No... I use a different term because that is the term used for this platform, regarding this activity on all of the sites that describe how to do it and how to revert.
As for any implied attempt to compare one device to another, please...do tell?
Where did I accuse any device of being more crippled than another?
Where did I even mention *any* device other than the Samsung Galaxy S Fascinate??
Oh...right... I didn't.
(It's all in your head...)
As for it being crippled, I suppose it depends entirely on one's definition of crippled.
Lockdown, as dictated by the practical reality that no popular consumer device has ever actually *been* successfully locked down, is irrelevant.
It is what you can do *after* the device has been unlocked that dictates my opinion on how "crippled" or not it may be.
Please do not ever again try to assume you know anything about me. The mere thought of it is absurd....and you are apparently very bad at making assumptions.
Now that's just flat-out bullshit. Are you lying on purpose, or was it simply an error of exaggeration because you are, without any doubt, totally and completely....wrong.
I just bought a Verizon Samsung Galaxy S Fascinate 2 weeks ago.
Yesterday I rooted it, installed an overclocked kernel, and wireless tethering. All without spending a dime. All in less than 10 minutes. It runs the Zeam Home-Launcher, Skyfire browser, a 3rd party camera app (Vignette), and about a dozen other "customizations".
I would hardly call this device crippled...in the least.
It may take a whopping 15 minutes to get it back to stock if it is necessary when 2.2 is released OTA.
If you have to stretch the truth to make your point...perhaps your point is simply not worth making.
^^^ This is why people who know absolutely nothing about the subject at hand should keep their damned mouths shut.
This is not a copyright or patent issue. This is a Trade Secret issue. The laws and limits on this one are *actually* somewhat sane. If the plans for the jump become widely known (without a provable source for the leak), the plans are then considered public....good luck on RB not getting sued if they do manage to leak though.
Well, that would be the cynical view, and you have every right to express it.
On the other hand, I see a almost endless sea of VS and.Net developers chomping at the bit to be able to utilize their skills and tools on a platform virtually *made* for them.
Even so, taking the cynical view, most developers will port apps between platforms for even the chance to get more users. (unless of course, the platform is more important to them than the users...);)
I've never understood this philosophy of "too little too late" in a market that auto-renews every two years for nearly all of it's customers. People haven't stopped buying phones. It hasn't even slowed. The market isn't saturated, nor is it stagnant.
I see this argument from a lot of the same people comparing the KIN to WP7... One is a device, the other is a platform. They both make about zero sense.
But you don't want to. It chafes your sense of entitlement.
Your desires do not trump the manufacturer's rights. They have the right to build the device any way they want to. You can then either choose to buy it...or not.
You also have the right to sit here and whine about the decision you made.
You even have the right to demand the manufacturer add a unicorn to it.
They, and anyone else who chooses to, then has the right to laugh at you mercilessly for being absurdly unreasonable.
The only time you *ever* get to dictate how a product is made...is when you make it yourself.
I wasn't basing that comment on myself, but on what I have seen at the VZW store. I know it's a rather small sampling and not quite representative of the whole, but it is what it is.
I usually have a very low opinion of people in general ("A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals" Kay-MiB), but I honestly think most people going to buy phones either go in having seen one of their friends (and going for the same model) or have actually used it, if only for a short period.
I have yet to run into *anyone* technically inclined or otherwise, who regrets buying their phone because they did absolutely zero research before buying.
"I believe that people _will_ hear about cool features that an Android phone offers, buy an Android phone and find out, too late, that it's available on _other_ Android phones, not the one they bought. "
Are people really this stupid? I would imagine there might be a few nitwits out there who will walk in, see a phone, buy it, and walk out without even actually *using* it, but most folks I see actually spend a good deal of time playing around with them first.
(I've spent a good deal of time lately in the local VZW store since I am upgrading in a month)
Most folks I see there are doing exactly what I am: asking questions, downloading apps to the display phones, and basically getting a pretty good look at the device before they make a decision.
"Did you actually bother to think your comment through at all before posting?"
I did.
Did you read the rest of my comments? The situation was a farce. The GP stated Jobs should be let into a public terminal regardless of what he carries because he owns the plane.
None of that happened, of course, but for him to suggest that struck me as... odd. So I argued.
You are right...Jobs never did anything of the sort. The story was a fake. The point was merely that I disagreed with the logic used by the OP claiming that because Jobs had his own plane, he should not have been stopped at the public terminal.
Sure...he shouldn't have been. Had the story been factual, he would not even have *been* at the public terminal...but that wasn't the OPs argument.
The OP suggested that because Jobs owned his own plane he should be allowed into the public terminal without a security check. I don't think there is anyone here who agrees with that...
Same-same. Based on the story and the OP's comment, I disagreed with his "logic". Your are, I am sure, entirely correct and it's entirely moot at this point.
"If the terrorists had money for a jet , they'd have money for a missile or two and they certainly wouldn't give a shit about commercial airports and what kind of plastic fork you can use on board.Furthermore if they _own_ the jet , i don't think they'd go through the hassle of hijacking it."
Terrorists = anyone who wishes to incite terror. Not just Muslim radicals.
Stupid people with money never quite seem to do what us rational folk would expect them to do...:) (like buy and island and leave everyone else the hell alone.)
"I fail to see the logic of searching the contents of carry-ons (or otherwise) of private plane owners - except of course for contraband."
Like...weapons?
"If you've got a private plane to carry out nefarious deeds, once loaded up with fuel, you don't NEED firearms to carry on-board to cause harm"
Not the point. Allowing the owner to walk through airports *with* those weapons is the point. According to the OP....Job's should be able to walk through the airport with knives, guns, bombs, etc without nary a word from the security personnel.
While the image of terrorists throwing ninja stars out of jumbo-jets is highly amusing...did you perhaps miss something in your desire to get that lovely image out to the rest of the world?
..like maybe that allowing these people to walk through airports with weapons unchecked might lead to some of those weapons making it aboard planes that are *not* privately owned??
Regardless....the story is a fake....but I just love the absolute inability of so many people here to be able to think beyond...
So we'll let Jobs..and anyone else with a private jet, walk through public airports with as may weapons as they can carry. Surely *none* of those weapons would ever make onto a plane that could be hijacked....Right??
Slashdot Mirror
"You mean jailbroke it."
No. I rooted it.
"You use a different term so it hides..."
No... I use a different term because that is the term used for this platform, regarding this activity on all of the sites that describe how to do it and how to revert.
As for any implied attempt to compare one device to another, please...do tell?
Where did I accuse any device of being more crippled than another?
Where did I even mention *any* device other than the Samsung Galaxy S Fascinate??
Oh...right... I didn't.
(It's all in your head...)
As for it being crippled, I suppose it depends entirely on one's definition of crippled.
Lockdown, as dictated by the practical reality that no popular consumer device has ever actually *been* successfully locked down, is irrelevant.
It is what you can do *after* the device has been unlocked that dictates my opinion on how "crippled" or not it may be.
Please do not ever again try to assume you know anything about me. The mere thought of it is absurd. ...and you are apparently very bad at making assumptions.
"All the new phones out there are all crippled."
Now that's just flat-out bullshit. Are you lying on purpose, or was it simply an error of exaggeration because you are, without any doubt, totally and completely....wrong.
I just bought a Verizon Samsung Galaxy S Fascinate 2 weeks ago.
Yesterday I rooted it, installed an overclocked kernel, and wireless tethering. All without spending a dime. All in less than 10 minutes. It runs the Zeam Home-Launcher, Skyfire browser, a 3rd party camera app (Vignette), and about a dozen other "customizations".
I would hardly call this device crippled...in the least.
It may take a whopping 15 minutes to get it back to stock if it is necessary when 2.2 is released OTA.
If you have to stretch the truth to make your point...perhaps your point is simply not worth making.
...
^^^ This is why people who know absolutely nothing about the subject at hand should keep their damned mouths shut.
This is not a copyright or patent issue. This is a Trade Secret issue. The laws and limits on this one are *actually* somewhat sane. If the plans for the jump become widely known (without a provable source for the leak), the plans are then considered public. ...good luck on RB not getting sued if they do manage to leak though.
Well, that would be the cynical view, and you have every right to express it.
On the other hand, I see a almost endless sea of VS and .Net developers chomping at the bit to be able to utilize their skills and tools on a platform virtually *made* for them.
Even so, taking the cynical view, most developers will port apps between platforms for even the chance to get more users. (unless of course, the platform is more important to them than the users...) ;)
I've never understood this philosophy of "too little too late" in a market that auto-renews every two years for nearly all of it's customers. People haven't stopped buying phones. It hasn't even slowed. The market isn't saturated, nor is it stagnant.
I see this argument from a lot of the same people comparing the KIN to WP7... One is a device, the other is a platform. They both make about zero sense.
"when the government subsidizes private industry the results must also conform to those same restrictions."
Ah. I think I see the where the logic broke down...
Couple of questions:
When did the government fund HTC? or Motorola? or Samsung? ...to produce cell-phones?
When did the government fund Verizon? or AT&T? or Sprint? ...to update software for cell phones?
Still refusing to "get it"?
So what, in the subsidy, gives you the right to demand they make any product to *your* specifications, exactly???
No...you don't...
But you don't want to. It chafes your sense of entitlement.
Your desires do not trump the manufacturer's rights. They have the right to build the device any way they want to. You can then either choose to buy it...or not.
You also have the right to sit here and whine about the decision you made.
You even have the right to demand the manufacturer add a unicorn to it.
They, and anyone else who chooses to, then has the right to laugh at you mercilessly for being absurdly unreasonable.
The only time you *ever* get to dictate how a product is made...is when you make it yourself.
He can bring his shurikens onboard at a public airport. :) ...just not through a public terminal.
I wasn't basing that comment on myself, but on what I have seen at the VZW store. I know it's a rather small sampling and not quite representative of the whole, but it is what it is.
I usually have a very low opinion of people in general ("A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals" Kay-MiB), but I honestly think most people going to buy phones either go in having seen one of their friends (and going for the same model) or have actually used it, if only for a short period.
I have yet to run into *anyone* technically inclined or otherwise, who regrets buying their phone because they did absolutely zero research before buying.
"I believe that people _will_ hear about cool features that an Android phone offers, buy an Android phone and find out, too late, that it's available on _other_ Android phones, not the one they bought. "
Are people really this stupid? I would imagine there might be a few nitwits out there who will walk in, see a phone, buy it, and walk out without even actually *using* it, but most folks I see actually spend a good deal of time playing around with them first.
(I've spent a good deal of time lately in the local VZW store since I am upgrading in a month)
Most folks I see there are doing exactly what I am: asking questions, downloading apps to the display phones, and basically getting a pretty good look at the device before they make a decision.
42.
Obviously. :)
"Did you actually bother to think your comment through at all before posting?"
I did.
Did you read the rest of my comments? The situation was a farce. The GP stated Jobs should be let into a public terminal regardless of what he carries because he owns the plane.
None of that happened, of course, but for him to suggest that struck me as ... odd. So I argued.
"Jobs never crossed that cordon" ...
You are right...Jobs never did anything of the sort. The story was a fake. The point was merely that I disagreed with the logic used by the OP claiming that because Jobs had his own plane, he should not have been stopped at the public terminal.
Sure...he shouldn't have been. Had the story been factual, he would not even have *been* at the public terminal...but that wasn't the OPs argument.
The OP suggested that because Jobs owned his own plane he should be allowed into the public terminal without a security check. I don't think there is anyone here who agrees with that...
See my 2nd reply to Americano.
Same-same. Based on the story and the OP's comment, I disagreed with his "logic". Your are, I am sure, entirely correct and it's entirely moot at this point.
The *story* (which was wrong, admittedly) involved Jobs not being allowed into a public terminal with weapons.
The OP stated it should be allowed.
I disagreed based on the story and the response by the OP.
Back in reality, I believe you, and I agree wholeheartedly regarding the sacrifice of liberty for "security".
I simply disagreed with the "logic" used by the OP.
"If the terrorists had money for a jet , they'd have money for a missile or two and they certainly wouldn't give a shit about commercial airports and what kind of plastic fork you can use on board.Furthermore if they _own_ the jet , i don't think they'd go through the hassle of hijacking it."
Terrorists = anyone who wishes to incite terror. Not just Muslim radicals.
Stupid people with money never quite seem to do what us rational folk would expect them to do... :) (like buy and island and leave everyone else the hell alone.)
They're just mean like that.
But they do apparently need weapons. Which is what the article misrepresented as what Jobs was trying to bring into an airport.
The story is false....it's all just rambling now anyway. ;)
"I fail to see the logic of searching the contents of carry-ons (or otherwise) of private plane owners - except of course for contraband."
Like...weapons?
"If you've got a private plane to carry out nefarious deeds, once loaded up with fuel, you don't NEED firearms to carry on-board to cause harm"
Not the point. Allowing the owner to walk through airports *with* those weapons is the point. According to the OP....Job's should be able to walk through the airport with knives, guns, bombs, etc without nary a word from the security personnel.
It's not about the plane. It's about the OP's idea that being a private jet owner should allow you to walk through public airports armed to the teeth.
While the image of terrorists throwing ninja stars out of jumbo-jets is highly amusing...did you perhaps miss something in your desire to get that lovely image out to the rest of the world?
Regardless....the story is a fake....but I just love the absolute inability of so many people here to be able to think beyond...
Oh!! Shiney!! ;)
Ahh... Someone with a brain.
Thank you.
It's sad that rational posts on this site are so greatly outnumbered by the "shuriken @ 30k feet" imbeciles...
*sigh*
So we'll let Jobs..and anyone else with a private jet, walk through public airports with as may weapons as they can carry. Surely *none* of those weapons would ever make onto a plane that could be hijacked....Right??
Think.
Please?
Damn those people for not working for free to lay the lines, manage the network, and answer the phones!
Think.
Please?
"because its his own fucking plane and quite honestly he should be able to do whatever he wants to" ...In public airspace? Over public property?
So...all the terrorists need to do is purchase their own jets?
Did you actually bother to think that through at all before posting your emotional knee-jerk?