curse the company out and hold off from buying the device because it's 'crippled' actually gives apple money.

of course it was quickly broken, it's part of the dance.

Looks Good for Porn

[Anonymous Coward]

It's probably good for browsing porn. I hate always having to boot a full OS for just to browse porn. It looks super portable too, so I'd be able to browse porn from just about anywhere. It has a fairly big screen, which would be good for browsing porn. And good battery life so I could browse porn for long periods of time. The touch screen is nice, so I'd be able to touch the porn I'm browsing. It has good Internets connections, so I'd be able to browse lots of porn fast. I don't think it's good for much else. I think I'm sold.

Re:Looks Good for Porn

[angelfly]

Flash is currently the standard for sites streaming porn. So until they switch to HTML5 or the iPad gets Flash there will be no iFapping.

Re:Looks Good for Porn

[bennomatic]

Um, porn sites exist to make money for their owners. I'd be *really* surprised many of them haven't already jumped on the mobile bandwagon and begun offering their content in non-flash formats such as H.264.

ABC.com has put together an app for watching their online streaming shows on the iPad. I've heard Hulu and Netflix are going to do the same, and others are sure to follow, including the adult-oriented of the bunch.

one handed navigation is iffy

[YesIAmAScript]

Unless you buy a stand, you need to hold the device with one hand to keep it angled so you can look at it and if your other hand is busy that means you have no way to change pictures, etc.

Re:one handed navigation is iffy

[tyler.ness]

Unless you buy a stand, you need to hold the device with one hand to keep it angled so you can look at it and if your other hand is busy that means you have no way to change pictures, etc.

It sounds like you've done this before.

speedbump

[goombah99]

Running software not designed for it is not the real issue here. The issue is what is a stake and how appropriate the lockdown is.

apple tends to argue for "speed bump" DRM. basically make something difficult enough or a sufficient game of cat and mouse on the one hand (the speed bump) and and offer an express lane you can pay for. So for example, itunes. you can break the audio files if you want to. they impose some speed bumps to make it not worth your effort. then they offer enhanced value for staying in the itunes eco-system: the seemless updates to the ipod, cover art access, organization of the meta data, safe store, etc... All things you could do on your own but would most people would prefer it to happen magically rather farting around with bit torrent or sending your credit card to some russian mafia website.

Now for somethings like the iphone they have taken a much more agressive lockdown. I rationalize that by thinking about what they are protecting. You don't want crazy shit happening on a cell phone. so you make it hard to install anything not vetted by the mothership. Even the android market has this vetting. It's not that you can't do it. they just make it even harder. people will get much more enraged if their cell phones crash or the cell network itself starts malfunctioning.

SO that makes sense.

the Ipad is sort of in the middle regime so it's going to be more of a test of how apple wants to go. it's really more of a general purpose computer. some units don't have cell phones in them, and even those are not there primarily for voice but for data.

so you could see them going either way on this one. My suspiscion is they will try to maintain the lockdown. that's what they did with the ipod touch (which is not a cell phone).

The new rationale will be that this is an appliance not something you are supposed to mess with. protection for content owners will be seen as paramount over make-like access to the internals. Byt treating it as a appliance that protects content owners they will be able to more freely provide content without onerous access modalities. This will keep the device behaving more like an appliance than a computer.

COntrary to cory doctrow I see this as good. why? well it's not an either or situation, it's an all of the above. If I want true access to my computer then I should buy a computer that allows this. it's called a laptop. I can put linux on it. it's mine to mod. But I should expect that I'll also run into access restrictions from content owners. I might find that less user freindly. On the other hand if I want easy access then there's this appliance I can use for that. I can't modify it. that's the trade, but it's a trade that gives me a value I want.

you could wish for both in one device and if this were easy to provide then someone will do it.

but because both devices, laptop and appliance exist, I have not lost anything.

Re:speedbump

[jo_ham]

All well and good, but there is no DRM on the iTunes Music Store music anymore - they are regular AAC files that are just tagged with your Apple ID. They will play in anything that supports AAC.

Initially though, I agree, it was all about doing the bare minimum to appease the music industry (who own the content), and encouraging you to break the DRM by burning to audio CD when you downloaded.

Re:Hack released

[Pentium100]

Firefox says that Google says that this site has viruses or browser exploits in it...

Sigh...not this shit again

[Chicken_Kickers]

For the love of God people! WTF is wrong with you guys? It is a freaking mass produced consumer product, not the elixir of youth or manna from heaven. It is also not the Dajjal (AntiChrist) either. Do you vehemently argue over the merits/evils of your washing machine or your sink's waste disposal unit? If people want to buy a severely crippled product, it is their own decision to make and money to spend. You do not lose anything if someone else buys it. Similarly, if people don't like a particular Apple/Microsoft/Boeing/Airbus/Sienar/Incom etc. product, then they are not committing heresy against the Holy name of the Immortal Omniscient God Emperor either. Get it into your heads people! There is no obligation on you to support or hate a freaking mass-production, soulless commercial entity.

Re:Still not worth purchasing

[dissy]

It makes your warranty void,

Point. But while arguing for the right to hack and tinker, that sort of comes with the job so is not an issue.

Installing not-windows on your HP voids warranties too, as stupid as that sounds, which is the exact type of thing the GP is wanting in his hardware.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, it's just not something a tinkerer/hacker type can really expect to state with a straight face.

prevents you from installing the official security patch,

Nonsense. My jail broken phone is running the latest software and patches.

and is generally a legal grey area ...

It is actually very easy to do without having to download or distribute any of apples copyrighted software (or any other software without an explicitly free license)

While of course some people can, and probably most people do, use jail breaking to violate copyrights with pirated apps, this is in no way a requirement and only takes your own will power not to do it to avoid breaking the law.

The open repositories that you gain access to with the jail broken software have a whole lot of free software, and you can of course continue to install free itunes apps.

Nothing about me modifying hardware I own, in ways that do not touch upon others rights, is in any way a legal gray area.

wrong

[commodoresloat]

Uh-huh. Try reading a book on the iPad -- at the beach.

Don't get me wrong, I think the iPad will be great. But it's not an e-reader. The problem with e-ink is that it's not a mature technology. Apple is playing it smart here - stay out of the e-ink business until you can have color, or at least monochrome at a speed that is acceptable, and without that annoying "screen flash" as pixels rearrange when you turn pages. Once you can do that I think Apple will jump in and we'll see iPads with eink options (or perhaps some other kind of e-ink display appliance, maybe even a usable web browser). Why should Apple release an e-ink device that is just as annoyingly slow as all the others out there, when they can wait until all the tech is in place and jump in at the last minute with a device that gets it right, and then take credit for having practically invented the e-reader, the way they did with the mp3 player and the smartphone?