There is obviously a problem if so many people jailbreak their Apple devices.
Lot of people are of the "Woz notion" that computers and devices should be open and obey the owner.
The "Jobs notion" is people are ignorant, their devices need to be closed and controlled by mother Apple.
I agree for some the Job's way is the right way, but for most others the Woz way is the better path as proven by the open nature of desktop PC's flooding the world.
My guess would be some sort of compromise, allowing advanced users more control over their devices, but not as detrimental as jail-breaking software and the risks it's entails.
The market and customer satisfaction results would seem to indicate differently. You don't see nearly the uptake in the Android market (or Open Source for that matter) as you did/do for Apple. And it ain't in the marketing either, because for every ad that Apple puts out there there are a dozen articles/blogs about how Apple is closed and proprietary, how that is bad, and how Apple is too controlling and so on. Try again please.
Bull. They're not trying to make squat better - they just want to "see if they can" because it's nothing but a challenge for them to try and prove themselves...
OK. So making it better is just a side affect. I'll accept that.
I jailbreak my iPhone. I also buy software from iTunes and I buy software from jailbreak developers. I pay for all my software. I jailbreak so that I can customize my phone to the way I want it to be not to steal software. None of the people I know with jailbroken phones steal software. The ignorance in this forum astounds me.
Apple (rightly) wants some measure of control over their products and how they will be used for the following reasons:
- consistent user experience
- support issues
- and yes, profits
Even if they approved of jailbreaking (and I see no reason why they should), they would not (and should not) say OK publicly because they then assume responsibility (in the public's eye) for bricked phones, additional software support issues, malicious apps, etc. Furthermore, they would give tacit approval to apps which could harm their brand. Like when junior jailbreaks his iPhone, downloads god knows what, and then shows it to mom. Mom does not even know what jailbreaking is and if there is any hint that the app is Apple-approved, the media and circus storm that ensues is enough to keep 7 law firms and 20 public relations firms busy for a year.
Bottom line: Apple is not open software. If you prefer that model, look elsewhere.
And in my opinion, they should stay away from a very stable OS.
[/url]
IMO, MYOB.
They are just doing their own thing. You need not participate nor take any notice. They are not affecting you or anything that touches you. They are hurting nobody.
The sad reality is that most people ARE ignorant. If they were all power users, we would have no need for security, anti-viruses, and OSX. Windows would have no need for security since everyone would know what not to do. That's an idealistic viewpoint but it's valid. I think that's where Apple is leading the way because they recognize the ignorance of people and try everything they can to design their products that a kid in kindergarten can pick up and use.
Like it or not, I think that is the path in the long run.
Your right in a way, but I think the issue is when users do come up to speed on their devices eventually they start asking themselves things like:
"Hey why do I have to keep seeing the Stock App on my iPhone and what can I do to remove it?
It's because Apple maintains a bit too much control that people are led down the path of jail-breaking.
Which comprises a very small and vocal minority. As it has been in countless threads before, these are not the folks Apple focuses on for their toaster-appliances.
They are just doing their own thing. You need not participate nor take any notice. They are not affecting you or anything that touches you. They are hurting nobody.
No matter if it is their intent or not. They are hurting Apple.
When people jailbreak their iPhones (which is easy and might seem desirable) their iPhones gets unstable.
The very idea of hacking is against the Apple ideology.
Also, I think it's hilarious that you tell people to mind ones own business on an internet forum.
As long as I'm not trolling (,and I'm not,) I have freedom of speech just like everyone else.
I jailbreak my iPhone. I also buy software from iTunes and I buy software from jailbreak developers. I pay for all my software. I jailbreak so that I can customize my phone to the way I want it to be not to steal software. None of the people I know with jailbroken phones steal software. The ignorance in this forum astounds me.
No disrespect, but I'd rather see people such as yourself not having the option to jailbreak their
phones then millions of users getting their devises messed up because of jailbreaking and bad luck.
They do not belong to the Apple platform, because they're not needed there.
What's the point in trying to ruin a good solution several people have worked so hard on creating?
I have never cared for hackers very much either (well at least *today's* hackers), they seem to be mostly concerned with simple theft of IP.
OTOH, Apple is going out of it's way to provide motivation for the platform to be hacked. The "freedom" argument hackers use for instance had no real legs until Apple started censoring content for purely moral and aesthetic reasons as they have lately. Also, the new focus on advertisements at the same time that they released the iPad is another great reason to jailbreak. People don't generally like forced advertisements and never have.
It's the lack of any other option for the end consumer that seems to be driving the latest round of jailbreaking, even if the first few rounds were mostly driven by the criminal/looser types.
The market and customer satisfaction results would seem to indicate differently. You don't see nearly the uptake in the Android market (or Open Source for that matter) as you did/do for Apple. And it ain't in the marketing either, because for every ad that Apple puts out there there are a dozen articles/blogs about how Apple is closed and proprietary, how that is bad, and how Apple is too controlling and so on. Try again please.
Customer satisfaction is high for Mac's too and it's a open device, why can't this be translated to iPhones, iPads and iPod Touch's?
There is firmware on my Mac that regulates what the machine can do to prevent damage and mischief, so why not on the above devices?
If I start spamming, my ISP will cut me off. If I start abusing AT&T networks with the 3G laptop connect card they will cut me off too.
Apple should allow advanced users of those devices a legal way and safe way to jail break their device and take their own risks with software and the like from the internet, just like on a Mac.
Guess what I found out? When visiting the NY Times website with a iPad (using iPad agent in Safari) it makes a extra covert connection to Akamai servers.
Now what if this was a malware hosted on a site and it wanted to connect to a botnet? I can't place a outgoing firewall software on a iPad to warn one of such covert connections because Apple won't approve something like that on their App Store.
Security is resting totally on Apple's shoulders and they still haven't fixed the glaring issues with Safari.
I have never cared for hackers very much either (well at least *today's* hackers), they seem to be mostly concerned with simple theft of IP.
OTOH, Apple is going out of it's way to provide motivation for the platform to be hacked. The "freedom" argument hackers use for instance had no real legs until Apple started censoring content for purely moral and aesthetic reasons as they have lately. Also, the new focus on advertisements at the same time that they released the iPad is another great reason to jailbreak. People don't generally like forced advertisements and never have.
It's the lack of any other option for the end consumer that seems to be driving the latest round of jailbreaking, even if the first few rounds were mostly driven by the criminal/looser types.
I agree with the censorship being a bad aspect. But I also believe it's a necessary compromise.
If Apple didn't control the applications available, there would be problem with malware, low quality
apps and apps that would give the iPhone a bad image (porn apps and such).
The advertisement concept seems to be a little misunderstood.
Rather then previously ad-free apps becoming "infested" with ads.
Apps with already existing "boring" ads would have more attractive ones and
perhaps previously not free apps would be free if containing ads.
I would completely agree with you if they suddenly censored an app for containing
democratic rather then republic opinions of that caliber.
I really prefer the limitations before the named cons as a compromise.
Some people destroy just to destroy. They’re insecure and so they key a car or steal a password. But that applies to “crackers” to use the proper term. The term “hackers,” properly used, it not a bad thing. It means essentially “tinkerers.” People who fool around with things and see what they can be made to do. Sometimes that’s useful! At worst, it’s fun. But then the term often gets applied to crackers: the truly malicious people out to break and steal.
Thank you for writing that post! I want to stop right now and tell you that I really enjoyed reading the whole thing! But the part quoted above is what I'm so glad someone finally stepped up to the plate and said.
Although everyone likes the word hackers to describe technical and maybe illegal actions performed with electronic devices, it does NOT automatically mean that someone is a person bent on breaking into things and destroying them. That is a great misuse of the term. A true hacker is one who takes a great interest in how the world around them functions, without wanting or intending to destroy or damage it. I don't speak in any way for any of the world's hackers, but I did notice that a great many used to take offense at the misuse of the term. I guess they've all realized that nothing is going to stop people from misusing the term.
Personally speaking, I do take things of every shape and size apart to find out how their designers built them. I do that wherever I am confident that I can do so without destroying the device. I like to look at things in the background that most people never see and wonder what else the designers might have been thinking of doing. But I'd never steal, damage, intentionally destroy or vandalize any of them, especially ones I don't fully control and cannot therefore accept all of the responsibility for whatever may happen. And for the record, I have never jailbroken any of the iPod Touch devices that I own or that are "under my control". Nor do I intend to--I am not that unhappy with how they work. (Although I do fully understand how some people can be. Everyone's got to do what they have got to do.)
Which comprises a very small and vocal minority. As it has been in countless threads before, these are not the folks Apple focuses on for their toaster-appliances.
I guess you're right. I miss the old days when Apple made computers for the rest of us.
Thank you for writing that post! I want to stop right now and tell you that I really enjoyed reading the whole thing! But the part quoted above is what I'm so glad someone finally stepped up to the plate and said.
Although everyone likes the word hackers to describe technical and maybe illegal actions performed with electronic devices, it does NOT automatically mean that someone is a person bent on breaking into things and destroying them. That is a great misuse of the term. A true hacker is one who takes a great interest in how the world around them functions, without wanting or intending to destroy or damage it. I don't speak in any way for any of the world's hackers, but I did notice that a great many used to take offense at the misuse of the term. I guess they've all realized that nothing is going to stop people from misusing the term.
Personally speaking, I do take things of every shape and size apart to find out how their designers built them. I do that wherever I am confident that I can do so without destroying the device. I like to look at things in the background that most people never see and wonder what else the designers might have been thinking of doing. But I'd never steal, damage, intentionally destroy or vandalize any of them, especially ones I don't fully control and cannot therefore accept all of the responsibility for whatever may happen. And for the record, I have never jailbroken any of the iPod Touch devices that I own or that are "under my control". Nor do I intend to--I am not that unhappy with how they work. (Although I do fully understand how some people can be. Everyone's got to do what they have got to do.)
I agree that is important to be observant and not misuse terms.
But actually, I used the word "hackers" for what it was, I wasn't referring to "crackers".
Comments
There is obviously a problem if so many people jailbreak their Apple devices.
Lot of people are of the "Woz notion" that computers and devices should be open and obey the owner.
The "Jobs notion" is people are ignorant, their devices need to be closed and controlled by mother Apple.
I agree for some the Job's way is the right way, but for most others the Woz way is the better path as proven by the open nature of desktop PC's flooding the world.
My guess would be some sort of compromise, allowing advanced users more control over their devices, but not as detrimental as jail-breaking software and the risks it's entails.
The market and customer satisfaction results would seem to indicate differently. You don't see nearly the uptake in the Android market (or Open Source for that matter) as you did/do for Apple. And it ain't in the marketing either, because for every ad that Apple puts out there there are a dozen articles/blogs about how Apple is closed and proprietary, how that is bad, and how Apple is too controlling and so on. Try again please.
Bull. They're not trying to make squat better - they just want to "see if they can" because it's nothing but a challenge for them to try and prove themselves...
OK. So making it better is just a side affect. I'll accept that.
Apple (rightly) wants some measure of control over their products and how they will be used for the following reasons:
- consistent user experience
- support issues
- and yes, profits
Even if they approved of jailbreaking (and I see no reason why they should), they would not (and should not) say OK publicly because they then assume responsibility (in the public's eye) for bricked phones, additional software support issues, malicious apps, etc. Furthermore, they would give tacit approval to apps which could harm their brand. Like when junior jailbreaks his iPhone, downloads god knows what, and then shows it to mom. Mom does not even know what jailbreaking is and if there is any hint that the app is Apple-approved, the media and circus storm that ensues is enough to keep 7 law firms and 20 public relations firms busy for a year.
Bottom line: Apple is not open software. If you prefer that model, look elsewhere.
The sad reality is that most people ARE ignorant.
And then there's the rest of us.
And in my opinion, they should stay away from a very stable OS.
[/url]
IMO, MYOB.
They are just doing their own thing. You need not participate nor take any notice. They are not affecting you or anything that touches you. They are hurting nobody.
Of course, Jailbreakers will never admit that their phone-cracking is the cause of apps blowing up. [/QUOTE]
Is that true, Solipsism?
There is obviously a problem if so many people jailbreak their Apple devices.
So many people, give me a break!
Jailbreakers are a tiny minority of people who either want some unapproved apps or to pirate apps. And most will fall into the latter category.
I tried it once for unapproved apps, and it sucked ass!
The sad reality is that most people ARE ignorant. If they were all power users, we would have no need for security, anti-viruses, and OSX. Windows would have no need for security since everyone would know what not to do. That's an idealistic viewpoint but it's valid. I think that's where Apple is leading the way because they recognize the ignorance of people and try everything they can to design their products that a kid in kindergarten can pick up and use.
Like it or not, I think that is the path in the long run.
Your right in a way, but I think the issue is when users do come up to speed on their devices eventually they start asking themselves things like:
"Hey why do I have to keep seeing the Stock App on my iPhone and what can I do to remove it?
It's because Apple maintains a bit too much control that people are led down the path of jail-breaking.
Perhaps they should loosen up a bit.
And then there's the rest of us.
Which comprises a very small and vocal minority. As it has been in countless threads before, these are not the folks Apple focuses on for their toaster-appliances.
IMO, MYOB.
They are just doing their own thing. You need not participate nor take any notice. They are not affecting you or anything that touches you. They are hurting nobody.
No matter if it is their intent or not. They are hurting Apple.
When people jailbreak their iPhones (which is easy and might seem desirable) their iPhones gets unstable.
The very idea of hacking is against the Apple ideology.
Also, I think it's hilarious that you tell people to mind ones own business on an internet forum.
As long as I'm not trolling (,and I'm not,) I have freedom of speech just like everyone else.
I jailbreak my iPhone. I also buy software from iTunes and I buy software from jailbreak developers. I pay for all my software. I jailbreak so that I can customize my phone to the way I want it to be not to steal software. None of the people I know with jailbroken phones steal software. The ignorance in this forum astounds me.
No disrespect, but I'd rather see people such as yourself not having the option to jailbreak their
phones then millions of users getting their devises messed up because of jailbreaking and bad luck.
Again, nothing personal
I don't care for hackers.
They do not belong to the Apple platform, because they're not needed there.
What's the point in trying to ruin a good solution several people have worked so hard on creating?
I have never cared for hackers very much either (well at least *today's* hackers), they seem to be mostly concerned with simple theft of IP.
OTOH, Apple is going out of it's way to provide motivation for the platform to be hacked. The "freedom" argument hackers use for instance had no real legs until Apple started censoring content for purely moral and aesthetic reasons as they have lately. Also, the new focus on advertisements at the same time that they released the iPad is another great reason to jailbreak. People don't generally like forced advertisements and never have.
It's the lack of any other option for the end consumer that seems to be driving the latest round of jailbreaking, even if the first few rounds were mostly driven by the criminal/looser types.
The market and customer satisfaction results would seem to indicate differently. You don't see nearly the uptake in the Android market (or Open Source for that matter) as you did/do for Apple. And it ain't in the marketing either, because for every ad that Apple puts out there there are a dozen articles/blogs about how Apple is closed and proprietary, how that is bad, and how Apple is too controlling and so on. Try again please.
Customer satisfaction is high for Mac's too and it's a open device, why can't this be translated to iPhones, iPads and iPod Touch's?
There is firmware on my Mac that regulates what the machine can do to prevent damage and mischief, so why not on the above devices?
If I start spamming, my ISP will cut me off. If I start abusing AT&T networks with the 3G laptop connect card they will cut me off too.
Apple should allow advanced users of those devices a legal way and safe way to jail break their device and take their own risks with software and the like from the internet, just like on a Mac.
Guess what I found out? When visiting the NY Times website with a iPad (using iPad agent in Safari) it makes a extra covert connection to Akamai servers.
Now what if this was a malware hosted on a site and it wanted to connect to a botnet? I can't place a outgoing firewall software on a iPad to warn one of such covert connections because Apple won't approve something like that on their App Store.
Security is resting totally on Apple's shoulders and they still haven't fixed the glaring issues with Safari.
See the problem?
No matter if it is their intent or not. They are hurting Apple.
When people jailbreak their iPhones (which is easy and might seem desirable) their iPhones gets unstable.
The very idea of hacking is against the Apple ideology.
Also, I think it's hilarious that you tell people to mind ones own business on an internet forum.
As long as I'm not trolling (,and I'm not,) I have freedom of speech just like everyone else.
No disrespect, but I'd rather see people such as yourself not having the option to jailbreak their
phones then millions of users getting their devises messed up because of jailbreaking and bad luck.
Again, nothing personal
Neither of these reasons make any sense at all. Your reasoning isn't following a logical train of thought.
I have never cared for hackers very much either (well at least *today's* hackers), they seem to be mostly concerned with simple theft of IP.
OTOH, Apple is going out of it's way to provide motivation for the platform to be hacked. The "freedom" argument hackers use for instance had no real legs until Apple started censoring content for purely moral and aesthetic reasons as they have lately. Also, the new focus on advertisements at the same time that they released the iPad is another great reason to jailbreak. People don't generally like forced advertisements and never have.
It's the lack of any other option for the end consumer that seems to be driving the latest round of jailbreaking, even if the first few rounds were mostly driven by the criminal/looser types.
I agree with the censorship being a bad aspect. But I also believe it's a necessary compromise.
If Apple didn't control the applications available, there would be problem with malware, low quality
apps and apps that would give the iPhone a bad image (porn apps and such).
The advertisement concept seems to be a little misunderstood.
Rather then previously ad-free apps becoming "infested" with ads.
Apps with already existing "boring" ads would have more attractive ones and
perhaps previously not free apps would be free if containing ads.
I would completely agree with you if they suddenly censored an app for containing
democratic rather then republic opinions of that caliber.
I really prefer the limitations before the named cons as a compromise.
Some people destroy just to destroy. They’re insecure and so they key a car or steal a password. But that applies to “crackers” to use the proper term. The term “hackers,” properly used, it not a bad thing. It means essentially “tinkerers.” People who fool around with things and see what they can be made to do. Sometimes that’s useful! At worst, it’s fun. But then the term often gets applied to crackers: the truly malicious people out to break and steal.
Thank you for writing that post! I want to stop right now and tell you that I really enjoyed reading the whole thing! But the part quoted above is what I'm so glad someone finally stepped up to the plate and said.
Although everyone likes the word hackers to describe technical and maybe illegal actions performed with electronic devices, it does NOT automatically mean that someone is a person bent on breaking into things and destroying them. That is a great misuse of the term. A true hacker is one who takes a great interest in how the world around them functions, without wanting or intending to destroy or damage it. I don't speak in any way for any of the world's hackers, but I did notice that a great many used to take offense at the misuse of the term. I guess they've all realized that nothing is going to stop people from misusing the term.
Personally speaking, I do take things of every shape and size apart to find out how their designers built them. I do that wherever I am confident that I can do so without destroying the device. I like to look at things in the background that most people never see and wonder what else the designers might have been thinking of doing. But I'd never steal, damage, intentionally destroy or vandalize any of them, especially ones I don't fully control and cannot therefore accept all of the responsibility for whatever may happen. And for the record, I have never jailbroken any of the iPod Touch devices that I own or that are "under my control". Nor do I intend to--I am not that unhappy with how they work. (Although I do fully understand how some people can be. Everyone's got to do what they have got to do.)
Which comprises a very small and vocal minority. As it has been in countless threads before, these are not the folks Apple focuses on for their toaster-appliances.
I guess you're right. I miss the old days when Apple made computers for the rest of us.
Neither of the reasons make any sense at all. Your reasoning isn't following a logical train of thought.
I'm a very logical person.
I must say I find it really surprising that you found my statements illogical.
Though I might have been a little unclear perhaps.
The Apple ideology is that if you let the end users get access to low-level stuff, the
end user experience gets damaged because the majority of the users are not technically
experienced enough to handle it or even be comfortable with the ability to interact with it.
So instead of exposing the users to the low-level stuff, Apple makes a simplistic approach and
creates an OS where you wont get warnings like "System exited with error 4352. Idle thread not responding to allocation of a new thread stack.".
Apple also spend a great deal of time seeing that the users can behave as ruthlessly as they want
without getting into trouble. The device is suppose to function even if you're drunk and using the
wrong hand while typing.
Jailbreaking introduces the unpredictability and removes the stableness which is half of the
point with the iPhone OS.
Yes, you can now write your name with the buttons at the home screen or see how how much RAM
is used at the home screen. But I say the big majority loses more then they earn by jailbreaking.
Thank you for writing that post! I want to stop right now and tell you that I really enjoyed reading the whole thing! But the part quoted above is what I'm so glad someone finally stepped up to the plate and said.
Although everyone likes the word hackers to describe technical and maybe illegal actions performed with electronic devices, it does NOT automatically mean that someone is a person bent on breaking into things and destroying them. That is a great misuse of the term. A true hacker is one who takes a great interest in how the world around them functions, without wanting or intending to destroy or damage it. I don't speak in any way for any of the world's hackers, but I did notice that a great many used to take offense at the misuse of the term. I guess they've all realized that nothing is going to stop people from misusing the term.
Personally speaking, I do take things of every shape and size apart to find out how their designers built them. I do that wherever I am confident that I can do so without destroying the device. I like to look at things in the background that most people never see and wonder what else the designers might have been thinking of doing. But I'd never steal, damage, intentionally destroy or vandalize any of them, especially ones I don't fully control and cannot therefore accept all of the responsibility for whatever may happen. And for the record, I have never jailbroken any of the iPod Touch devices that I own or that are "under my control". Nor do I intend to--I am not that unhappy with how they work. (Although I do fully understand how some people can be. Everyone's got to do what they have got to do.)
I agree that is important to be observant and not misuse terms.
But actually, I used the word "hackers" for what it was, I wasn't referring to "crackers".