Apple Quietly Drops iOS Jailbreak Detection API

bednarz writes "Without explanation, Apple has disabled a jailbreak detection API in iOS, less than six months after introducing it. Device management vendors say the reasons for the decision are a mystery, but insist they can use alternatives to discover if an iPhone, iPod touch, or iPad has been modified so it can load and alter applications outside of Apple's iTunes-based App Store."

Comments

Because they realized it was fruitless

[Anonymous Coward]

If you can jailbreak the phone, you can trick the detection API. Once the system is "untrustable" it is not trustable.

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[PNutts]

If you can jailbreak the phone, you can trick the detection API. Once the system is "untrustable" it is not trustable.

My God. Someone actually RTFA.

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[Anonymous Coward]

Fruitless ....Apple ....

Ahahahahahahahah! Good one, man!

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[Charliemopps]

You'd think at some point these companies would realize they're never going to be able to throw enough programming hours at a device to keep literally tens of thousands of basement tinkers from eventually hijacking it. You'd think they'd find it better to provide the jailbreak themselves so they can have SOME control over it. At least flag the device as jail-broken for the warrentee or not allowed on enterprise equipment...

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[Threni]

Heh - that, or Jobs has finally realised that if he wants to not totally fail in the long term against Android he has to allow people to run both OSes on his phones. "Yeah, we're doing all we can to prevent people

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd think at some point these companies would realize they're never going to be able to throw enough programming hours at a device to keep literally tens of thousands of basement tinkers from eventually hijacking it.

Jailbreaking is generally done via security holes which should be fixed anyway. They are effectively getting lots of free labor as people search for these holes.

Obviously, it's a lot better for them if a security hole is found by a jailbreaker than a criminal.

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[Anonymous Coward]

It was hacked within a matter of days. I don't think it ever managed to inconvenience any pirate.

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[geogob]

In the case of Apple inc., it's only partly fruitless...

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[icebike]

Still, why bother to disable it?

Perhaps there is some legal angle to this. Since jailbreak is not illegal, having a method to detect it allows third parties to disenfranchise an Apple customer from doing what they have a right to do. Perhaps Apple does not want that liability.

Or perhaps Apple is standing up for the rights of their customers.

Wait, thats crazy talk. Lemmie go take my meds.

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[Tubal-Cain]

Still, why bother to disable it?

Because the alternative is to maintain it.

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[aliquis]

Once the system is "untrustable" it is not trustable.

So tell me once again why I should vote? :/

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[Anonymous Coward]

Go(l)d1;)

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[SvnLyrBrto]

> You'd think at some point these companies would realize they're never
> going to be able to throw enough programming hours at a device to
> keep literally tens of thousands of basement tinkers from eventually hijacking it.

That's not the point. If that were the point, Apple could go all RIAA/MPAA DMCA-anti-circumvention on the authors of the jailbreak tools (and individual jailbreakers, for that matter). None of them are hard to find, after all. But Apple is still primarily a hardware company. And they get their money on said hardware whether you jailbreak or not. And even jailbreakers usually have a decent amount of AppStore purchases on their iPhones as well. After all, aside from Backgrounder and SBSettings, Cydia is pretty much a vast sea of crap.

The point is to keep the barrier to entry for jailbreaking high enough that the Genius Bars don't have to deal with morons who do things like install openSSH, don't bother to set passwords, and get their phones rickrolled.

To wit: Observe the reaction of the MPAA to DVD-Jon and deCSS vs Apple's reaction to him and PlayFair.

MPAA: Sue, sue, and sue some more. Who cares if he's Swedish and US law doesn't apply there? Sue anyway. Also sue journalists for mentioning the existence of deCSS. Try to get Jon extradited and/or prosecuted under everything from the Berne Convention to the Treaty of Versailles.

Apple: Ignore him until the RIAA squawks at them about the cracked DRM and do a minor point release to iTunes which breaks PlayFair which is, in turn, updated within 48 hours to work again. Carry on ignoring Jon until the RIAA squawks at them again.

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[GrumblyStuff]

How would you know, hmm? Unless... you read it, too!

Quick! Get the tar and feathers!

Re:Because they realized it was fruitless

[Anonymous Coward]

Installing software on a computer does not void the hardware warranty. Crapple might claim otherwise but you can take them to small claims court and point at countless precedents as well as the Moss-Magnusen act to prove their claim wrong.

Apple Relenting?

[TaoPhoenix]

So can we jai - unlock our iPhones now?

Re:Apple Relenting?

[HermMunster]

I believe you could already legally unlock your phone.

You probably don't understand the intent of the DMCA. The purpose of it was to stop copyright infringement. It was never intended as a lock to protect a company's business practices. In fact, the write up from the Library of Congress specifically targetted that fact--that Apple had submitted their oral and written opposition asserting their attempts to protect their business model. The Library of Congress concluded that to mean that Apple wasn't really trying to protect the right's holder's copyright, instead they were trying to protect their business model.

This is what the Register (Library of Congress) stated (taken from the Ars Technica write-up):

"Apple is not concerned that the practice of jailbreaking will displace sales of its firmware or of iPhones," wrote the Register, explaining her thinking by running through the "four factors" of the fair use test. "Indeed, since one cannot engage in that practice unless one has acquired an iPhone, it would be difficult to make that argument. Rather, the harm that Apple fears is harm to its reputation. Apple is concerned that jailbreaking will breach the integrity of the iPhone's ecosystem. The Register concludes that such alleged adverse effects are not in the nature of the harm that the fourth fair use factor is intended to address."

Copyright protection is granted to protect the rights holder from illegal distribution of their content and not to prohibit owners of the hardware from doing other things with it once they own it.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[Firehed]

You certainly can try, but unlocking (to my understanding) requires reprogramming parts of the GSM chip's firmware. Jailbreaking is merely getting root access. Which allows you to unlock the phone, but you still have to know what you're doing - and if you screw it up, the phone is probably dead for good even if the rest of the device remains functional.

Even if you CAN unlock, do you really want to? In the US, your only frequency-compatible option is T-Mobile, and you often lose 3G capability too. It's probably much more useful internationally.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[HermMunster]

I recently ceased my AT&T relationship after having an iPhone for nearly 3 years. Later I realized that I could take a simcard out of a cheap pay as you go cell phone, and that if I unlocked it I could use it on that carrier, albeit with limits. So, yes, some would. My 1st gen iPhone works perfectly (except battery life issues) and if I can make use of it at significantly (and I do mean significant) reduced cost I will.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[Anonymous Coward]

You probably don't understand the intent of the DMCA. The purpose of it was to stop copyright infringement. It was never intended as a lock to protect a company's business practices.

So you are saying it's not a lock to protect a company's bussiness practices, but a lock to protect *another* company's business practices. Oh, kay.

It sounds like in today's America the only freedom is the freedom to screw people, and only companies with deep pockets and criminal connections are allowed to exercise it. We are going back to the Dark Ages at cruise speed. Next you know you'll be beheaded for riding a horse without guild approved horseshoes.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[icebike]

Did you not understand a word of what the GP stated?

Jailbreaking is not illegal, and is your right.

Apples objections were based on untenable arguments and had nothing to do with copyright infringements.

So Apple was wrong. Its still your right to jailbreak.

Apple is not obligated to honor the warranty on any jailbroken device. But that is an entirely separate issue.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[HermMunster]

You need to reread, and to do so carefully.

Copyright is a legal concept designed to protect one's intellectual property. Apple wasn't defending their intellectual property, they were defending their business practice which isn't covered by copyright.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to reread, and to do so carefully.

Copyright is a legal concept designed to protect one's intellectual property. Apple wasn't defending their intellectual property, they were defending their business practice which isn't covered by copyright.

They should have patened their business practices, instead.

The sad thing is, I'm not sure if that's a joke, or not.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[DarkVader]

Except that Apple IS legally obligated to honor the warranty on any jailbroken device, unless the jailbreak itself caused the failure, at least in the US. They may claim otherwise, but Magnuson-Moss overrides their claim.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[icebike]

What part of Magnuson-Moss puts the burden on the manufacturer to prove that a user modification was the cause of failure?

There are an infinite number of modifications that users might make. There is only one (or a very few) configurations tested, released and warranted by a manufacturer. How could any manufacturer possibly test an infinite number of combinations and permutations of unknown future hacks? There isn't enough time. There aren't enough engineers.

I suspect there is a little self serving interpretation of the law here, because unless parts are expected to be replaced due to wear and tear (tire on cars), its pretty standard in every industry in every country for the warranty to come off as soon you hack something.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[DarkVader]

And you can.

PwnageTool has a very easy unlock option for the 1st gen iPhone, just check the box as you're configuring the jailbroken firmware. I think the version you want is 3.1.5, easily available on Pirate Bay (which is the official release location).

For later iPhones, it's simple enough to run UltraSn0w and unlock once you've jailbroken.

(I'm assuming from the tone of your post that you may well already know all of this, but GP appears to have no understanding of the ease of the process.)

Re:Apple Relenting?

[HermMunster]

Business model patents are as onerous as software patents.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[Billly Gates]

What is sad is the fact that you had to type that message.

Why o why after having a computer where you can load whatever apps or OS do you have to use your own phone the way you want it. Ohhh GOD FORBID. ... which is why I do not own an Iphone.

How would you like your pc to be locked like this? Locking phones should be downright illegal as well as the cell phone companies charging $5,000 for a two year contract. Oh silly it is not that high ... well multiple $200 a month for 2 years? I bet most of you never saw that coming. This should be downright illegal for any company to lock their product. It comes to show money can buy you a monopoly on the cell phones and your network. I am just happy our pcs are not locked down like this. MS and Dell would LOVE this. I can guarentee that.

Rise up and do something about this. No one cares or is so ignorant they can not see what the harm is. If I ever did buy a phone in the future it will be an Andriod. Problem being the manufactors love to lock these of course. UGh

Re:Apple Relenting?

[kenshin33]

not that i'm saying it is true, but the guy has a point. to keep in car analogy. let's say you hacked the car;s and added a compressor lored the suspension .... few days later the distributor goes boom (happened to me on time the car just stoped there -- haddn't changed any thing it was just old) .. what happens ? the dealer may say tought time man but you hacked your car ... no more waranty ?

Re:Apple Relenting?

[aliquis]

Your hack not working shouldn't be a warranty issue and if anything else fails regardless of whatever the phone where hacked or not how does the hack matters?

Re:Apple Relenting?

[SuricouRaven]

From my understanding, not all phones provided by US networks even *have* SIMs. Some do, some don't, in contrast to Europe where every phone takes SIMs - even if it's locked to only use those for one network.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[alannon]

Actually, that's EXACTLY what Magnuson-Moss says.
Here's a "for dummies" reference:
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/keeping-your-mods-warranty-intact.html

Re:Apple Relenting?

[HermMunster]

Yeah. In the US, T-Mobile and AT&T are just a couple that use simcards. Verison is one that doesn't.

The reason I mentioned my point about taking a cheap cell and using its' simcard is because I already have the cheap cell phone ($24.99 at Walmart & it uses prepaid cards) with a simcard that I can use in my iPhone.

I will likely have to keep the phone in order to redeem more cards, but you never know.

And, I paid big money for that iPhone over nearly 3 years of paying over $100 a month. And, it's only in as good a shape as it is because I took care of it.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[icebike]

Repair parts on cars is not the issue here.
People don't add parts to phones. Merely opening the case of an iphone voids the warranty.

Once you hack a phone and obtain root you will be unsuccessful trying to exercise your warranty on the brick you created.

I'm pretty sure Apple's lawyers prevail over a Dummies book with out getting out of bed in the morning.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[camperslo]

They can exclude warranty coverage if what you did caused the problem. For example if a change you've made alters normal cpu/power management, you should not expect free help if you experience short battery life. (batteries usually have relatively poor warranty coverage anyway).

A hack that caused overheating would be justification for excluding those heat-stressed components/modules from coverage (and components that fail as a result of those failing).
Overclocking laptop/desktop busses, CPUs, or GPUs could easily be such a case, but I don't know if there are any phone hacks causing similar trouble. The most likely non-covered consequences might be malware or apps doing unexpected things.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[Anonymous Coward]

A good number of people in the US travel to first world countries. They tend to switch SIM cards and use providers present in civilized nations as opposed to multi-thousand dollar roaming charges.

There is a market for unlocked phones. Even antediluvian CDMA providers back in the US understand this and put SIM cards in the phones that see civilized nations, so they can make money when people travel overseas.

Re:Apple Relenting?

[aliquis]

As far as my mac goes battery life probably got better after installing some fan setting application. I don't think it let you override the system settings as far as "slower" goes, only raise them, and it improved somewhat since that P.O.S. got really hot. It was probably called fan control or something such.

Battery life sucked though but that's to be expected if running in a machine at 70 degrees Celsius or such ..

Never overclocked on it though because I don't think overclocking pays for itself in most cases.

Reasons

[SilverHatHacker]

the reasons for the decision are a mystery

Sudden outbreak of common sense was too far-fetched? It's none of their business if I jailbreak my phone.

Re:Reasons

[Microlith]

Sudden outbreak of common sense

Nonsense, for fans of lock down "common sense" means that you do like the vast majority of people and leave control of the device to whoever locked it down. You're just a consumer, you shouldn't be doing that. You're supposed to visit the AppStore and consume.

It's a broken, twisted, and borderline abusive view on the world but that's what we have.

Re:Reasons

[zn0k]

Damn skippy you don't jailbreak the phone that your workplace gave you. After all, they own that phone. Literally.

Which is what the article is actually about - functionality that allows enterprise software to detect whether a phone deployed through that enterprise has been jailbroken. It's a simple part of compliance testing of work issued equipment.

Re:Reasons

[hedwards]

Indeed. Personally, I like how Google handles it on the Nexus One. Attempting to unlock it pops up a screen explaining that if you continue unlocking it that they are no longer responsible for what the software does. Which is fair enough, if they no longer have any control over the software, then it's a reasonable trade off.

But with the Android phones there's little reason to unlock it, unless one wants to run a custom UI, as you can already convenient install apps from elsewhere.

Re:Reasons

[Microlith]

Assuming that is the only basis upon which it was used. However the vast, vast majority of iPhones I've seen used with work systems are personal devices and as the first poster noted once a phone is Jailbroken it can lie to you about everything.

So they may be jailbreaking what is most likely their personal device, and they could easily load a hack that made it go "yeah I'm not jailbroken."

Re:Reasons

[zn0k]

> It's none of their business if I jailbreak my phone.

Agreed. It is, however, your company's business if you jailbreak the phone they gave you. THEIR phone. Which is what the article is about - enterprise software detecting whether you jailbroke THEIR phone.

Re:Reasons

[h4rr4r]

You missed the biggest reason, to run the latest OS version. Hardware vendors and carriers make updates slow and infrequent. On top of this they will stop updating a phone soon after release to ensure you upgrade to a newer model and get another contract.

I say this as someone who own a Moto Droid and for the most part likes it. I probably won't get another android device other than a pure google one like the Nexus line. Other than that I might get a meego/meebo device.

Re:Reasons

[Microlith]

I like it better on the N900, where I add a repository and install a package. My warranty is still intact, even. In any case, all phones should do at least what the Nexus One does.

Re:Reasons

[HermMunster]

That's my thought too. Developers should not be looking at my phone for any purpose other than running programs. What I do outside their tiny little sandbox is none of their business.

Re:Reasons

[cmdahler]

Sigh. You really ought to RTFA, otherwise you just come across as a dumbshit. This story has nothing to do with preventing you from doing what you want with your i-Device. It has everything to do with an enterprise-provided and -owned device reporting itself to the enterprise-owner that you as the non-owner-user have jailbroken your i-Device, thus causing a security hole the size of the one in your backside in the enterprise's system. And yes, Virginia, the enterprise that owns said device does have the right to know if you're being said dumbshit and jailbreaking a device that you don't even own.

Re:Reasons

[HermMunster]

That's a bullshit response, and I have to call it.

Common sense says that it is your device and you do to it what you will once you own it. The vast majority of people feel that way too. Just imagine the automotive industry locking down their vehicles and claiming no one can perform maintenance or modification outside of their purview.

We are not just the customer, we are the owner of the device. We "were" a customer but we became the owner once the transaction was complete. I am not renting the phone/ipod/ipad, I am buying it by trading my money in exchange.

Re:Reasons

[h4rr4r]

Any idea if meego/meebo/whatever crazy name they pick next will continue this trend?

Re:Reasons

[Microlith]

It's always been MeeGo. Currently the N900 runs Maemo, which has been around since the 770 back in 2005. Whether or not that trend continues depends on who uses it. Nokia hopefully will continue it on whatever successors running MeeGo appear. No guarantees for other vendors.

Re:Reasons

[h4rr4r]

I realize you are new here, but it is a long and proud slashdot tradion to not read the linked article. Many really hardcore slashdot users do not even read the summary.

Re:Reasons

[Microlith]

Common sense says that it is your device and you do to it what you will once you own it.

You aren't looking at it from the skewed perspective of a carrier or vendor like Apple.

The vast majority of people feel that way too.

They may, but the vendors are banking on their ignorance.

I am not renting the phone/ipod/ipad, I am buying it by trading my money in exchange.

Sure, but you aren't the kind of customer that companies selling locked down devices want.

Re:Reasons

[HermMunster]

He never said he was worried about them preventing, rather he said it was none of their business and that they shouldn't even be looking. To me it means that it's a breach of privacy and of good faith.

The implication was that Apple removed it for whatever reason (most likely to protect themselves), yet program authors could look anyway using their own methodology. That implies they can and will. Making the determination of whether a phone is jailbroken is not their business.

Re:Reasons

[Anonymous Coward]

MeeGo is an OS.

meebo is an instant messenger in your browser. It used to be nice but now it's kind of like talking to your friends over commercials.

Re:Reasons

[Requiem18th]

Am I the only one preoccupied that employers are shoving their employees with tracking devices? And given that you can't turn off or remove the battery form an iPhone what recourse these people have besides quitting their jobs? Dropping their phones in a metal lunch box?

Re:Reasons

[insertwackynamehere]

How can't you turn off an iPhone? Did you lose your fingers or something?

Re:Reasons

[netsharc]

You're forgetting one part, when a user-land exploit has managed to jailbreak the phone and install malware onto it, essentially being a rogue node inside the corporation's nework. Of course it's only theoretical so far, but an all-in-one spying software that can run undetected in iPhones would fetch quite a sum of money. As for the user-land exploit, that's real: the Spirit jailbreak used a bug in the PDF rendering library that got it all the way into the kernel...

Re:Reasons

[Karlt1]

You missed the biggest reason, to run the latest OS version. Hardware vendors and carriers make updates slow and infrequent. On top of this they will stop updating a phone soon after release to ensure you upgrade to a newer model and get another contract.

Original iPhone -- released in June 2007 and was capable of running the latest OS until Jun 2010
iPhone 3G -- released in June 2008, still capable of running the latest OS (with limitations)
iPhone 3GS -- released in June 2009, capable of running the latest OS.

No waiting on the carrier to decide when you can upgrade. Apple released the OS and everyone worldwide could upgrade the same day.

Re:Reasons

[netsharc]

Did I word that properly? I meant when the bad guys (e.g. the Chinese government) has used a user-land exploit to queitly jailbreak and install malware on your/the employee's iPhone...

If they had not patched that PDF bug (which, I believe is the case for iPhoneOS 3 and less), the bad guy can just send the iPhone user an e-mail with a PDF attachment, "take a look at this". User clicks the PDF, and boom, the exploit can fake a reboot (show the white Apple) while it downloads and installs itself from the internet. The average user would just think "heh, sucky iPhone/heh that's weird" and not think anything of it...

Re:Reasons

[Requiem18th]

Last time heard of it the iPhone still calls home when off so it's never really off.

Re:Reasons

[grub]

Slashdot has summaries?

Re:Reasons

[MightyYar]

And given that you can't turn off

Can't turn it off? Have you ever actually used one of these things?

tracking devices

Crackberries and WinMo had GPS before iPhones, and they also had the ability to run corporate code without hacks.

If your employer wants to track you, they can do it with any current-generation smart phone.

Re:Reasons

[mattack2]

[citation needed]

Hold down the top button for many seconds. A slider comes up saying "slide to power off".

When you power back on, it takes MUCH longer than waking the device, and you see it booting.

Re:Reasons

[MightyYar]

I am buying it by trading my money in exchange.

This is true. However, I bought it with the full knowledge of what I was getting into. I don't have a smartphone, but I do have an iPod Touch. I had no need for jailbreaking, so I don't really care that the device is locked down.

Would I rather that Apple didn't lock the device down? Sure. But until a competent competitor comes around, they are the best in town and worth the trade-off. If someone made a polished Android media player, maybe I would buy that instead. There's an Archos device that you can hack (jailbreak?) to get to the Android store, but the touch screen is resistive so it can't compete. I also found the video playback confusing - apparently you have to pay extra for some codecs? Anyway, it seemed inferior.

Re:Reasons

[h4rr4r]

Your point is?

Wow, their device was allowed to live 3 years instead of 2. There are G1s running the latest and greatest android right now.

Re:Reasons

[hedwards]

That's more a matter of Apple not allowing the carrier to use a custom interface. The main reason why it takes so long for a lot of those phones to get the latest release, is that the carrier feels the need to include a custom interface.

Re:Reasons

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

and they could easily load a hack that made it go "yeah I'm not jailbroken."

There's an app for that!

Re:Reasons

[HermMunster]

That still doesn't void the warranty. It just means that OEM wouldn't be obligated to provide technical support.

Re:Reasons

[whoop]

All Android phones - released from 2008 to present, capable of running any Android OS when the manufacturer no longer wishes to provide updates. Forever. Long live the root hackers. Google provides the OS. Manufacturers provide kernel mods / device drivers. The community takes care of keeping things up-to-date.

Apple phones - when we drop support, you need to be getting a new phone anyway, I mean come on, you don't want to be a lame-o with an old iphone, do you? Think what your neighbors will say of you.

Re:Reasons

[Fulcrum of Evil]

The thing still lives, it just doesn't get the new fancy stuff. Is that such a problem?

Re:Reasons

[mr100percent]

It seems like the API is running a checksum against OS files. How can you spoof that?

Re:Reasons

[Yaztromo]

As another poster has mentioned, you can turn the iPhone off -- the standard state most customers think of as "off" only really turns off the display.

However, a much easier way of doing the same thing is to just put the iPhone in Airplane mode. That mode disables all of the wireless subsystems at the hardware level, preventing it from being able to "phone home" in any way, shape, or form (I think airlines and various international air transport authorities would have a problem if the iPhone randomly overrode this mode when it felt like it).

Yaz.

Re:Reasons

[netsharc]

Have a copy of the virgin OS files on disk, and modify the checksum function to check those files instead of the real OS's files. In effect, put the checksum function in its own jail, which I think qualifies as irony.

I think AOL did this once in the AIM protocl to prevent third party clients like Pidgin (or Gaim as it used to be known) from connecting to their network. I forget how Gaim's developer solved it...

Re:Reasons

[Karlt1]

The main reason why it takes so long for a lot of those phones to get the latest release, is that the carrier feels the need to include a custom interface.

So the carrier feels the need to install the Sense UI on HTC phones, MotoBlur on Motorola phones and TouchWiz on Samsung phones?

Re:Reasons

[Karlt1]

Wow, their device was allowed to live 3 years instead of 2. There are G1s running the latest and greatest android right now.

Yeah because normal consumers are going to troll the Internet,root their phones and install an unofficial OS....

Re:Reasons

[Duradin]

Leave it at your desk, they'll think you're a model employee.

Re:Reasons

[aliquis]

And given that you can't turn off or remove the battery form an iPhone

They have done the same to the laptops now :D

You can't remove the battery of the Macbook Pro (or well, can and can, of course you can, but you're not supposed to.)

Want to know how to make even more profit on ridicilously overpriced machines? :D

Apple suck.

Re:Reasons

[samjam]

That doesn't mean that GPS is turned off (after all it's a receiver) and it doesn't mean it can't report your route up as soon as you turn it back on again.

Re:Reasons

[SuricouRaven]

Interestingly, there has never been a single incident of a phone interfering with an aircraft's electronics, and even in theory it's so unlikely as to be laughable. There are two theories as to why the phones remain banned. Some people claim it's over-caution - that airlines know the risk is infinitesimal, but still don't want to take even that chance. Other people claim it's financial: Forbid the mobiles in order to get rid of the competition, then people will have to use the passanger in-flight phones which are very expensive. Either way, mobile phones don't work well at high altitude: The base station is a long way down, and even at maximum transmit power the connection is too unreliable for voice. Texting only.

Re:Reasons

[SuricouRaven]

"Just imagine the automotive industry locking down their vehicles and claiming no one can perform maintenance or modification outside of their purview."

I don't need to: They already do. While simple damage to the bodywork, worn tires and such are still repairable at any garage, any engine fault is impossible to even diagnose in a modern car without access to the engine control unit. Those things invariably use a propritary, closed and very secretive protocol. The only garages with access to the software needed are those either run by the dealer, or who have licenced the software - which is expensive, espicially as each manufacturer has their own, and a garage needs to have the full set of popular cars. Manufacurers like to keep the software overpriced (I've heard everything from $100 for a basic 'read numbers and update firmware' package to $7,000 for the full 'insert cable, get diagnosis' software) as this puts their own dealers at an advantage.

Naturally, hackers have reverse-engineered the popular cars and even produced hacked firmwares that can increase performance at the expense of efficiency. But not many businesses want to risk using third-party software of dubious legality, or an unbranded interface box.

Re:Reasons

[toriver]

The biggest reason is the distance to cell towers when you are 30,000 feet above ground.

The cell phones would be sending at max power to talk with those distant towers. At the speed of an airplane, multiple towers would get the phone's weak requests to connect, and would each set aside a "slot" while waiting for the phone to complete handshake, which might never complete.

Re:Reasons

[Internal Modem]

You can turn the ignition key and pump the accelerator in specific sequences to reveal the diagnostic codes on most modern vehicles (similar to video game controller button combos to unlock hidden easter eggs). The sequence is specific to your vehicle. The codes will be displayed on the dash through a series of blinking lights if there is not a display. All of this is available on Google.

Re:Reasons

[Internal Modem]

There are huge reasons to root Android.
1. Remove bloatware (Verizon Navigator, My Verizon, Slacker Radio) to prevent unwanted programs from launching at boot and every time the phone is plugged in.
2. Add functionality back to the phone that was removed by carrier (mobile wifi hotspot)
3.Add software that requires superuser access, such as Titanium Backup that lets you back up your apps and data (progress in Angry Birds) and reinstall to any phone.
4. ? 5. Profit

Re:Reasons

[Rich0]

Look, I like android. I own a G1. I run Cyanogenmod and all that (though it is starting to hit the boundaries of usability with v6+).

The fact is that HTC stopped supporting the G1 about a year after it was released. Everything since then required rooting the phone. In fact, HTC's design would not allow the Android to run anything newer than 1.6 - their design was imperfect which is what allowed it to be rooted.

I think that in the support-for-older-hardware category I have to give the win to Apple. They support their older hardware a LOT longer than any of the android vendors do. Even the true-blood ADP was deprecated basically at the same time as the G1 - before then it just got the updates a little sooner and didn't have to bypass vendor locks to root it (though ironically you need to put those locks in to take advantage of the newer firmwares that free up more RAM).

I'd still go with Android in the future, but I'm under no illusions that getting newer OS versions on the device a year after it is released won't require considerable hacking.

Re:Reasons

[Rich0]

I guess that is up to the consumer, but the parent was right that if having the latest and greatest OS version is important to a consumer, they're more likely to get that from Apple than any of the Android vendors.

That isn't the MOST important criteria, which is why I run Android. However, I am disappointed that in general an Android phone is almost completely de-supported a year from release. Heck - didn't somebody come up with some browser exploits for Android a month or so back and I haven't seen any news of updates for the G1 - they're starting to look like MS on their patch schedules...

Re:Reasons

[MeepMeep]

Considering some of the postings I've seen, I'm not even sure if some posters read the title

Re:Reasons

[jmorris42]

> The base station is a long way down, and even at maximum transmit power
> the connection is too unreliable for voice.

No, do the math. 30,000 feet of empty air vs a mile of urban environment. The problem is a cell in a plane throws a very clear signal to every tower for miles around; All of which try to reply, hilarity ensues. And in the days of analog cell service there were only a couple hundred channels usable from any one cell site (to allow overlap) so a planeload of idiots trying to make calls would present a moving cellphone jammer to the system. And with digital the problem is only a little less horrible. The root of the problem is the cell network was conceived as a 2D environment and the problem of the Z axis's existence was left undefined.

Re:Reasons

[mlts]

Rootkits do this every day. This is done by one of two ways:

1: Know what wants to be sent up and send those exact numbers. Say something demands the MD5 sum of file foo... instead of doing the check of the file, the software just returns that sum.

2: Keep the original files stashed somewhere and report on those numbers.

The way to protect against this is having a chip with access to the whole filesystem, and that can run independently of the main OS. If it detects unauthorized modifications, then zero out the baseband or the OS so the device doesn't work until reinstalled, or short out something on one of the critical chips so the device is permanently rendered inoperable, then have it covered by some clause like "this device has the ability to disable itself if unauthorized modifications which can affect critical lines of communication are detected."

Re:Reasons

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell that to the 9/11 commission please!

Re:Reasons

[Requiem18th]

About the iPhone, I got that from here http://youtu.be/1ONXVE7QBCY @ 2:42
As for other phones, yes but at least they can be turned of, either way my complain isn't about the iPhone, it's about employers tracking employees outside office hours.

Re:Reasons

[Requiem18th]

About the iPhone, I got that from here http://youtu.be/1ONXVE7QBCY @ 2:42
So i was wrong. But can you assure me it doesn't phone home while off?

Re:Reasons

[Requiem18th]

I'm talking about tracking employees outside office hours.

But then again if they are stupid enough to fall for that they may pay you extra time.

Re:Reasons

[Requiem18th]

But it really is the fault of the consumers that pay for it.

Re:Reasons

[Duradin]

Simple. If you are not paid to carry a company phone after hours, don't. Leave it at home or on your desk. Voicemail exists for a reason.

If you are paid to be on call 24/7/365.25 carry a personal phone and forward the number to that one.

Re:Reasons

[RMH101]

You're completely right, although it should be pointed out that FASTBOOT /OEM on a Nexus One also displays the message that your warranty's void from that point on if you continue...

Re:Reasons

[MightyYar]

He just made a joke - not only can you turn off the iPhone, but you can disable GPS and WiFi while it is on. I don't have one, but my Mom turns off GPS and WiFi for battery life.

Think about it... how could you get on an airplane if you couldn't turn it off?

Strategic move

[damnfuct]

The android platform seems to be gaining a large market share recently, and I don't doubt that this action is a knee-jerk because of it.

Class action?

[mewsenews]

Jailbreaking became legally protected recently. Disabling functionality when a jailbreak is detected seems like it might open Apple to a class action lawsuit.

I'm sure they're legally allowed to say that jailbreaking voids the warranty, but I'm not sure they're willing to risk crippling a jailbreaker's device with an api flag.

"Sorry, you can't play our game because you jailbroke your phone" -- if Apple encouraged app developers to do this, things could get nasty.

IANAL - this post is total speculation

Re:Class action?

[Anonymous Coward]

[sarcasm]That would be crazy... Imagine if pc software vendors tried to pull something like that. What if they prevented their software from running when certain other software was detected? Surely no one would stand for that...[/sacrcasm]

Re:Class action?

[rabbit994]

I think API was more for IT Admins so they could disable phones or throw them off ActiveSync server if they get jailbroken. I know we only support Android with TouchDown after we found users installing No Lock application on their Android phones that would remove password requirement. Our sales group decided that locking screen after 10 minutes was too annoying.

Re:Class action?

[mewsenews]

I guess that's what I get for not reading the article. If a company owns the phones, they can do whatever monitoring they want on them. It might simply have been a case of Apple realizing that a call to is_this_device_jailbroken() would be the first thing any new jailbreaks subvert..

Re:Class action?

[EvanED]

Jailbreaking became legally protected recently. Disabling functionality when a jailbreak is detected seems like it might open Apple to a class action lawsuit.

Only for a much narrower sense of "legally protected" than you seem to think. The protection bars prosecution under the DMCA, but there's absolutely nothing that says phone manufacturers have to make it easy for you or can't take anti-jailbreaking countermeasures.

I'm sure they're legally allowed to say that jailbreaking voids the warranty, but I'm not sure they're willing to risk crippling a jailbreaker's device with an api flag.

I'm actually not so sure of the first part, though IANAL either. I'd be much more inclined to think the complete opposite of what you indicate: I wouldn't be surprised if Apple wouldn't mind that in the end.

Re:Class action?

[h4rr4r]

How does touchdown get around that?

Re:Class action?

[h4rr4r]

Tell them to install screeble instead, that way the phone stays unlocked while in the range of orientation that it has when you hold it.

Re:Class action?

[captor01]

I agree, why would the app developers agree to this. It's a failed mechanism that would just be overthrown by new programs anyways. But obviously Apple want to continue to control their products as much as possible.

Re:Class action?

[HermMunster]

Actually there's plenty of case-law that says that modification must be significant enough to have cause the damage resulting in the need to have the warranty honored.

So, technically, Apple has no grounds to claim loss of warranty when the modification wasn't significant enough to cause the type of damage that would cause the consumer to invoke the warranty.

And, in case you didn't know it, the warranty on those Apple devices is 9 months (at least for the iPhone). That's shorter than most in the electronics field.

Re:Class action?

[HermMunster]

I think it could be argued that by undoing a jailbreak would put Apple (or any entity doing so) in legal peril. What technically is being said is that since it is legal to jailbreak it would be illegal to violate the integrity of the device, which the DMCA exemption clearly identifies as the consumer's property.

Re:Class action?

[dgatwood]

And, in case you didn't know it, the warranty on those Apple devices is 9 months (at least for the iPhone). That's shorter than most in the electronics field.

Uh, last I checked, the iPhone warranty is one year.

Re:Class action?

[HermMunster]

The original iPhone warranty was 9 months. When I had to get my iPhone replaced Apple claimed a 9 month warranty. Because of the nature of the problem with the phone (dead areas on the screen) and due to the fact that Apple had know of the issue before manufacture they replaced it free of charge.

So, I get the "9 months" because that's what Apple told me the warranty was back then.

Re:Class action?

[nurb432]

That is the most likely answer. That and the "cat and mouse game" gets expensive after a while too.

Re:Class action?

[Alrescha]

"The original iPhone warranty was 9 months"

The leaflet that came in the box with my original iPhone (Summer 2007) says one year.

A.

Re:Class action?

[index0]

Only legal if you do it yourself. There was a recent case of a "terrorist" that was selling jailbroken phones.

Re:Class action?

[dgatwood]

Likewise. I'm pretty sure Apple has never had any product with less than a year warranty on hardware, or at least not since I started using their hardware in the mid 90s. Maybe the original poster is thinking of the three month warranty for random (non-hardware) user problems?

Re:Class action?

[SuricouRaven]

I also note that even though jailbreaking may be legal, it is still illegal under the DMCA to possess the software required for jailbreaking. DMCA exceptions are really just for show, a concession from politics. They were never intended to be actually used.

Re:Class action?

[SuricouRaven]

I suspect that was a case of 'We know he is guilty but can't prove it in court, so what else do we have on him?'

ENOUGH WITH QUIETLY

[Anonymous Coward]

Can anyone do anything anymore without it being labeled 'quietly'?!

Anonymous Coward, quietly posting.

Re:ENOUGH WITH QUIETLY

[Duradin]

It's Apple, so if they advertise they are doing some /.er yells about slashvertisment and spam and if they don't say anything about it they are trying to hide it and should be yelled at.

Re:ENOUGH WITH QUIETLY

[konohitowa]

Thank you! I searched the page for "quietly" first, because had it not been here, I would going to do a "Slashdot Quietly Rolls Out Web 2.0 Interface" or something similar.

Oh geez. I should have known. Fucking k-moron-dawson. I really need to find a way to block this idiot's stories from my slashboxes. Just removing him from the front page isn't enough.

Android did it first !

[noddyxoi]

Android did it first !

Android pod touch

[tepples]

The android platform seems to be gaining a large market share recently

Android is gaining on iPhone, but not on iPod touch, and it's all Google's fault. Google reportedly requires all devices that can access Android Market to have a camera, GPS, and other things more suited for a telephone than a PDA, leaving the pure-PDA market to Apple.

Re:Android pod touch

[hedwards]

I might be missing something, but the iPod touch isn't a phone. And I'm not really sure why Google would even want to compete with it. Right now they're making phones and are moving into the tablet market. And they're making moves on netbooks as well.

And don't forget about Google TV. Seems like trying to compete with the iPod touch would be a distraction, and they haven't demonstrated any interest in it up to this point.

Re:Android pod touch

[h4rr4r]

You keep saying that, yet many folks have pointed out devices you could be using. The pure PDA market is dead. the iPod touch is not a PDA, it is just the nicest iPod. That it happens to act as a PDA is only a side effect.

Android does not mean you get market access, you can use other stores. Heck, you could buy an old iPhone not get a phone plan and install android, if you wanted.

Re:Android pod touch

[Daniel Phillips]

Android is gaining on iPhone, but not on iPod touch, and it's all Google's fault. Google reportedly requires all devices that can access Android Market to have a camera, GPS, and other things more suited for a telephone than a PDA, leaving the pure-PDA market to Apple.

What? Those are all things I want in a "pure PDA". The reason Android isn't gaining on iPad (I *think* that's what you really meant) is that there aren't very many tablet products released yet. On the other hand, Samsung quickly sold over a million Android tablets. I would call that gaining.

Re:Android pod touch

[MightyYar]

And I'm not really sure why Google would even want to compete with it.

It's a locked-down internet device. Not only can you get content without searching the wider web, but Apple even gets all of the ad revenue. Google wants you to think "Web!" when you want a book, movie, or song. Not the iBook store or iTunes... Google has zero chance to get a cut that way. Even the weather can be fetched without a single Adword visit. :)

Re:Android pod touch

[tepples]

And I'm not really sure why Google would even want to compete with it.

Because competing with Apple wouldn't take much effort: just open up Market access to more devices.

Right now they're making phones and are moving into the tablet market.

I'd buy an Archos 43 tomorrow if it were truly a viable substitute for iPod touch.

Microsoft has got away with it

[tepples]

I'm sure they're legally allowed to say that jailbreaking voids the warranty, but I'm not sure they're willing to risk crippling a jailbreaker's device with an api flag.

Microsoft has got away with it on Xbox and Xbox 360, banning jailbreakers from Xbox Live.

Re:Microsoft has got away with it

[anss123]

On the xbox 360 they hack the DVD drive as, AFAIK, it's not jailbroken yet.

Now that ARM CPUs is starting to support virtualization I expect to see tougher protection on cell phones, similar to what's on the PS3 and 360, though it's a bit expensive since you need to embed a ROM on the CPU.

Re:Microsoft has got away with it

[metalmaster]

MS gets away with it because the Xbox isnt a phone. The exception to the DMCA seems to be (smart)phone specific. Additionally, MS has a bigger interest in keeping up security for the sake of their online community. Modders quickly become cheaters who become a nuisance to those who play fairly

Re:Microsoft has got away with it

[SuricouRaven]

Yet this has never been a great problem in the PC gaming area. Well, other than Counterstrike. It isn't about the online community - it's about subsidised hardware. Consoles operate on the same business model as printers. The initial hardware is sold at a loss, on the expectation of making enough profit on the games (Or ink) to make that back and then some more. There are two things which can ruin this business model: Pirate or independant, unlicenced games (Akin to third-party ink cartridges) and people who use the low-cost hardware for something other than the manufacturer's intention, such as installing linux and using it as a budget desktop PC. For this reason all major console manufacturers, like many printer manufacturers, use technological means to prevent the end user doing anything with their hardware that doesn't result in more money for the manufacturer. That is the only way the business model can be viable. Without it, the cost of the console would have to reflect the *real* cost of manufacture - and MS wouldn't be selling many xboxes if they cost £500.

where's the like button...

[ritzer]

'nough said -- this site needs a "like" button.

Re:where's the like button...

[h4rr4r]

No it does not.Get off my lawn, then go back to dig or where ever you came from.

Apple sells the jailbreak

[tepples]

You'd think they'd find it better to provide the jailbreak themselves so they can have SOME control over it.

Apple sells the jailbreak; it just costs $600 for a Mac plus $99 per year.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[StarHeart]

I don't think that is a full jailbreak. It just lets you load your own applications. Plus if you want to distribute applications to regular phones you have to give them a 30% cut.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[dogmatixpsych]

Or, you receive a whole 70% of the profits by letting Apple promote (mostly passively unless you have a great app), host, transfer, and manage your apps. It's all in how you want to spin it. 30% to reach a market of millions and millions isn't bad.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not "letting" you have no choice in the matter.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[NiceGeek]

You don't have to do business with them do you? You do have a choice.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[sjames]

Unless, of course, you want your iPhone to do something Apple would rather it not do. Then your app will go into a limbo of not being accepted or rejected until you give up and buy an Android phone.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[grouchomarxist]

Not if you're willing to distribute the applications for free.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[aliquis]

Actual cost of my Macbook Pro ended up being closer to $ 5.5 / day.

Except a 8cm CD MP3-player the most stupid purchase of my life.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[dunkelfalke]

Thanks, Hobson.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[tepples]

You also have a choice, a Hobson's choice, to do or not to do business with the electric power company. But not all of us want to join the Amish.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[Anonymous Coward]

The choice I don't have, is to do business with iDevice owners without doing business with Apple.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[NiceGeek]

So Apple is the only smartphone provider with an app store? News to me.

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[IAmGarethAdams]

Sure you have that choice. In fact, if you do any business I would think a significant proportion of it is with iDevice owners.

But you're right, you don't have the choice to do business with iDevice owners in the Apple App market without doing business with Apple. So you're basically annoyed that to enter the market you want to enter, you would have to make some concessions you don't want to make. And that's fine, plenty of businesses have the same dilemma in different markets. And, if they don't like that, they don't enter that market!

Re:Apple sells the jailbreak

[Anonymous Coward]

It's informative retards.

low-end Macbook Pro late 2007 in Sweden, regular price:
19995 sek.

Current value:
19 995 Swedish kronor = 2 930.00731 U.S. dollars

Delivered:
1 sep 2007.

Tried to submit for warranty replacement:
27th (?) aug 2008.

(Didn't worked even though within a year because they probably calculated the date from the date of shipping or something such.)

Stopped using it because the power cord where so lose it didn't charged:
May 2009.

sep 2007 to may 2009 = 20 months

3 000 / ((365 * 20) / 12) = 4.93150685

Tried to mail them just before the three year period (protection against manufacturing faults in Sweden) but got the reply after three years which they mean is "over three years."

Anyhow he checked it somewhat and claim the left io board is broken. Had no idea because for all I knew it just had issues charging by the crappy mag safe which I had to turn around the whole freakin' time trying to make it connect.

Maybe it has burned the left io board.

Don't know about the other issues but they will most likely do nothing about them:
* Possible broken 8600m GT (text messing up during scrolling + some occurrence of color gradients and such.
* Non-functional DVD-burner, probably because the whole computer is made of aluminum foil.
* Lose case around the button which release the latch for the screen.
* Some damage of the light distribution thingy behind the screen I assume because it got a lighter strike behind the pixels.

drop or hide?

[metalmaster]

are ya sure it hasn't just been retooled to become

super_secret_function()

Re:drop or hide?

[thenextstevejobs]

are ya sure it hasn't just been retooled to become super_secret_function()

I don't think you've seen the iOS SDK.

I'd guess something more like [NSReallyInternalDeviceIdiomDetector superSecretFunction:host:port:withDelegate:inSection:byAppendingString:context]

Re:drop or hide?

[SuricouRaven]

I have seen the iOS SDK. Then I saw the code for Hello, World. Then I uninstalled the iOS SDK. Objective C is... ugh. What's wrong with good old C or C++? Or having a nice, simple function to draw text on the screen, rather then needing five different classes just to make an app that does nothing?

Re:drop or hide?

[am 2k]

Being good for a Hello World demo app doesn't mean it's good for a larger 10000+ (or 100000+) lines app and vice-versa.

the iPod Touch is the iPad Mini

[rsborg]

I might be missing something, but the iPod touch isn't a phone. And I'm not really sure why Google would even want to compete with it.

ie, it's basically a tiny tablet. It's mobile computing just like the iPhone (but without a phone or mobile data). Seems like Google does want to compete or be involved in that market (see Galaxy Tab, Android Honeycomb, supposed hundreds of tablet models next year, etc).

The iPod Touch is a great device and probably accounts for a bit of the iPhone success in that folks who can't afford (or are too young) to own their own cell phone can still participate in the AppStore goodness.

Perhaps Google isn't competing because it would pretty much be a full-out declaration of war against Apple, and that would be bad for business.

Android muscling in on their territory?

[Mr0bvious]

I think Android is becoming a threat to Apple iP?d products. Apple don't have anything new to offer at the moment, they need to give their users something..

Re:Android muscling in on their territory?

[SuricouRaven]

Apple are amazing when it comes to marketing. They almost created the tablet market from nothing. What they can't do now is offer something that Android can't, and at a much lower price. They are selling iPads on marketing and brand recognition alone right now, and such a business model can... oh, wait. I just remembered that my sister spent her food money on designer clothes recently and had to come home from university to beg for more. Actually, a business model based entirely on branding can work very well indeed.

You're incorrect about iPhone warranty length

[rsborg]

Where did you get 9 months? It's 1 year, and has been as long as I can remember. See link.

Apple's Limited Warranty for iPhone covers your iPhone for one year from the date of original purchase. Apple's Limited Warranty begins on the date that the iPhone was originally purchased. To determine your warranty coverage, enter the serial number of your iPhone in the Online Service Assistant section on the Apple Support site. Apple may need to examine your proof of purchase document to verify your iPhone's warranty status.

Its your phone

[nurb432]

But its not your network.

Re:Its your phone

[Microlith]

Irrelevant. All my phone needs is to communicate via the protocol used for the network and have some means of authenticating. Given a SIM and a compliant radio, the carrier can STFU and GBTW.

My phone not being locked down has nothing whatsoever to do with that.

Re:Its your phone

[SuricouRaven]

The carriers like to attract customers by providing a phone too - a new, really flashy phone like the iPhone. Free, or at an extremally low cost, because the carrier knows that they'll make back the loss over the duration of the contract. They can only do that if they are sure you'll actually stick with the contract and not just take the phone and go over to a network that offers cheaper service. If they couldn't lock the phones, they wouldn't be able to offer the illusion of giving a free phone - which would arguably be better for customers, but terrible for marketing.

Humans do not make rational decisions. When they are given the choice between buying a £300 phone and then getting a contract for £20 a month for two years, or a £40 a month contract that comes with the same phone absolutly free, they'll think 'FREE PHONE! I JUST SAVED THREE HUNDRED QUID!' Even though in the long term that 'free' phone is costing them £210 more than if they just purchased it seperatly, that £210 is spread out over two years - enough time that it just blurs off into vagueness and doesn't merit consideration.

It's just marketing. But marketing sells contracts, and the carriers are not going to easily give up such a powerful way to nudge customers towards the more profitable tiers.

Re:Its your phone

[Internal Modem]

The problem is that contract or not, you still need to pay for voice and data. Verizon, the largest network in the US, does not offer discounted plans if you bring your own phone. Therefore, there is little advantage to paying full price for a phone if you intend to use Verizon for any period of time.

Where is Samsung's Galaxy Player?

[tepples]

The reason Android isn't gaining on iPad (I *think* that's what you really meant) is that there aren't very many tablet products released yet.

I meant both iPad and iPod touch. There are cases where I might want a tablet roughly that size.

On the other hand, Samsung quickly sold over a million Android tablets.

Samsung has announced the Galaxy Player, but nothing has come of it, not even an estimated release date.

AppsLib is a token store

[tepples]

many folks have pointed out devices you could be using.

Not many people are willing to pay $600 for an unlocked phone and just never put in a SIM when Apple sells something comparable for $230. Part of the market for iPod touch is children not yet old enough for their own phone line, and they use the iPod touch that they got for Christmas to play video games from the App Store. There is an iDevice that competes with Nintendo DSi, but not yet an Android device that competes with Nintendo DSi. So if an indie video game developer wants to make and sell a handheld game, especially one that appeals to demographics that don't carry a phone, it's a Hobson's choice between iOS and not being in business at all.

Android does not mean you get market access, you can use other stores.

I believe you're referring to AppsLib, the store coming with Archos devices. This doesn't help if none of the major app publishers publish on AppsLib. I've read reviews of Archos devices, and those that talk about AppsLib mention the lack of selection.

It NEEDS Jailbreaking

[No2Gates]

The only reason I Jailbroke mine was that I couldn't hear the damn email tone. It's like they went into a meeting and figured out what was the only noise other than a dog whistle that people couldn't hear unless they were in a anechoic chamber.

Seriously, why the hell won't they let you pick the email tone???

iPod touch runs iOS too

[tepples]

So Apple is the only smartphone provider with an app store?

No, but Apple is the only smart MP3 player provider with an app store. And it's Google's fault for not letting, say, Archos 43 onto its Market.

Alternative for Apple

[ahyan80]

This may be the best path to be followed by apple if you want to compete with other vendors such as Nokia and Samsung