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.
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.
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.
you forgot
* blend it
Isn't any repository a whitelist?
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
Buy it, use it, break it, fix it,
Trash it, change it, mail - upgrade it,
Charge it, pawn it, zoom it, press it,
Snap it, work it, quick - erase it,
Write it, cut it, paste it, save it,
Load it, check it, quick - rewrite it,
Plug it, play it, burn it, rip it,
Drag and drop it, zip - unzip it,
Lock it, fill it, call it, find it,
View it, code it, jam - unlock it,
Surf it, scroll it, pause it, click it,
Cross it, crack it, switch - update it,
Name it, rate it, tune it, print it,
Scan it, send it, fax - rename it,
Touch it, bring it, Pay it, watch it,
Turn it, leave it, start - format it.
Technologic
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
No, not really. How much do you think it costs to develop games for the PS3 or XBox 360? Developing professionally for those platforms costs thousands of dollars. PS3 did have the Linux option, now gone, and XBox 360 does have hobbyist options, but if you actually want to release games to the public, you're not talking the retail price of the device, you're talking thousands. 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. The development model, OS and user experience are designed to bring console-style simplicity and reliability to a smartphone. It works, and everyone is really happy with it, other than a few geeks who just can't grasp that it's not designed to be a really really small laptop. That's why Apple keep such a tight grasp on what goes on the device, how it's programmed etc., so it doesn't descend into a mess. It's also way, way cheaper to develop for than consoles.
Console like simplicity is good for most typical users, but it effectively excludes the more technical class of users who want more control. In that respect, current games consoles and ipad/iphone go too far one way, while something like windows that requires you to deal with updates, drivers and anti malware protection etc goes too far in the other.
A compromise more like the Amiga would be better - typical users could boot the machine directly into a game or specific apps either from floppy or cd on certain models, while more technically literate users could boot up into workbench etc.
Don't alienate the geeks when making products suitable for end users.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Everything you say is absolutely correct. In effect, you never really own an iPhone. You are just licensing the use of Apples hardware/software and you have zilch to say about the decisions Apple makes regarding what that will/wont allow to be done to the device, and even what platform and languages you use to develop for the device.
Which is why, as a developer, I can't imagine the draw to develop for the iPhad platform (the potential for riches is greatly overrated), when there is an alternative.
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
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. The development model, OS and user experience are designed to bring console-style simplicity and reliability to a smartphone. It works, and everyone is really happy with it, other than a few geeks who just can't grasp that it's not designed to be a really really small laptop.
Agreed. If you buy an iPhone when you really wanted an Android phone, or an XBox 360 when you wanted a PC, or any number of other closed-platform solutions when what you wanted was an open-platform you have only yourself to blame.
After you have bought the device that doesn't fit your requirements is the wrong time to complain about it. Either don't buy it, or deal with the limitations. Simply buying the closed device and then complaining that it's closed continues to funnel money towards that closed platform, and away from the open platform you should have purchased instead. Suddenly, you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
How much do you think it costs to develop games for the PS3 or XBox 360? Developing professionally for those platforms costs thousands of dollars.
Don't you see that as a problem? If I wish to develop something for use on the console that I own, I should be able to do that. If other people find it valuable and want to pay me for a copy, I should be able to let them do that. At no point should I have to ask permission from anyone or pay anyone.
To use the venerable car analogy, if I want to manufacture after-market addons for a car I should not have to ask GM for permission or pay them any sort of fee.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
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.