T-Mobile G2 'Permaroot' Achieved

VValdo writes "After over a month of relentless hacking, genius scotty2 has finally smashed the G2's notorious emmc-read-only-on-boot mechanism, which had been incorrectly characterized in the press as a 'rootkit.' The hack involves several steps — first achieving 'temp root' through a fork bomb exploit, then running a specially crafted kernel module that power-resets the read-only emmc to bring it up in read-write mode. Finally, the bootloader is re-flashed, which permanently removes the read-only on subsequent boots. The whole process is expected to be automated by tomorrow."

Comments

Now if they could only add another rows of keys

[leighklotz]

Now if they could only add another rows of keys I could type my password...

Re:Now if they could only add another rows of keys

[FunkyELF]

yeah.... I miss the vertical pipe too

Re:Now if they could only add another rows of keys

[leighklotz]

It's missing []{}|\`. All but ` you can type with a pop-up on-screen kbd.
I'd like to see something like the Samsung Epic 4G keyboard from Tmobile.

Re:Now if they could only add another rows of keys

[Daniel Phillips]

The G2 keyboard is pretty nice, but Goog totally dropped the ball on handling special symbols. You simply cannot enter the special symbols with the keyboard and the cursor control is way broken. These are software issues. Just one of a huge list of little warts marring a decent product.

If the Android project were truly open such issues would be well on their way to being fixed by now. But it is not truly open and satisfactory solutions will therefore not come from Google, they will come from people who like to fix things for the love it, not just to pull down a paycheck. And that in a nutshell is why root access and community built roms are essential to the continued success of Android.

Re:Now if they could only add another rows of keys

[cdombroski]

You realize that you can download and install new soft keyboards from the market, right? (Assuming that your provider/manufacturer didn't decide that you couldn't have the market...) In fact, here's a list of soft keyboards on the market. (Granted most of these are for non-English languages, but there's a few out there that try to improve on the stock keyboard.)

Re:Now if they could only add another rows of keys

[otterpopjunkie]

Not that I disagree with your point, but the cursor control did improve from 2.1 to 2.2 which has been wild for a while.

Re:Now if they could only add another rows of keys

[justme8800]

Um, you do realize that you can hold down keys on the G2 keyboard for more options? Hold "alt" and the parenthesis key for brackets or curly braces. Hold down alt slash for the backslash. Alternatively, you can just type alt space for some symbols. The only symbol the G2 keyboard is truly missing (that I can tell) is the caret. It does have a superscript 2, though, so it's not usually a problem.

Re:Now if they could only add another rows of keys

[Anonymous Coward]

I wasn't aware that Google had anything to do with the hardware design of the G2. I thought Google just wrote the OS-OS (open source operating system;) and provided the Google branded services...

Google has no control over what companies and users do with the source code...

this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

"Buying" a device that doesn't become yours and then going through extreme measures to make it yours doesn't help anything. It hurts everybody in the end, because (a) it makes the next round of devices even MORE locked down to since they learned from last time, and (b) it doesn't exert economic pressure against this sort of lock down to begin with.

Re:this just encourages them

[Lazareth]

But it does train us for the future. Sometime after 2020 everybody will be able to permaroot their house in their sleep (which might be a necessity).

Re:this just encourages them

[icebike]

So what then is your suggestion?

Continue to pay for something you can never really own?

Demonstrating that any lock down can be broken does exert pressure for the companies to stop wasting their resources.

Bringing a phone to market has real costs associated with it.

If they know it will be hacked (often before its official release date) why bother trying? Why spend all that money and time dicking around with some cat and mouse game where you are always the mouse, when your competition can get there quicker by avoiding the effort.

All they really need is an indicator that it WAS hacked so they can choose to honor the warranty or not, (Like the Nexus One, which gives you root at the press of a button, but makes it obvious you chose to take it).

Sooner or later we should start pushing for lock downs to be made illegal, and demonstrating that they are ineffective is as good a first step as any.

Re:this just encourages them

[Darkness404]

Sooner or later we should start pushing for lock downs to be made illegal, and demonstrating that they are ineffective is as good a first step as any.

No, lock downs shouldn't be illegal, it should, however, on the packaging and in the contract say to what extent things are locked down.

It should be the manufacturer's right to lock down whatever in the product they send out, it isn't the manufacturer's right to send feature destroying firmware updates out with the intent to disrupt people who chose to use their devices in other ways just like it isn't within my rights to mail every Windows user I know a virus intending to cause harm and because it is fraud to sell a product then release something that makes the product inoperative.

On the other hand, it should be perfectly within anyone's rights to modify and use their legitimately purchased items in whatever way they want (assuming it doesn't cause harm to others).

Re:this just encourages them

[Microlith]

lock downs shouldn't be illegal

Why not?

It should be the manufacturer's right to lock down whatever in the product they send out

Why, when it only disenfranchises the end user?

On the other hand, it should be perfectly within anyone's rights to modify and use their legitimately purchased items in whatever way they want (assuming it doesn't cause harm to others).

This conflicts with the manufacturer being allowed to ship things locked down. I can understand secured with option to disable, but stuff like what Motorola does (and HTC, if they start signing the bootloader) precludes your right to work with your property, and solely for the benefit of the manufacturer.

Re:this just encourages them

[sqlrob]

Demonstrating that any lock down can be broken does exert pressure for the companies to stop wasting their resources.

Not really. Most, if not every, lock down in the past few decades have been broken. Yet they still persist. They're not going to learn.

Re:this just encourages them

[Man On Pink Corner]

Why, when it only disenfranchises the end user?

And legislative interference with the end user's right to enter into a contract -- regardless of your personal opinion about the terms of that contract -- isn't "disenfranchising"?

Re:this just encourages them

[geekoid]

And it is, but it may void your warranty; which it should. And lets not forget the fact that with a connected device, whatever you do may impact others.

For example, if you 'jail break' a phone to exceeds some internal limit on down load, then you are impacting everyone else who is also using the bandwidth.

That example was used to make a point, I have no idea if anyone is doing that.

Re:this just encourages them

[Entropius]

Only in a truly free market.

We've long passed the point where cell service is a true free market, with any real competition.

Re:this just encourages them

[Microlith]

legislative interference with the end user's right to enter into a contract

Oh boy, more nonsense. Is it really a fair contract when it's between you and a multi-billion dollar corporation presenting you a one-sided contract?

Indeed, it would be PUTTING POWER IN YOUR HANDS. They wouldn't be able to strip you of control over your own property (which it does eventually become.) And yet you whine?

Re:this just encourages them

[Microlith]

if you 'jail break' a phone to exceeds some internal limit on down load

Then someone is doing it very, very wrong.

Re:this just encourages them

[Lazareth]

So in short, the 'security' of the lockdown is to cover their ass because of bad design? To continue on your example, who the hell would think it a good idea to locally define how much or how fast one may download? That should be controlled by the "server" or in this case carrier, not the client. Don't trust the client with server-critical settings!

There's no legit reason to lock down a device in such a way, other than the 'legit' reason of not wanting the user to be able to upgrade the OS without shelling out more $$$.

Hypothetical questions of how the user can use the tampered device to cause harm is bollocks. The signals are transported through the air. Use other means than locking down the device to prevent "harmful" operation, such as actually designing the server-client interface to behave intelligently.

Re:this just encourages them

[Darkness404]

We have a network where pretty much everyone runs whatever they want on it. Its called the internet. And yet, oddly enough there aren't any major service disruptions other than a few localized events.

Re:this just encourages them

[cromar]

I agree, but I wonder if it is true no device can be irreversibly locked down. No one has done it yet, but I fear it may one day be possible to do so completely. I would love to be proven wrong.

Re:this just encourages them

[Darkness404]

You don't seem to understand the point.

A government who tries to 'help' consumers by limiting what corporations can do can and will just as easily screw customers in favor of corporations. If you don't screw with the balance of power and instead leave governments out of things like this, consumers gain more control.

When you put that control into the government's hands it flip flops back and forth from control from the people to the corporations back to the people then back to corporate control again.

It is a fundamental right for people to be able to sell whatever product they wish so long as its not represented fraudulently and doesn't cause harm when used normally. Similarly, it is a fundamental right to use whatever product you purchased in whatever way doesn't harm others. When kept in balance, both sides balance each other out, sure, HTC can make a locked down phone, but it is a right for consumers to break it. When that balance of power doesn't exist like in copyright, either side demands more and more legislative protection which removes any balance and shifts it on one side or the other.

Indeed, it would be PUTTING POWER IN YOUR HANDS

At the expense of taking the power out of HTC's hands. You don't seem to see the historical precedent set by just about every law which shifts the power, it goes from one side to the other where both sides end up losing.

The FDA was designed to 'protect' consumers but yet it is used for big corporations to squash competition from smaller, localized, farmers. Copyright was designed to protect the artist and the public but yet it doesn't. Patents were designed to not monopolize knowledge but to free it from the grasps of guilds, but yet it is a monopoly. Etc.

The only sustainable way to have freedom is to allow businesses to do what they will and let consumers do what they will. It is only through that, that a sustainable and free equilibrium can be reached.

Re:this just encourages them

[Lemmy Caution]

When it comes to this sort of thing, they don't need to learn. Most of their user base will not jailbreak or unlock anything; they don't get a lot of benefit from policing the few who do. In fact, if it becomes too easy, then there's a problem: if a critical number of people start tethering unlocked phones, the carrier will then need to meter bandwidth. As long as only a techie few are doing it, they can generally be left alone.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed, it would be PUTTING POWER IN YOUR HANDS.

At the cost of taking it from someone else's.

All well and good, until it's your hands that the power is being removed from.

Re:this just encourages them

[Microlith]

At the cost of taking it from someone else's.

From a corporation, whom otherwise has way, way more power than you. I don't consider that a problem.

Re:this just encourages them

[badboy_tw2002]

The GP post was pretty stupid (those limits would be on the tower/host side of things), but bandwidth isn't free in the cell world. Its the same as everyone trying to use the same wifi hotspot when you're at a conference or something - you are sharing with other people on the network. What _should_ be contractual is the amount of bandwidth you're to expect, and the provider should have to honor that by expanding service in heavy use areas.

Re:this just encourages them

[Darkness404]

This conflicts with the manufacturer being allowed to ship things locked down. I can understand secured with option to disable, but stuff like what Motorola does (and HTC, if they start signing the bootloader) precludes your right to work with your property, and solely for the benefit of the manufacturer.

No it doesn't. Consider someone buying a locked chest. It should be within someone's rights to sell a locked chest so long as the person who buys it knows that it is locked. It should be well within that person's rights that when they take it home, they decide to either pick the lock, cut off the lock, or smash open the chest. There is no conflict there. Now, that person shouldn't be able to force the seller of the locked chest to help him glue back the pieces of the chest he smashed open because he took that risk when he took a hammer to it, but there still is no conflict, it was a fair deal: the person got what he paid for knowing it would be a locked chest and the person selling it got the money from what they were selling.

It is only when you involve government that there can be conflicts. It is only with government control that you can get into pointless 'rental' disputes about how you never actually owned the things you paid for.

Re:this just encourages them

[Darkness404]

But that has nothing to do with jailbreaking. I can just as well use that much bandwidth streaming Pandora all day on a non-jailbroken iPhone or non-rooted G2 and the idea that jailbreaking somehow is going to add to bandwidth problems is rather silly at best.

Re:this just encourages them

[Microlith]

You don't seem to understand the point.

I don't defend the ability for corporations to leverage their power over people in unfair ways.

It is a fundamental right for people

People. The biggest failure of the Supreme Court was for them to declare corporations as legal persons, despite being complete legal fictions.

HTC can make a locked down phone, but it is a right for consumers to break it

Except when HTC utilizes their control over the design to ensure that you can't. Sort of like how no one has broken Motorola's lock down of the boot loader or kernel.

The only sustainable way to have freedom is to allow businesses to do what they will and let consumers do what they will. It is only through that, that a sustainable and free equilibrium can be reached.

Nonsense. Corporations have too much power and control information too well for there to be a truly informed consumer base. That and corporations deliberately leverage the ignorance of the masses for their own benefit. Corporations and people are not equal. As it stands they have way more in terms of rights, power, money, and political influence than you and will always use it to disenfranchise you and benefit themselves.

But go ahead, believe in the "Free Market." Like I said on Ars the other day, like God, I don't believe it exists.

Re:this just encourages them

[Microlith]

#%@#$

Forgot a closing blockquote in there, right before "People" :(

Re:this just encourages them

[Microlith]

I wonder if it is true no device can be irreversibly locked down

Technically it is. The catch is that to unlock, say, a Motorola device you'd need to desolder the SoC stack and install a new OMAP3 chip in its place. This is a nontrivial, highly risky operation even when done with specialized equipment.

So while it is technically defeatable, effectively it is not.

Re:this just encourages them

[Daniel Phillips]

So what then is your suggestion?

Allow me to make a suggestion. Pressure Google. The Google logo is writ large on this HTC/T-Mobile phone. Google is more responsible for the evil lack of respect for the free software this phone is built with than anybody else.

Make it known to any Google representative who will listen (warning: these are few and far between) that you regard the company as hypocritical and cynical, and not worthy of your trust unless the rights of owners of phones running Android/Linux are fully respected.

And yes, I know all about Google and cynical, after all I worked there for three years and had plenty of opportunity to observe Google management up close. Google is in fact just another cynical megacorp, however it is slightly unusual in that its stock will suffer greatly if its users ever become widely aware of this fact. Therefore, Google tends to be slightly more responsive to justifiable criticism than other cynical megacorps.

Re:this just encourages them

[null etc.]

It's funny to read this comment after seeing an ad from the BSA on Slashdot's homepage. Unfortunately, that means that this will be my last post here. I'm off to inhabit other virtual locales that don't cater to the strong-arm tactics of the BSA.

Re:this just encourages them

[a_nonamiss]

I mostly agree with your point, but I can think of a few examples where a user could unlock a phone and cause harm to others. For example, they could increase the signal strength to something beyond the approved FCC limit for mobile devices. This would harm anyone in the competing spectrum, and isn't something you could regulate on a server end.

If course, when I'm talking about "unlocked" here, I'm also referring to things you could do the hardware as well as the firmware. (i.e. open the device up and replace the fancy electric stuff and whatnot.)

Re:this just encourages them

[Darkness404]

I don't defend the ability for corporations to leverage their power over people in unfair ways.

How is it unfair?

I go to buy a product, I am informed of the product and reasonably can know its limitations. I buy that product. I am able to use that product as I see fit.

Yes, I do think that phones should have to say on the packaging if they do not allow root/admin/superuser/etc. access. But saying that you can't sell them despite the fact that people were aware of the limitations is as silly as saying we should ban tomatoes because they don't give you the ability to fly.

Except when HTC utilizes their control over the design to ensure that you can't. Sort of like how no one has broken Motorola's lock down of the boot loader or kernel.

Oh yes, I forgot about the fact that I was held up at gunpoint and forced to buy Motorola products! I mean, I was just sleeping and a Motorola representative pointed a 9MM at my head and handed me a Droid and made me use it.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. There are phones sold pre-rooted without a contract. Go buy one of those if you want one.

Nonsense. Corporations have too much power and control information too well for there to be a truly informed consumer base. That and corporations deliberately leverage the ignorance of the masses for their own benefit. Corporations and people are not equal. As it stands they have way more in terms of rights, power, money, and political influence than you and will always use it to disenfranchise you and benefit themselves.

Oh yes, I forgot that everyone everywhere was a corporate shill and that every single review MUST be written by an agent of a corporation. Bullshit. If you truly want to inform yourself you can read support forums, reviews from different sites, listen to what people on /. have to say about it, look at your friend's devices, etc. There can be a truly informed consumer base, the thing is, most people have no desire to be informed. No one wants the -best-, the most reliable, etc. they just want to make a statement with it.

And no, corporations (unlike governments) require the masses to survive. People automatically have leverage over corporations when the government steps out of the way and lets the market work. If people really didn't want phones like these, they would all buy Nexus Ones or similar phones and HTC wouldn't be profitable making locked-down phones and would switch to the more profitable phones or face increased competition from Nokia/Samsung/Motorola/etc. and don't say that the masses "didn't know" about the fact it was locked down, its pretty damn obvious if they were searching for it that it was locked down.

Corporations don't control the information, consumers just don't want to look for the information.

Re:this just encourages them

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Oh boy, more nonsense. Is it really a fair contract when it's between you and a multi-billion dollar corporation presenting you a one-sided contract?

And just to pile on here, note that its a multi-billion dollar corp that is dependent on government granted monopolies on otherwise public airspace. I'm sure the corps would argue that they bought those monopolies free and clear at the FCC spectrum auctions, but given that the entire reason for such monopolies is justified as public benefit it's not congruous with then limiting device functionality at the expense of the public.

Re:this just encourages them

[RulerOf]

They wouldn't be able to strip you of control over your own property (which it does eventually become.)

Eventually?!

My phone was mine the instant I bought it. I did, however, acquire it for a sub-retail price by agreeing to be either a customer of the reseller for 24 successive months or to pay them $375, pro-rated monthly after fulfillment of the first 12 months of the prior option have elapsed.

Contract or not, there's no fucking way that the device belongs to anyone other than its owner. The fact that rooting *a computer* that you own is dangerous and sometimes impossible, warranty or not, is egregiously offensive to me as a consumer.

If I buy your shit from you, it's not your shit anymore. It's my shit and you have no damn business telling me what I do with it, and no, I signed no contract stating otherwise.

Don't ever forget that, and don't ever let a retailer tell you differently.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, yeah, except that the radio is kept completely seperate from the main phone OS so there is zero chance for jailbreak or root to facilitate jacking up the power to the radio. Come back when you actually know what you're talking about, son.

Re:this just encourages them

[MichaelSmith]

they could increase the signal strength to something beyond the approved FCC limit for mobile devices.)

Doesn't seem to happen on the open moko and other free phones. The GSM module has its own processor and firmware. Rooting the processor which coordinates the system can't force the GSM module to do anything dangerous.

Re:this just encourages them

[Ihmhi]

IMO if you want to use someone's service, you have to use it their way. Certain Apple Apps would require a certain firmware that may have not been jailbroken yet. However, it should still be someone's choice to do what they want with a physical device they purchase.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll give you that the carrier may need to shut down your connection IF your phone is behaving badly on their voice network or control band. They already have ability to deal with "past limit" on their data plans.

How about we stipulate that if you've overclocked / under volted it acts just like the water sensor has gone off: no warranty. But for software that didn't overclock as long as you flash it back to standard before asking for repair there should be no reason that you have no warranty. You want software support? Fine, for the standard load only. I really don't get why it has to be harder than that and why the manufacturers and carriers want to make it harder than that. (Well, I can understand the greed aspect with the carriers often wanting to charge you to use something that is actually built into the software - but we should not tolerate that.)

Re:this just encourages them

[arth1]

Is this why the monthly price is cheaper and the coverage higher in countries where consumer protection prevents the mobile phone companies from locking phones (or for locking them for more than a couple of months after purchase)?

When legislation serves to increase competition instead of allowing de-facto oligopolies to strongarm the consumers, it isn't trampling people's rights; it's securing them.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anachragnome]

"So what then is your suggestion?"

Stop giving the manufacturers of such locked-down devices your money?

Trust me on this one--they will stop making something that doesn't make them money.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

its whatever the ad provider shows in rotation you blithering idiot.

Re:this just encourages them

[DavidRawling]

Furthermore, destruction of the lock and use of the unlocked chest does not excuse the seller breaking into your house at night and attaching a newer, stronger padlock to the chest, locking you out of it again (OTA updates anyone?) Also, what about the people that bought outright? Are you going to argue that the device suddenly becomes the property of the telco when the person signs up for service?

Bloody anonymous cowards ...

Re:this just encourages them

[wampus]

And you can't modify the radio software. Why is that ok?

Re:this just encourages them

[Miamicanes]

> All they really need is an indicator that it WAS hacked so they can choose to honor the warranty or not,

For the record, in the United States, a consumer can't be coerced into disclaiming a manufacturer's warranty, and a manufacturer can't disclaim a warranty for mere breach of contractual terms (least of all a contract of adhesion) unless the breach involved non-payment for a service contract or the manufacturer can demonstrate that whatever it is that the consumer did WAS, in fact, the reason for the failure.

It's called the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.

Also, a few points that need to be repeated often:

* Few phones truly get "bricked". 99% of the time, someone screws up a reflash, panics when it doesn't reboot, posts a few messages online, hits google, then figures out 1-36 hours later that he needs to take out the battery, wait a minute or so, then power it back up with some nearly impossible combination of button-presses to trigger its REAL "last-chance" bootloader.

* It's almost impossible to truly cause real, honest-to-god permanent hardware damage to a recent-vintage phone by reflashing. Worst-case, it might take a minimum-wage employee at an authorized repair center with a JTAG a few minutes to reflash it.

Re:this just encourages them

[wampus]

Tethering isn't a terribly compelling reason to root the G2, considering you just have to check a box in the network settings. The only reason I even installed VISIONary is to add some shit to my hosts file to make my Angry Birds experience better.

Re:this just encourages them

[slinches]

My suggestion would be to buy an unlocked phone. They are readily available Here and can be used on any compatible network. The only drawback is that there only seems to be one carrier (T-Mobile) offering reduced pricing on service for a non-subsidized phone.

Re:this just encourages them

[MichaelSmith]

As long as the radio is a simple embedded appliance I am not too fussed about it. I give it my bits and bytes and the radio sends them on. From linux on the moko I can flash the GSM module, but I feed it a binary blob. There is nothing to stop me coding up my own binary, there just isn't much reason to do it beyond improving factors such as power management.

Re:this just encourages them

[wampus]

They already did stop selling things that don't make money- the hobbyist phones.

Re:this just encourages them

[slinches]

Replying to my own post, but I should clarify.

T-Mobile is the only US carrier that has lower pricing for plans without a subsidized phone. I think there are more options in other parts of the world.

Re:this just encourages them

[shoehornjob]

Corporations have too much power and control information too well for there to be a truly informed consumer base

While I agree that corporations in general (in the USA) have way too much power I disagree that the public wants to be truly informed. The general public in the USA suffers from what I call plug and play syndrome. People don't care if you can get root on a phone and load your own software. They want something that fills a need ( the corporations sold them on) and they want it to work with a minimum of hassle. This is why the Iphone is so popular. Try to talk to a person about tech and use a few terms they are unfamiliar about and you'll see the eyes glaze over. You're right on when you say "corporations deliberately leverage the ignorance of the masses for their own benefit". They get away with it because there are too many sheep in this country who have been bread for ignorance.

Re:this just encourages them

[thunderclap]

that's why the solution is not buy it to begin with. That is the only solution that truly works. If they don't get their return on their investment its a lesson to others who care only about money that this doesn't work. Cracking locked down objects still says that selling locked down objects is profitable and will continue to be so.

Re:this just encourages them

[jonwil]

Buy phones that dont require exploits or "jailbreaking" in order to use them.
Nokia N900
OpenMoko Freerunner
Nexus One
Palm Pre (last I heard the Pre doesnt require any hacks in order to replace the kernel or system files but I dont know if the new Palm Pre 2 is different in this respect)
Samsung Galaxy S (again, this one aparently doesnt require hacks)

Re:this just encourages them

[Cimexus]

Indeed. Buying the phone outright then just going home and popping your existing SIM card in (with your existing provider/account) is the norm in much of the world.

The 'cheap phone up front that you pay off via higher plan charges and a compulsory 24-month contract' model is the less-preferred option (or may not even be an option) in many places.

There are advantages to each approach. I personally prefer buying the phone outright (which is expensive, e.g. $700+ for a high end HTC/Samsung Android, or $800+ for iPhone 4) but not being locked to a provider or plan (since typically, better plans come out within the 24 month life of a typical contract). I'm a light user so can then go on a cheap $15/month plan or something.

On the other hand, if you are a heavy user and don't have any reason to change providers in the next 2 years, the subsidised phone/contract route can actually work out cheaper.

But I'm glad where I live, I have both options. In the US, as you say, T-Mobile is the only carrier that really lets you do that. And even then, due to the differing 3G frequencies used, the phone is unlikely to work at 3G speeds if you switch between T-Mobile and AT&T. Not to mention that rubbish phone 'exclusivity' you have over there (e.g. iPhone only with AT&T)...

Re:this just encourages them

[wampus]

Shhh! The less whiny nerdrage, the better.

Re:this just encourages them

[IamTheRealMike]

It's pretty sad you believe that. For one, if you'd like a phone that lets you reflash the OS you are welcome to buy a Nexus One direct from Google. The nature of open source code means that the phones made entirely by HTC may do things you disagree with. But that's openness for you. Sometimes people will do things you disagree with. It would be fairly pointless to have an open source OS if Google had veto power over every way in which it was used.

I don't know what the potshot at management is about. I've worked here for over four years and have also had plenty of opportunity to observe Google management up close. If they were really as cynical as you believe, they wouldn't have ensured Android was open source and the Nexus One was reflashable out of the box would they? This is something that, what, 0.01% of people purchasing phones probably base a purchasing decision on. If that. Yet here we are, with a phone of highly competitive quality that is also open to operating system developers. I haven't seen any other organization produce such a device, have you?

Re:this just encourages them

[mug funky]

i'm sort of wondering how you'd fare in a county where the government stepped back and let the free market reign do the government's job.

some essential services simply can't run at a profit - that's why government exists and why it collects taxes. looking at privatization, sometimes it works beautifully, but often running costs exceed reasonable expectations of profit.

i'm not advocating any particular point of view, just saying that yours is misguided, at least as i understand it.

Re:this just encourages them

[Daniel Phillips]

It's pretty sad you believe that. For one, if you'd like a phone that lets you reflash the OS you are welcome to buy a Nexus One [blogspot.com] direct from Google. The nature of open source code means that the phones made entirely by HTC may do things you disagree with. But that's openness for you. Sometimes people will do things you disagree with. It would be fairly pointless to have an open source OS if Google had veto power over every way in which it was used.

I believe you missed the part where the Google trademark is stamped all over the T-Mobile G2. If you do not think that gives Google veto power over evil additional restrictions on the distribution of GPL software, you did not think very hard.

If they were really as cynical as you believe, they wouldn't have ensured Android was open source and the Nexus One was reflashable out of the box would they?

Eric and Larray are plenty cynical by any objective measure. Sorry if you're too tanked up on koolaid to see it. Want another one? How about the posturing on carbon credits in context with their 767 pleasure buggy parked across the street at the air base? How about the blatant nepotism?

I don't really know a lot about Sergy, but I had plenty of occasion to note that Larry and Eric are both pretty "flexible" when it comes to morals versus money versus power. Sad, it certainly did not have to be that way. That said, Google is nowhere near as far gone as Microsoft, or Oracle say. And EMG certainly does recognize the value of getting the open source community to do their heavy lifting for them. It's not like full time Googler's actually have the stomache for hard work any more.

Re:this just encourages them

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

I couldn't agree more.

Google's flogging "OPEN OPEN OPEN!"

Well, no. It's not open to the endusers. Rooting is a mess.

Google screwed the pooch, big, with their licensing terms.

Yes, I am an iOS fanboy, but Steve Jobs and other Apple employees aren't tweeting about rebuilding iOS from source. They've set my expectations correctly.

Re:this just encourages them

[Fnkmaster]

Brilliant suggestion: buy a Nexus One. Best phone you can get right now. If you buy one of these locked down Android phones and whine about it, it's your own fault, and you are voting with your dollars for carriers to lock phones down. You are now part of the problem. Be part of the solution instead.

Re:this just encourages them

[Nethead]

It sounds like you have a bit of a bone to pick with the big G.

Here's a life lesson kid, don't crap on your past employers in public. It makes it hard for people to hire you in the future. I've worked for some big names (call them the big A) and I could tell stories. And I do, with friends after a few drinks. But I never would do that on a public geek forum like /. because maybe someone that is thinking of hiring me is reading.

Re:this just encourages them

[Nethead]

Whadda ya mean? I can still bring up the autopatch on my 2m HT!

Re:this just encourages them

[ScrewMaster]

But that has nothing to do with jailbreaking. I can just as well use that much bandwidth streaming Pandora all day on a non-jailbroken iPhone or non-rooted G2 and the idea that jailbreaking somehow is going to add to bandwidth problems is rather silly at best.

Carriers say they need total control of the applications and operating system so that "rogue" applications can't run amok and dilute the "user experience." Or something. What it comes down to is that they want to sell locked-down black boxes that can't do a fraction of what they should be capable of doing, so long as the user can't remove the crapware they install in an effort to generate an alternate revenue stream by selling advertising. That fucking pisses me off: trying to monetize my phone. Frankly, if they're going to pull that shit they'd better give me half off my monthly bill.

Re:this just encourages them

[Daniel Phillips]

Brilliant suggestion: buy a Nexus One. Best phone you can get right now. If you buy one of these locked down Android phones and whine about it, it's your own fault, and you are voting with your dollars for carriers to lock phones down. You are now part of the problem. Be part of the solution instead.

My G2 was rooted the day I got it and will soon be permarooted. This time, Google's weak kneed posture with respect to HTC's and T-Mobile's mean spirited abuse of the open source gift they have been given will come to no harm. Next time might be different. All the ISP's, the Android manfacturers, and especially Google, need to be put on notice that their open source rocket may fizzle and fall back to earth if they don't get a clue.

Why not get a Nexus one? It doesn't satisfy my hardware needs.

Re:this just encourages them

[ScrewMaster]

who have been bread for ignorance.

If more people could get bread for ignorance, they could cut down on their grocery bill.

Re:this just encourages them

[ScrewMaster]

IMO if you want to use someone's service, you have to use it their way. Certain Apple Apps would require a certain firmware that may have not been jailbroken yet. However, it should still be someone's choice to do what they want with a physical device they purchase.

Sure, and I will cheerfully agree not to use my cellular provider's service to rob banks or trigger bombs like they do in movies. But we aren't talking about use of service, we're discussing what you yourself said: the right to use our own property as we see fit.

Re:this just encourages them

[hrimhari]

Your example is great, and so is the argument against forbidding locked down devices. But I fail to see the link between that and government involvement.

Unless the government is involved there won't be any of either rights granted.

To me, excluding the government means everybody is free to do whatever they want with zero limits. Your neighbor can kill you and only somebody with a bigger gun will be able to do anything about it.

If you put you and a corporation in that competition, guess who wins...

Re:this just encourages them

[ScrewMaster]

And it is, but it may void your warranty; which it should.

Why? Does it it void your warranty if you install Windows XP on a computer that used to have Windows 98 on it? The only reason there's any risk whatsoever of damaging a phone while installing a third-party operating system is because the phone manufacturers have made it that way. Now, I had a G1 (rooted, running Cyanogenmod) and with a decent recovery partition installed and Nandroid backups it was damn near impossible to brick it. Not impossible, just very difficult ... and it wouldn't have been hard for HTC to made it impossible to brick. This "void your warranty" excuse is just that: an excuse, and frankly I'm sick of carriers making up reasons to turn powerful personal computers into pocket calculators. Pisses me off.

Re:this just encourages them

[ScrewMaster]

lock downs shouldn't be illegal

Why not?

It should be the manufacturer's right to lock down whatever in the product they send out

Why, when it only disenfranchises the end user?

On the other hand, it should be perfectly within anyone's rights to modify and use their legitimately purchased items in whatever way they want (assuming it doesn't cause harm to others).

This conflicts with the manufacturer being allowed to ship things locked down. I can understand secured with option to disable, but stuff like what Motorola does (and HTC, if they start signing the bootloader) precludes your right to work with your property, and solely for the benefit of the manufacturer.

I agree. This makes me think of the DMCA and Fair Use ... yes, we have that right (technically) but since content distributors were not required to make it possible for us to exercise that right (and in fact, the anti-circumvention and no-trafficking-in-tools clauses of the DMCA makes it largely impossible) we're still screwed. It's the same thing here: if we have a "right" that is removed via technology, then it's not really a right.

Re:this just encourages them

[Daniel Phillips]

Let's be clear. I still think Google is a great company and I still have not sold a single one of my respectable stack of Google shares. Stayed with it through thick and thin, and now thankfully we're back to the thick and I'm still not selling. However... Google is a great disappointment compared to what it could if it actually walked the walk that it talks, and compared to what it still could be. This saddens me greatly and I criticize in the hope that some good can come of it.

Certainly, nothing good can come from ignoring the creeping rot that has set in at MTV in many ways. Ignore that and you eventually follow in the footsteps of Microsoft, with only the entrenched management winning and all else including shareholders, employees and customers losing.

Re:this just encourages them

[Man On Pink Corner]

How did this corporation gain all this power over me in the first place, if the government didn't hand it to them?

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

Try to talk to a person about tech and use a few terms they are unfamiliar about and you'll see the eyes glaze over.

Maybe they genuinely don't care. Maybe they really do want things to be easy and don't care if a minority is satisfied or not, having everything else equal.

Re:this just encourages them

[sjames]

Yeah, just the other day I saw some teens beating up 1st graders for their lunch money. I nearly stopped to help but then I realized that by saving them from the teens, I would be leaving them vulnerable to me turning evil and stealing their lunch money tomorrow, so I just gave them the thumbs up and went on my way.

Put another way, it doesn't matter how hands off the market the government is today, it can still pass the strangling puppies and screwing the consumer for the children act tomorrow. In the mean while it might as well help the balance of power.

If the FDA hadn't existed, Big Pharma would create one, only it would be even more anti-consumer and pro-big business. Government power abhors a vacuum.

Re:this just encourages them

[Nethead]

So, how do you want us to act upon your criticism? Do you want us to stop using Google or do you want us to support them with our continued use of their (your) products? Tearing down your employer from the outside while still pulling a paycheck is really chicken shit.

I have an ex-employee that went to work for Google (think network architect) and when he ran into personal problems they bent over backwards to help. Far beyond what I would have been able to do. From seeing that I'd be willing to work for them if needed too.

It's a fsckin' company! It needs to make a profit! From what I can see, they do that more humanly than most out there. If you have found some deep dark secret evil plan, then maybe you should quit and contact a reporter at the New Yorker or something. Otherwise, shut up and keep cashing your paycheck. You can't have it both ways.

Re:this just encourages them

[westlake]

People don't care if you can get root on a phone and load your own software. They want something that fills a need and they want it to work with a minimum of hassle. This is why the Iphone is so popular.

Come to a full stop.

There is nothing more that needs to be said.

They get away with it because there are too many sheep in this country who have been bread for ignorance.

The masses are far more likely to see the geek as wolf than shepherd.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

Who cares if they lock down the next phone. If we go by your idea and not root our current phones, then to the OEM, the phone is fully locked down already

If I go to my local computer store and spend $600 on a small laptop with a built in GSM adapter, would it be right to expect me to not have full access to my computer and do with it what I want? At the end of the day, its a computer, it has GSM access, its still mine and I should have full access to do what I want. Lets look at an android phone. Its a $600 mini computer with a GSM adapter. Or even a full PC with a dial up modem. There is no difference here.

Back when everyone had dial up internet, it was just as easy for a virus to command every PC it had infected to dial up the phones at the same time and DDOS the phone companies.

Yes, keep the RADIO locked down, but the OS, that should be the buyer's choice. Ship with the standard locked down OS and include a note in the box saying "If you feel the need to have full access to your new shiny toy/phone/computer do this... but, you might loose your warranty"

Re:this just encourages them

[mdielmann]

They wouldn't be able to strip you of control over your own property (which it does eventually become.)

Eventually?!

You keep using that word...

My phone was mine the instant I bought it. I did, however, acquire it for a sub-retail price by agreeing to be either a customer of the reseller for 24 successive months or to pay them $375, pro-rated monthly after fulfillment of the first 12 months of the prior option have elapsed.

Yep, and when you have eventually paid for the item in full, or eventually go into the store and buy it outright, it's all yours. Until then, it belongs to someone else - the manufacturer or the phone company.

So what's your point again?

Re:this just encourages them

[PReDiToR]

I was going to mod you up because you said something I agree with.

But. Here I am replying. Crap.

You know that car that you bought on hire-purchase that takes twenty four months to pay off?
If you lose your job halfway through the contract and they repossess, they would be pretty annoyed if you had taken the back seats out, installed a roll cage and race-specced the engine in a family saloon.

Similarly, if you break contract with $PHONESELLER they can (and do) demand return of equipment that was under contract to you, if you refuse to return it they IMEI lock it and make sure that you can't use it. This stops people getting "free" phones by defaulting on their contracts a day after signing them.

Once you're out of contract (or you buy the phone outright) your point about it being yours to do what the hell you want with stands and stands firm.
nobody should be able to tell you that you can't smash your own bought and paid for phone/PS3/Car/house with a hammer, should you choose. This includes software, firmware, glass, metal, bricks and mortar.

On a somewhat related note, this is why I went out and bought the Orange San Francisco (ZTE Blade) this week. £99, own it outright, similar specs to my EEE 4G. I have root on both, and I will be replacing 2.1-1 with 2.2 (like I replaced Xandros with Arch) as soon as I get bloody fastboot working =/

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

there used to be 5% of us that knew the truth, now it seems like fewer.

Does it pain you to see everything you post mod +5 insightful, when all you are doing is screaming the obvious at the people ?

Re:this just encourages them

[headbulb]

It is only when you involve government that there can be conflicts. It is only with government control that you can get into pointless 'rental' disputes about how you never actually owned the things you paid for.

I think you mean to use the word people instead of government. Otherwise you're just coming off as anti-government.

Re:this just encourages them

[troubbble]

I think you're misusing the term "free market". A (truly) free market is a market without regulation. This has nothing to do with the level of competition in the market, unless you incorrectly believe that a free market necessarily implies competition.

I think the term you're looking for is more along the lines of "competitive market".

Re:this just encourages them

[gl4ss]

but it's something that you can have today, a device that does whatever you want, not trying to shape the world of tomorrow by flimsy buying choices. economic pressure is for living in the future fantasy land.

besides, it needs a hack so it's already locked down, they would try to make the next round more locked down anyways.

and plain not buying would be pressuring them to not sell it at all.

now here's an idea: don't run a business model that depends on fantasy services earnings.

Re:this just encourages them

[iserlohn]

My suggestion - take contract law and then land law, and then you'll understand that any 'right' you may have to property is only possible because there is government. The distinction you make about owning something (in fee simple) and renting something (under a leasehold) is actually a lot less that you think. Both are types of ownership, for example, you can have very long leases which was drawn up with the power to extend. These leaseholds are (almost) as good as freeholds in nearly every regard and is the only way to own land in some common-law jurisdictions.

Looking at your post in whole, I find it somewhat strange; anti-government are usually anarchists, and they oppose all forms of property altogether. Libertarians, however, are all for property rights, and they have no qualms with lease agreements at all.

I suspect you are a libertarian, but in this case you are making the wrong argument.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

If you actually believe what you just wrote you're fucking stupid and have no experience with the real world at all.

Re:this just encourages them

[mcvos]

Not to mention being able to root the robots when they rise.

Re:this just encourages them

[mcvos]

I think you're misusing the term "free market". A (truly) free market is a market without regulation.

No. A completely unregulated market will be owned by the big players on that market, and not be free at all. You need the right kind of regulation in order to free a market.

Re:this just encourages them

[mcvos]

Oh yes, I forgot about the fact that I was held up at gunpoint and forced to buy Motorola products! I mean, I was just sleeping and a Motorola representative pointed a 9MM at my head and handed me a Droid and made me use it.

I forgot about the fact that I was informed about this lockdown before I bought it.

If devices are going to be sold like this, they need to get a big warning on every ad that says: "you will never truly own this product". Then I'll know I shouldn't buy it. It was a fair assumption at the time that "Android" meant "open".

Re:this just encourages them

[mcvos]

I'm not so sure a corporation counts as "someone". If we allow power to be taken away from people and put in the hands of inhuman institutions, pretty soon everybody will be completely powerless.

Re:this just encourages them

[gl4ss]

it's going to add to bandwith problems if jailbreaking is the only way you could get data heavy applications that would agree to use your 3g connection for the data.

and actually - with iphone and it's wifi-only policies for some services, this is a valid point that operators tried to do - of course there is not much they can do about it in the long run short of starting to run a total walled garden.. in usa it has been quite usual that you're limited from tethering your device without paying extra - if you jailbreak, you can get around that and actually use your mobile broadband as mobile broadband.

(all these things add to why they've shunned away from some nokias where they couldn't control this stuff.. androids designed customability is also just for enabling _carriers_ to do customisations to prevent these uses, the hacking scene is just a by product)

Re:this just encourages them

[Raenex]

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/free%20market

"An economic market in which supply and demand are not regulated or are regulated with only minor restrictions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

"A free market is a market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation by the state, except to enforce private contracts and the ownership of property."

Re:this just encourages them

[sonicmerlin]

Uh, no. A free market is a hypothetical concept proposed by Adam Smith, that involves zero barrier to entry, perfect information among consumers and suppliers, and perfect competition. Why don't you read the *whole* wikipedia entry, not just the one that serves your twisted version of reality?

Re:this just encourages them

[mcvos]

What you're forgetting is that monopolies and cartels can also regulate supply and demand. There is a difference between a "free market" that's completely unregulated by anyone other than the big players in that market, and a market that is really free.

Re:this just encourages them

[Raenex]

I'm not forgetting any such thing -- I gave you definitions of what a free market is. Ideally, in a free market such monopolies or cartels would succumb to competition. If they don't, then it just means that the free market doesn't work ideally, and regulation may be preferred over a completely free market.

Re:this just encourages them

[avm]

Unfortunately the Nexus One doesn't work on the only network with acceptable signal near my house. That's right, the big red V. So, I chose what I felt was the next best option... Get a Samsung Fascinate. I'm happy enough with the stock setup though, so I'll save the tinkering until it's abandoned by its manufacturer and carrier (which at present rate shouldn't be too far off).

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

If the user really, sincerely, wants a locked down phone, what prevents the manufacturer from allowing the user to lock it themselves, even in an environment in which the a locked down phone cannot be sold to end users?

Re:this just encourages them

[ThirdPrize]

I think you will find it is just a very grouchy % of the end user. I mean, of all the millions of iPhones in operation I bet only a few thousand are Jailbroken. Most people couldn't give a damn.

Re:this just encourages them

[SHaFT7]

Without regulation, your monopolies and cartels wouldn't 'succumb' to anything, as they would exert whatever pressure (monetary, deadly force, whatever) in order to retain the control they have.

Re:this just encourages them

[Raenex]

Monopolies have imploded before without regulation, and cartels are notorious for members who break away. "Deadly force" is one of the things not allowed in a free market.

Anyways, I'm not arguing that the free market is perfect or even better than a regulated market. I'm just arguing about the definition. Making up definitions to suit your ideology isn't right.

Re:this just encourages them

[aliquis]

Yeah, I wanted to add a "or buy an open phone instead" comment.

Guess the Nexus One come closest. Don't know how open the N8 and such is.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

They are bred for ignorance, though they may be bread for hungry ignorance, if ignorance seeks to spread.

Yours sincerely,
Grammar Himmler

Re:this just encourages them

[EraserMouseMan]

Open Source appeals to the phone manufacturers. Always has. Google hasn't been running any commercials falsely setting the expectations of phone customers that they will be able to easily program their phone any way they like.

To the end-customer, Android offers choice. There are many different form factors and carriers to choose from. I can choose my phone based on what I primarily need my phone to do for me. People like having options.

Re:this just encourages them

[aliquis]

If you do not think that gives Google veto power over evil additional restrictions on the distribution of GPL software, you did not think very hard.

But they obviously don't want to.

More restrictions = Less popular software = Less consumer data for Google = !profit

Less restrictions = Everyone decides to use it = More consumer data for Google = Profit.

Sure it would be better for you, but not for Google. As long as all the crap the manufacturers do isn't enough to put you and "everyone else" from buying the phone in the first place. By then both Google and the phone manufacturer would think different(tm.)

I wonder how Symbian and MeeGo will be here. I doubt MeeGo will be open enough for my likening, but I can hope.

WebOS2 maybe is?

Re:this just encourages them

[AltairDusk]

Verizon has done this for years (others may have too but going from my own experience here). Even before the smartphone craze they would purposely cripple their phones. One of the flip phones I owned that came from the manufacturer with Java support and the Bluetooth file transfer profile they locked out those among other things. Anything that could possibly allow you to get something they sold in their VCAST store onto the phone with out having to pay them for it got nixed.

Is it really so much to ask for a phone that isn't crippled or hobbled in some way with a contract discount or removing the cost of the built in phone subsidy if I bring my own phone?

Re:this just encourages them

[GameboyRMH]

Exactly. What do I think about having to root Android phones? See my sig.

Re:this just encourages them

[vadim_t]

Ok, but do you really want to wait for a decade or two until it happens?

And if it's going to happen, and it's right for it to happen, then why delay it and have things be suboptimal meanwhile?

Re:this just encourages them

[radtea]

completely unregulated market will be owned by the big players on that market, and not be free at all.

Which big players would those be? Because without the gross interference in the "truly free market" known as "The Companies Act" or some variation thereof, there would be no "big players" because there would be no corporations.

The reification of a corporation as a legal entity and the sheltering of the owners behind the skirts of the Nanny State in the form of liability limitation is a huge interference with "free markets".

For some reason defenders of the "free market" always seem to be in favour of that particular type of interference, and against any further interference that would aid in protecting everyone from rampaging corporations.

Anyone who is intellectually consistent is either for corporations AND corporate regulation; or against corporations AND against other forms of government interference in free trade between individuals. To be for corporations and against regulation is simply contradictory.

Re:this just encourages them

[radtea]

he only sustainable way to have freedom is to allow businesses to do what they will and let consumers do what they will.

As a free individual I have a right to hold the individual owners of a corporation responsible for any actions taken by the legal fiction they control.

The Nanny State interferes with this right by protecting corporate owners via limitation of liability and other special treatment under the law.

The "free market" you are defending is not free: it is populated by special groups (corporate owners) who have the huge power of the Nanny State protecting them. A truly free market would have no corporations in it. A market with corporations in it needs to be regulated. There is no third option.

Re:this just encourages them

[Raenex]

"Anyways, I'm not arguing that the free market is perfect or even better than a regulated market. I'm just arguing about the definition. Making up definitions to suit your ideology isn't right."

Re:this just encourages them

[mcgrew]

Demonstrating that any lock down can be broken does exert pressure for the companies to stop wasting their resources.

Then why are software companies (who should know better, more than anyone) still using DRM after thirty years of failure?

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

However what you described is a theoretic concept and no longer has much to do with reality. Especially in markets that have infrastructure costs which are natural monopolies.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

"there's no fucking way that the device belongs to anyone other than its owner"

Well, hard to argue with that. :*)

Re:this just encourages them

[gartogg]

But picking the definitions to suit your ideological goals is?

One standard usage of "Free Market" is where supply and demand determine the price of goods; if cartels and monopolies form, the supply/demand cause is replaced by cartel or monopoly pricing, which disassociates the supply and demand.

Re:this just encourages them

[GameboyRMH]

if you 'jail break' a phone to exceeds some internal limit on down load

Then someone is doing it very, very wrong.

That's actually how GSM modems work, they depend on certain settings and behaviors being unchangeable. If you were to build a custom GSM modem you could wreak all kinds of havoc on cell networks. But the cell provider isn't really doing anything wrong, it's just that if the cell network is going to work properly, users can't be allowed to crank up their transmit power to 11, drowning out other signals, because they really need that Facebook status update to go through.

Not that I'm arguing for lockdown on phone software. The GSM modem's basic behaviors should be locked down as they are now, because the network just can't work otherwise due to the nature of radio signals, but software should be a crazy-ass free-for-all.

Re:this just encourages them

[Raenex]

But picking the definitions to suit your ideological goals is?

Unlike the other posters in this thread, I supplied sourced definitions. Where is yours?

Re:this just encourages them

[numbski]

As the lone person in the room that seems to have studying micro econ and then had to drop out halfway through macro, these arguments don't appear to scale very well.

A truly free market with corporate entities with the same rights as people but not the same responsibilities or consequences leads to a broken argument, period.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

A $350 termination fee and access to your credit record is what stops people from doing that.. at least in the US.

Re:this just encourages them

[RulerOf]

"there's no fucking way that the device belongs to anyone other than its owner"

Well, hard to argue with that. :*)

Hahahaha! I tripped over that as well but couldn't think of anything better to put in its place in the 5 or 6 seconds' thought I gave to it :D

Re:this just encourages them

[John Hasler]

...as they would exert whatever pressure (monetary, deadly force, whatever) in order to retain the control they have.

Entities that do so are called "governments".

Re:this just encourages them

[Fjandr]

I did, however, acquire it for a sub-retail price by agreeing to be either a customer of the reseller for 24 successive months or to pay them $375
I signed no contract stating otherwise

Signing a contract is not necessary to enter into one, so while these two statements might be true on their face, one of them is not substantively true. If it were, you could renege on the agreement tomorrow, keep the phone, and pay them nothing with zero consequences. Do you actually believe that to be the case? If not, the fact that you did not physically sign a contract is irrelevant to whether or not you own the phone, and you should be smart enough to realize that is the case.

Re:this just encourages them

[Anonymous Coward]

Mmm... sheep with bread.

Re:this just encourages them

[RazorDaze]

(b) is probably incorrect, since the cost of the device may well be subsidized by the presumed profits generated by locking the device down in the first place, and indeed the hardware itself sold at a loss to encourage a wide market base. See the original xbox for reference.

Re:this just encourages them

[ScrewMaster]

Verizon has done this for years (others may have too but going from my own experience here).

Yeah, Sprint too. I had them for a couple of years, and it was a pain. I had a nice semi-smart phone. It was a decent phone for the time, but Sprint crippled the hell out of it. For example, Bluetooth could only be used for headsets: to get your own pictures off the thing, you had to have a data plan from Sprint and fucking email them to yourself. I found the manufacturer's spec sheet for the phone: it could do a hell of a lot more than Sprint would allow, because (as you say) they wanted to force you to buy a data plan and pay for value-added crap on top of that.

Plus which I had a plan with unlimited texting, and the bastards would spam me regularly and then charge me for the privilege. That's another story however. But I too am sick and tired of these bloodsucking corporations that have nothing better to do than nickel-and-dime us to death.

Re:this just encourages them

[Ihmhi]

And I agree with you, but wouldn't certain cell phone lockouts go hand-in-hand with being able to use it with a service?

1) Phoneco has an exclusivity agreement so their phones will only work with the Telephony phone company.

2) Part of this agreement is that their lock-in (which prevents Phoneco phones from being used on other networks) remains untouched.

3) Someone jailbreaks/roots a Phoneco phone.

4) Q.E.D. Telephony has every right to disallow jailbroken/rooted phones from working on their networks.

s/phonecompany/any other service.

What I'm saying is you have every right to mod your X-Box, DSi, etc. and their respective companies have every right to keep you from using your modded unit on their networks.

I don't agree with it and I don't like it, but that's the way things are. In many ways it's a necessity; not so much for worry of pirated games but for worry of cheats and the like.

on the fence

[metalmaster]

while i am against total lockdowns that cripple a phone(think VZW) I do think that some security is in order.

Re:on the fence

[Microlith]

Security is in order, sure, but should the end user wish to assume direct control then it should be a trivial process that requires the user be in physical contact with the device (such as holding down a button.) Not requiring the user to find a local exploit to grant them shell or terminal access like a 3rd party attacking the system.

But between the carrier and the vendor, you are a 3rd party attacker. This is why I have no respect for most vendors nor for any of the carriers.

Re:on the fence

[Darkness404]

What "security" does this give you though? Its becoming increasingly obvious that many vendors -cough- Motorola -cough- want to lock down phones while not providing updates. When I buy a phone, subsidized or not, I should have the right to use it in the way that I want to. Whether that is jailbreaking, rooting, unlocking, etc. the phone. It is counter-productive for HTC/Motorola/Samsung/etc. to keep locking down their phones because what does it really gain them? A bunch of pissed off customers that their device won't be upgradeable past Android 1.6?

Re:on the fence

[mirix]

and making the device less usable helps security?

I guess in some ways it does. This rock is definitely more secure than my computer, which has root. It suffers slightly in usefulness, however.

Re:on the fence

[metalmaster]

Pushing a button might not require physical access though. Someone just has to publish an app with mal-intent. Make it look pretty so joe and julie numbskull download it. Run the app to root the phone. You can reek plenty of havoc. Leave security to the users and it will always be defeated by stupidity. Vendors and Carriers alike fear this scenario. Locks are put in place so someone's shiny new toy doesnt become a slave to someone else's bidding. I have to agree with this. Pool enough zombie phones and you can bring phone infrastructure to its knees.(DDoS of local towers?) IMO, that happens enough already. There's no need to have it become the whim of a botmaster.

Userland services shouldnt be at the mercy of a carrier though. We pay enough for voice and data, so we shouldnt be restricted to carrier-based addon services(411, GPS, Email clients, ringers ect...)

Re:on the fence

[Microlith]

Someone just has to publish an app with mal-intent.

Err, if a button has to be pressed when you power the device on to trigger a security unlock, it'll be a heck of a lot harder to do it with an "app" all on its lonesome.

Leave security to the users and it will always be defeated by stupidity.

I have no problem with security by default. But let me turn it off if I want to.

Userland services shouldnt be at the mercy of a carrier though.

Kernel space is nothing special on these devices. And everything you described can be done in userland.

Re:on the fence

[a_nonamiss]

I could write an app that displays on the screen "Hold down the red button on the side for 10 seconds, then press this button, then do this, and your app will give you free pr0n!"

It sounds stupid, but it would be trivial to socially engineer thousands of people to do something to hardware, if that were my end goal. Granted, not smart users, but then, that's not really who these guys are after. Plenty of low hanging fruit on the shallow end of the gene pool.

Re:on the fence

[Microlith]

By hold a button I mean "power the device off, hold this button, turn the power on, agree to the terms displayed that explicitly say you're reducing security and voiding your warranty unless you reflash to stock" not something in the runtime user interface.

Sorta like how the Nexus One does it. Or maybe like how my N900 does it, where you have to enable a repository and explicitly install a package. That alone would throw warning flags off for most people.

Re:on the fence

[Totenglocke]

while i am against total lockdowns that cripple a phone(think VZW) I do think that some security is in order.

"In order to ensure the security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire, for a safe and secure society."

Re:on the fence

[Anonymous Coward]

And so the phone displays a dire warning (as does the nexus one) explaining what you're doing if you do it. If users are illiterate they have no business owning a smartphone.

Re:on the fence

[Anonymous Coward]

VZW is only strict if the phone has been reported as lost/stolen, which is why those phones are flashed to cricket or other companies that allow flashed phones. Sprint is the strict one, every phone has a different spc code and so it's really hard to flash. one of the reasons to get a sim card phone unlocked is to use it on another phone network that uses sim cards.

Re:on the fence

[Gothmolly]

So you trade freedom for security?

Re:on the fence

[JazzyMusicMan]

Sir, I think your post is slightly insulting to rocks. They have tons of uses!

1) Beat someone up with it
2) Break stuff with it
3) Throw it at something you don't like
4) Turned into concrete
...
100) Crushed to a powder and used to sandblast paint off things

Next time, use a more sensible example, such as ... bureaucrat

Re:on the fence

[shoehornjob]

end user's assumeing direct control over their phone = the sound of millions of end users bricking their phones. I can see the calls in queue at the call center.

Re:on the fence

[sjames]

That's why once you do the power on while holding the magic button, a last chance dialog should come up that tells you what you are about to do, what could go wrong and if you weren't expecting this or it no longer seems like a good idea, hit cancel.

It's also not a bad idea to have a simple go back to locked out procedure.

If you want to double check that the user knows what they're doing, display a random number in hex and tell them they must enter the twos complement to complete the unlock.

Re:on the fence

[sjames]

And yet a rock can still be used in a wide variety of criminal activities.....

Re:on the fence

[Belial6]

On the contrary. Exactly the opposite. All it takes is a button press that will reload the factory install, and no one will brick their phone. If the only read-only part of the phone was code that would load whatever the phone owner wanted, you wouldn't see the things hacked. I guarantee more phones get bricked now with these lockouts in place than you would see if people were allowed to load whatever they wanted.

Re:on the fence

[Archangel Michael]

HAVE YOU actually met a "user" in the casual sense?

I don't blame the big companies from making it hard. NOT ONE BIT. I'd do it myself if I was in their shoes. It costs tons of money and bad publicity if it was easy and people FUBARed their phones.

Re:on the fence

[gl4ss]

making it hard and trying to make it impossible are not the same thing. they are trying to keep it impossible, but chickened out on hw design to back it up. simlocks and appstore security(piracy) is what it boils down to, nothing else. the operators really, really don't like it when device manufacturers simlocks turn out to be worthless(it's bad for the business model of giving out "free" crack*erm* phones that can only be used on their network).

Re:on the fence

[jonaskoelker]

You can reek plenty of havoc.

Your spelling stinks ;-)

(Sorry)

Re:on the fence

[Anonymous Coward]

You could build a bridge out of it.....

Re:on the fence

[AltairDusk]

The way the unlock is handled for the Nexus One is a model that other manufacturers (and HTC themselves as of late) should be following.

Re:on the fence

[AltairDusk]

Next time, use a more sensible example, such as ... bureaucrat

If Torgo's Executive Powder has so many uses I'm sure they could come up with a Political line too.

Re:on the fence

[asdfghjklqwertyuiop]

Kind of like how end users having direct control over their PCs has resulting in nearly all PCs made over the past 35 or so years being bricked?

Re:on the fence

[asdfghjklqwertyuiop]

Run the app to root the phone. You can reek plenty of havoc.

Like uninstalling this uninstallable piece of crapware on this verizon droid 2 which asks me if I want to buy or continue a trial after every single call when I hang up on?

Re:on the fence

[tlhIngan]

Kind of like how end users having direct control over their PCs has resulting in nearly all PCs made over the past 35 or so years being bricked?

Best Buy seems to do OK with Geek Squad, and it seems people are willing to pay $30 to have something trivial done to their PCs, and several hundred to have Windows reinstalled, so... I'd say yes, the vast majority of PCs end up unusable in some form or another. Villify Geek Squad, but they're profitable, so users are "bricking" their PCs constantly. Hell, people pay the $100 "optimization" service that gets them a recovery CD. Then they take that back to Geek Squad to have some lackey stick the CD in, power up, hit Yes a couple of times and walk away.

The problem with Android is, Google decided to be Anti-Apple. Apple basically holds the carriers to gunpoint and dictates the terms to which they can carry the iPhone (outside the US especially - what sane carrier will agree to profit share and demands that they not touch the phone at all just for one particular phone?). Google decided to be more "open" and let carriers run wild with Android. So while Apple goes and says "You're not allowed to preinstall anything", "The customer experience must be like XXX - you must let the customer open the box and be the first to touch it" and "Sorry, we're doing the software, you have no say", Google says "free for all - keep doing things the way you have been - the manufacturers are still your b*tches you can slap around".

Microsoft decided to take the middle road. No "we dictate the software load", but "there may be up to 5 preinstalled apps".

The other thing is, Apple pretty much started the whole software update craze. Prior to the iPhone, you got your updates through your carrier only, and usually only because they tell you to update. After the iPhone, people seem to want to update more frequently and get pissed when their carrier doesn't provide an update. Another advantage of dictating software load, I guess - one firmware per model.

The only reason carriers put up with Apple is the iPhone sells, and Apple's got a whole network of marketing and distribution out so anyone can go buy an iPhone from them or their carrier - something Google nearly did with the Nexus One. I'm still looking for an Android phone and the fact that the Nexus One is only on T-mo for 3G isn't happening.

Hopefully the Nexus Two will be more popular.

Re:on the fence

[shoehornjob]

Kind of like how end users having direct control over their PCs has resulting in nearly all PCs made over the past 35 or so years being bricked

It's more like uneducated end users clicking on pop up messages telling them that they have x amount of viruses in their computer and click here to remove them. I work in a call center so I see this kind of stuff all the time.

Re:on the fence

[asdfghjklqwertyuiop]

At least if my desktop PC becomes infested with malware I can go to best buy and have it removed and possibly get better at not acquiring it in the first place. With Android phones the drive-by browser exploit malware installs have been replaced by uninstallable carrier-installed malware. Instead of popups about fake virus software I get notifications asking me to upgrade QuickOffice for 50% off and a message from City ID, whatever the fuck that is, asking me if I want to continue my trial or have it ask me again later every time I end a phone call.

Locking is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Since this was obviously quite a lot of fun.

I hope the next level of this game is even more challenging! Maybe a phone which explodes if it detects tampering?

Re:Locking is a good thing

[MrEricSir]

Great! And we can program it in Intolerant.

Description makes the guy sound like a magician

[Stregano]

This is not off topic as it is awesome that he was able to do that, but come on, no need for the magician introduction on him, "Now introducing, the wonderful, spectaculor, super genius the Amazing Houdini". What ever happened to just giving us the facts and letting us determine how awesome it is?

Re:Description makes the guy sound like a magician

[The End Of Days]

Clearly you have memories of Slashdot from before its very existence.

Re:Description makes the guy sound like a magician

[tmzt]

You know what they say, irc logs are the first draft of history and they're linked from the wiki, so I'll make this brief. Scotty2, whose early successes include hacking the unhackable gsm RAZR, had a plan of attack that went directly for the eMMC chip through a kernel module. Though sidetracked by a month of other avenues, including the traditional radio and bootloader exploits, buffer overflows and the rest while building a war chest of knowledge about kernel modules (try building a kernel module for a kernel without source sometime) and patiently educating me (sometimes too patient), it came back to the same GPIO 88 that had been looked at a month earlier, and the same method. After the "hard reset" attempt of the eMMC module failed it was clear to him that only powering down the chip would allow the write protect to be disabled (or a reset line but that was either/both not connected or disabled in the eMMC's configuration). So the next month was spent trying to find a way to power down this chip. The reality is HTC was really clever and didn't actually use GPIO 88 itself in the traditional way, but instead used it as a pull down against the eMMC's power line (we think) so that changing the GPIO's configuration and not it's level would reset the chip. This is exactly what HTC's bootloader does when it needs to disable the write protect. If you follow the IRC logs from last night you'll see that it was finally looking at what parameters were being passed to the gpio_config (name is guessed) function, which didn't make any sense for just switching the value of the GPIO line. I know, personally, I had fun and hope you can see that from all the source on github.com/tmzt which is scotty2's, mine, and others. It's all there for anyone who needs to get into a locked down kernel (tivoized) on ARM, so you don't have to start from scratch.

Re:Description makes the guy sound like a magician

[Anonymous Coward]

Only one word was used as a qualifier: "genius". You admit that it is supported by the article. The rest of the summary is a description of the hack -- the facts -- and says nothing about how clever it is. It seems to me that you are inventing something to be upset about.

Re:Description makes the guy sound like a magician

[Anonymous Coward]

Given the difficulty of the task, it could be argued that every person on the G2 root team *is* a magician.

Forgive my ignorance...

[Anonymous Coward]

What does rooting the Android accomplish? Beyond the ability to change your prompt... what is the result of this?

  I don't have an Android so if somebody could enlighten me (and I'm sure others as well).

Much appreciated.

AC

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[kyhwana]

Gives you write access to /system/ ? (Inc /etc, so on)

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[colinnwn]

Allows you to run on the G2, non-T-Mobile versions of the Android operating system.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[Daniel Phillips]

What does rooting the Android accomplish?

Maybe fixing some of the crappy base functionality that come with the phone and can't be replaced by normal apps? For example, the alarm clock that wouldn't stop ringing until I pulled the battery. And countless other major warts that Google is not doubt horribly embarrassed about, but not so embarrassed as to fix or take patches for.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[a_nonamiss]

There are many answers, but realistically, it enables you to use it as a "free" wi-fi hotspot. (as in, no extra charge from the carrier.) Some other cool stuff, too. Useful stuff, not just changing your background.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[JazzyMusicMan]

Don't forget tethering, and the up and coming new favorite annoyance of the wireless industrial machine, bloatware! yes, exactly like the crap that is shipped on pc's! only you can't remove it, at all, ever, unless you root the device

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[wampus]

Tethering is part of the OS and is sitting there in the network menu where you'd expect it. There are also applications you can download from the market that accomplish the same thing.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[Anonymous Coward]

What does rooting the Android accomplish?

Maybe fixing some of the crappy base functionality that come with the phone and can't be replaced by normal apps? For example, the alarm clock that wouldn't stop ringing until I pulled the battery. And countless other major warts that Google is not doubt horribly embarrassed about, but not so embarrassed as to fix or take patches for.

My G2 has ran perfect since I bought it over a month ago. No idea how yours could be so vastly different.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[ScrewMaster]

What does rooting the Android accomplish? Beyond the ability to change your prompt... what is the result of this?

I don't have an Android so if somebody could enlighten me (and I'm sure others as well).

Much appreciated.

AC

Well, I will tell you what. Among a number of interesting things, rooting allows you to run any of a number of third-party operating system ROMs. One guy even got Debian Linux running on a G1 (not too practical, but it shows the power of an open device.) My personal favorite, and by far the most popular, is the Cyanogenmod ROM. Keep in mind that the relatively open nature of the open-source Android operating system has made this a legitimate affair: this is not remotely comparable to what iPhone users suffer under Apple's heavy-handed rule. Frankly, having used Cyanogen's product (generally faster, more stable, and more featureful than the stock firmware) for over a year now, if a particular phone won't let me install it ... well, that's one handset I won't be buying. More interestingly, Cyanogen (aka Steve Kondik) has a close relationship with the lead Android developers at Google, and much of his team's work has been used to improve the mainstream OS, so even those who are running the stock firmware have benefited. Are you listening, T-Mobile? Yeah, and that applies to the rest of you bloodsuckers as well: open is good for your customers, and good for your business.

Here's the deal folks. It was one thing when we were all using not-particularly-smart phones that had a few built-in applications, a camera, and maybe some extra flash to store a few MP3s. That's not what we're talking about here: these are not cellphones, they're personal computers that happen to fit in your pocket. I cannot accept that cell phone carriers (who are, after all, just fat pipes, not gods) have an intrinsic right to determine what operating system and/or applications we can use on our rather powerful pocket computers. I wouldn't accept that treatment from a PC vendor, and I see no reason for society to accept that from corporations who have spent years trying to convince us that they absolutely must limit the potential of these devices in order to "manage their networks", to provide us with a "better user experience." Of course, we all know what it means when a carrier is in control of the user experience. I will decide upon the kind of experience I want, and so far as network management goes, well that's not my problem. I expect to be provided with the service that I pay for, and that includes a hands-off approach to the phone and it's software. It's my pocket computer, not yours. Just deal with that, and stop trying to use it as an alternate revenue source.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[ScrewMaster]

Tethering is part of the OS and is sitting there in the network menu where you'd expect it. There are also applications you can download from the market that accomplish the same thing.

That's a very recent addition to the Android featureset. For a long time you either had to use a third-party tethering app (as you say) or run an alternate operating system ROM like Cyanogenmod, which has had that feature for some time now. Rooting was never really a requirement for tethering, even on early versions of Android, since apps like PDANet were available and didn't require root access.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[Miamicanes]

Enables you to install a kernel with proper support for Bluetooth HID, so you can use a folding keyboard and/or bluetooth gamepad with the phone.

Enables you to create a swapfile and use virtual ram. See, Android has an official mechanism for reclaiming memory used by suspended apps, but it's not instantaneous. If you buy Class-6 (or faster) microSD flash, it's faster to just swap a chunk of ram to the flashcard than it is to wait for the app to shut itself down, save its state, and release its memory so something else can use it. If you use class 4 flash, it'll be roughly the same speed either way. If you use class 2 flash, swapping is slower. As you've probably guessed, the free microSD card that comes with most Android phones is only class 2.

Tether for free. Sprint charges $30/month extra if you want to tether without rooting.

Run the CPU faster. Unlike (Intel) desktop CPUs, phone CPUs don't really have a hard upper speed limit. They just go through a point where your battery life totally goes to hell, then a zone where they're kind of flaky and it crashes a lot, then finally a zone where it's almost impossible to use for more than a few minutes WITHOUT crashing. A rooted G2 can run at 1GHz without breaking a sweat, and I'm pretty sure I read that they're generally stable up to around 1.6GHz. The catch is, your battery will last about an hour at that speed.

You can use Samba to make your /sdcard filesystem accessible over the network as a normal Netbios share.

You can use OpenVPN. Unrooted Android can't use it, not even as a client.

You can install sshd and use SSH to securely connect to a root shell on your phone.

You can install thirdparty SSL root certs.

You can use Tor.

Those are just a few things off the top of my head. There are a lot more.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[Anonymous Coward]

Like automatically associating new contacts with the primary Google account? O_O

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[nloop]

tethering that 4g internet that is faster than many home DSL connections

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't know why that's modded funny. Yes you have full write access to the whole filesystem, and can even dual-boot if you wish.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[AltairDusk]

My personal favorite, and by far the most popular, is the Cyanogenmod ROM. Keep in mind that the relatively open nature of the open-source Android operating system has made this a legitimate affair: this is not remotely comparable to what iPhone users suffer under Apple's heavy-handed rule. Frankly, having used Cyanogen's product (generally faster, more stable, and more featureful than the stock firmware) for over a year now, if a particular phone won't let me install it ... well, that's one handset I won't be buying.

As a CyanogenMod user since shortly after getting my N1 I fully agree. Capability to flash custom ROMS and a solid release of CM are prerequisites for me even considering a new phone.

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[LanMan04]

What does rooting the Android accomplish? Beyond the ability to change your prompt... what is the result of this?
    I don't have an Android so if somebody could enlighten me (and I'm sure others as well).
Much appreciated.
AC

Edit hosts file to get rid of ads
Enable swap on SD cards to help low-memory devices
Increased range of dynamic under/overclocking
Better backup capabilities
Cool stuff like wifi tethering
Much better performance (better kernels, i/o scheduling, etc)

Re:Forgive my ignorance...

[ScrewMaster]

My personal favorite, and by far the most popular, is the Cyanogenmod ROM. Keep in mind that the relatively open nature of the open-source Android operating system has made this a legitimate affair: this is not remotely comparable to what iPhone users suffer under Apple's heavy-handed rule. Frankly, having used Cyanogen's product (generally faster, more stable, and more featureful than the stock firmware) for over a year now, if a particular phone won't let me install it ... well, that's one handset I won't be buying.

As a CyanogenMod user since shortly after getting my N1 I fully agree. Capability to flash custom ROMS and a solid release of CM are prerequisites for me even considering a new phone.

The impressive thing about Kondik & Co. is that they don't make you wait very long for that solid release.

Donate to the Genius!

[Anonymous Coward]

Donate to scotty2 (for root): walker.scott@gmail.com (PayPal)

Why are phones special?

[by (1706743)]

It seems that people rarely complain about the proprietary engine/drive-by-wire/etc. management software in their car, unless it breaks (think the Toyota debacle of late). Is it just that phones that run *NIX "feel" like they should be open, as we (the greater /. community) know *NIX (Jurassic Park reference intentional...)? Granted, there are legitimate safety concerns for cars, but I imagine there are less drastic examples of this apathy towards device X, but the demand for openness on device Y (phone, game console, etc.).

That said, I have a clamshell VZW phone, and it does irk me that it's useless for anything except the basics.

Re:Why are phones special?

[Microlith]

Because these are not phones. These are miniature computers that handle phone calls as a subset of their capabilities.

The software that controls my engine/drive-by-wire has a singular purpose, and is basically a bunch of tables with a bit of microcontroller code to flip through them. Smartphones are much, much more and tend to play a greater role in people's day to day activities.

And if you ask Apple and Microsoft, mobile is where the market is going to be moving heavily. Not necessarily to the exclusion of the desktop market, but still heavily. And, frankly, I don't see the mobile space being controlled so heavily by vendors with vested interests in controlling what you do and how as a good thing.

Re:Why are phones special?

[Anonymous Coward]

People do in fact complain about proprietary engine management software all the time. There is a significant industry centered around reprogramming ECUs and there is typically a few years of frustration after the release of a new model to successfully gain access to and reprogram the ECU. Personally, I remember being frustrated that my ECU had two sets of timing maps that it chose between the two based on dynamic and not entirely predictable conditions. It made it very difficult to 'tune' the car.

There are community efforts to reprogram automotive ECUs: http://www.openecu.org/

Re:Why are phones special?

[confused one]

It's difficult to improve on a modern car's management software in most cases. Having said that, you're not running around in the right circles if you think there are no aftermarket automotive computers or software hacks for reflashing the existing computer(s).

In fact, right now I'm designing a replacement for the Honda TCU in my 20 year old Accord because it has a "design flaw" we've all seen affect PC's -- electrolytic caps. After 20 years the caps finally failed and fried the TCU in the process. (can't be fixed, the parts are unobtanium) Sure, Honda has NOS TCU's available; but, why not try to improve on it?

Re:Why are phones special?

[by (1706743)]

I guess my point is more that if you buy a four-function calculator, you're not going to be upset when you figure out that there's no sin() button -- even though the processor in the calculator may be capable of doing that. Analogously, when you buy a phone, people get rather upset that they can't run arbitrary code on it. Sure, the company is controlling what you run -- but you bought it that way. I agree with what's been said before -- companies need to offer this, in which case the geek money will go with the most open phone 9 times out of 10.

Now, as to there being legal repercussions against hacking a phone, that's stupid -- the phone should be yours once you buy it.

Re:Why are phones special?

[colinnwn]

I'd say you are being generous. I complain about the fact car companies don't give access to certain features in code or data on the CAN bus of cars. I'm on email lists of DIY enthusiasts who complain about similar.

Car mfgrs are also terrible about not following specs, or creating proprietary specs and charging a lot for access, where they should be encouraging open industry standards to develop for new features. The argument about safety is used to justify this, but it is not terribly germane, as there are ways they could secure the engine/transmission/brake code while still giving third party access to other features. Another reason is proprietary secrets, though I don't think software should be patentable, so that one is out.

And really I feel like all car code should be available to 3rd parties, regardless of the safety implications, and if you'd like to run 3rd party code on your car, you sign a contract with the mfgr acknowledging you waiving warranty and liability claims, and you get a physical dongle for a low cost that basically gives you root access to your car. The dongle is less about the method of delivery for access, than about the act of inserting it is willful acknowledgement of what you are doing.

Re:Why are phones special?

[vlueboy]

Cell Phones have existed for a very short time. Technically we have watched them evolve from huge analog call-making units to something beyond even our home computers in functionality.

Anti-establishment people are making the statement that our PC's won't easily head in that direction anytime soon. With cars, well... they've existed for a whole century, and it's too late to stop the lockout. But we look at the suddenly-hardening mindset in the videogame/smartphone industry and see a chance of throwing wrenches to slow down the painful escape of our former liberties.

Re:Why are phones special?

[Microlith]

you're not going to be upset when you figure out that there's no sin() button -- even though the processor in the calculator may be capable of doing that.

Probably not, but then there's a wide gulf between a basic calculator and more powerful devices like these. Witness the consternation over the TI calculators and cracking their signing key. Capability draws attention, and a desire to exploit it.

Analogously, when you buy a phone, people get rather upset that they can't run arbitrary code on it.

People used to not care, of course. But they didn't care because the devices were very much single-purpose, they handled phone calls. Now they can run arbitrary code, manage your contacts and calendar, send e-mail and browse the web. There's capability there that hasn't been there before. These are not simply phones.

Sure, the company is controlling what you run -- but you bought it that way.

And what happens when they're ALL selling them that way and no other way? We're pretty damn close to that now. The only reason they control it, and provide no means of undoing it without a battle, is because they have a vested interest in ensuring your phone channels you to whatever means of making money from you they've set up, or to ensure your phone atrophies feature wise and you decide to buy a new one.

Motorola is doing this constantly, go look at Engadget to see people relieved that Motorola finally found it in themselves to bless Cliq users with Android 2.1. Were the bootloader and kernel not locked down, people could have put 2.1 on their devices MONTHS ago.

Re:Why are phones special?

[by (1706743)]

Having said that, you're not running around in the right circles if you think there are no aftermarket automotive computers or software hacks for reflashing the existing computer(s).

Yeah, I'm running around in the circles where the timing's controlled by vacuum/centrifugal advance ;)

Re:Why are phones special?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then again, the magical open-source anyone-can-build-and-use implementation exists for cars: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/MegaSquirt .

Re:Why are phones special?

[do0b]

Phones aren't special.
Cars ECU are also hacked on a regular basis.
Unitronic does it for VAG. Cobb tuning uses the OBD port to allow modification to the fuel maps.

Re:Why are phones special?

[djdavetrouble]

I call Bullshit. What "people" are you talking about? The people around here are concerned with
all proprietary and closed computers.

href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/10/0120249"/a

As a matter of fact this was a popular topic around here a few years ago.
It turns out, there ARE people that want access to the computers in their car, they
believe they can do a better job, and that mods are a good thing. Smart phones are
the big fad these days, so you read about unlocking and rooting frequently.

Re:Why are phones special?

[Miamicanes]

> These are miniature computers that handle phone calls as a subset of their capabilities.

Actually, it's even deeper than that. With every Android phone I'm aware of, the actual low-level "phone" functions are handled by a separate CPU (or core that's partitioned off as a de-facto second CPU), runs its own firmware, and basically looks a lot like a metaphorical voice modem to the rest of the OS (not entirely a coincidence... the first PalmOS PDA phones were basically cobbled-together agglomerations of a voicemodem chipset with a PDA and a cell phone, tied together by a serial bus. The metaphor stuck, even if the underlying hardware has been massively consolidated into 2 or 3 chips).

Re:Why are phones special?

[ScrewMaster]

> These are miniature computers that handle phone calls as a subset of their capabilities.

Actually, it's even deeper than that. With every Android phone I'm aware of, the actual low-level "phone" functions are handled by a separate CPU (or core that's partitioned off as a de-facto second CPU), runs its own firmware, and basically looks a lot like a metaphorical voice modem to the rest of the OS (not entirely a coincidence... the first PalmOS PDA phones were basically cobbled-together agglomerations of a voicemodem chipset with a PDA and a cell phone, tied together by a serial bus. The metaphor stuck, even if the underlying hardware has been massively consolidated into 2 or 3 chips).

Yes. My old G1 has two ARM cores in it, one runs the operating system and the other runs the radio firmware.

Re:Why are phones special?

[theJML]

Not to stick up for "the Man", because I hate him as much as anyone here... but one major reason why these devices aren't wide open in the first place is support. It's MUCH easier to support a phone that does {W,X,Y,Z} than it is one that does {W,X,Y,Z,$WhateverElseWasInstalled}. Especially when installing those extra things requires potentially rooting and altering the underlying system.

I'm all about the device being yours as soon as you purchase it. But if I bought a car and decided I wanted to swap the engine out for an electric engine and batteries, I'd not expect the manufacturer to even look my way when I drove it in to the shop.

Re:Why are phones special?

[PieSquared]

Mostly because car manufacturers don't all own gas companies, or have exclusivity agreements with them.

No, really. If they did own gas companies, they would lock their own cars such that they could only use the right brand of gas, and then they wouldn't care about how much fuel got wasted since any drop in customers due to bad MPG would be made up for by increased fuel sales. Then we'd have reason to hack in, to remove the station-specific locks, and to correct the fuel injection amounts.

As it is, it's in the manufacturer's best interests to get those as good as possible on their own, and they do a near-optimal job. Nothing to fix.

We'll see if this continues once actual computer interfaces in the passenger compartment become commonplace, however. If they decide to try to prevent us from adding our own applications and similar, I'm sure we'll see just as much jail-breaking for cars as we do for phones.

Re:Why are phones special?

[Anonymous Coward]

The software that controls my engine/drive-by-wire has a singular purpose, and is basically a bunch of tables with a bit of microcontroller code to flip through them.

Your description is over a decade out of date. If your car is less than five years old, it contains at least half a dozen processors. PPC is the most common architecture, but ARM is a close second. Google for "canbus" to read up on the standard for networking all the computers in a car. Now that at least a few are running an RTOS, networking is no longer trivial.

Your phone is a computer and a DSP to run a radio. Your car is a network of many computers, several of which are as powerful as the one in your phone. Grandparent has a point.

Re:Why are phones special?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually there is a niche market for tweaking the acceleration curves in cars using the OBD-II ports that are on almost all North American Cars made after 2005.

Re:Why are phones special?

[Anonymous Coward]

When you buy a phone, people get rather upset that they can't run arbitrary code on it.

To be fair: Virtually no one understands what this sentence means, and only a small fraction of those who understand care. If you were in charge of designing and marketing cellphones, how would you prioritize making sure arbitrary code can run, vs. the functions the other 99.999% of your customers will use?

Re:Why are phones special?

[ChunderDownunder]

Few manufacturers will support you if you buy a PC and replace the installed OS with Linux.

Why should phones be any different? Stick a disclaimer with the flashing utility that unsupported images may brick your phone. Provide 'factory restore' images to un-brick your phone.

There's no technical reason to prevent this, only the vested interests of manufacturers and carriers.

Re:Why are phones special?

[headbulb]

There is an easy solution. The company should only say they will support this version of software, then for the hardware have a test partition that runs through hardware tests.

Easy isn't it.

Re:Why are phones special?

[Anonymous Coward]

And it will only add a few tens of dollars to the cost of everyone's phone, for something that most people don't care about.

Re:Why are phones special?

[AltairDusk]

Few manufacturers will support you if you buy a PC and replace the installed OS with Linux.

As a matter of fact Dell will claim that by doing so you have voided the hardware warranty and they are not responsible for hardware failures after 3 days of ownership (yes I'm speaking from experience, sadly)

Re:Why are phones special?

[AltairDusk]

They can also tweak shift parameters on some automatics. My Superchips tuner allows me to modify the shift program and adjust the torque management.

Re:Why are phones special?

[ukemike]

It seems that people rarely complain about the proprietary engine/drive-by-wire/etc. management software in their car, unless it breaks

Actually the engine management software is most cars is modifiable. I can even get my car programed with multiple engine management programs that I can switch between using the buttons on the cruise control stalk. Multiple programs might include a performance program for fun, a crippled program for valet parking, and the standard program for when you take your car in for service. Your statement above just indicates that you aren't a car enthusiast.

Admittedly car computers are different. That computer isn't networked and it's job is to get the right amount of gas into the cylinder at the right time and fire the spark at the right time. Phones are more meta tools. A phone these days is a map, a communications device, a camera, and nearly anything else a creative person might make of it. That's why we care about openness because we understand that the potential of these new phones will only be discovered by persistent innovation.

Re:Why are phones special?

[couchslug]

"It seems that people rarely complain about the proprietary engine/drive-by-wire/etc. management software in their car, unless it breaks (think the Toyota debacle of late). "

You must not hang out in car forums very much. Modding car EFI systems took off with the first convenient system (GM's old TBI) many years ago and is a staple of the modern performance vehicle hobby.

Re:Why are phones special?

[confused one]

I can appreciate old school. Built a few of those myself. Don't like to limit myself though. Since I'm an engineer who works with sensors and sensor systems and who writes software... I don't.

Re:Why are phones special?

[by (1706743)]

True. My sense, though, was that people don't feel entitled to mod their EFI/ignition/etc. -- I'm not at all disputing the fact that you might want to mod various aspects of your car.

If a geek buys a car and realizes that he/she can't just remap the ignition with a laptop and a USB cable (and instead must jump through some more substantial hoops), it's hardly news; if a geek realizes that she/he can't run arbitrary programs on a smart phone, there'll be dozens of /. articles about it =)

Those responsible

[Anonymous Coward]

Those responsible can be found here, if you wish to thank them!

irc.freenode.net
#g2root

Nice and open platform... right?

[vinehair]

All I have to say is this, as an owner of two android phones, the second only because it physically fell apart from (ab)use and from someone with a love for the platform:

Looks like we still have that 'DON'T USE APPLE BECAUSE IT'S A CLOSED TOTALITARIAN SLAVE PLATFORM!!!! COME TO ANDROID WHERE ITS FREE AND OPEN AND CHAMPAGNE AND PUPPIES!!!!!!' card, right lads? I mean, we're still laughing at the silly iPhone users having to jailbreak their phones so they can run what they want, right chaps? Right?

Now while we're at it, can I can a 'connect phone, run program, press button and you're done' solution for rooting my HTC Wildfire? I'm perfectly happy of course, to run adb and replace my bootloader and all the other things that used to get me wet while I was a student - isn't that the definition of open? - but I get the feeling that we could make it just as easy as those Apple user fellows and not lose any of the openness. Right guys?

Sarcasm away, that dream is gone, guys. The phone networks got to you and Google gave up. If you're going to carry on tooting about the openness of Android to users (they couldn't care less if their developers have to pay to develop or not) then you need some other talking points.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[blahbooboo]

All I have to say is this, as an owner of two android phones, the second only because it physically fell apart from (ab)use and from someone with a love for the platform:

Looks like we still have that 'DON'T USE APPLE BECAUSE IT'S A CLOSED TOTALITARIAN SLAVE PLATFORM!!!! COME TO ANDROID WHERE ITS FREE AND OPEN AND CHAMPAGNE AND PUPPIES!!!!!!' card, right lads? I mean, we're still laughing at the silly iPhone users having to jailbreak their phones so they can run what they want, right chaps? Right?

Now while we're at it, can I can a 'connect phone, run program, press button and you're done' solution for rooting my HTC Wildfire? I'm perfectly happy of course, to run adb and replace my bootloader and all the other things that used to get me wet while I was a student - isn't that the definition of open? - but I get the feeling that we could make it just as easy as those Apple user fellows and not lose any of the openness. Right guys?

Sarcasm away, that dream is gone, guys. The phone networks got to you and Google gave up. If you're going to carry on tooting about the openness of Android to users (they couldn't care less if their developers have to pay to develop or not) then you need some other talking points.

You are so going to be voted down for saying anything negative about android. p.s. BTW, you're 100% correct.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[tknd]

I am sitting here perfectly happy with my unlocked from the factory NexusOne. I've been running froyo for months now. I don't have any of the "I need root" nonsense the other phones have.

The phone networks got to you and Google gave up.

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't since there's lots of rumors of a Nexus Two.

They certainly didn't market or sell the phone correctly. Even Steve Jobs doesn't throw up a web page and expect people to buy his products. What does he do? He throws the press a bone or two before his official announcement to get everyone all excited and curious. He has a grand planned out event where he tells the world "behold, the next best thing EVAR!" And on the same day or near future, many different brick and mortar stores have the product ready for sale, for touching and looking. And if you missed all that, there's giant ads on walls, billboards, TV, and other mediums.

Google, a company that primarily makes money off of a marketing/advertising product certainly dropped the ball when it came to product awareness marketing. For a product, the NexusOne is a great product. But in terms of awareness, nobody knows about it. Pretty much everyone I talk to I have to give the run-down on the history and what it can do. It is just as capable as any of the Samsung Galaxy phones.

I also know that marketing speak is disliked around here but Google really should have advertised a primary feature being "Android Care" or something similar. All "Android Care" would mean is free and timely updates such as Froyo, etc. The updates really are a step up from the competition including Apple. The releases of Android are much more often than other devices.

Google needs to learn to commit to things and sell them rather than leaving things out there and hoping people will bite. Yes, that means hiring those pesky "marketing" guys, hiring an ad agency, and coming up with a valid Marketing Strategy, not just build a product and throw up a webpage.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[Fnkmaster]

Wow, what a rant. Just get a Nexus One. Best phone on the market right now. Just pay the $25 developer tax to Google to buy it. If you buy a locked down Android phone, it's your own fault, you're voting with your dollars.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like we still have that 'DON'T USE APPLE BECAUSE IT'S A CLOSED TOTALITARIAN SLAVE PLATFORM!!!! COME TO ANDROID WHERE ITS FREE AND OPEN AND CHAMPAGNE AND PUPPIES!!!!!!' card, right lads? I mean, we're still laughing at the silly iPhone users having to jailbreak their phones so they can run what they want, right chaps? Right?

No, I'm laughing at all y'all.

Blackberry has had freely available documentation & SDK for years. Do what you want with your blackberry - it's yours. No need to use RIM's app world to sell your apps. RIM doesn't prevent you from looking at pr0n, angry political viewpoints or anything else on your blackberry.

RIM doesn't have the ability to remove apps from your blackberry - after all, it's your blackberry. The carrier doesn't have that ability either.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[Rennt]

The Android source is freely available from a git repository hosted by the developer. You can improve or extend it however you like - and many people have. Crucially, community improvements have even been merged back into the main tree.

Now, whether or not you can install your compiled system on a particular device is a legitimate concern - but I have trouble believing you would compare this to rooting iOS with a straight face.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[PReDiToR]

can I can a 'connect phone, run program, press button and you're done' solution for rooting my HTC Wildfire?

I just got an Android phone (Orange San Francisco/ZTE Blade) and rooting it was as easy as downloading a program called "universal androot", installing it with a couple of clicks and then running it to provide root.

The PITA is that I have to re-root it after every reboot because it isn't permanent.

On the other hand, I got an iPod Touch (2nd Gen) a couple of months ago and had awful trouble jailbreaking it because as soon as I plugged it into iTunes it gave me the chance to upgrade the OS, which I took.
Jailbreaking it by downgrading the OS was much more odious and time consuming, although visiting jailbreakme.com and swiping was about as easy as anything I've ever done on a computer.

After playing with both Android and iOS I can safely say that I'll be sticking with rooted Android/Linux in the hopes that we can drop the Android part and replace it with GNU somewhere down the line. Cydia made the iOS device worth using, but still massively overpriced. I just couldn't drink the Kool Aid and buy an iPhone when my Blade was £400 cheaper.

Linux is Linux, and I'm using it on my phone, laptop, desktop and server because I can.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[arkhan_jg]

The thing is, you don't actually *need* root on android anywhere as much as you do on the iphone.

You can install your own application APKs from outside the google market, with a simple tickbox option. That's how I installed angry birds, for example, before they finally put it on the google market.

You can install apps that replace core functions, such as the messaging, email or even the home screen(s) app, and they're even hosted on the official market.

Google doesn't use its veto power on the market to block anything it decides competes with its own functions, such as mail apps, or voip.

All of the above require root on an iphone; on android, they're open and available to all users. I have rooted my phone, and I use it to backup my ROM before flashing new leaked ones (I've had froyo for several months before it became officially available for my handset this week); and to replace the default battery icon with one which shows a percentage, as opposed to the non-root option of having the official icon plus a 2nd one showing the percentage. Samsung have locked down flashing unsigned custom kernels in an update; root allows me to reverse that also. None of these are of huge interest to the vast majority of ordinary android users.

Blame the handset maker and carrier for locking down the phone to block root - the vast majority are still trivial to root, though I'd wish more handset makers would follow the nexus one approach of making getting root a built in option. Android is still far more open than iOS.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[slacker001]

Now while we're at it, can I can a 'connect phone, run program, press button and you're done' solution for rooting my HTC Wildfire?

Actually, you can: http://unrevoked.com/#wildfire

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can install your own application APKs from outside the google market, with a simple tickbox option.

Unless the carrier or manufacturer disable that functionality, like on some of AT&T's Android phones.

Google doesn't use its veto power on the market to block anything it decides competes with its own functions, such as mail apps, or voip.

No, they just use their veto power to say that an entire device is blocked from the Android Marketplace unless they approve. Such as all the cheap knock-off tablets that have been available for the last year or so.

Blame the handset maker and carrier for locking down the phone to block root - the vast majority are still trivial to root, though I'd wish more handset makers would follow the nexus one approach of making getting root a built in option. Android is still far more open than iOS.

It's never Google's fault.

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[Anonymous Coward]

So you favor one device over another because it's easier to run a security exploit on it?

Re:Nice and open platform... right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of us who laugh are laughing because they've only got one (censored) place to get their apps, music, etc. If, for some reason, 4chan decides to DDoS their app servers for a day, there are precisely 0 other options to get native applications.

Additionally, there's almost nothing that an non-rooted / non-custom FW Android phone couldn't do that a jail broken APL phone can. On the flip-side, the capabilities of a non-jailbroken one are dwarfed by the capabilities and freedom of any Android phone (even with AT&T's market lockdown).

Evidence?

[jbn-o]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Where is your evidence that treating your devices as though you own them "makes the next round of devices even MORE locked down"? How are we to know that it would not matter whether buyers did this, proprietors are going to continue to pursue ways to exclude users from being free to treat their computers as they wish?

Why would you want this, again?

[rastoboy29]

I am only interested in a phone that doesn't have to be hacked by some genius to get root access.

It's fine if it voids the warranty or whatever, but I'm not going to pay for something if I have to fight it to get full control over it.

Frankly, I might not even take full advantage of that--but I still demand the ability.

Re:Why would you want this, again?

[cbhacking]

Nokia N900. Debian Linux ported to ARM with a small-touchscreen-friendly interface. Comes with a terminal app; open that; type "su" and hit Enter. The default root password is publicly available (good idea to change it). People complain that its app store is lacking, and they're right, but they're also missing the point: the thing *runs desktop Linux*!
It has repositories.
sudo apt-get install <foo>
You can even compile from source taballs right on the phone, if you really want to / there's no pre-built binaries.

The browser is Gecko-based, and includes Flash. You can install AdBlock Plus if you want. You can even install mobile Firefox and get the full Firefox experience, with extensions. You can also install other browsers, if you prefer. Nothing is stopping you.

The main downside is that it's a due for a refresh. The hardware runs the OS and apps fine, but it's not terribly impressive by modern smartphone measures.

Re:Why would you want this, again?

[Anonymous Coward]

OC it to 1ghz, and you'll find it to be a match for most any current phone out there.

(Posted from my n900)

Re:Why would you want this, again?

[gregthebunny]

Get a Palm Pre or Palm Pixi; webOS requires no rooting. Then install PreWare (easy as pie -- again, no rooting required) and gain instant access to hundreds of custom patches and home-brew apps. I installed the Terminal app and the first thing the prompt reads is "palm-webos-device root #". :-)

Re:Why would you want this, again?

[cbhacking]

Sounds good (and yes, you have enough control to overclock it, how sweet is that?!?) I'd be curious what that does to battery life, though. Granted that the CPU will usually be run stepped down, it seems like that could eat battery really fast while on Skype or something.

Simple phones :(

[cosm]

I sometimes miss the days by I had a phone that simply made phone calls. Although you can still get simpler phones, it seems like the industry is pushing me to larger, more complicated devices. I enjoy evolving technology, but I just a want a simple phone. The old rubber hardened nextels that you could punt across a football field and then subsequently use without any damage to the phone whatsoever were absolutely awesome.

I am not pining for the days of yore, but some of us want a simple, quality phone. It seems these are the current options:
1 - Smartphone X, slam packed with features, takes awhile to boot, too many menus to do anything
2 - Crappily manufactured with terrible interface cheap-phone Y 3 - There is no option 3.

Does anybody know of any phones that are simple, elegantly designed, work-as-advertised, and constructed with quality, and they aren't made for Barbie or Ken? RAZRs? Mattels?

Re:Simple phones :(

[MichaelSmith]

it seems like the industry is pushing me to larger, more complicated devices.

Its a free market. You can buy whatever you like. I don't know where you live but department and variety stores in Australia will sell you a samsung phone for less than 50 AUD, no contract. You can get the same phone for less locked to a carrier with a prepaid SIM. Just calls and SMS. Nothing fancy.

But OTH I just signed up for an LG Optimus. 20 AUD per month for two years, zero up front. No additional cost to me. It runs android 1.6 and has lot of pre-loaded software. So far its a very nice phone and I plan to start porting my openmoko apps to android.

Re:Simple phones :(

[Fnord666]

Does anybody know of any phones that are simple, elegantly designed, work-as-advertised, and constructed with quality, and they aren't made for Barbie or Ken? RAZRs? Mattels?

For a simple phone I like the motorola razr v3.
My reasons are:

1. Basic phone functionality works well
2. Decent case
3. Bluetooth
4. Easy to repair if needed
5. Parts are readily available
6. Inexpensive replacement/spare batteries

Re:Simple phones :(

[Freedom Bug]

It's hard to beat the Motofone F3 for "simple, elegantly designed, work-as-advertised, and constructed with quality". It's indestructible, the battery lasts forever and it's dirt cheap. It was designed to be used by people who can't read, so it uses a really annoying icon menu system. And it really sucks for text messages. But you just want a phone, right? Engadget calls it the "zombie apocalypse survival phone" (mostly because of it's 2 week+ battery life).

Re:Simple phones :(

[MoonBuggy]

My default recommendation in these cases is a Nokia 1100 (or 1101). Black and white screen, so excellent readability and very long life, but with enough pixels to display a text message properly (unlike the Motorola F3's segmented e-ink screen), costs next to nothing, decent lithium ion battery, a well thought out interface, and nearly indestructible.

Re:Simple phones :(

[cosm]

I actually owned one of these. It worked really well, but as another poster mentioned the text messaging was its only weak point. Otherwise, your are definitely correct that for one seeking the simplest of the simplistic, it is one that was a sure winner for me. The menu was tolerable, but navigation is pretty rough at times, and during high-glare or low-light situations it can be rough to read if the incident angle isn't perfect.

Re:Simple phones :(

[cosm]

I had forgotten about that phone, ebay's my next stop! Thanks!

Re:Simple phones :(

[gl4ss]

some new cheapo nokias and se's etc have been getting more features lately. and they're available. the new s40 phones with touch+buttons could do the trick. or go with some s60 candybar most people wouldn't label as a smartphone and you don't need to use them like a smartphone. that's how nokia did the popularity trick with s60.. they introduced s60 in 7650 without much fuss - the fuss was made about it being a cameraphone while it was much more important that it was s60. pretty much all candybar s60's can be used without having to think them as pda's or as multitasking machines.

just buy them. but don't look for reviews for them on tech sites.

One word

[Anonymous Coward]

Nokia

iPod Classic

[kevinmenzel]

Where were all these genius hackers when all I wanted to do was install Rockbox on my iPod Classic?

Re:iPod Classic

[dch24]

linux4nano mailing list has been dead for months. Sorry, man. (No sarcasm intended.)

Why?

[alexmin]

Why would anyone bother cracking the crippled phone (ok, jailbraking, whatever) when there is a better, competitively priced ($400) and completely open alternative (N900)? T-mobile does charge lower monthly fee and does not lock you into 2 year contract if you bring your own device. So again, why do you want to waste your time with any of the G-stuff that also spies on your keystrokes?

Re:Why?

[schnikies79]

Because I'm not going to pay full cash price for a cell phone.

I've been with the same cell company for 11 years, so a 2 year contract isn't a big deal.

Re:Why?

[alexmin]

You do realize that you are paying more than full retail for the phone during 2 year contract, don't you?

Re:Why?

[Arker]

Because T-Mobile service is pretty well nonexistent most places where I need my mobile to work. Also I have unlimited text, data, voice, and roaming with my current carrier - does TMobile even offer that?

Re:Why?

[Belial6]

Yes, they do as well as unlimited internet. They also will charge you less if you bring your own phone, or decide not to upgrade. In fact, the last time I was in the store, they explained that they were switching to a new policy where they didn't subsidize the phone, they just charged you the lower rate for the service, and would give you a 22 month loan for the purchase of a phone. For most people, that works out the same, but for those that want to keep their phone longer, or upgrade more frequently, it is quite a bargain.

Re:Why?

[schnikies79]

I'm with at&t so it doesn't matter as I pay the same price contract or not. T-mobile isn't available in my area.

doesnt matter to me

[jonwil]

I intend to buy a device that lets you replace the phone software out of the box without the need to exploit it (most likely a Nokia N900)

Re:doesnt matter to me

[eudaemon]

I bought two of them - The original G1 developer's version and the Nexus One when it was available. The Nexus One was slightly less "flash the OS' friendly in that you had to void the warranty, but one command and done.

Clearly there's a big market for decent linux-based devices. Not huge, not earth-shattering, but big. Joe Consumer doesn't really care but Joe Consumer can just buy a Droid or an Iphone and call it done... I'm talking about slashdotters here. GOOG needs to keep up the trend of releasing unlocked devices that leapfrog phones currently found on the market. Their trendsetting really helps and lets those of us who want an unlocked device an easy way to buy one.

one quick point.

[IBitOBear]

He didn't actually say anything negative about android. It's the handset manufacturers that are doing this at the behest of the telephone companies.

All the evil is coming into the pipe _after_ android, down in the boot loaders and the skins.

And Google doesn't actually have the Apple Fanboy features that Apple has. Google knows that they will be held to some account by their fickle fan base if the screw up or let their brand get _too_ tarnished by the handset cartel.

It is a given that "Apple can do no wrong" as far as an Apple Fanboy is concerned. Google has simply not done wrong enough yet to deserve derision as far as Android is concerned.

Not the same thing at all. In fact, there are legions of people waiting to catch Google out to crucify them.

because Re:this just encourages them

[NuShrike]

DMCA:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jailbreaking/

Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson-Moss_Warranty_Act

specifically:
The federal minimum standards for full warranties are waived if the warrantor can show that the problem associated with a warranted consumer product was caused by damage while in the possession of the consumer, or by unreasonable use, including a failure to provide reasonable and necessary maintenance.

Not odd at all

[SuperKendall]

Why is that odd? The internet was designed exactly so that major issues would not cause outages. As the infrastructure grew, it saw massive demands from all over, both attacks and valid uses - and so the internet we have today was designed from the start AND forged in fire exactly to handle "everyone running anything".

The cell networks were never originally designed with network use, or even really truly heavy loads in mind. More recently they are thinking along those lines but it takes time to widely deploy physical infrastructure. It's absurd to claim the cell network should ne able to handle things "the internet" can because both are "networks".

please, they don't care about the basics

[SuperBanana]

Make it known to any Google representative who will listen (warning: these are few and far between) that you regard the company as hypocritical and cynical, and not worthy of your trust unless the rights of owners of phones running Android/Linux are fully respected.

Right. Look: google doesn't even give a shit about the fact that people have been complaining for YEARS about the lack of group support in Android's contact manager and poor company name support (for example, it is impossible to search for your contact at Widgetco. That's a BIG problem for someone with a couple hundred business contacts, like a salesperson.)

Something my Siemens phone could do back in the early 2000's (bluetooth sync my contacts with the Macintosh Address Book, complete with groups), something my original iPhone did since day 1...Android can't. Well, it sort of does- but it made an utter fucking mess of things when I enabled syncing.

There's all sorts of half-assed-ness throughout Google products and in particular Android. For example, you can use groups in Google Voice to manage call handling behavior per-group, but only by using the Gmail Contacts interface- not your phone. You can't add a calendar to Google Calendar from your phone. Google Voice doesn't accept mp3 voicemail announcement uploads, something Youmail has supported since day 1.

The music syncing sucks (doubletwist can bite my shiny iPhone), the music player sucks (both stock and free alternatives, though at least the free alternatives have lockscreen systems), and there's all sorts of annoying 'holes'- like not being able to add a calendar from your phone.

Re:please, they don't care about the basics

[Daniel Phillips]

Yes, it seems like there is more suck that doesn't suck in Android. Frankly I'm flabbergasted that with the amount of resources available to Android project before and after being acquired by Google that the end product consists of so much suck. Or, actually I'm just pretending to be flabbergasted because I know exactly what happened: Android was way under resourced before being acquired by Google, and after they were way over managed and, overmeetinged, over facedtimed, and overfed (see infinite free junk food).

For this is the way with Google, or any big organization really. Much more organizing than working. Improving Android therefore must be done by the community. Google needs to do more to facilitate this. This is much easier, cheaper and faster than attempting to have Google's smart people do the work. The problem with Google's smart people is, they are so smart they are extremely good at avoiding work. Not much working for the love of it there, I'm afraid.

Only the outside community can provide the kind of motivation and creativity that will seal Android's success. A megacorp can't do it, not at the speed it needs to be done. Unless the corp is run by Steve Jobs that is, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

And by the way, I'm happy with my G2, suck and all :-)

I just want it to be a lot better, and I'm willing to help make that happen.

Re:please, they don't care about the basics

[metamatic]

...and poor company name support (for example, it is impossible to search for your contact at Widgetco.

Huh? I type widgetco in the Google search box and it finds my four contacts with widgetco mentioned in their records. What's the problem? (And yes, I just verified that this works on my phone with a real example.)

Good old fork bombs

[krull]

Great way to kill time (and annoy other people) back in the cs lab...

According to your resume, that would be Amazon

[SuperBanana]

Hi, Robert Joseph (Joe) Hamelin, formerly employed by Amazon.com as a network engineer. Saw a lot in netops worthy of drinking stories, eh?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tNzoc2EMubAJ:nethead.com/resume/Resume.doc+joe%40nethead.com&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

So, yeah, I'd agree with you. And add in something about glass houses and stones.

Re:According to your resume, that would be Amazon

[Nethead]

Yeah, the (kinda) updated version is at hamelin.us. Nice detective work. Noticing that my public email address matches to my real name in whois. BTW: I also have nethead.org, nethead.us and nethead.org.uk. (Some damn Aussie by the name of Charlie Fox has nethead.net.)

The difference is that I didn't tell the stories on /. and everyone has stories from past employers. The making the stories public was the point.

Re:According to your resume, that would be Amazon

[Daniel Phillips]

The difference is that I didn't tell the stories on /. and everyone has stories from past employers. The making the stories public was the point.

The above stories are all public. I have plenty of private stories about Google, none of which you are going to hear whether good or bad. BTW, don't be shy about using your real name. Some people will hate you for speaking your mind, and my life advice to you is: never work for one of those, it's not worth it.

Re:According to your resume, that would be Amazon

[Nethead]

and my life advice to you is: never work for one of those, it's not worth it.

I hear you there. There is one company that wants me that I won't work for. It's a good crew but the company datamines and sells personal backgrounds. Not what I helped build the Internet for.

The N900 is as open as you ask for

[jonaskoelker]

Now while we're at it, can I can a 'connect phone, run program, press button and you're done' solution for rooting my HTC Wildfire?

8 steps to root on the N900:

(1-5) main menu -- App manager -- Category:All -- gainroot -- install
(6-8) main menu -- xterm -- "sudo gainroot"

Works fine. You can also install custom Linux kernels from the package manager to get wifi-tethering (which I have done, and it works fine).

Unintended Consequence

[ThatsNotPudding]

Folks like Scotty2 are doing serious, difficult, rigorous pen testing. For free. Leading only to a new generation of un-hackable handsets. Careful what you wish for.

GPLv3

[Anonymous Coward]

If the GPLv3 was the dominant free software license, we would not have to crack our own phones. For the free software comnunity today, the biggest problem is not the availability of free software, but vendors taking away our freedom as users while using our software. Using GPLv3 exclusivly helps.

Let me know when they start shipping titles

[RulerOf]

Yep, and when you have eventually paid for the item in full, or eventually go into the store and buy it outright, it's all yours. Until then, it belongs to someone else - the manufacturer or the phone company.

So what's your point again?

My point is that though it may seem like that's the case, it's not. If it were, you would have the option of surrendering the device and paying the difference between the device's FMV and the ETF in the event that you decide to break the contract, but you don't. There's no lien on the device itself. Once the sale is made and the 30 day return window has lapsed, the service provider couldn't care less what you do with it so long as you maintain service with them.

If you want absolute proof that it really is the case that you own the phone outright from the moment you acquire it regardless of subsidy, there's a simple question to ask yourself: "Does the monthly cost of my cellular service go down when my contract expires and I am presumably done paying off the device itself?"

You'll also notice that your bill doesn't state recurring fees for the hardware either.

So I'll reiterate:

If I buy your shit from you, it's not your shit anymore. It's my shit and you have no damn business telling me what I do with it, and no, I signed no contract stating otherwise.

Don't ever forget that, and don't ever let a retailer tell you differently.

selling

[Anonymous Coward]

ghd straighteners,
purple ghd,
ghd hair,

ghd straighteners
purple ghd
ghd hair

no detective work

[SuperBanana]

Nice detective work. Noticing that my public email address matches to my real name in whois.

Wrong. I just plugged your email address into Google.