Since interesting news that I’m actually knowledgeable about is still a little hard to come by, I have to work a little harder. This is something interesting to discuss: John Gruber, rather famous Apple blogger, is now arguing that Apple is in fact not fighting the jailbreaking community. Wait, what?
That was my response. After all these years, how can you claim – with a straight face – that Apple is not fighting the jailbreaking community? Well, you can make this claim if you focus on one particular aspect of this supposed fight against jailbreakers; namely, the aspect which doesn’t have to have anything to do with jailbreaking.
Jailbreaking works by finding a vulnerability in the iOS, and gaining root access to the operating system via that vulnerability. Once you have root access, you can use the iOS to its fullest potential, instead of the more limited potential Apple approves its users to use. Jailbreaking provides little to no benefit to ordinary, non-geek users (I advise my non-geek friends not to jailbreak), but for a geek like me with Android-envy, it’s a godsend.
Back to John Gruber. A few days ago, Colin Gibbs published an article in which he argues that Apple should cease its fight against the jailbreaking community. He also states that more or less allowing jailbreaking – implicitly – could help sell iPhones. “Apple can simply say, ‘We don’t support that garbage’, maintain its policy that jailbreaking automatically voids warranties and remain unsoiled in the public eye,” he argues.
Gruber took offence to this one, claiming that Apple doesn’t fight the jailbreak community at all. “Apple isn’t ‘fighting’ jailbreaking,” he argues, “They simply don’t support it. iOS 4.0.2 fixed a serious security vulnerability. By arguing that Apple shouldn’t have bothered doing so, Gibbs is implicitly arguing that Apple shouldn’t fix security vulnerabilities. It’s that simple.”
This is the one aspect I mentioned earlier. Indeed, most of Apple’s apparent fight against jailbreaking revolves around fixing the security vulnerabilities that jailbreakers use to gain root access to their phones. As such, one could argue, as Gruber does, that Apple is not fighting jailbreaking – it is merely fixing security vulnerabilities.
And I have a unicorn.
Of course Apple is fighting jailbreaking. While the fixing of security vulnerabilities that allow jailbreaking isn’t proof enough (or at all), there’s this other pesky affair in which Apple pretty much flat-out admitted – for all the world to see – that it takes jailbreaking very seriously, and that it intends to fight the practice every step along the way.
Let’s back up for a second. Every three years, the US Copyright Office accepts requests for exemptions to the DMCA, the US law which, among other things, makes it illegal to circumvent DRM schemes and copyright protection mechanisms. In 2008, the Electronic Frontier Foundation submitted a request to have jailbreaking added to the list of exemptions. This request covered all mobile phones – not just Apple’s.
After requests are sent in and made public, comments can be sent in. Only one mobile phone maker bothered to counter the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s exemption request: Apple. And they countered hard, with an infamous FUD-attack involving crashing transmission towers and several “think of the children”-arguments.
Apple fought hard to maintain jailbreaking as an illegal activity, and now Gruber is seriously arguing that all this was, well, just a joke? Didn’t happen? A figment of our collective imagination? I guess we’re seeing revisionist history in the making here. Fascinating.
As we now know, Apple lost. The Copyright Office sided with the EFF; jailbreaking is considered fair use for US residents. This is great news. Of course, your warranty should void when you jailbreak your phone; this is only natural. However, Apple’s documented fight to keep jailbreaking illegal shows – quite clearly – that the company takes it seriously, and is actively fighting the practice.
Arguing otherwise is either ignorant, or deliberately misleading.
Keep fighting the good fight, Thom.
Thom: Can you please stop saying, “Wait, what?” It’s annoying the hell out of me. (…Wait, what?)
John Gruber should be seen as an extension of apple’s PR machinery. To be suprised or expect him to not spin anything in apple’s favor reflects poorly on you.
Any form of discussion with him about anything apple should be done purely for amusement purpose.
Actually, there’s a more valid reason: he is very good at predicting trends in Apple’s areas of expertise, as well as predicting what Apple are going to do next. His “Claim Chowder” posts and their sources are very interesting to read for a point of comparison.
Edited 2010-08-30 23:20 UTC
I LOLed at trends. Given his popularity within Apple people, he must be having contacts from Apple PR people. He is afterall an unofficial Apple PR spokesperson who will defend whatever Apple does (even if Steve Jobs shot on your face).
What Apple is going to do next? For Apple it is a very good chance to leak information to Gruber, so that it can be leaked in a controller manner and hype can be built properly.
Why do so many people so easily and willingly delude themselves so much?
Honestly, I really hope that Gruber was joking. Obviously, fixing security vulnerabilities is a good thing, but it’s easy to see that Apple does everything they can to prevent jailbreaking.
It’s not just Apple fanatics though. People like RMS will tell you that proprietary software is unethical, and that everyone should just start using open source for every purpose. Countless people will argue that climate change and evolution are hoaxes. For every obvious fact, there will be millions of people who ignore the truth and try to push their flawed views onto everyone.
When are people going to wake up?
People often cherry-pick facts to support their arguments, knowingly or unknowingly. Don’t be so arrogant.
Just so you know, there is no 100% proof of evolution or climate change, both have a lot of holes in them, that is why they are currently classified as theories and not laws (no matter what Carl Sagan said – LOL). Creationists and those that argue that there is no climate change (or at least, induced by humans) have a lot of holes in their arguments too.
We don’t know all the facts about Apple’s motives. We can look at the evidence and try and have an educated guess, but the fact is, we don’t know the facts about most things, and certainly not Apple’s motives, just as we don’t know what MS’s motives are or indeed Google and so on.
To suppose otherwise is arrogance (as has been pointed out).
The fact is, if there is a security hole, then Apple (and I would hope other companies) should fix them and pronto. If you are currently jail-breaking (or should I write gaol-breaking) your phone, then this will be an expected inconvenience.
Personally, I would like to have root access on my phone, and it would be nice if Apple provided that (as they currently do with their desktop OS X). How this would be managed would be very interesting.
My guess (and it is totally a guess) is that Apple isn’t so much against jail-breaking as much as carriers might be more against it. Allowing people to find ways to not pay AT&T (or Optus in my case) wouldn’t be in their best interest. I do understand that Apple would lose revenue from the App Store too, so they have a vested interest also.
From the article:
Why? If I buy a new PC, format the hard drive and install whatever I want, should that also void my warranty? And what are smartphones other than pocket-sized PCs?
I wouldn’t expect them to support me software-wise if I jailbroke and installed unsupported apps, or if I took iOS off altogether and installed Android, but unless I just completely brick the phone while tinkering with it (user error), shouldn’t I still be able to get support if, for example, the home button completely stopped working, or the screen died?
Edited 2010-08-31 00:50 UTC
The correct analogy in this case would be that you bought a new PC and re-flashed the BIOS with a hacked version.
Say as a result you perhaps bricked the machine, or something went wrong with the overvoltage/overheat protection logic and it caused your mainboard to fry.
I’d say the manufacturer has a pretty good case for voiding your warranty (assuming this was disclosed in the terms).
Most “consumer devices” are not designed to be user-hacked – phones, game consoles, GPS units, etc. generally fall into this category.
On the other hand, your PC is designed (for the most part) to run any suitable OS – there are numerous ways built into the BIOS which allow booting alternative OSes from the start.
Well, you’re speaking under the scenario that somebody actually bricked the device while trying to do something it wasn’t designed to do, which of course is going to void the warranty …
Why would warranty be an issue unless there are problems with the device? Why should Apple need to diagnose a jailbroken phone to see whether the jailbreak led to the issue?
I haven’t followed the saga regarding the Apple’s comments about jailbreaking, but the company being against jailbreaking could be interpreted many different ways.
As a developer, I would be happy if the company put an end to App Store piracy. Piracy is a very serious problem here, considering that iPhone developers generally don’t use or cannot use serial numbers to verify ownership. Even if the store facilitated this, the App Store is designed around impulsive purchase behaviours, such that serial number requirements would not be tolerated by users.
Personally, I doubt Apple is against using a jailbreak to grant access to SSH, to expose hidden functionality in the system, etc. That said, nobody here know their specific concerns either.
Edited 2010-08-31 02:33 UTC
Hardware should be designed such that it cannot be physically damaged by software, and so that whatever state the hardware gets in it’s always possible to return it to a default state.
When i first bought an Amiga years ago, the manual showed me how to make a copy of my workbench disks, and then went on to say that there was no way to physically damage the machine regardless of what i did software wise and that absolute worst case, i boot the original workbench disks (which have the readonly tab set) and create a new copy of the disk.
App store “piracy”, like any other form of “piracy” is not as cut and dry as people try to make out… Many of the people who download warez copies of apps wouldn’t (or couldn’t afford to) have bought those apps if they were unable to obtain them for free.
Aside from that, copyright infringement of the software actually increases sales of the hardware and in the case of cellphones might increase the use of the network too. If you spend less on intangibles like software, you have more money to spend on things you can’t get for free such as hardware and services.
Serial numbers are pretty worthless, they harm and inconvenience legitimate purchasers, while dodgy serials are widely circulated via warez sites. To give an example, i bought a tomtom gps a few years ago and it came with the device itself, an sd card with the software/maps on and a cd with a backup copy of the software and a serial number printed on the flimsy paper cd wallet. I bought this gps in 2004 or so, and recently needed to reload the software onto it due to damaging the sd card.. I bought a new card, loaded the latest version of the software (Freely downloadable from tomtom), and copied the map on from a backup i made of the old card… It wanted me to activate the map using the serial from the cd case, now i have no idea where this case is, it’s 6 years since i purchased the unit and i haven’t had to use the cd or its case since so its either lost or been thrown away. Tomtom want me to buy a whole new unit… But why should i?
So i downloaded a keygen and am now again able to use the device i paid good money for.
Well, not being able to hurt the hardware itself is one thing. There is, however, one little other problem with devices containing radio transmitters, such as wireless routers and mobile phones.
The power you are allowed to send with, or the the frequencies that are allowed to send at, may vary from region to region. In such cases, the hardware manufacturer will use a single hardware design, but flash it with different firmwares depending on where the unit is to be sold.
Often, people that flash their wireless routers do it in order to turn up the radio power. Perhaps unknowingly, they might tune it up to a level that is not legal in their country, which could be a bit of a problem. Especially if some people think the manufacturer should be held responsible – then it means that they cannot allow their customers to install third party firmware, and the geeks stop liking the company..
Your first point is the most interesting; that it should not be able to break hardware by the software.
Assume for a minute that a chip can run for a length of time at a certain temperature, but any longer than that its possible to damage the hardware.
Its certainly plausible, and, in my opinion acceptable, to determine this in software, and software which can be flashed.
If its possible to replace this software (which calculates whether the chip is getting close to a dangerous limit) to be replaced, then its an admission that hardware alone can’t mitigate all these risks and I reakon its completely fair that replacing this software voids the warrenty.
Whether or not this is the case with apple; I don’t know. But just consider that software may be responsible for hardware opperating within its range
Agreed.
There will always be legitimate reasons to implement some features/functions/etc. in software versus hardware. One without the other is far less interesting and functional. You can easily make hardware more flexible with software and make software faster or more secure with hardware (just a couple examples). Overlap is a good thing but can also lead to abuse or problems.
To state that one has to be impervious to changes in the other is downright shortsighted and reeks of ignorance.
“that is why they are currently classified as theories and not laws”
You mean like the kinetic theory of gases? Or the theory of relativity? Or Copernicus’s heliocentric theory?
The truth is Newton’s *Law* of Gravity is less successful in describing gravity than Einstein’s *Theory* of General Relativity.
You can look up scientific “law” and “theory” on wikipedia. Your naive understanding of the terms does not reflect actual usage in science.
Sorry, this is off-topic and I do not want to start a discussion on climate change, but the “just a theory” line of reasoning always annoys me:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Scientific_theory
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Scientific_law
Summary: in science, laws are observations and theories are explanations. Really good theories don’t become laws, they become established and accepted scientific theories. The theory of evolution explains why we observe evolution. The theory of global warming explains why we see global warming. Of course, if the theory does not match the facts, then it is a bad theory, but an established scientific theory will have experiments and measurements that give reason to believe it is a good model for the way the world works. Science never “proves” anything; it provides evidence that a given explanation seems to work very well.
Christ, there’s always one.
“Just so you know, there is no 100% proof of evolution or climate change”
There’s just no reasonable objections and few reasonable objections, respectively.
“both have a lot of holes in them”
Bullshit.
“that is why they are currently classified as theories and not laws (no matter what Carl Sagan said – LOL).”
Sigh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law
Theory > law. People really shouldn’t pretend to knowledge.
“Creationists and those that argue that there is no climate change (or at least, induced by humans) have a lot of holes in their arguments too.”
Understatement. Even mentioning the latter in the same breath as Anthropogenic climate change and evolution, is to afford these kooks more credibility than they’re worth. Creationists and (largely) AGW deniers belong to the same clade as astrologists and NWO conspiracy theorists. Placing them on the same pedestal as biologists and climatologists, is to denigrate them and their body of work rather abhorrently.
(Sorry for the OT rant but I can’t abide by this kind of vapid nonsense.)
I beg to differ but the global controversy on climate change is not whether it occurs or not, it is on packing billions of dollars and destroying the economy on the very vague statement that the very climate change is caused *primarily* by mankind itself (even though 80% CO2 comes from the oceans). This type of hype is perfect mean for some people and groups of control to pull out some serious scums and don’t tell me you haven’t heard about any manipulations. Earth’s climate has always been connected with Sun periods and the climate has been periodically changing even before industrial age – as an easy example, in XVIth century Poland has been invaded by Sweden over *FROZEN BALTIC SEA*. The winters have been EXTREMELY HARSH and people have even been building inns on the Baltic because of the long periods it was economically feasible. It was called “small ice age”. Yet, in previous centuries you can find a lot of evidence of very hot climate. I am not saying that we are completely innocent, it’s just that there has been no striking evidence to support such strong global actions on “global warming”.
We can yet live long enough to see the “global colding” period and everybody will miss the warmish temperatures.
Also don’t get me wrong – protecting the environement is usually a good thing because after all we live here … but not on false intentions to stop the warming! I like the warmth.
To some, global warming caused by mankind has become almost like a religion while the real theory should welcome the arguments against it so that it can prove them wrong – like it has been in the times of great physics achievements in the XXth century. You don’t see a scientific method in the global warming talks – it’s just hype, hype and FUD.
This comment is my subjective opinion and everybody is free to prove me wrong – I welcome anyone who can provide enough evidence to change my views.
Cheers!
… and Elvis didn’t have sideburns.
Apple could take more technical measures to discourage jailbreaking.
They don’t push upgrades to devices. They allow continued use of the App Store and push notifications with older (vulnerable) OS versions and on jailbroken devices. iTunes continues to sync with devices not running the latest available firmware..
Exactly, but as someone said in another comment – people often cherry-pick facts to support their argument so in this article these wouldn’t even be a blip on the radar…
And there are still less “insecure” ways to jailbreak your iPhone.
The PDF exploit was a big hole in the security record that Apple try to keep as clean as possible, and was easily fixable too (update the freetype rendering library).
Of course they don’t !
1/How could they technically push updates ?
2/What about those that don’t have a proper internet connection at home ?
3/What would you think of a brand who forces people to download 30MB regularly over their old internet connection in order to continue to use their product ?
I like freedom, I have a Palm Pre. I have UeberKernel installed and that is why I like to decide about updates. Bad thing, Palm don’t let choose you. You can say “not yet”, but during midnight and with a good connections, it is installed.
It is possible.
It can be done when it is possible to do it.
Smartphones only make sense with a internet flat rate. Who cares?
WebOS devices seem to have online updates pushed to them. Android devices seem to have over-the-air updates as well, but I don’t know if the updates are ever automatic.
Without an Internet connection, iTunes won’t check for updates.
People weren’t forced to buy the product in the first place. The set of people who both use insufficient internet connections and buy devices that depend on fast internet connections for much of their functionality is very small.
This is exactly the case for platforms like Xbox Live, which requires frequent software updates to continue using online features.
One way to do this would be to disable syncing with firmware that was old at the time of the latest desktop app release. This would require the user to download the newer version of the desktop app before syncing would be prevented. But they don’t do this.
And I’m even a massive Apple hater.
This particular fix, it really was fixing a massive security flaw.
A flaw that allows drive-by download and execution of arbitrary code as root would be considered completely and totally unacceptable in any other OS.
With this one, you could visit a web page that turned out to be a PDF, and it could execute malicious code against your will, and rootkit your phone.
While I do think that Apple should leave a backdoor open for jailbreakers, or better yet, leave the platform mostly open from the beginning, this is not the backdoor to leave, because it affects non-jailbreakers in a VERY negative way.
Not patching this would be like not updating your Java version for six months even though there’s a known explo… oh, wait, Apple did that, too.
Ah, but in Thom’s reality distorted field, closing security holes is fighting against jailbreakers that exploit them. Since you can’t jailbreak a phone without exploiting a security hole, fixing security holes is a bad thing for Apple to do.
Maybe one day he will point out all jailbreakers Apple has taken to court and flung in jail.
Well, your username “macUser” tells scores how much you are obsessed with Apple. This tells us the strength of Apple’s Reality Distortion Field.
So it is natural, you would speak against anyone who is against Apple
Just because he likes Macs does not mean that he is an ignorant Apple fanboy. I know several people who use Mac computers but have no intentions of ever buying any iOS device. And a person’s username should not matter is discussion of their ideas.
But quite obviously, he is a troll and didn’t read the article
I was just pointing out that the chances of being an Apple fanboy is pretty high. I have many friends who have MBP and love it. They don’t have obsession or blind love. His comments were weird and yeah, you are correct – he is a troll
Troll.
How about you read the article? Namely, the part where I said fixing these holes is NOT proof for the fight against jailbreaking?
Thom, you’re the one trolling flamebait.
To date, jailbreakers exploit security vulnerabilities. Patch the holes and suddenly you’re fighting jailbreakers?
Just point out all of the jailbreakers Apple has fought. You can’t because there aren’t any. Of course, I expect you to ignore that fact.
There was a flaw in the bootloader of the first iphone, 3G and early 3GS models which could also be used to jailbreak the phones, but only if you had a physical USB connection to the phone…
They should take a similar approach to it that google did with the nexus one, you can jailbreak the phone if you have the ability to physically connect a computer to it, and by doing so you erase any data already on the phone and lose the ability to receive support from apple.
1. Apple doesn’t mind people running OSX on non-Apple hardware.
2. Apple encourages other companies to make Mac-compatible machines.
3. Apple has no problem with people syncing non-Apple devices with iTunes.
4. Apple provides simple battery replacement for all of its devices.
5. Apple is happy when websites try to figure out what they are releasing next – especially when they are right!
I just thought it would be good to clear up these common misunderstandings.
1. Apple doesn’t care if you want to run OS X on non-Apple hardware. They’re just not in the business of helping you figure it out.
2. Apple makes the hardware and the software. Why would they want another company duplicating their product? Does Microsoft encourage companies to write Windows compatible operating systems? Does Sony encourage companies to build PlayStation compatible gaming systems? Does RIM encourage companies to build BlackBerry compatible phones?
3. Apple has an API for developers to access the iTunes database for syncing with non-Apple devices.
4. If you worry about replacing your battery that often, you should think about getting better batteries or a more efficient device that won’t kill them so quickly.
5. Apple isn’t happy when websites disclose private intellectual property or information. It couldn’t care less about rumors or conjecture.
Fanboy detected !
Apple forbids the installation of OSX on non-apple hardware in its EULA [1].
Maybe Microsoft doesn’t encourage other to write windows-compatible operating systems, but they haven’t sued ReactOS or WINE (not an OS, but you get the point). Remember Psystar ?
There is a difference between “not encouraging” and “suing everybody”.
[1] http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf
Similar comments could be applied to this as to the relaxed way Apple pursues jail breakers. If you try to run a business selling hardware or utilities that let people avoid buying Apple hardware Apple will chase you. If you do the same thing for free they leave you alone.
I installed MacOS on a Dell Mini 10v a while back and there is a well established web site that supports doing just that, including downloadable utilities etc. Apple does nothing to shut such sites down. If they started to charge money for any of this then Apple would react. It all seems fairly reasonable to me.
Apple’s entire massive, take-no-prisoners, to-the-last-man, death-before-dishonor fight against jailbreaking is:
1. Filed some paperwork with the Library of Congress.
2. Fixed security problems without giving a rat’s ass about whether or not their fix was convenient for jailbreakers.
By Apple’s standards, that’s sending jailbreakers a muffin basket.
What you’re missing is the part where they tried as hard as they could to prevent jailbreaking _before_ the release of iOS4, but missed a hole that hackers found in the PDF viewer.
It’s not like Apple provide a doJailbreak (); API for those who want to. Hackers are having to rely on good old-fashioned programming flaws to get in, and it’s not without trying.
Apple don’t want jailbreaking—period. They will up the anté with the next hardware & software release.
Oh yes a jail breaking API.
Now let’s write the next iOS virus.
int main(void) {
doJailBreak();
doSomethingNasty();
return 0;
}
This just makes my head hurt.
Root access must be available on the iDevices with or withoug jailbreaking. It is used by iTunes and the App store application, among other things.
Legit jailbreaking just means letting the user run a root terminal app on his phone, in a controlled fashion (ie no rogue app can exploit this terminal app).
Why do you all seem to consider that as a security flaw ? Guys who jailbreak their phone are supposed to know what they are doing and not execute some random script shell in a root terminal. And this kind of user-related security flaw is the *sole* new vulnerability added by jailbreaking.
If jailbreaking didn’t exist (which essentially means suppressing the root terminal icon in the phone application panel), root access would still be there for Apple apps. Anyone hacking Apple servers could still remotely shut down all iOS devices in the fashion Apple remotely killed the iPhone 4 prototype. No security flaw would be removed.
How is it hard to understand ?
Edited 2010-08-31 20:38 UTC
Some Jailbrakers may know what they are doing its the rest that are at risk, the ones that do it just to be cool or to say ner ner to Apple.
Any programmatic API to give root access is a security hole waiting to be exploited by the next trojan and its not just jailbrakers that will be hit, it’ll be anyonewho downloads an App that abuses it before it gets spotted and pulled.
It depends what you mean by “fight”
It seems to me that Apple plugs security holes that jail breaking uses mostly for security reasons but is probably very happy that that also inconveniences jail breakers. But if a corporation with the amount of cash, resources and will power that Apple clearly does posses wanted to “fight” jail breaking they would be making life much harder for jail breakers. No cease and desist injunctions, no threatening letters from lawyers, nobody busted. All Apple does is plug holes in its OS which has the (from their point of view) the pleasing side effect of blocking off avenues of jail breaking.
I can’t see that Apple cares that much about jail breaking – certainly not at the minuscule level that it goes on at currently. Jail breaking is minuscule because about 99% of Apple customers cannot see any advantage to it, and they are right to take that view, it brings the vast majority of Apple customers no added benefit or feature that they feel is lacking.
Apple is obviously keen to limit the spread of any exploits that aid App piracy and that’s a good thing. Apps are available in vast numbers and at very low prices precisely because developers earnings are not crushed by piracy.
As a non jail breaker and an avid App buyer I hope Apple continue to contain jail breaking as a super small minority sport and that the App store model flourishes. It’s brought me and millions like me nothing but benefits.
1. Where’s the outrage against Moto for shipping the DroidX locked down by the OMAP M-Shield, which securely prevents users from rooting their machine? How dare they! Why for the love of sales, would they cripple the device so totally for people who want free usage? And how many websites have even MENTIONED that this popular device has been more securely locked down than the iPhone?
2. Where is the outrage against AT&T for selling Androids that are locked against sidegrades? What?!? Androids can’t run whatever software you want?
3. How dare Google remotely wipe an app off users’ phones, without so much as a “may I?” Just because it supplied user data, after users agreed to?
4. What gives that Google is keeping functional, correctly-advertised apps out of their store, just because a user might bypass a carrier tariff?
5. Google is now engaging in an arms race with people like a poster here who want to try out apps before buying, by advising a complicated usage monitoring scheme for developers to integrate into their code. (Alas, it is both potentially a show-stopper for legit users with a lousy connection, and also so lame that it will crumble against the sort of effort that is common for popular PC games.) “Phone home” has a new meaning, as does “customer service” now that developers will be responsible for tracking illicit use of their apps, dealing with billing and delivery fuckups on the Android Store.
Let’s hear about how awful Google, other manufacturers and the carriers are, in the same breath as Apple’s sins, eh? Because otherwise, it just looks naïve. Or totally hypocritical. Or downright dishonest.
= = = =
There’s an easy answer, however: virtually every excluded app, every missing feature such as Google Voice, tethering or VoIP, all the increasingly-strong lockdowns, are dictated by the carriers. iPhones, Androids, BlackBerrys, virtually all devices (in the US) are sold under terms that the carrier specifies and enforces.
Nobody over the age of 12 who cares about phones should forget all that 2007 hoohah about AT&T being concerned about zombie botnets taking down their precious service, or forget how Apple provided tethering many months before AT&T deigned to put the meter on it. Ditto for why Moto would raise their manufacturing costs, cut attractiveness and PO customers with M-Shield.
Apple struck a deal with AT&T that nobody here has seen and Verizon has jumped back into the game with a range of Android manufacturers, each device more restricted than its predecessor, now that Verizon thinks it has achieved parity between Droid and iPhone.
The outrage against Apple might be phony, just as phony as Google’s widely-broadcast claims that they started the Android project (in 2005!) to keep Apple from monopolizing the mobile internet. They don’t let facts stand in their way, no sir! Or, it may be from EFF types who don’t realize that they’re being used by the carriers to gain market-share advantage, all the while being able to neuter users’ net-neutrality with the push of a button.
Either way, it looks rather simplistic. Apple just has their ecosystem a bit better figured and admits that they’re out than the late-comers, who are busy with the baling wire and duct tape as we watch, locking down every mobile internet device.
PS: There IS the little matter of how Apple responded to Adobe’s lies about why there’s no Flash on the iPhone. (The obvious reason, that Adobe has only 42 months after the iPhone, managed to support phones with 3X /8X the CPU/RAM as the original iPhone, is never discussed by them.) They’re certainly the last company I’d want anywhere close to MY oxygen hose. Anybody who wants to champion Adobe’s genius successes on other phones as indication of why Apple should’ve delayed the iPhone by 3 years, step right up.
PPS: no matter how strong the logic above seems to me, you’d have me if there were serious security holes in iOS that Apple left UNPATCHED because it only crashes the phone and there isn’t a possible jailbreak tied to it. Got any to cite?
PPPS: just because I hate to read BS encouraged by dishonest marketing types doesn’t mean I didn’t jb my old 3G when I had a chance. Legal, and useful to me for an upcoming trip — a more useful user mod than most of the apps I’ve bought.
How about you bite your tongue?
http://www.osnews.com/story/23725/Motorola_Goes_Legal_Against_Custo…
http://www.osnews.com/story/23489/Google_Flicks_Remote_Kill_Switch_…
http://www.osnews.com/story/23717/The_Dirty_Little_Secret_About_Goo…
Just a random selection. Please, if you’re going to troll, first be sure we haven’t actually reported on the things you say we did not report on. I hope you’re man enough to apologise.
Again, whiners will whine.
Don’t like what Apple is doing? Don’t buy an iPhone / iPad.
Problem solved.
that sounds like people have a Choice. Its not their fault.. Apple Forced them to buy.
Yes, or to rephrase what you just said: when Apple does something that’s against their customers’ best interest, you should just avoid being their customer — BUT FOR GOD’S SAKE SHUT UP ABOUT IT AND LET THE MASSES OF BRAINDEAD FANBOYS TAKE CARE OF THE DISCUSSION.
Government: Anyone want some free ice cream?
Electronic Frontier Foundation: Nobody wants ice cream.
Apple: Hey, I want some ice cream.
Government: Anybody else? Are there perhaps any other US cell phone software companies that want free ice cream as well?
Electronic Frontier Foundation: This is 1998. There is nobody else.
Government: Well, I’m not going to buy ice cream for just one person. Sorry, Apple.
Apple: Shucks.
Thom Holwerda: Can you believe how hard Apple fought for that ice cream? What a prick.
Wherein ice cream is the ability to enforce copyright on cell phone software.
Edited 2010-08-31 06:47 UTC
#1. As the article says, fixing security holes is not an indication of being anti-jailbreak.
#2. Wanting jailbreaks to be illegal is also not a clear indication of being anti-jailbreak. What Apple is really concerned about, and rightly so, is app piracy. ‘Breaking iOS allows the bypassing of signed-code checking, which would then allow pirated apps to install and run. This is a big deal to developers trying to make a living from writing apps, and Apple is obligated to make sure they get paid for their work. Apple has to demonstrate a willingness to protect the developers or they could end being held liable for negligence and ultimately sued by a disgruntled developer who feels Apple isn’t doing enough to curb theft.
#3. Apple is not “fighting the jailbreaking community” as the author of this article seems to think. Name one instance when Apple tried to sue a person for jailbreaking their phone. Or tried to sue the hackers who discovered and exploited the vulnerabilities and then developed and distributed the jailbreak. Or the last time Apple tried to shut down Cydia or any other “open” app store? THEY NEVER HAVE! Why? They really just don’t care if people want to tinker with their device (although they don’t want to have to actively support it either, e.g. it voids the warranty).
#2. Wanting jailbreaks to be illegal is also not a clear indication of being anti-jailbreak. What Apple is really concerned about, and rightly so, is app piracy. ‘Breaking iOS allows the bypassing of signed-code checking, which would then allow pirated apps to install and run. This is a big deal to developers trying to make a living from writing apps, and Apple is obligated to make sure they get paid for their work. Apple has to demonstrate a willingness to protect the developers or they could end being held liable for negligence and ultimately sued by a disgruntled developer who feels Apple isn’t doing enough to curb theft.
#3. Apple is not “fighting the jailbreaking community” as the author of this article seems to think. Name one instance when Apple tried to sue a person for jailbreaking their phone. Or tried to sue the hackers who discovered and exploited the vulnerabilities and then developed and distributed the jailbreak. Or the last time Apple tried to shut down Cydia or any other “open” app store? THEY NEVER HAVE! Why? They really just don’t care if people want to tinker with their device (although they don’t want to have to actively support it either, e.g. it voids the warranty). [/q]
Your points under 2 and 3 are interdependent. Apple tried to make jailbraking illegal so that it could fight jailbreaking … Apple can not sue anyone who discovers any vulnerability (nor can anyone else for that matter). Next time try to be more logical please.
Edited 2010-08-31 17:33 UTC
Anyone noticed it, too? Apple was fast in fixing the security bug that affected a jailbreak. Other bugs do not get fixed this fast. My guess: Completely unrelated.
Some other aspects.
When you paid your iPhone, the hardware, it is yours. You can do anything you like. i.e. hack the hardware. You can analyze it. But you can not reproduce and sell it without the licenses.
But your not allowed to use a root account of the OS! In any way. You don’t have the right to do it. You don’t own the software and you don’t own the right to alter it, to edit it, to make it usable the way you like.
This is not in balance. No one is asking for the right, to pirate and sell copies of the software. But what users and citizens should be allowed to do is: Use the software like you can use hardware. Especially hack it if you are able to do it.
Apples denies this freedom. Perhaps it is legal before the court to do this. But it is not fair. Apple likes to domineer over its customers.
But you can choose yourself. Be free or let Apple master yourself.
Good to see people defending Apple.
Let’s just roll over and wake up to find that we no longer have control over our own computers. When the current crop of desktop OSes become obsolete, we’ll suddenly realise the significance of what we’ve let slip away by singing the vendor’s justifications to remove basic freedoms we take for granted.
Yeah, let’s all defend the “little people” that are vigorously opposed to these policies, yet are willing to sponsor Apple empire by buying a $600 phone because they like (nay, are “entitled to”) their shiny apps?
People buying these devices know what they are getting into.
Of-course Apple has act against jailbreaking. Don’t forget they have a few obligations and interests, both commercial and legal.
First off, there’s AT&T. Should be obvious they don’t want jail-breaking since it potentially opens the phone towards other networks.
Secondly, there’s the FCC. All devices on the carrier’s networks have to be validated by them. Having a phone wide-open results in Apple not being able to guarantee that the phones will not be used to disturb the workings of the cellular networks (which have been proven to have very weak security).
Thirdly, there is are the applications on the phones. Unlike consoles like the Wii, where primary uses for breaking into the console is piracy, there’s also a valid use to install custom, unauthorized – but usefull applications, directly competing with their Appstore. That however, does not mean piracy is not an issue, because it certainly is. Apps are pirated, and Apple should do as much as possible to protect it’s loyal developers pushing apps onto the stores and relying on them to pay for their bills. Additionally it’s also a revenue stream for Apple.
While jailbreaking on itself can be very nice and useful, it’s certainly not all that positive or ethical. No company would pretend it’s all good and just allow it. Just look at copy-protection-schemes and DRM. In that regards, Apple is very customer-oriented, where they don’t want the security to get into the way of their vision of the “user experience” – and they’re doing a pretty damn good job imo. I’m pretty sure Apple knows that sooner or later, holes will be found, and a jailbreak-method will be out but from their pov, they just have to act to prevent it, but it’s not like they’re spending huge amounts on locking down the entire phone.
PS: my iphone is jailbroken.
http://imgur.com/P5Qma.png
So, I gather e.g. N900 did not get FCC approval? You sure?
This whole conversation seems blown out of proportion. It’s mainly a discussion of semantics and viewpoint. So let’s just focus on the facts.
– iPhones have been jailbroken since the early days
– Jailbreak exploits survive release after release
– There are no active systems in place that check for jailbroken phones
– There are no negative technical actions taken against jailbroken phones
– Apple has tried to get jailbreaking a phone declared illegal
In general, Apple is lackadaisical about plugging security holes used to jailbreak phones. If you can use a security hole to root a device over the network – that’s fixed quickly – if you can only use it by physically connecting to the device – they take their time.
What, I believe, Gruber is saying, is exactly that. Apple hasn’t declared all out war on jailbreakers. Let’s put our thinking caps on and put together a list of simple ways Apple could mess with jailbroken phones.
– They could scan the phones on connection to iTunes, looking for jailbreak signatures and suspend iTunes accounts.
– They could brick phones that contain jailbreak signatures.
– They could report users to carriers that have jailbreak tethering apps.
– They could plug jailbreak holes with point releases.
And these are just the simplest things that they could do. But they don’t. They mostly ignore jailbreaking. To the point that their former spokesmen was on a talk show with his jailbroken phone projected for the world to see.
I’m with one of the other posters, I wish Apple would provide a known path to jailbreaking devices. A supported API to bypass the Apple eco-system. You have to press the “Yes, I know I’m losing my warranty by doing this and there’s no guarantee my jailbreak apps will survive updates, button” but no security holes would be necessary. But I’m not holding my breath.
Apple has never actively gone after jialbreakers and haven pretty much dragged their feet when it comes to stopping jailbreaks from happening on their device. Apple could do a lot more to deter jailbreakers than it currently does. Look at Sony and the PS3 for examples. Apple is nowhere near in the same ballpark as what goes on there. In-fact Apple has always been rather lenient with the hacker community as long as these hackers don’t try to 1) monetize the hack to Apple’s detriment (Psystar) 2). Use some sort of security exploit that can potentially create issues for users not interested in jailbreaking their device.
At this point Thom is talking crap, and/or has really short memory when it comes to Apple. Regardless of Apple’s intention with the legality of jailbreaking your device they have never actively gone after jailbreak users or developers nor have they locked down their device to the point where doing anything jailbreak related will brick, report, or block your phone. Nothing at all.
So Apple doesn’t have a supported backdoor to their software, neither does the Xbox, or a PS3 (Sony recently removed their only supported hacker related door, though it was very limited in what it gave access to). Why don’t you complain about them? They’ve done much worst than Apple has ever done to the jailbreak community. Apple, like MS, and Sony are obligated to protect their developers because that’s where the money is at. Their huge Appstore shows that what they are doing works and developers like me appreciate that extra layer of protection, something that I personally think is missing on the Android devices where piracy is rampant. Google is not really doing much about it. They either don’t care or have no idea how to go about it. Code obfuscation is a shitty way to protect developers.
Apple are under no obligation to make it easy to jailbreak their phones. They sold a product. You bought the product AS SOLD.
They will support and warranty this product as it was sold. If you take it upon yourself to change things via unsupported hacks. They wont Stop you, but they certainly wont help you if it goes wrong. Why should they?
Another one who didn’t read. Fantastic.
i did read the article and am, tbh, confused at the assertion I did not. Anyway, will clarify.
Apple have apparently taken the logic that they are fixing holes. BUT they are well within their rights to sue people who are jailbreaking and breaching the terms of use of the product AS SOLD (as per my comment above)
Remember ‘jailbreaking’ is an umbrella term which is used for unlocking of carrier locks (legit), installing 3rd party os/addons (legitish) to outright software piracy (100% not legit)
Gruber is right. Thom is wrong.
What else is new…
Anything to back up that statement, or just because you said so.
Obviously Apple doesn’t like the jailbreaking community and they are not turning a blind eye to it but neither they are declaring an all-out war … why the big fuss guys?
So I suppose the patent against jailbreaking represents “supporting jailbreaking”?
See http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/21/apple-attempts-to-patent-kill-sw…
I own a jailbroked (jailbroken?) iPhone 2G. I had to Jailbreak it since day one as its only supposed to work on AT&T and i’m using it in Saudi, Bahrain, etc.
I have to say i never felt apple put that much effort into preventing the phone from being jailbroken as i’ve updated my phone over the years. If they were *that* keen on it they would have released far more “security updates”
Its worth noting though if jail beaking were very easy far far more people would be running copied App Store apps. This would hurt developers more than anyone…
Gruber is an apple zealot, but he generally calls it as he sees it. And I agree that Apple didn’t really try that hard to stop Jailbreaking.