Slashdot Mirror
In Defense of Jailbreaking
Keith found a nice manifesto saying "There's a trend that's been disturbing me lately. When the topic of modding or jailbreaking comes up — say, in the wake of the iPad announcement, or Sony's restrictive PS3 update — there is an outcry. Who am I to tell Apple what's best for their devices?"
"Who am I to tell Apple what's best for their devices?"
Who are Apple to tell me what I can and can't run? Precicely why I'll be buying a Lenovo Ideapad U1 (have been waiting for a device "like" the iPad for almost as long as my flying car, FINALLY somebody listened to the idea of simply having a detachable screen).
Certainly a worthy moral argument, but thanks to the WIPO copyright Treaty (which everyone, except for a few of us crazies who were warning about it, completely ignored back when it was being debated), such circumvention of technology (specifically if it's designed to access protect copyrighted content) is nonetheless illegal in many WIPO countries, including the U.S.
From the anti-circumvention section of the DMCA: "No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
And notice the language there. It doesn't say "no company may do this for profit" or "no one can do this for anyone else" (as many mistakenly believe), it says "No person." That means you sitting at home jailbreaking your own cellphone. Now, maybe you could make the case that an iPhone and its OS is not a "work protected under this title" but I think that would be a hard sell.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
that means it's YOURS now. end of story.
...it becomes YOUR device.
Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
Who am I to tell Apple what's best for their devices?
The user who paid for the lovemaking device without having to first agree to anything.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
Who am I to tell Apple what's best for their devices?"
Assuming that you haven't been shoplifting, they are not their devices. They are your (our) devices.
Having said that, if Apple says that doing such-and-such may wreck the machines, you've been warned.
"Who am I to tell Apple what's best for their devices?" The current OWNER of said device.
"Who am I to tell Apple what's best for their devices?" How about, "Who is Apple to tell me what is best for my device?" If the act of shelling out $800 for one does not make it mine, I guess I'll just wait for a good Linux tablet.
"Who am I to tell Apple what's best for their devices?"
It's mine. I bought it. Who are Ford or Honda to tell me what brand of gasoline to buy at the station?
I'm not against jailbreaking but you can't expect a company to care about jailbreaked devices becoming bricks when they release a firmware update. In other words, do it if you think it offers value that outweighs the risk of problems.
Myself, I didn't jailbreak my ipod touch. I don't mind paying small sums for good software, the itunes store allows with simple upgrade maintenance, and there is (at first sight) little jailbreak-only software that I would care about. VLC, if available, but otherwise not really anything. I can wait for OS4 for wallpaper and multitasking.
I is Apple's device BEFORE you pay for it, NOT after.
It belongs to you! What kind of would are we living in that anyone belives some company has anything to say about what you do with what you bought and paid for. Don't give me this EULA made up crap. Think about it!
If Apple wants the control they have, it should be free!
* Carthago Delenda Est *
(*) Disclaimer - or i can not buy jailed device in the first place and save myself some trouble.
Is that manufacturers are allowed to right EULA's that violate the basic rights of citizens. I'm all for reading the EULA and for receiving consequences upon it's violation, because that's fair. But what I'm confused on is why companies are allowed to write EULA's that specify exactly what can and cannot be done with it period.
Take away service? Ok,that's fair. You don't know what I put on this device, so I can understand if you don't want to support it.
Discontinue updates? I get that, for the same reason as above.
Void warranty? I get that too, since I could easily be an idiot who broke it and that's not your responsibility.
But the one I don't get is why companies are allowed to write EULA's that basically allow them to retain ownership of a device after it's been "purchased." For all legal purposes, this item belongs to the consumer. If it's stolen, it's returned to the consumer, not Apple. Why then, is Apple allowed to make this claim to ownership?
Again, I'm very much in favor of realizing and accepting consequences under the law...but I really think the law is flawed here. The rules for EULA's needs to be visited and rewritten such that purchases of technology amount to more than borrowing your big brother's gameboy.
Putting aside the whole "You should", "You shouldn't" be able to Jailbreak the thing, I think it's interesting that we finally have a whitelisted platform. For years and years, whenever we have a security discussion on Slashdot, someone inevitablely says
"You can never succeed trying to filter out all the bad stuff. You need a whitelist of the good stuff."
But then someone else always says
"But who creates the whitelist?"
And both get modded +5 insightful. In this case, Apple created the Whitelist that all the security people say we need. And applied it to a whole platform. They apparently do code reviews, and enforce proper usage of the API.
Personally, if I had an iPhone, I'd jailbreak it. But I like the idea that I can give one to my Mom, let her get apps off the app store, and not have to de-gunk the malware every 3 months like I do with her PC.
I have not seen the outcry you're talking about. I think this post is just another angle for people to rail against Apple's policies.
Which is fine, BTW! People are certainly welcome to do so, and to an extent I agree with the outcry. But I object to the implied victimhood here--of a person beset upon by the horde.
Jailbreaking is very likely legal due to the first sale doctrine. But it hasn't been tested mainly because Apple has yet to go after a single customer for jailbreaking a product they own. They won't honor the warranty, but they're not bothering them either. It's the right place for a tech company to be IMO. If I install a new engine management chip in my Civic, Honda won't honor that warranty either.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
You may not and you agree not to, or to enable others to, copy (except as expressly permitted by this License), decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, attempt to derive the source code of, decrypt, modify, or create derivative works of the iPad Software or any services provided by the iPad Software, or any part thereof
This License is effective until terminated. Your rights under this License will terminate automatically or otherwise cease to be effective without notice from Apple if you fail to comply with any term(s) of this License. Upon the termination of this License, you shall cease all use of the iPad Software
In other words, jailbreaking is a good way to indicate that you want to terminate the licence. After which you are no longer bound to its terms.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
Out of principle, I won't buy a device with this much restriction. It's not designed for the customer, which it should be in my opinion, because the customer is the one paying for it. Instead, it's designed for the company that designed it. The number of devices/products I buy is going down hill pretty fast. I'm the customer, if they don't make what I want, I won't buy it and it's as simple as that. If everyone did this, we would actually get what we want. Unfortunatly, more people than not are becoming desensitized and are happy to own half featured devices at double the price.
I think the whole Android / iPhone situation is interesting. Basically, it's put-up or shut-up time for Open Source. With the Droid we finally have not only a platform that can go head-to-head with the big corporations, we also have real marketing and advertising budgets to go with it. Personally, I'd like to see the iPhone remain totally closed and controlled. This represents the greatest chance we have to show the general public why they should care about Free Software and open platforms.
The moment I buy it, it becomes MY device. If I want to blend it, that is MY option. All that I will void is the warranty.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I agree that if you bought it you own it. ANd would you agree that if you break it or want service it's okay for apple not to supply it? And if something bricks it, it's not apple's problem?
THe trouble with computing devices is that the grey area of "normal use" is so broad it's hard to know where to draw a reasonable line. For example, if I buy a water resistant timex watch and I wear it in the shower and it gets wet inside. was directed water under pressure normal use for a water resistant watch. Should I have done the reasonable precaution of avoiding the bathing with it? it's a grey area. Imight see it as normal and timex might not but one can see it both ways quite easily.
with a software/hardware device if you mod it with hardware clearly this was not normal use. But what if you modded the firmware when it said not too. That's probably your fault too. and finally what if you ran software that they said you should not? it gets morally grey but legally it's pretty clear you violated the warantee (don't like it? dont' buy it).
But y'know what is going to happen if you brick it after jail breaking? are you going to man-up and say oh well. Or are going to go lie to apple and say "it just broke". Or are you going to blog about all the apple's that are bricking for "no reason" and spoil their reputation?
I'd bet that people that jail break and brick make more than their share of service requests and cause more than their share of replacements.
SO I assert it's rarely the end.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
A couple of my coworkers were talking recently about Kindles and iPads. I told them about the DRM. Neither of them knew what DRM stood for, so I had to explain. Neither of them had heard of the infamous incident involving Orwell's 1984. Neither of them knew about the history of DRM'd media becoming unplayable within 5 years after people buy it, because the company running the DRM dies or abandons the project.
Once people are educated about the issues, then it's up to them. If they buy a locked-down device, that's their decision. They know what they're getting into. We all buy coffee pots and wristwatches without any expectation that we'll be allowed to load arbitrary software into their CPUs. Everybody just has to draw their own individual line between the devices where they care about lockdown and the devices where they don't.
The crunchgear article has some major logical flaws. The author states, "Lastly, I would like to humbly thank Apple, Sony, Microsoft, and all the others, for creating wonderful devices which I plan to enjoy to the fullest extent." In other words, he's bought these locked-down devices, and now he has to find some way to justify buying them, even though he's unhappy with the EULAs. "A popular objection is that one doesn't have to buy the devices that happen to be wrapped up in restrictive systems or deliberately limited. Vote with your wallet, right? [***] Sure, and even when you jailbreak or mod, you are doing just that. You bought the device most suited to your needs." At the point where I inserted the [***] there is a major gap in his logic. He's paid money to these companies. He has voted with his wallet. He's cast his vote in favor of locked-down devices. He didn't buy the device most suited to his needs. He bought a device that was unsuited to his needs, and then modified it in order to suit his needs. He also ignores the very real practical consequences of modding and jailbreaking. The manufacturer is almost certainly never going to give him warranty service, and some of them may actually intentionally or unintentionally brick his device when it phones home for software updates.
Here are a couple of proposals that I'd consider more realistic. Both of these really do involve voting with your wallet. (1) If there are no options that avoid DRM and lockdowns, don't buy. This is my current attitude about the Kindle and iPod. I'll buy one when there is a non-DRM'd library of books available for it that is roughly the same size as Amazon's current catalog. (2) Buy the lesser of two evils. E.g., I believe Android is significantly less locked down than iPhone, so if I were choosing between the two, I'd buy an Android.
Find free books.
Once you've purchased it, the device isn't Apple's any more, it's yours.
The fact that people want to jailbreak their iPhone says one thing to me -- they shouldn't have bought it.
Think about it, it's a device that's broken out of the box, to the extent that in order to use it for the purpose you bought it for, you have to mend it. And the act of mending it invalidates the warranty!
Why not just buy something that does the job you want it to do in the first place? If Apple don't make such a device, buy one from someone else.
If everyone did this, perhaps market forces would cause Apple to make their platform less restrictive.
Who am I?
Before the purchase?
I am the customer... and the customer is always right, amirite?
It is their job to make me satisfied with the sale I am about to commit to.
And after the purchase?
I am the owner... and who is Apple to tell me what’s best for my devices?
They’re just the manufacturer, and all the more say that the manufacturer gets is to print out nice full-colour manuals, instructional booklets, and quick start guides that I won’t ever read (step 1: open box, remove this instruction sheet from its protective sleeve).
Who am I, indeed!
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
As a developer, you are free to upload any app you write to your phone.
As a developer, there is an annual fee. This fee over the estimated 5-year useful life of a device often exceeds the retail price of the device itself. Do you understand the complaints about XNA and iPhone OS now?
"People who buy Apple products are generally okay with being limited on capabilities."
While I'm in favour of jailbreaking and such, I think what you really mean is something other than limited on capabilities. Now if you mean "limited on capabilities" in the sense that the obtaining of apps is restricted to Apple's app store, well... restriction of source is only a restriction on capability if you can't find what you need at that source. If there's something you need to do on an iPhone, there's probably an application that'll do it.
I just got my iPhone, and I've been looking for an excuse to jailbreak it, but... it does everything I want it to do. I thought the inability to multitask (corrected, apparently, in iPhone OS/4) would bug me, but it turns out it's a non-issue.
The only thing I can think of offhand that Apple has restricted the capabilities of is flash, but in all honesty I haven't missed it at all.
Isn't any repository a whitelist?
rule number 1 of slashdot: ANY thread can be twisted into a bash of microsoft. no exceptions.
...and should be. no exceptions.
New mod option wanted: -1 DrunkenRambling
In Apple's case, jailbreaking is to open up a closed device. Of course, anyone buying an Apple iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad just because you can jailbreak it and do what you want is pretty stupid - there are millions of other devices out there that are perfectly open. Jailbreaking is a bonus to make a nice device even better. But one should not be under any pretenses that it's sanctioned nor available everywhere (e.g., the second run iPhone 3GS require re-jailbreaking every time you reboot it).
In Sony's case, they're removing an advertised feature. In which case, "jailbreaking" is to get back what Sony sold me.
Apple never sold me anything on the basis that it can be jailbroken - the features and restrictions thereof have been known at the time of purchase. I still use them because they're pretty nice devices, and all are jailbroken because I might as well do it and enjoy the nice bonus.
Sony sold me a PS3 on the belief it has a certain set of features, namely, OtherOS. Now they're taking away that feature, so I am entitled to do whatever it takes to get back the same featureset that Sony offered when it sold it to me.
In one case, jailbreaking gets you more stuff. In the other, jailbreaking is to get back stuff you bought. Hell, Apple's rolled out more features for my iPhone than came with it when I bought it. Sony's pretty much ensured launch unit PS3s still command original selling prices on the used market by removing stuff every hardware revision. Heck, even the Xbox360 gained features on newer revisions (HDMI output...).
And yes, while I believe you can do anything you want with hardware, I also don't buy hardware just because someone's already hacked it, but whether or not that device without hacking would be useful to me. If I have two similar devices then the availability of a hack might sway me one way or another, but it's never a checklist item.
It claims EULA's are legally binding contracts. They are not. End of story. A EULA isn't worth the paper it ain't written on.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
once you buy it its no longer their device, its your device
and should be able to do with it as you please.
however there are non consumer friendly laws that
got bought that prohibit this concept...
If I could walk that way I wouldnt need cologne.
I'll never get this obsession with buying Apple products - supposedly it's because they "just work", but when you have to void the warranty to get it to do what you want it to do, you're obviously admitting that it doesn't "just work". Why buy it when you can get something that is designed to be open and hackable?
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for hacking and modding and sticking it to the man, but since when is forking over your hard earned cash (to the man, no less) for a device that is hack-hostile "sticking it to the man"? Why not instead encourage companies that are encouraging you to be more than a consumer?
Nathan's blog
OK, since the author of the article seems to be totally ignorant of the actual issue, let me help you. This is nothing to do with "customer rights" and everything to do with stealing.
Your iPad/PlayStation/XBOX costs MORE than you are currently paying for it. Apple/Sony/Microsoft is selling it to you more cheaply because they want to make up the difference by selling you software.
So the companies have a few choices. 1) charge much more for the hardware and worry that people will not buy it. 2) undercharge for the hardware and lock people in to a closed app store. 3) sell two different versions - locked and unlocked - and let people choose which one they want.
Some open systems like PCs do #1 while some smartphones do #3. But most content-based products do model #2. When you "jailbreak" your product and use that to exit the app store ecosystem, that is basically saying "I know you want $800 for this, but I only want to pay you $400". We have a word for that. It is called "stealing". If you want to buy a toaster and it costs $20, but you only want to pay $10, you can't just tell WalMart that it is your "customer right".
And all of this talk about companies "forcing" you to do this or that. Wake up! You DO NOT HAVE TO BUY AN IPAD. If you don't like being locked in, don't engage in criminal behavior - just buy something else that is open. Geez people.
- davevr
There was a point in time, not too long ago, that I was considering purchasing a second PS3.
It would be cool to experiment with the cell processors running Linux.
However, after the generally despicable behaviour of Sony and the removal of the 'Boot Other OS', there is really no reason to consider a second PS3.
I think this is the problem with people... they get a false sense that Apple products are "safe". While it's true that an iphone may never have a "virus", the real money is in "spyware". Any "approved" app has full access to your phone... at least in the next version of they'll have to "ask" for permission to get your location... but your information, contact info, etc... all there for any app to mine. Actually many apps already report your "usage" back to big mamma without you knowledge... Apple is not a safe platform just because of the whitelist... in fact, implying that the whitelist makes the platform safe is just plain wrong.
http://i-phone-home.blogspot.com/2009/07/pinchmedia-anatomy-of-spyware-vendor.html
People have been arrested for modding consoles
Every time I have read about this, it turned out that the modder had promoted the modification for use with infringing copies of entire non-free video games.
DMCA also says you can UNLOCK a phone and lexmark tried to use the same crap to lock out 3rd party ink and they lost in court.
Sure. But having an app that you chose to install compromise your privacy is still a far cry from ending up with a root-kit that encrypts your data for ransom and steals your credit cards because you followed a link in a forum to a site that had been compromised without the host owner's knowlege.
I don't think anyone, even whitelist proponents, would say that whitelist guarantees privacy or security. Rather they'd say that at least there's someone making an effort to enforce a consistent set of rules.
mac os x also needs to be open to all x86 hardware as well.
and apple still like to pull that video card lock in carp so you pay $250-$300 for a old video that cost about $50 - $100 more then the pc ver of it.
A loosely enforced whitelist. In the sense that you can still install software from other sources, or compile from sources. As well there's not necessarily code review / quality checks (though some iPhone Apps are of dubious quality). It's no different than telling a PC user to not download software unless it comes from Softpedia or download.com. While it will be highly unlikely they will be able to download malicious software, nothing prevents them from getting it elsewhere.
"Who am I to tell Apple what's best for their devices?""
Because YOU bought it. Therefore, it's YOUR device and YOU deserve to be allowed to do whatever the fuck YOU want to.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
But when you lease it, it does not become your device. As electronics recycling grows, expect to see purchases of electronic hardware replaced with 20-year leases, after which point the "buyer" must return the device to the manufacturer "for recycling".
Who cares? Don't buy locked devices ever.
When you purchase a locked down device, you send a message that it is ok to screw end users.
When you go out of your way and buy an open device where tinkering is encouraged, you send a different message.
I can't blame Apple for trying to lock down a DRM player. If they didn't have any DRM involved, then they wouldn't need to screw users so often and so hard for so much money.
If you gave apple your money, then you deserve what you're getting.
These devices should not be locked in a way that makes it extremely difficult to install custom software or use it in a way not intended by the company that makes it. I mean, it's difficult to jailbreak a device you own to be able to control directly what can go in it. While the iPhone isn't jailbroken, it's Apple who decides how you can use it.
DMCA and intellectual property laws are the new Inquisition.
I'll buy one when there is a non-DRM'd library of books available for it that is roughly the same size as Amazon's current catalog.
Any reader device that can use DRM-free ebooks can display the 30,000 DRM-free ebooks of Project Gutenberg. Your tax-deductible donation will help PG scan, proofread, and package every book published from 3760 BC to AD 1922.
And both get modded +5 insightful. In this case, Apple created the Whitelist that all the security people say we need. And applied it to a whole platform. They apparently do code reviews, and enforce proper usage of the API.
Yes, *but*, I think it's natural to assume that anyone advocating a "whitelist" approach to applications would simultaneously advocate an option to voluntarily opt out of that process.
And that's ignoring the fact that one of the big problems with, say, Apple's app store isn't necessarily that Apple is filtering the content, but that it's filtering it simply to benefit itself, by using the process as a cudgel to eliminate competing products. ie, security has nothing to do with it. It's all about protectionism. Additionally, it's clear the review process is largely arbitrary, which means seemingly legitimate apps can't even get through the process.
Of course, that's entirely their choice, it's their system, and the customers, by buying one of their devices, opt in to that system (after all, it's not like this is a big secret). But I think it obvious that advocates of a whitelist-based approach to application security didn't have in mind the approach Apple has taken with their system.
We can all agree that once the device is purchased it belongs to someone other than the manufacturer.
I think we can also agree that the software on that device uses is NOT the property of the device owner but that of the company who wrote it. If one chooses to violate that license or circumvent it entirely it's their choice. The consequences are part of that decision. As someone said earlier, those living outside the lines should expect a cut or two not be wasting everyone's time complaining about it.
Bottom line, if you don't like it, use a device that has more open licensing standards or invent your own and put whatever the hell you want on it.
My personal opinion on this is that people want to keep their cake and eat it proverbially speaking. Whether it's rooted in jealousy at the the companies for raking in such profits or something else I have no clue but the small group (comparatively) of iPhone and iPad and PS3 users who are complaining about this is not going to be enough to change the landscape of things to come.
It seems largely apparent that the vast majority of users of these devices and others are perfectly happy with the way the software works and the scheme does a good job of maintaining a standard operating efficiency for the devices. Imagine if every user of anything were required to be an expert level programmer to put apps on, play games, or simply use it. It would be utter chaos and everyone would instead be complaining about the device's lack of intuitive capability and would ultimately go the way of the dodo.
I maintain that one of the prime reasons iPhones are so popular is BECAUSE of the software being so locked down. Any IT support staff member will tell you that a system idiots can't accidentally break is a godsend.
I think it's natural to assume that anyone advocating a "whitelist" approach to applications would simultaneously advocate an option to voluntarily opt out of that process
Not at all. Most of the more successful whitelists in history have been the product of either Government or Organized Religion. Neither of which is particularly interested in having you "opt out". Some people will support these mandatory whitelists if they feel that the value of the law and order they provide outweighs the value of the loss of freedom. Even some current iPhone users would be against an opt-out system if they thought it would disrupt the highly controlled ecosystem they're comfortable in.
It's analogous to buying a car and being told you can't change the oil/rotate the tyres/install an aftermarket stereo yourself.
You own (?) the physical handset, so what right (besides invalidating warranties) do Apple have to prevent you from modifying your property?
Not at all. Most of the more successful whitelists in history have been the product of either Government or Organized Religion.
Don't be an idiot. We're talking about a technical whitelist. It's no different than Ubuntu signing their packages, or Microsoft signing drivers. The only difference between those cases and Apple's app store is that Ubuntu and Microsoft let the user opt out.
Seriously, troll much?
They ran Symbian.
As far as I know, no United States carrier has made an S60 phone its flagship offering, at least not the way AT&T has marketed the iPhone. So please allow me to narrow my assertion:
Probably someone who bought a smartphone for use in the United States before Android OS phones became common.
No trolling at all, although perhaps I should have spoken differently. "Most of the successful _mandatory_ whitelists..."
Signed packages or drivers are one thing if there's an easy way to install unsigned packages or drivers. Ubuntu or Microsoft is giving something an endorsement. Nothing more. But the iPhone, when used as Apple intends, forces average users to limit themselves to the whitelist. Apple has gone beyond this, and is acting as the Governor of their device. Whether or not this is a good thing is up for discussion.
It's not a hospital wall white, but more like a Motel-6 wall white. You know, white, but muted so that the the owners don't have to scrub it all the time but it still looks white enough.
No trolling at all, although perhaps I should have spoken differently. "Most of the successful _mandatory_ whitelists..."
And nothing about the concept of the application whitelist requires the list be mandatory. All it needs to do is put a barrier in the way that the user must jump over before they can opt out (for example, agreeing to void their warranty or limit their support contract).
Signed packages or drivers are one thing if there's an easy way to install unsigned packages or drivers. Ubuntu or Microsoft is giving something an endorsement. Nothing more.
No, what they're actively saying is "these things are trusted, you can use them safely". Particularly in the case of Microsoft signing drivers, that's far more than an endorsement, as it comes with a guarantee of safety. Which is, of course, the entire point of a whitelist to begin with.
But the iPhone, when used as Apple intends, forces average users to limit themselves to the whitelist. Apple has gone beyond this, and is acting as the Governor of their device.
Yes, congratulations, you've just reiterated a good part of my original post. Well done.
The part you left out is that Apple's system is *not* necessarily what whitelisting proponents intended, and so the OP's post, I think, draws a contradiction where one doesn't exist. Rather, Apple's system goes much farther than simply providing security guarantees on whitelisted apps, and is instead being used as a tool for limiting competition.
If you buy an iPhone when you really wanted an Android phone
What handset should someone have bought instead between when iPhone with iPhone OS 2.0 came out (July 2008) and when Motorola Droid came out (November 2009)?
or an XBox 360 when you wanted a PC
I want a PC and its comparative openness, but some of my favorite video game genres are horribly underrepresented on PC.
It is kind of amazing how more Americans don't speak out against this kind of lockdown. GM, in the 70s, tried to do something similar by requiring that its customers use only GM parts and even GM fluids or risk nullifying the warranty. Amazing how everyone raised the hue and cry and this thing got struck down. Remember, the consumers hold all of the power.
They make stupid laws, people won't obey them. What else is new?
Ya gotta love the sensitivity of the slashdot children when you criticize anything about their firefox blankey.
..when you go out of your way to criticize firefox on a topic that has nothing to do with firefox. Yeah, I know, like petulant little children, all modding that off topic flamebaiting as off topic, the nerve! They're almost as bad as [insert group here] when I go into one of their [rallies/forums/other place of gathering or discussion] and talk trash on [insert unrelated subject that happens to be viewed favorably by a good number of said partisans].
But I like the idea that I can give one to my Mom, let her get apps off the app store, and not have to de-gunk the malware every 3 months like I do with her PC.
The inherent problem of Apple's model isn't the Whitelist itself. That's great, specially for computer illeterate people who would otherwise have to hunt the whole web to find what they need and would very probably download a lot of malware while doing so (see what happens with Windows installations).
The problem is that there's no other alternative. If you're unhappy with your iPhone, the only solution is to jail break it (or not buy it).
Meanwhile, there are a lot of other concurrent solution which are NOT completely locked down. See the Palm Pre, for exemple. It too, has an application store featuring applications which have been cherry picked and doctored. It's guaranteed no to fuck up the phone, just like the App Store. *BUT* if you are not happy with this default solution, you can take any new device - i mean "out-of-the-box", no special exploit or hack required - and type a specific command, you can turn on the developer mode and do what you want. Including install another application downloaded (Namely "Preware" - not only works with official WebOs Palm-approved apps, but also with homebrew, etc.)
The same could also be applied to Android or lots of other phones (and in one instant, console: Sony's PS3, at least until the recent "Other OS" debacle). Only Apple makes big effort to prevent any form of alternative on their phones.
And it's not like this will lead to Joe-6-pack accidentally gunking the Phone : There's a default App Store with all that is needed (up until recently when Apple started removing pr0n content), and switching into developer mode requires clear unambiguous action from the owner - you can't download malware from the internet by accident, you have to voluntary take specific actions before stepping out of the walled garden.
Results : Competitors have been providing less drastically controlled environment and their users still haven't suffered the massive phone-infection that Apple's fans have predicted.
(That's also the model followed by Linux distro too. With an official repository for officially sanctioned packages and 3rd party repository to get extra stuff. Except that one would argue that Linux is for computer-literate people, and that this is the real reason why less Linux user get malware from random internet places).
Think of the outcry if Microsoft created a "Microsoft Apps Market place" and declared it the only possible source for software running on Windows, while kicking out competitors like OpenOffice.org.
A "Microsoft Apps Market-Place" would be acceptable, only as long as interested users could also use Valve's Steam or a hypothetical Google OpenSource App repo. Otherwise users will complaining about abuse. Well that' exactly the kind of abuse which Apple is forcing onto their consumers.
That's maybe the real reason while Apple wants 100% control : otherwise there might be a risk of concurrent ecosystems emerging (an iPhone port of Steam ?) from which Apple gets absolutely zero revenue. That and the fact that people at Apple are absolute control freak who want 100% control over the "Apple experience" because that's what they are experts at : selling an experience, an image.
But if it works for Androids or Palm phones, there's no actual reason why the system should work with them.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Edit: meant group, not partisans...
Why do i keep talking about hardware failures? Where else do I talk about it?
And if you read my comment, I clearly state that is something Apple SHOULD still be on the hook for.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
I do have some locked devices because I need them professionally and many of them suck because of their restrictions. I get rid of them when I can and when people ask me about it, I tell them that I'm stuck with them but not to get their own if they can help it. How's that for guerilla marketing?
I'm not going to help the companies that produce this kind of junk by working around their own restrictions or doing free advertising for them.
These should not be compared. If I were to buy an iPhone, I full expect to be locked into a specific carrier, run one app at a time, purchased from one store, if allowed by the manufacturer. It is for this reason I would never purchase an iPhone.
When I bought a PS3, running another operating system was an advertised feature, and partially effected my decision to purchase the system. Taking a feature away after purchasing the product is bait and switch advertising, and should be illegal.
I'm disgusted with Sony, and I will not update.
I don't like Apple, but they don't bother me because they are upfront about the limits they impose.
It's not actually Apple's fault. In my research for building hackintoshes I learned that the reason you can't use an off-the-shelf GTX 285 in a Mac Pro is the card's firmware isn't capable of interfacing with the EFI (BIOS) in a Mac. The Mac version of the 285 actually has different firmware than the PC card. If you wanted to risk bricking a $400 card you could try flashing a PC card with EFI-compatible firmware.
"No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title."
Doesn't sound like it effectively controls anything if it can be so easily bypassed.
Rather than the effectiveness of the measure what about "the work" itself? The iPhone OS controls access to what you can run on the hardware device but does not protect it from being copied. So if I want to write and run my own program on the iPhone/iTouch surely the DMCA would not apply since my work is not protected from me and the iPhone OS does not protect the device from being copied and so you are circumventing a measure that does not prevent copying of anything that is protected. Of course this would need a clever lawyer and lots of money to argue in court but fortunately I live in Canada where (at least so far) there is no DMCA.
mac os x also needs to be open to all x86 hardware as well.
That's not going to happen anytime soon. Doing so gambles the entire company on effective and fast enforcement of antitrust laws against Microsoft, since MS would then be in direct competition. The US's track record on actually enforcing their laws is so terrible US companies go to the EU to get action against other US companies. So unless you have a brilliant new business plan for entering a monopolized market, Apple would have to be braindead to try this until Windows install base is under 70%.
...and apple still like to pull that video card lock in carp[sic] so you pay $250-$300 for a old video that cost about $50 - $100 more then the pc ver of it.
Yeah, because it is in Apple's best interests to have peripherals for their computers more expensive? Apple would love it if they could get more video card companies to support their systems with proper support for EFI and drivers that are not abysmal. As Apple's market share increases the market makes this more profitable for peripheral makers, but economy of scale takes a lot to overcome.
G1
I commend T-Mobile for taking the lead in offering Android OS phones, but T-Mobile's signal coverage is even worse than the AT&T coverage about which iPhone critics like to complain. And what Android-based alternative to an iPod Touch do you recommend for someone who doesn't want another phone bill?\
Put another way, if you are purchasing a phone with the expectation that it doesn't meet your needs, how much can you really complain afterward?
My needs expanded, and my phone failed to expand with them.
Most of the genres that are more highly represented on console than PC that I can think of involve the kinds of game best played on a couch with others (party games, etc).
Exactly those. I'm trying to compile a list of substitutes for titles on closed platforms, and I need more native couch multiplayer games for a home theater PC. Sure, there's Sonic Kart to replace Mario Kart, and Street Fighter IV is a decent traditional fighting game. But what platform fighting game (like Power Stone or Smash Bros.) do you recommend? Or anything like Mario Party?
So the question is which is more important to you: the openness of the platform, or the number of applications (games) available?
That choice shouldn't have to be taken. Why should I have to have one box exclusively for major-label video games and a separate box exclusively for independent video games?
Nokia N900 built on Maemo (Debian Linux)..... Ahh shit, thats 7 words. As soon as I've got a couple more apps ported to it, my Jailbroken iphone goes to the wayside!
As an example, let's say a car manufacturer sells two variations of the same car, one with 100 horse powers, and the other with 200 horse powers, for different prices. Which is Ok, you get different things, you pay different amounts. Now the manufacturer finds a way to change the horse power of its engine using software. They can still offer the same two car variants, but you are saying they shouldn't be allowed to do that. What justification do you have for that except your own personal greed?
This is nothing new. A lot of professional software is sold using this sort of tiered approach.
For instance, some PCB layout packages let you buy a cheap version that is limited to two layers, a certain board size and perhaps only a hundred pins. Pay them some more money and now you can do 4 layers and a larger board size and more pins. Pay them even more money and you can do 32 routing layers and unlimited board size and pin count.
Or consider VHDL simulation software. You can use the free version which is speed limited and has a limit to the number of lines of code before it becomes unusable. Pay some money and the lines-of-code limit is removed (but it's still slow). Pay more money for the "personal edition" and it's faster. Pay even more money and it's faster yet, plus you can do mixed-language simulation with more advanced features.
In all of these cases, you download and install the software once and if you want the extra features you pay more money and get a license which unlocks those feature. The advanced features are always there, just not available unless you pay. And in many cases, the lower-cost versions are sufficient. So in this manner, the vendor makes money by appealing to all levels of the market.
Hell, even Quicken works like this. The basic version of Quicken has a bunch of features. The Deluxe version, for a few dollars more, allows you to use other features. "Upgrading" is as simple as giving Intuit a credit card number which unlocks those features in your current install.
Have you never heard of Carterfone?
The wireless carriers have tended to act like they haven't heard of Carterfone. POTS after the Bell breakup looks a lot more like the European mobile phone market than like the U.S. mobile phone market for these reasons:
T-Mobile is probably the closest thing the U.S. has to the European phone market, but among U.S. nationwide carriers, it has the worst signal coverage.
It can't even show animated GIFs,
I'd consider that a feature.
Isn't any repository a whitelist?
Mod this man up!!!
Let's end the Apple myth. I see all these planted and biased reviews, and I can't take it. They're just garbage and they're feeding the Apple image, which frankly isn't true. I recently used an IPhone, AND an Android phone. Both phones for a month (not 2 days like most reviewers). Let me precede that both are pretty darn good. But the IPhone isn't better. Here are my findings as to what is better about each over the other:
IPhone
1. Appearance of "smoothness." Notice I said "appearance." They're both just as quick, it's just that the IPhone has better visual animations in the interim to distract you to make you think that's its immediate. It's really not as quick as you think between actions.
2. Touch screen works the way you think. This feature isn't better, only different. Once you get used to either phone, it doesn't matter. With the IPhone, when you press something, adjusts to where you really think you're pointing, whereas in Android, it's where your finger actually rests and makes contact with the capacitive screen.
Android
1. Probably the most amazing and useful feature ever in a phone--auto synchronization between Gmail, Google calendar, contacts, and photos. Yes blah blah Mobile Me. Well Google is free--Apple is $100/yr. And please, the functionality and features of Gmail and Google calendar absolutely crap on the lame excuse of the Apple offerings. Don't even try to argue this one.
2. Free turn-by-turn GPS. Killer feature here. Saves you like $15/mo for navigation. That's big. And I could never justify 15/mo when I could navigate myself with Mapquest. Well now that I use it, it's amazing, and I still can't justify the 15/mo for it, but I can justify getting an Android phone over Apple for it.
3. Free tethering. This feature is huge. You're paying for a data plan either way, but at least with Android you don't need to shell out another 60 per month for a wireless cell service just because Apple says "Because I say so."
4. Higher resolution. Makes text to much more readable and the difference in image quality is like night and day between the two.
5. The ability to use it as a mass storage device, with a removable Micro SD card. Droid has 16gb worth to store.
6. User-replaceable battery. No $60 rip-off price and driving to an Apple store to get a new battery installed. And tell me this, one day your IPhone will freeze. Not if, but when (all software does). Do you want to be out a few days just to gain use of your phone when it won't restart via software? When with Android, all you have to do is pull the battery out? This one is a scary demerit for Apple.
7. I can install what I want. I'm not told I can't use tethering. Killer features then the IPhone doesn't have: tethering and VoIP (and I mean on a cell network, NOT over wifi--wifi is useless if you're out of your house, and NO I'm not going to travel to Starbucks to use VoIP, no matter how plentiful they are).
8. Finally, the last game changer and killer feature Android has over the competition: voice to text translation, in all fields (especially text messages). I've never seen a voice-to-text program since the early 90s that actually worked well. I can't believe it, but Google's does. I barely even use the keyboard when sending texts anymore.
And to address all the "b-b-but !", no, Jailbreaking is NOT a solution. It just isn't. The average person doesn't know how to do it, the average person technically inclined who actually has a job can't be bothered, and I'm not voiding my warranty or preventing myself from getting updates for it.
As you can see, the baseline of each phone is pretty equal. But the only features that the IPhone excels at are weak. Androids superior features are pretty much game changers. I only hope that at least some people read this to know how the products REALLY compare.
Go ahead now, mod me down into oblivion.
Of course you guys realize you are debating a verrrry old story about the Garden of Eden...
Average Joe User = Adam
You = Eve
iPhone = The 'Apple'
Steve Jobs = God
Jailbreaking = Original Sin
Read the op. The op went out of his way to criticize i.e. on a topic that has nothing to do with i.e. Get the comment now? And let's get this straight, I hate i.e. and haven't touched it in a decade.
The problem is that a fanboi simply saw their toy being 'maligned' (debatable, since it's essentially true), and failed to be adult enough to recognize the parody and penalize the parent post as well. Then again, the child mentality tends to act first and think never.
As a member of Slashdot with a 5-digit uid, I find the standards here have been in steady decline in the last several years and most effort to 'improve' the place has been in the area of appearance, not substance. I and many members I know rarely come here any more and can't be bothered to log in most of the time. Too much fanboism and not enough mature judgement in the (meta)moderating. Instead of maturing, this site has gotten more juvenile.
It should also be pointed out that your post is also completely off-topic, but has been modded "insightful". So, it doesn't take much more than supporting the majority view to get modded up these days, and dissent to the majority view regularly gets modded down.
So, high-fives and fist-bumps all around. Enjoy the circle-jerk, folks.
'bye
p.s. I have no interest in a flame war. The above is all I'm going to say. I've got grown-up things to do.
My policy is not to buy anything that needs jailbroken. If everyone did that, they wouldn't be using that ****.
It's the company's fault for ruling it with an iron fist. There should be consumer protection policies implemented to prevent this. Distributing copyright materials is already illegal, there is no need for software/hardware to behave this way.
who's against it?
--
Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!
However, Apple also forces people to use their whitelist -- an iPad user is not free to use someone else' whitelist, or not whitelist at all. This is not truly an issue of security; this is an issue of rights, freedom, and control.
Why not allow users to select a non-Apple app store? Why not allow users to opt out of the "security?" Probably because Apple did not have security in mind when they decided to undermine the rights of their users.
Palm trees and 8
Are you the kind of person who will wait at a “Don’t Walk” sign on an empty street? Then you probably live in Seattle.
that had me rofl.
The reason we wait for the Walk is because we usually have weed on us and don't want the cops to hassle us.
Be seeing you...
...and apple still like to pull that video card lock in carp[sic] so you pay $250-$300 for a old video that cost about $50 - $100 more then the pc ver of it.
Yeah, because it is in Apple's best interests to have peripherals for their computers more expensive? Apple would love it if they could get more video card companies to support their systems with proper support for EFI and drivers that are not abysmal. As Apple's market share increases the market makes this more profitable for peripheral makers, but economy of scale takes a lot to overcome.
Most Apple computers aren't exactly ready to have third-party video cards added. Any Mac with "Book" in the name isn't going to have much of a third-party market for video cards, and I'm not sure about the iMac or Mac mini, either. That leaves the Mac Pro and Xserve, neither of which are, I think, high-volume machines by Apple standards.
Actually, you're wrong. Use of circumvention tools is considered fair use in the same cases as anything else. The problem, is that distribution of said tools is in almost all situations not considered fair use, so it it illegal for anyone to develop a tool that allows people to circumvent protection which they have the right to break. In effect, anyone who does not have the rights to give away the data itself does not have the right to release a circumvention tool in the US.
A good precedent for this is the RealDVD case, where the judge confirmed that it is perfectly legal (fair use) for a person to rip a DVD they own, but not for Real Networks to distribute the software that enables it:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/RealDVD/Real%20v%20DVD-CCA%2C%20PI%20Order%20081109.pdf
I don't see why it's so hard to grasp the iPhone is not, and was never intended to be, a general-purpose computing device.
If it weren't enough that the hardware is more or less as capable of as the general-purpose hardware of 10 years ago, we could use the words of their own marketing campaign:
"there's an app for that."
It presents as a small, mobile computer with a touchscreen. The development environment lets you write apps the do general computer-y things. The app in the store do general computer-y things, except ones that Apple doesn't want to accept, and the phone will even do those if you jailbreak it.
It walks like a duck and quacks like a duck; I think it's likely that we're dealing with a member of the family anatidae.
Tweet, tweet.
Maybe, but I don't want Apple writing my whitelists. I can decide for myself what I want.
When it comes to the ballot box, though, people are very unified in strongly supporting the idea that government should initiate force to limit what people can do with things that they own.
And you know that, because all the democrats prefer voting for the Democratic Party, rather than the Democratic Party Prime, which is exactly like its sister party except they have a different stance on copyrights (and vice versa for republicans).
Wait, no... in fact, I don't think you know that; the historical outcome is consistent with a population ignorant of copyright laws and caring very strongly about their relative preferences for tax-paid public television stations and (freedom of) gun ownership. Or some other political issue.
And that's what's wrong with a two-party system: you can buy only whole packages, not individual bits and pieces, and none of the two parties can split into two camps based on an issue if the election system is clone-deterring...
Isn't any repository a whitelist?
Yes. That brings up the question: why trust one repository over another?
Why should I trust Debian's repository over RandomDude's (or vice versa)? Why should I trust Apple's over RandomDude's (or vice versa)?
Well, I guess Apple are trustworthy because they say so, and RandomDude didn't say he was trustworthy...
I've heard of not reading the article, and not reading the summary, but "jailbreaking" is right there in the article headline. This is a discussion about jailbreaking; this discussion centers around an apologetic for Apple's closed and inferior systems. The author, being a user who jailbreaks by definition, should not have thrown his money at a company that is so obviously hostile to him and others like him. He should have known better, and he shouldn't apologize for Apple or claim that "it just works" when it doesn't for him.
Like Mark Pilgrim says in the link I posted:
Nathan's blog
Is that manufacturers are allowed to right EULA's that violate the basic rights of citizens. I'm all for reading the EULA and for receiving consequences upon it's violation, because that's fair. But what I'm confused on is why companies are allowed to write EULA's that specify exactly what can and cannot be done with it period.
Take away service? Ok,that's fair. You don't know what I put on this device, so I can understand if you don't want to support it.
Discontinue updates? I get that, for the same reason as above.
Void warranty? I get that too, since I could easily be an idiot who broke it and that's not your responsibility.
But the one I don't get is why companies are allowed to write EULA's that basically allow them to retain ownership of a device after it's been "purchased." For all legal purposes, this item belongs to the consumer. If it's stolen, it's returned to the consumer, not Apple. Why then, is Apple allowed to make this claim to ownership?
Again, I'm very much in favor of realizing and accepting consequences under the law...but I really think the law is flawed here. The rules for EULA's needs to be visited and rewritten such that purchases of technology amount to more than borrowing your big brother's gameboy.
I totally agree, why should sony pull off features you had paid for from a device you own just because they think you no longer need them? that's totally wrong. This is where capitalism and greed have strove to overrule the rights entrenched in the constitutions of nations.