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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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: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.

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.