Why must Apple and others sell items with such restrictive agreements? Think about it. How does it benefit them? All they have to do is give a warranty for the hardware and original software. They don't need to honor warranties for non-Apple software? They don't honor warranties for non-Apple software. So why is there this big need to control the users? Why must they dictate what we can do with our property?
This is about controlling people. These agreements are invasions of privacy. These companies are interfering with our lives from afar. They let their machines come into our homes and they are then dictating to us what we can do with them. That is unacceptable.
Most of us wouldn't stand for the US government blocking web sites and preventing us from getting information on the internet or running certain programs on our devices. The Chinese government does it for their people. They are blocking access to technology and information. Computer and phone manufacturers are doing a similar thing to end users. They just don't have the same force and power behind them. They are still exercising power over individuals by telling them what they can and can't do. Instead of using physical treats of violence they use financial force. They void warranties.
Spending hundreds of dollars on a device and having it die due to a manufacturing flaw would be very detrimental to many people if there were no warranty. Who's to say that these companies with their proprietary secret hidden code, haven't embedded kill switches in these devices that can be activated when one loads "unapproved" software? Then they can just void a warranty and blame the user. Until the code is visible to all, we'll never know if this isn't already happening.
I'm about as FAR FROM a fascist as you will find. Just so you know.
I buy iPhone and iPad, and I invest time into iOS7 (or whatever) BECAUSE I know that it won't be a mess, BECAUSE I know what I'm getting is OK'ed.
As far as your last paragraph, I don't even know where to begin. I've been using Apple products fro over a decade. I'm fairly sure that they aren't messing with my content.
1) Learning: to gain new information about something. Anything will do.
2) Teaching: to OFFER new information about something. Anything will do.
3) Collaboration: social experiences are pretty awesome, after all.
4) Commercial activity: sales of software and many, many, many other things.
5) Pirated software redistribution.
By the logic you have been applying here, #5 and #5 alone means that the Internet (and the Web in particular) is a vector for software piracy and that therefore anyone acquiring software via the Web "deserves what they get" if they end up picking up malware in the process, that this causes all sorts of support headaches because of user forgetfulness, and really some serious thought should be given to shutting it down.
I've said no such thing. You are conflating two things (and adding in a third, the "deserves what they get", which I've never said, and never do).
Those two things (which are SEPARATE) are:
1. People commonly use jailbreaking for piracy.
2. I prefer an iOS without a notable jailbreaking scene.
You seem to be operating under some kind of assumption that my jailbreaking MY phone (or, in my particular case, my iPad) makes YOURS less secure.
Nope, I never said that. I said those two things I listed above, and also (in reference to another claim, though this is just the primary reasoning behind #2) that having jailbreaking be something even remotely common, people will do it when they shouldn't, which will cause things like bad reviews for apps, and cause problems for people who don't understand what's going on, all because some idiot said something like, "lol, why are you using the iPhone the way Jony Ive is forcing you to? Mod it like mine, don't be a sucker."
Quote:
Apple doesn't owe the flexibility and they should not be under any obligation to support it, correct. But it doesn't follow from there that they should do everything in their power to deny it to anybody and everybody.
I never said that followed. Please quit putting words into my mouth. These are straw men. Congrats on defeating an argument I am no making. Now, could you focus on the ones that I am? They are numbers 1 and 2 above (with the third one being an elaboration on #2).
Quote:
Jailbreaking isn't "broken security", it's relaxing one part of a multifaceted security model. If Apple's sandbox were literally the only thing standing in between a perfect iOS experience and "everything is broken, your device is under the control of anybody", then their security would have been broken by design. Fortunately for us all, Apple isn't that stupid. (Now if only their public statements didn't suggest that they think their entire userbase is... )
No, jailbreaking is breaking the security, not "broken security". QUIT USING QUOTES as though I've said any of those words. You've literally "quoted" nothing I've written. Nor did I say it was "literally the only thing" or that "everything is broken, your device is under the control of anybody".
I said the two things above, with the third for elaboration.
If your intention is simply to argue with a made up list of arguments, please don't bother replying to me, as I've said none of it and have no responsibility for the imaginary arguments put forth by people in your head.
Who's to say that these companies with their proprietary secret hidden code, haven't embedded kill switches in these devices that can be activated when one loads "unapproved" software?
So like what Google did when Android users in the UK enabled voice guidance in Google maps or the other times they have used their killswitch?
Just thought I'd put this in, because I don't think the anti-jailbreak brigade know what they are talking about.
if I jailbreak my iphone , and I have cydia, I cant download any pirated apps from cydia.
i have to manually add sources that have pirated apps, and as soon as I click add, I get a warning from cydia that this source has pirated software and its recommended not to install it.
so no, jailbreaking and piracy don't go hand in hand
The people "reasoning" against jailbreaking obviously don't know what they are talking about, so let's clear up a few misconceptions here:
a) Jailbreaking makes the iPhone less secure!
FALSE! Jailbreaking *exploits* preexisting security holes in the iPhone, forcing Apple to fix these holes and leaving one less wormhole for three letter agencies and other thiefs to control your device without you being aware of it. So the very fact that there is a jailbreaking scene makes iOS MORE SECURE.
Further, a jailbroken phone has all the same security mechanisms intact as a non-jailbroken phone, the only person with more power after jailbreaking is THE OWNER, in other words, jailbreaking only helps the owner of the device to exercise his ownership over his device, nothing more, nothing less. An iPhone is nothing but a Mac with a less powerful CPU, a touch interface and a cellular modem built-in. It's a pocket computer running Darwin (just like a Mac), where the owner (unlike on the Mac) doesn't get administrator privileges.
To assume that jailbreaking makes iOS less secure is like claim the Mac OS X is less secure because the owner can have admin rights; you can consider OS X "jailbroken" from the factory.
So why would anyone in their sane mind think that just because it's a pocket computer instead of a laptop, the user should not have the same rights to control the device he bought?
(Note: Jailbreaking can make an iOS device less secure if someone installs ssh and forgets set new passwords, but if iOS came factory-jailbroken like any Mac does, then setting these passwords would be part of the initial device setup, and that would be a non-issue, too)
b) Jailbreaking is about piracy!
FALSE! Just like owning a Mac with OS X isn't about piracy as these Macs are all "factory jailbroken", so jailbreaking an iPhone isn't about piracy. Apple jails the user of an iOS device for the following reasons:
1) less support requests, because of limited user choices => to make more money
2) to allow carriers to charge different prices for exactly the same good (wireless bandwith usage), depending on whether you want to use that bandwith for your phone or your tethered device, this allows the carriers to be price gauging, which in turn allows Apple to make more odious contracts with the carriers => to make more money
3) to prevent people from buying software anywhere but the AppStore, which means Apple might lose out on the 30% cut of any AppleStore purchase => to make more money
c) Jailbreaking is about freedom of choice!
TRUE! Apple is perfectly free to say they won't give support for a device unless it's in a non-jailbroken state and only has software installed that was downloaded from the AppStore, but it's intolerable for them to say you can't have anything on your device unless they approve it, particularly since they not only check software for security, but also have a content policy that turns all Apple customers into kids visiting DisneyWorld.
Every company is free to decide what they sell as their offerings affect their brand image, but when that freedom of a company is combined with a monopoly store like the AppStore/iTunes Store, then THAT COMBINATION turns into censorship which isn't any more acceptable when perpetrated by a private entity than when it's a consequence of government action. One might even argue that if the government aids and abets with the various laws that make Apple's construct legal, that this constitutes an indirect form of government censorship.
So that means that
EITHER Apple would have to accept any product offering as long as it's not illegal or a security hazard
OR Apple would have to allow alternative channels for content providers.
How ludicrous some of these things are:
- Safari is built-in, but downloading a third party web browser from the AppStore throws up an alert panel that looks like one just downloaded a porn app.
- the built-in Photos app and iPhoto apps are perfectly capable of displaying porn through PhotoStreams, etc. but they are easy to install, but a 500px picture browser again comes with a huge "adult content" warning.
- Not only do apps throw such a warning upon initial install, but with each update, as if putting a new version of an already installed app would be a problem when the rating didn't change.
- games that promote violence are not a problem, games that promote sex are out of the question
In short, it's hypocrisy, that creates a fake sense of "decency" and "child safety", yet violence is OK, but love making isn't. Ugh, whatever happened to "Make love, not war!"??? Long time since Jobs' hippy days, I guess.
d) Jailbreaking is illegal!
FALSE! There are clear exemptions from the DMCA that explicitly allow jailbreaking, which of course isn't a free pass for piracy, and that proves that the two have a priory nothing to do with each other, because otherwise there were no such exemptions since the DMCA was specifically created as an anti-piracy measure, which brings us back to point b) above.
And on a totally different note: Just because "them" (the Chinese) are doing it doesn't make it worse than if "we" (the US) is doing it.
Just as China tries to protect and advance its market and products, so does the US. Just study up on how US agricultural subsidies destroy farmers around the world, so China's lax stance on piracy hurts the US. The US isn't interested in the fate of other countrie's farmers and China doesn't give damn about US software developers.
How absurd these things becomes clear when you look at font design: In the day of letterpress printing, typefaces were NOT under copyright protection in the US, because all the leading type foundries were German and the US had no interest in protecting a foreign industry. With the advent of desktop publishing and computerized layout, typefaces became a software product, and since the leading companies in that field were US based, NOW it was important to protect software fonts with copyright laws.
So please, stop swallowing the "bad Chinese" red herring hook, line and sinker, and study up on IP law history...
Jailbreaking *exploits* preexisting security holes in the iPhone, forcing Apple to fix these holes
And this sentence somehow magically keeps the device as secure, despite one of its key accessibility features being direct, unprotected access to all files on the device?
Further, a jailbroken phone has all the same security mechanisms intact as a non-jailbroken phone, the only person with more power after jailbreaking is THE OWNER…
And anyone who knows the stock root password or anyone who wants to access it remotely.
…where the owner (unlike on the Mac) doesn’t get administrator privileges.
Right: with jailbreaking they get ROOT privileges.
To assume that jailbreaking makes iOS less secure is like claim the Mac OS X is less secure because the owner can have admin rights
Root rights. Also, admin rights in OS X allows for the viewing of all local content anyway, so it by definition makes it less secure.
…you can consider OS X “jailbroken" from the factory.
You could if you had no grasp of what jailbreaking was.
b) Jailbreaking is about piracy!
FALSE!
Well, that’s true. It’s growing less true, but it’s still true.
1) less support requests, because of limited user choices => to make more money
2) to allow carriers to charge different prices for exactly the same good (wireless bandwith usage),
3) to prevent people from buying software anywhere but the AppStore… …to make more money
Well, that’s completely false. We’re delving to conspiracy theory territory here.
c) Jailbreaking is about freedom of choice!
So jailbreaking is the abortion argument. Great. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
…it’s intolerable for them to say you can't have anything on your device unless they approve it
Except something like 260 million people tolerate it.
…particularly since they not only check software for security…
Oh, no! What a dystopian nightmare!
…a content policy that turns all Apple customers into kids visiting DisneyWorld.
“No, I don’t want to sell artichokes at my furniture store. There’s a farmer’s market down the road a ways. Entrance fee is just $50 plus the proper legal paperwork for origin of consumable goods. That’s far less headache than you’d have getting ready to sell it in my store.
… Yes, if you’re stupid enough to sue me over it, I’ll gladly go to court; it’ll be the easiest money I’ve ever made.”
One might even argue that if the government aids and abets with the various laws that make Apple's construct legal, that this constitutes an indirect form of government censorship.
Are you psychotic? “Apple following the laws that the government created means that Apple is responsible for government-level censorship,” is your argument. I guess you’re outraged at every single company in the entire country, then. Every single company, even competitors in the same market, are “aiding and abetting their own monopoly status” according to you.
News flash, jethro. Google censors child porn in the US. Unlike your nonsense, that’s actual government censorship. I suppose you’re furious about that, huh.
EITHER Apple would have to accept any product offering as long as it’s not illegal or a security hazard
OR Apple would have to allow alternative channels for content providers.
How ludicrous some of these things are:
Some of them? I’m looking at the most ludicrous right now.
- the built-in Photos app and iPhoto apps are perfectly capable of displaying porn…
Hey, good luck FINDING porn using Photos and iPhoto. You don’t seem to comprehend the distinction, so feel free to get thrown in the slammer for it.
…as if putting a new version of an already installed app would be a problem when the rating didn’t change.
Yeah, see, there are legal requirements at work here.
Ugh, whatever happened to "Make love, not war!"??? Long time since Jobs' hippy days, I guess.
1. Prove Jobs was a hippie.
2. Prove Jobs held to that tenant.
3. Jobs has never, at any time, spoken anything except disdain for that industry and its place on his products.
Being a parent–you know, actually having some responsibility in life–tends to make you make the right decisions.
…that proves that the two have a priory nothing to do with each other…
Okay, first, I’m guessing you mean a priori. Second, jailbreaking isn’t protected by the DMCA. The law is worthless nonsense, after all.
Jailbreaking your tablet is illegal. Jailbreaking your phone is not (until 2015). Unlocking your phone is illegal.
The DMCA doesn’t protect your “rights” or help your argument at all. It doesn’t care about jailbreaking as a concept in the slightest.
No, jailbreaking is breaking the security, not "broken security". QUIT USING QUOTES as though I've said any of those words. You've literally "quoted" nothing I've written. Nor did I say it was "literally the only thing" or that "everything is broken, your device is under the control of anybody".
I said the two things above, with the third for elaboration.
If your intention is simply to argue with a made up list of arguments, please don't bother replying to me, as I've said none of it and have no responsibility for the imaginary arguments put forth by people in your head.
Your item #2 is nonsensical as stated because no reason is given. What motivates this preference, given that you do not jailbreak and are therefore incapable of being unaffected by jailbreaking?
Nothing threatens me. I couldn't care less, to be honest. What bothers, me, though, is someone claiming that the iPhone he bought is somehow so screwed up -- due to THINGS HE KNEW ABOUT GOING IN! It's like me buying a Shakira (well, old Shakira, anyways) album called "Sale e Sol" and then complaining that it's in Spanish.
When I was sick of Windows -- sometime between '95 and '98 -- I moved to Linux. I ran that for many years. Eventually, I got my first Mac, a TiPb G4, and that was that (god, I miss that machine -- spilled a Coke on it in my sleep ). If I wanted Windows, I ran that (god knows why). When I wanted free software and a system with which I could do absolutely anything, I ran Linux. When I wanted a Mac and a very free OS, I ran and am running OSX.
So, I run the OS which most fits my use-case scenario. If digging into the root system and messing around with the file system most fits your use-case scenario, then why use iOS? Why not use Android? Clearly, that fits the scenario much better.
I don't know of any open operating system that can also run iOS-specific apps. I can get a functional equivalent to that, though, by jailbreaking. Did you also, say, morally object to using WINE when you were on Linux?
(And yeah, that rant you're referring to doesn't exactly do any favors for the causes espoused therein. I grimaced when reading that.)
And this sentence somehow magically keeps the device as secure, despite one of its key accessibility features being direct, unprotected access to all files on the device?
To be fair, I'm pretty sure the statement was meant to apply to all iPhones as a whole. Certainly any given individual device that is jailbroken has some of its controls relaxed. But that has zero impact on any other iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And anyone who knows the stock root password or anyone who wants to access it remotely.
Three things:
1) Again, this only affects the jailbroken iPhone, not iPhones as a whole.
2) This applies only if one installs OpenSSH and manages to overlook the many, many warnings displayed on the front page of Cydia, in the description of the app itself, and in the popup that comes up after the app is installed that one must change the default passwords Right Now.
3) Said potential hole is why I've maintained that jailbreaking entails taking more responsibility for one's own security. If folks don't know how to handle that sort of thing, they shouldn't be jailbreaking.
I do not believe I am wrong. If I circumvent my agreement with Apple, and by extension, Apple's agreement with it's contractors, to get things I don't want to pay for, and/or things which are by contract unacceptable, I am a crook. Do you agree?
If you pay for what you want, and you don't break a contract, then you may obtain it.
If you found someone's wallet, would you not feel better about yourself if you returned it? Honor is measured in the small things you do, when no one is looking.
I don't know of any open operating system that can also run iOS-specific apps. I can get a functional equivalent to that, though, by jailbreaking. Did you also, say, morally object to using WINE when you were on Linux?
(And yeah, that rant you're referring to doesn't exactly do any favors for the causes espoused therein. I grimaced when reading that.)
One: I used WINE just fine, and didn't have any "moral" problems doing so.
Two: I don't remember making a "moral" issue out of any of this. Did I?
Three: I believe in all OS. I really do. If someone is happy with Windows, then go with Windows. If someone is happy with iOS, then go with iOS. Etc. Android, iOS, WP, Windows, OSX, Linux, FreeBSD, whatever. I'm all for all of it. And, honestly, I've used the vast majority of these OSes.
But believe me, I don't have a "moral" objection to any of them. Sure, I might rip into Windows on a daily basis, but I don't "morally" object to it.
[QUOTE] vaporland "It's better to be a pirate than join the navy" - Steven P. Jobs [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE] Tallest Skil “I was definitely talking about the theft of intellectual property when I said that. Totally. Like, no two ways about it.” – Steven P. Jobs [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]vaporland Rip, Mix, Burn - Steven P. Jobs [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE] Tallest Skil “I was definitely talking about stealing CDs and illegally distributing them. Like, totally. That’s what I wanted people to do when I said that.” – Steven P. Jobs
No, really keep it up. Is English not your first language? Do you not comprehend context? [/QUOTE]
Here's some context for [I]you[/I]: [B]This is a photo of one of many blue boxes that Jobs and Wozniak manufactured and sold[/B], back in the hippie days . . .
This device was used to make long distance phone calls for free. It's interesting, really. That was most certainly piracy. It was use of a service without paying, and was a serious felony at the time they were selling them. The income they received from the sale of these illegal devices helped to fund the manufacturing of the 1st 200 Apple I computers. Thanks to that criminal act, you're not using DOS 67.5.
Perhaps now you will cease your imperious and sanctimonious interpretations of Steve Jobs' mindset. (If you insist on channeling him, I'll send you an Ouija board - it would be more accurate than your efforts here)
[QUOTE][I]The Hollywood Reporter noted that Walt Disney Co. president and CEO Michael Eisner has taken computer makers, including Apple, to task for fostering piracy.
Eisner's comments came as he testified before the United States Senate Commerce Committee about the potential threat that computer use has to music and movie distribution. Eisner accused the computer industry of considering piracy its new "killer app." He singled out Apple's "Rip, Mix, Burn" ad campaign of 2001 as an example of this type of behavior.
Apple's ad campaign suggested to potential buyers "that they can create a theft if they buy this computer," said Eisner, who otherwise ignored Apple's iPod ad campaign, which features prominent warnings against stealing music.
Eisner's comments come as congress considers legislation known as the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act. The act would require computer makers and consumer electronics makers to install technology which would prevent such devices from being able to duplicate copyrighted media, including CDs, DVDs, digital music and movies and more.[/I][/QUOTE]
Amusingly enough, [I]Jobs later became one of Disney's biggest shareholders.[/I] He reengineered Disney's operations and turned it around. A lot of that turnaround happened once iTunes started offering Disney content.
Still more context: If I steal your bike, you cannot use it. I have deprived you of the use of your bike.
If I copy your music, I have not deprived you of the use of your music. I may have used it without authorization, which some people in the entertainment industry (e.g., Mr Eisner quoted above) tend to equate with stealing.
I'm not 'stealing' by copying music instead of paying for it, because guess what: [I]I was never going to pay you in the 1st place. You didn't lose a sale - you never had one to begin with[/I].
It's actually legal to tape music off of the radio, edit out the ads, make a mixtape and give it away. Also to rip, mix, burn and give the CD away. It's illegal to sell it, but not to copy and give it away.
[VIDEO]
P2P works exactly the same way but on a much grander scale. I used to download a lot of movies and TV. I don't anymore. Netflix for $7/month is a better legal deal.
A battle of wits with an unarmed opponent is too close to bullying, and my post here is bordering on [B]tl;dr[/B], so I am going to stop now.
Spare me your insulting comments about my first language and contextual comprehension. You fail to appreciate the context of where your 'tech' originated from, and where it will end up if myopic folks like yourself get your narrow minded way.
Comments
You're a great fascist.
Why must Apple and others sell items with such restrictive agreements? Think about it. How does it benefit them? All they have to do is give a warranty for the hardware and original software. They don't need to honor warranties for non-Apple software? They don't honor warranties for non-Apple software. So why is there this big need to control the users? Why must they dictate what we can do with our property?
This is about controlling people. These agreements are invasions of privacy. These companies are interfering with our lives from afar. They let their machines come into our homes and they are then dictating to us what we can do with them. That is unacceptable.
Most of us wouldn't stand for the US government blocking web sites and preventing us from getting information on the internet or running certain programs on our devices. The Chinese government does it for their people. They are blocking access to technology and information. Computer and phone manufacturers are doing a similar thing to end users. They just don't have the same force and power behind them. They are still exercising power over individuals by telling them what they can and can't do. Instead of using physical treats of violence they use financial force. They void warranties.
Spending hundreds of dollars on a device and having it die due to a manufacturing flaw would be very detrimental to many people if there were no warranty. Who's to say that these companies with their proprietary secret hidden code, haven't embedded kill switches in these devices that can be activated when one loads "unapproved" software? Then they can just void a warranty and blame the user. Until the code is visible to all, we'll never know if this isn't already happening.
I'm about as FAR FROM a fascist as you will find. Just so you know.
I buy iPhone and iPad, and I invest time into iOS7 (or whatever) BECAUSE I know that it won't be a mess, BECAUSE I know what I'm getting is OK'ed.
As far as your last paragraph, I don't even know where to begin. I've been using Apple products fro over a decade. I'm fairly sure that they aren't messing with my content.
Common reasons why people use the Internet:
1) Learning: to gain new information about something. Anything will do.
2) Teaching: to OFFER new information about something. Anything will do.
3) Collaboration: social experiences are pretty awesome, after all.
4) Commercial activity: sales of software and many, many, many other things.
5) Pirated software redistribution.
By the logic you have been applying here, #5 and #5 alone means that the Internet (and the Web in particular) is a vector for software piracy and that therefore anyone acquiring software via the Web "deserves what they get" if they end up picking up malware in the process, that this causes all sorts of support headaches because of user forgetfulness, and really some serious thought should be given to shutting it down.
I've said no such thing. You are conflating two things (and adding in a third, the "deserves what they get", which I've never said, and never do).
Those two things (which are SEPARATE) are:
1. People commonly use jailbreaking for piracy.
2. I prefer an iOS without a notable jailbreaking scene.
#2 is not predicated on piracy.
Nope, I never said that. I said those two things I listed above, and also (in reference to another claim, though this is just the primary reasoning behind #2) that having jailbreaking be something even remotely common, people will do it when they shouldn't, which will cause things like bad reviews for apps, and cause problems for people who don't understand what's going on, all because some idiot said something like, "lol, why are you using the iPhone the way Jony Ive is forcing you to? Mod it like mine, don't be a sucker."
I never said that followed. Please quit putting words into my mouth. These are straw men. Congrats on defeating an argument I am no making. Now, could you focus on the ones that I am? They are numbers 1 and 2 above (with the third one being an elaboration on #2).
No, jailbreaking is breaking the security, not "broken security". QUIT USING QUOTES as though I've said any of those words. You've literally "quoted" nothing I've written. Nor did I say it was "literally the only thing" or that "everything is broken, your device is under the control of anybody".
I said the two things above, with the third for elaboration.
If your intention is simply to argue with a made up list of arguments, please don't bother replying to me, as I've said none of it and have no responsibility for the imaginary arguments put forth by people in your head.
Who's to say that these companies with their proprietary secret hidden code, haven't embedded kill switches in these devices that can be activated when one loads "unapproved" software?
So like what Google did when Android users in the UK enabled voice guidance in Google maps or the other times they have used their killswitch?
Fortunately for users both Apple and Google have put a killswitch in their OS.
http://www.phonenews.com/did-apple-flip-the-ios-kill-switch-on-ndrive-11579/
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/06/google-flips-android-kill-switch-destroys-a-batch-of-malicious/
Fortunately for users both Apple and Google have put a killswitch in their OS.
http://www.phonenews.com/did-apple-flip-the-ios-kill-switch-on-ndrive-11579/
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/06/google-flips-android-kill-switch-destroys-a-batch-of-malicious/
Except Apple has never been shown to have used a killswitch to interfere with people's phones, unlike Google, the hypocritical champions of "open".
I guess I'm not familiar with whatever evil thing you're accusing Google of this time. Any link so I can read up on it?
Just thought I'd put this in, because I don't think the anti-jailbreak brigade know what they are talking about.
if I jailbreak my iphone , and I have cydia, I cant download any pirated apps from cydia.
i have to manually add sources that have pirated apps, and as soon as I click add, I get a warning from cydia that this source has pirated software and its recommended not to install it.
so no, jailbreaking and piracy don't go hand in hand
The people "reasoning" against jailbreaking obviously don't know what they are talking about, so let's clear up a few misconceptions here:
a) Jailbreaking makes the iPhone less secure!
FALSE! Jailbreaking *exploits* preexisting security holes in the iPhone, forcing Apple to fix these holes and leaving one less wormhole for three letter agencies and other thiefs to control your device without you being aware of it. So the very fact that there is a jailbreaking scene makes iOS MORE SECURE.
Further, a jailbroken phone has all the same security mechanisms intact as a non-jailbroken phone, the only person with more power after jailbreaking is THE OWNER, in other words, jailbreaking only helps the owner of the device to exercise his ownership over his device, nothing more, nothing less. An iPhone is nothing but a Mac with a less powerful CPU, a touch interface and a cellular modem built-in. It's a pocket computer running Darwin (just like a Mac), where the owner (unlike on the Mac) doesn't get administrator privileges.
To assume that jailbreaking makes iOS less secure is like claim the Mac OS X is less secure because the owner can have admin rights; you can consider OS X "jailbroken" from the factory.
So why would anyone in their sane mind think that just because it's a pocket computer instead of a laptop, the user should not have the same rights to control the device he bought?
(Note: Jailbreaking can make an iOS device less secure if someone installs ssh and forgets set new passwords, but if iOS came factory-jailbroken like any Mac does, then setting these passwords would be part of the initial device setup, and that would be a non-issue, too)
b) Jailbreaking is about piracy!
FALSE! Just like owning a Mac with OS X isn't about piracy as these Macs are all "factory jailbroken", so jailbreaking an iPhone isn't about piracy. Apple jails the user of an iOS device for the following reasons:
1) less support requests, because of limited user choices => to make more money
2) to allow carriers to charge different prices for exactly the same good (wireless bandwith usage), depending on whether you want to use that bandwith for your phone or your tethered device, this allows the carriers to be price gauging, which in turn allows Apple to make more odious contracts with the carriers => to make more money
3) to prevent people from buying software anywhere but the AppStore, which means Apple might lose out on the 30% cut of any AppleStore purchase => to make more money
c) Jailbreaking is about freedom of choice!
TRUE! Apple is perfectly free to say they won't give support for a device unless it's in a non-jailbroken state and only has software installed that was downloaded from the AppStore, but it's intolerable for them to say you can't have anything on your device unless they approve it, particularly since they not only check software for security, but also have a content policy that turns all Apple customers into kids visiting DisneyWorld.
Every company is free to decide what they sell as their offerings affect their brand image, but when that freedom of a company is combined with a monopoly store like the AppStore/iTunes Store, then THAT COMBINATION turns into censorship which isn't any more acceptable when perpetrated by a private entity than when it's a consequence of government action. One might even argue that if the government aids and abets with the various laws that make Apple's construct legal, that this constitutes an indirect form of government censorship.
So that means that
EITHER Apple would have to accept any product offering as long as it's not illegal or a security hazard
OR Apple would have to allow alternative channels for content providers.
How ludicrous some of these things are:
- Safari is built-in, but downloading a third party web browser from the AppStore throws up an alert panel that looks like one just downloaded a porn app.
- the built-in Photos app and iPhoto apps are perfectly capable of displaying porn through PhotoStreams, etc. but they are easy to install, but a 500px picture browser again comes with a huge "adult content" warning.
- Not only do apps throw such a warning upon initial install, but with each update, as if putting a new version of an already installed app would be a problem when the rating didn't change.
- games that promote violence are not a problem, games that promote sex are out of the question
In short, it's hypocrisy, that creates a fake sense of "decency" and "child safety", yet violence is OK, but love making isn't. Ugh, whatever happened to "Make love, not war!"??? Long time since Jobs' hippy days, I guess.
d) Jailbreaking is illegal!
FALSE! There are clear exemptions from the DMCA that explicitly allow jailbreaking, which of course isn't a free pass for piracy, and that proves that the two have a priory nothing to do with each other, because otherwise there were no such exemptions since the DMCA was specifically created as an anti-piracy measure, which brings us back to point b) above.
And on a totally different note: Just because "them" (the Chinese) are doing it doesn't make it worse than if "we" (the US) is doing it.
Just as China tries to protect and advance its market and products, so does the US. Just study up on how US agricultural subsidies destroy farmers around the world, so China's lax stance on piracy hurts the US. The US isn't interested in the fate of other countrie's farmers and China doesn't give damn about US software developers.
How absurd these things becomes clear when you look at font design: In the day of letterpress printing, typefaces were NOT under copyright protection in the US, because all the leading type foundries were German and the US had no interest in protecting a foreign industry. With the advent of desktop publishing and computerized layout, typefaces became a software product, and since the leading companies in that field were US based, NOW it was important to protect software fonts with copyright laws.
So please, stop swallowing the "bad Chinese" red herring hook, line and sinker, and study up on IP law history...
*headdesk*
Seriously? That's you're argument?
a) Jailbreaking makes the iPhone less secure!
FALSE!
Well, there goes your credibility.
And this sentence somehow magically keeps the device as secure, despite one of its key accessibility features being direct, unprotected access to all files on the device?
And anyone who knows the stock root password or anyone who wants to access it remotely.
Right: with jailbreaking they get ROOT privileges.
Root rights. Also, admin rights in OS X allows for the viewing of all local content anyway, so it by definition makes it less secure.
You could if you had no grasp of what jailbreaking was.
FALSE!
Well, that’s true. It’s growing less true, but it’s still true.
2) to allow carriers to charge different prices for exactly the same good (wireless bandwith usage),
3) to prevent people from buying software anywhere but the AppStore… …to make more money
Well, that’s completely false. We’re delving to conspiracy theory territory here.
c) Jailbreaking is about freedom of choice!
So jailbreaking is the abortion argument. Great.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Except something like 260 million people tolerate it.
Oh, no! What a dystopian nightmare!
c.1) Jailbreaking is for porn. TRUE!
Follow this link for education: monopoly
“No, I don’t want to sell artichokes at my furniture store. There’s a farmer’s market down the road a ways. Entrance fee is just $50 plus the proper legal paperwork for origin of consumable goods. That’s far less headache than you’d have getting ready to sell it in my store.
… Yes, if you’re stupid enough to sue me over it, I’ll gladly go to court; it’ll be the easiest money I’ve ever made.”
Are you psychotic? “Apple following the laws that the government created means that Apple is responsible for government-level censorship,” is your argument. I guess you’re outraged at every single company in the entire country, then. Every single company, even competitors in the same market, are “aiding and abetting their own monopoly status” according to you.
News flash, jethro. Google censors child porn in the US. Unlike your nonsense, that’s actual government censorship. I suppose you’re furious about that, huh.
OR Apple would have to allow alternative channels for content providers.
How ludicrous some of these things are:
Some of them? I’m looking at the most ludicrous right now.
Hey, good luck FINDING porn using Photos and iPhoto. You don’t seem to comprehend the distinction, so feel free to get thrown in the slammer for it.
Yeah, see, there are legal requirements at work here.
1. Prove Jobs was a hippie.
2. Prove Jobs held to that tenant.
3. Jobs has never, at any time, spoken anything except disdain for that industry and its place on his products.
Being a parent–you know, actually having some responsibility in life–tends to make you make the right decisions.
Okay, first, I’m guessing you mean a priori. Second, jailbreaking isn’t protected by the DMCA. The law is worthless nonsense, after all.
Jailbreaking your tablet is illegal. Jailbreaking your phone is not (until 2015). Unlocking your phone is illegal.
The DMCA doesn’t protect your “rights” or help your argument at all. It doesn’t care about jailbreaking as a concept in the slightest.
…study up…
Oh boy.
No, jailbreaking is breaking the security, not "broken security". QUIT USING QUOTES as though I've said any of those words. You've literally "quoted" nothing I've written. Nor did I say it was "literally the only thing" or that "everything is broken, your device is under the control of anybody".
I said the two things above, with the third for elaboration.
If your intention is simply to argue with a made up list of arguments, please don't bother replying to me, as I've said none of it and have no responsibility for the imaginary arguments put forth by people in your head.
Your item #2 is nonsensical as stated because no reason is given. What motivates this preference, given that you do not jailbreak and are therefore incapable of being unaffected by jailbreaking?
Nothing threatens me. I couldn't care less, to be honest. What bothers, me, though, is someone claiming that the iPhone he bought is somehow so screwed up -- due to THINGS HE KNEW ABOUT GOING IN! It's like me buying a Shakira (well, old Shakira, anyways) album called "Sale e Sol" and then complaining that it's in Spanish.
When I was sick of Windows -- sometime between '95 and '98 -- I moved to Linux. I ran that for many years. Eventually, I got my first Mac, a TiPb G4, and that was that (god, I miss that machine -- spilled a Coke on it in my sleep
). If I wanted Windows, I ran that (god knows why). When I wanted free software and a system with which I could do absolutely anything, I ran Linux. When I wanted a Mac and a very free OS, I ran and am running OSX.
So, I run the OS which most fits my use-case scenario. If digging into the root system and messing around with the file system most fits your use-case scenario, then why use iOS? Why not use Android? Clearly, that fits the scenario much better.
I don't know of any open operating system that can also run iOS-specific apps. I can get a functional equivalent to that, though, by jailbreaking. Did you also, say, morally object to using WINE when you were on Linux?
(And yeah, that rant you're referring to doesn't exactly do any favors for the causes espoused therein. I grimaced when reading that.)
Quote:
Well, there goes your credibility.
And this sentence somehow magically keeps the device as secure, despite one of its key accessibility features being direct, unprotected access to all files on the device?
To be fair, I'm pretty sure the statement was meant to apply to all iPhones as a whole. Certainly any given individual device that is jailbroken has some of its controls relaxed. But that has zero impact on any other iPhone.
Quote:
And anyone who knows the stock root password or anyone who wants to access it remotely.
Three things:
1) Again, this only affects the jailbroken iPhone, not iPhones as a whole.
2) This applies only if one installs OpenSSH and manages to overlook the many, many warnings displayed on the front page of Cydia, in the description of the app itself, and in the popup that comes up after the app is installed that one must change the default passwords Right Now.
3) Said potential hole is why I've maintained that jailbreaking entails taking more responsibility for one's own security. If folks don't know how to handle that sort of thing, they shouldn't be jailbreaking.
Yeah, we are specifically talking about jailbreaking, after all.
And yet its proponents laud it as the way the iPhone should exist and how Apple is evil for doing anything else.
And yet its proponents laud it as the way the iPhone should exist and how Apple is evil for doing anything else.
Wrong. What proponents want is the ability to make that choice without having to jump through hoops and existing security holes.
Well… they’re never gonna get it. They need to give up.
I do not believe I am wrong. If I circumvent my agreement with Apple, and by extension, Apple's agreement with it's contractors, to get things I don't want to pay for, and/or things which are by contract unacceptable, I am a crook. Do you agree?
If you pay for what you want, and you don't break a contract, then you may obtain it.
If you found someone's wallet, would you not feel better about yourself if you returned it? Honor is measured in the small things you do, when no one is looking.
I don't know of any open operating system that can also run iOS-specific apps. I can get a functional equivalent to that, though, by jailbreaking. Did you also, say, morally object to using WINE when you were on Linux?
(And yeah, that rant you're referring to doesn't exactly do any favors for the causes espoused therein. I grimaced when reading that.)
One: I used WINE just fine, and didn't have any "moral" problems doing so.
Two: I don't remember making a "moral" issue out of any of this. Did I?
Three: I believe in all OS. I really do. If someone is happy with Windows, then go with Windows. If someone is happy with iOS, then go with iOS. Etc. Android, iOS, WP, Windows, OSX, Linux, FreeBSD, whatever. I'm all for all of it. And, honestly, I've used the vast majority of these OSes.
But believe me, I don't have a "moral" objection to any of them. Sure, I might rip into Windows on a daily basis, but I don't "morally" object to it.
"It's better to be a pirate than join the navy" - Steven P. Jobs
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE] Tallest Skil
“I was definitely talking about the theft of intellectual property when I said that. Totally. Like, no two ways about it.” – Steven P. Jobs
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]vaporland
Rip, Mix, Burn - Steven P. Jobs
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE] Tallest Skil
“I was definitely talking about stealing CDs and illegally distributing them. Like, totally. That’s what I wanted people to do when I said that.” – Steven P. Jobs
No, really keep it up. Is English not your first language? Do you not comprehend context?
[/QUOTE]
Here's some context for [I]you[/I]:
[B]This is a photo of one of many blue boxes that Jobs and Wozniak manufactured and sold[/B], back in the hippie days . . .
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/36579/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
This device was used to make long distance phone calls for free. It's interesting, really. That was most certainly piracy. It was use of a service without paying, and was a serious felony at the time they were selling them. The income they received from the sale of these illegal devices helped to fund the manufacturing of the 1st 200 Apple I computers. Thanks to that criminal act, you're not using DOS 67.5.
Perhaps now you will cease your imperious and sanctimonious interpretations of Steve Jobs' mindset. (If you insist on channeling him, I'll send you an Ouija board - it would be more accurate than your efforts here)
Here's some more context:
[URL=http://www.macworld.com/article/1003743/eisner.html]Disney boss accuses Apple of fostering piracy with Rip Mix Burn ad campaign for iTunes[/URL]
[QUOTE][I]The Hollywood Reporter noted that Walt Disney Co. president and CEO Michael Eisner has taken computer makers, including Apple, to task for fostering piracy.
Eisner's comments came as he testified before the United States Senate Commerce Committee about the potential threat that computer use has to music and movie distribution. Eisner accused the computer industry of considering piracy its new "killer app." He singled out Apple's "Rip, Mix, Burn" ad campaign of 2001 as an example of this type of behavior.
Apple's ad campaign suggested to potential buyers "that they can create a theft if they buy this computer," said Eisner, who otherwise ignored Apple's iPod ad campaign, which features prominent warnings against stealing music.
Eisner's comments come as congress considers legislation known as the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act. The act would require computer makers and consumer electronics makers to install technology which would prevent such devices from being able to duplicate copyrighted media, including CDs, DVDs, digital music and movies and more.[/I][/QUOTE]
Amusingly enough, [I]Jobs later became one of Disney's biggest shareholders.[/I] He reengineered Disney's operations and turned it around. A lot of that turnaround happened once iTunes started offering Disney content.
Still more context: If I steal your bike, you cannot use it. I have deprived you of the use of your bike.
If I copy your music, I have not deprived you of the use of your music. I may have used it without authorization, which some people in the entertainment industry (e.g., Mr Eisner quoted above) tend to equate with stealing.
I'm not 'stealing' by copying music instead of paying for it, because guess what: [I]I was never going to pay you in the 1st place. You didn't lose a sale - you never had one to begin with[/I].
It's actually legal to tape music off of the radio, edit out the ads, make a mixtape and give it away. Also to rip, mix, burn and give the CD away. It's illegal to sell it, but not to copy and give it away.
[VIDEO]
P2P works exactly the same way but on a much grander scale. I used to download a lot of movies and TV. I don't anymore. Netflix for $7/month is a better legal deal.
A battle of wits with an unarmed opponent is too close to bullying, and my post here is bordering on [B]tl;dr[/B], so I am going to stop now.
Spare me your insulting comments about my first language and contextual comprehension. You fail to appreciate the context of where your 'tech' originated from, and where it will end up if myopic folks like yourself get your narrow minded way.
for iPhone or iPad users, i found something that really help me to create an iPhone or iPad App or Game, check this:
http://www.tinyurl.com/nd9zt7h