Well, the inevitable
hacking of Apple's latest flavor of iPhone has happened. Named "purplera1n," the tool will only allow installation of unauthorized applications instead of a full unlock.
"The purplera1n jailbreak will free your iPhone from the limitations imposed on it by AT&T and Apple. After jailbreaking, a user will be able to customize the iPhone with home-screen wallpapers and third-party ringtones. But the biggest advantage of jailbreaking is the support of unapproved apps such as iBlackList (blacklists and whitelists for contacts) and many others."
err, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would anyone buy a device where someone *else* decides what apps you can run and what you cannot run? You don't own such a device - someone else owns it, and is letting you use it only under conditions they decide.
I'm sure this will get modded down by iPhone fanboys, but I don't mean it as an anti-iPhone thing, more like an anti-any-device-where-the-mfg-regains-control-after-you-buy-it thing.
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why? Easy: it's a pretty good phone, it comes with some nice apps (including a great mobile browser) and has a lot of other great apps available to add to it.
Isn't that enough?
Yeah, I can't do everything I want with it. And that sucks. But the devices which are better about that are much worse in other areas. When it comes right down to it, the iPhone is the best device for me, despite its locked down nature.
Parent
Re:err, why? (Score:4, Funny)
iphone: it's got what people crave!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
it's got electrolytes!
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because even with that restriction, the iphone is still a zillion times more useful than my old phone.
Sure, I can only choose from Apple-authorized apps, but seeing as there's tens of thousands of those apps, chances are I can find at least one app (or more likely a few to choose from) for pretty much anything I want to do. For most practical purposes, it really doesn't make a difference to me, seeing as I don't really care from any philosophical or ideological angle.
And if I ever have the need, jail-breaking my phone will always be an option.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Let me guess: You never had a Nokia phone with Symbian.
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because most of us iPhone users are willing to trade "device freedom" for "device just works."
Parent
Re:err, why? (Score:4, Insightful)
In any case, there are no widely available phones that are truly open. The G1 is controlled by T-mobile, and t-mobile can change features as it wishes. The same is true for the pre. Any freedom has one has is an illusion. The only open platfor I have seen is something like the Open Moko, which, apparently, no one wanted.
I also might suggest that matter of openess has taken a change in times of the script kiddie. Now, a phoneis open if it can be hacked using script kiddie tools, or if one can download a program that will let one do something that generally cannot be done. This is not useful, and are really just indicative of children having temper trantrums because they can't have another piece of candy.
In a more traditional sense, open means that almost anyone can write software. This is where Apple has always been better than some other companies. Apple comes from the tradition where hardware is just a platform for software. Therefore the hardware is controlled while the software is extremely well documented and most tools very cheap or freely available. The G1 and pre are of the same ilk. However, as Apple is commercial enterprise, it does charge $100 a year for the developer. My understanding is that this allow the developer to not only test on the personal iPhone or iPod Touch, but on up to 100 phones. Far from controlling software that can be run, Apples is provided, for $100, the tools one needs to write and deploy code. Android is very competitive here, with the Eclipse IDE plugin. I don't know if the Pre is competitive.
Parent
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Informative)
If you keep repeating it, it may become true.
Not that G1 is greatest phone ever made (and you have to be a fanboi to make such a claim, which seems to be iphone-only case), but if you are talking about being able to install apps I want to, I can do it today, without worrying about it being locked out/bricked when next updates come along. Also, I do not have to pay for features when they are released - Android update to 1.5 was free. ("free" - look it up in dictionary).
Parent
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Funny)
Also, I do not have to pay for features when they are released - Android update to 1.5 was free. ("free" - look it up in dictionary).
If you keep repeating it, it may become true.
Parent
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple comes from the tradition where hardware is just a platform for software.
That's totally why Apple allows you to install OSX on any platform, and why no one cares about the shiny brushed aluminum cases or paying extra for getting a black MacBook instead of a white one -- because dammit, no one cares about the hardware! Seriously, though, my bad attempt at snark aside, isn't the Apple philosophy high-quality hardware that you never have to muck around with? Isn't that their justification for the somewhat higher prices?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The only open platfor I have seen is something like the Open Moko, which, apparently, no one wanted.
Open Moko wasn't a platform. It was an experiment in crowdsourcing software for a phone. Go figure, no one wants to pay $400 to have to fix bugs to receive a phone call.
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
I'm tired of these stories! (Score:5, Insightful)
People buy the iPhone, or the kindle, or some other device that requires everything to be signed, then they either "jailbreak" them or whine about the restrictions.
If you want these restrictions to go away stop buying the devices, and educate everyone who'll listen about why YOU won't touch them, then let them make up their own minds.
You wouldn't buy a car that required you to call the manufacturer and get authorisation every time you wanted to put petrol in it or attach those sickly fluffy dice to the rear vision mirror, would you? And if you did buy it despite such a ridiculous restriction, would you then be complaining to everyone about the restriction?
We don't need 2 slashdot stories per week about this. We're just chasing our own tails here.
Parent
Re:I'm tired of these stories! (Score:5, Insightful)
You wouldn't buy a car that required you to call the manufacturer and get authorisation every time you wanted to put petrol in it or attach those sickly fluffy dice to the rear vision mirror, would you?
Why frame this debate with one of the worst car analogies I've ever heard? The equivalent of petrol in a phone is battery charge... last I checked, I didn't need to get apple authorization when I plug my phone into an outlet. I don't even need an Apple-certified outlet. The fluffy dice is the iPhone equivalent of an iPhone case. The last case I bought wasn't one from Apple but from a third party case manufacturer. This debate is more equivalent to changing your Ford engine for a VW engine and then trying to get it serviced at a Ford dealer. I haven't tried it but I doubt Ford will really honor your warranty if you do make such a change.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Advertisement is a powerful drug, and never moreso than when addressed to the "individualist" in us all.
The surefire way to get everyone to conform is to appeal to their sense of individuality. Especially if everyone of their cohort group is doing the same thing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My co-worker bought a phone online that allows data transfer via a cable. The provider locked that feature so he'd have to email photos to get them off the phone. He called to complain, and 30 minutes later they pushed an unlock to his phone.
So it's not the iPhone, nor any other phone. It's the features that your carrier arbitrarily decides to lock.
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Informative)
UNLESS you pay full retail price, you do NOT own the device. Even then.. you only own the hardware, not the OS, which is only LICENSED to you. Nor do you, at that point, still have any right to use whatever SIM card you want to in it. NOR do you have any warranty.
First, wrong. I DO own the device if I purchase it. If I am specifically LEASING it, I don't. If I stop paying my bill they can turn off my service and send me to collections for the service, NOT the device.
Second, I DO have the right to use any SIM card I want. Wireless providers are required to unlock your phone. They can charge for it, but that wasn't the statement.
Parent
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't you people ever read contracts and EULA's anymore? So... well, I think that sums it up. Let me know if you still have questions.
Read EULAs? Crap, I've tried. I usually glaze over long before the midpoint. I've gone through days where I have 4 or 5 updates that each demand I read a new EULA before installing - I don't have the time, the legal skills, or the money to hire a lawyer with the time and legal skills necessary to understand all that. It's a farce. We need a UCC for software and services. I would love to do a social experiment at a Walmart (or similar) store, where every time a product was swiped across the UPC scanner, it would ask the purchaser to read a 15 page legal document before letting them proceed. It'd be interesting. I wonder how many people would read them before clicking "OK". Then I'd like to detain a few of them as they left the store, and inform them that the EULA they agreed to at the register limited them to using one or two of the products they paid for only inside the store, and by removing the product from the store they were stealing. That'd be a hoot.
Parent
Re:When it just has to work (Score:5, Interesting)
Because programs vetted by Apple are likely to be accurately described, genuinely useful, and fully compatible with your phone.
accurately described - ok.
fully compatible - sure... they still can crash, but its not like the situation on palm or windows mobile.
genuinely useful - er... say what now? take a look at the app store sometime. most of the paid ones are a waste of time and money, and most of the free ones are a waste of time. Lets see we have "Virtual Girl" who dances on your screen, and iFart which makes farting noises, and some bikini-girl-a-day gallery (ranked #1 in entertainment apps)... 426 apps that all make your screen white called 'flashlight' or some variation (although in practice just pulling up the general settings app is about the same brightness, or a blank page in safari...)
ooo a dictionary... because a dictionary.com bookmark is too much effort... ah but this resides on your phone so it works even when you have no service.... seriously... do you often need to look up the spelling or meaning of words while in a dead zone? Does this really happen to people enough to make it worth it? Hell... I ony lookup works once or twice a month... and I suspect that's well above average.
etc... etc...
Parent
Re:err, why? (Score:5, Informative)
Not necessarily.
From a security point of view, it can be very sensible to have a locked down device. Take computers. A lot of users out there would want a computer that can do nothing but browse the web and write emails, along with the ability to view pictures and movies and maybe do a little office work. That's it. Essentially, they don't need or want a full blown machine.
Sure, they could make a restricted account and use that. But they neither know how to do that nor do they want to learn. So what happens? They surf around with administrator privileges (because "it works") and likely become a spambot.
For them, outsourcing that problem to someone else would certainly be something they would not mind. And, frankly, I'd welcome it as a step towards more security.
I wouldn't want such a computer, and I would not buy it. Just as much as I did not and will not buy an iPhone. But just because it would be the wrong device for me doesn't mean it can't be the right device for anyone else.
Parent
iTunes The Real Problem (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't want me to use software of my choice to allow two pieces of hardware I own to interact with each other (PC to iPhone)? That's pretty evil.
Let me get this straight, you're pissed at Apple because they don't create a seamless environment for you to use a THIRD PARTY application with their hardware?
Did Apple tell you you were buying a PC, or did they tell you you were buying an iPhone?
It's not evil, it's Apple creating an eco-system that is dead simple to use, and avoiding -- at all costs -- the nightmar
Re:iTunes The Real Problem (Score:5, Insightful)
In this case, Apple's doing the latter, and that's pretty evil.
Parent
Only in apple world... (Score:5, Insightful)
Kudos to you and apple.
Parent
Borderline insanity (Score:5, Informative)
That's not particularly evil - the itunes-iphone connection does more than just sync files. What is borderline insanity is:
Parent
Re:iTunes The Real Problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Why isn't apple getting into deep shit with the DOJ for antitrust practices?
It doesn't command sufficient market share.
Parent
Re:iTunes The Real Problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Because MS had a monopoly on its OS, and used that monopoly to leverage acceptance of the browser. Apple has no monopoly on cell phones or media players, and thus isn't leveraging a monopoly on one to increase adoption of the other. A buyer who wishes to opt out of iTunes can buy a different phone.
Look at it this way: Apple would only get into that kind of trouble with the DoJ if you were forced to use iTunes to sync any phone with your computer, not just an iPhone. Since that doesn't seem very likely to happen, I doubt you'd see Apple slapped with an anti-trust suit for this. iTMS/iPod is more likely, but since Amazon entered the market, I wouldn't hold my breath for that one either.
Simply pairing a software product and a hardware product together is in itself not worthy of attention from the DoJ.
Parent
Does this unlock it though? (Score:3, Informative)
Unlocking the damn thing would be the single most useful feature (for use with providers other than ATT).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
AT&T uses HSDPA.
http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/why/technology/3g-umts.jsp [att.com]
"Running unapproved apps" (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would you run an app that would organize the contacts on your phone, if you're the least bit worried about who the heck they are? Now, the iBlacklist may be just as legit as any app in the App Store, but there's a rather large chance that a version is floating around that actually sends your contacts' names, emails, and phone numbers to an Asiatic hacker or something. Or that the crack itself sends your data to said Asiatic hacker.
I'd say "there's a reason they're unapproved", but the examples of apps rejected by Apple are, to be honest, rather ridiculous sometimes - and they don't inspect the traffic that comes out of their test machines, I'd presume - so I can't say that "there's a reason they're unapproved"... although it does seem like an apt comeback (cue the apt-get comeback joke) to this sort of cracking.
Point? Don't put your data on a machine you can't lock down yourself, I suppose.
How about hacking together some linux support? (Score:3, Interesting)
Any word on whether or not this method enables tethering on AT&T networks?
The 3GS Unlock is available (Score:5, Informative)
The 3GS unlock & jailbreak has been available since midnight last night.
http://blog.iphone-dev.org/ [iphone-dev.org]
The usual culprits (the iPhone DevTeam) were waiting until the 3.1 release but it looks like their hand was forced by an independent hacker releasing his jailbreak on Friday.
There was a LOT of stuff you after jailbreaking (background apps, tether, etc) on the 1.x and 2.x OS releases but as Apple adds more features with each consecutive release, I'm finding the need to jailbreak a little less compelling. I still will, b/c I find a terminal + SSH alone to be compelling but once tethering is official, I may just go back to an un-jailbroken state. I still need the unlock, of course.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you need the unlock, you will need the jailbreak.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not with a 3G or a 3Gs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You guys (you and a child post) have a VERY incomplete understanding of what the dev team did or did not do, and their reasons for such.
They had a jailbreak for the 3GS almost immediately, but apple was already preparing their 3.1 update (beta is already out).
If they released the jailbreak right away, apple would patch it in 3.1 and every new phone sold would be 3.1 without the ability to downgrade due to the fact that apple has new signing protections in the 3GS.
If they waited the short time until the 3.1
jailbreak justification (Score:5, Interesting)
#1 - on a standard iphone, you can't change the incoming email alert sound... it is what it is. that means, if you have 10 people in a room and they all have iphones, if anyone gets an email, then everyone will be checking their phones because none of that is customizable.
#2 - on a standard iphone, you are limited to a handful of incoming sms alert sounds.... again, same thing as with email sounds.
the only 2 jailbreak applications that i actually use are the 5 icon dock (with the dockflow theme) and cyntact (an app that allows me to see the pictures of my contacts while they are in the list as opposed to having to open the contact to see the picture).
if apple would alleviate the 2 restrictions about changing sounds, i could live without the 5 icon dock and cyntact. i would have no reason to jailbreak.... and by alleviate, i don't mean to make me buy the sounds off of itunes like they try to make you do with ringtones, which you can get around that by importing m4r files.. 8)
Mine's hacked and unlocked (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Wow, ...and I just got an HTC Touch Pro and..erm..installed pretty much anything I wanted to run 'just like that'
why doing this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Jailbreaking is counterproductive. Apple and AT&T will never learn this way. I opted for N97 instead, sure it has some drawbacks, but I am simply not prepared to give any kind of money to companies as evil as Apple and AT&T.
Re:Don't need to jailbreak for wallpaper/ring tone (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Don't need to jailbreak for wallpaper/ring tone (Score:5, Interesting)
They do make it much harder than necessary to make ringtones. You can't just use any old mp3/aac/etc file, and all the documentation etc makes it seem like you have to buy ringtones.
Pretty annoying.. even my old locked down verizon LG phone had the ability to use bluetooth to transfer mp3s and midis to the phone for usage as ringtones.
Parent
Re:Don't need to jailbreak for wallpaper/ring tone (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
AFAIK, that no longer works. You have to use Apple lossless now. My understanding is that they disabled the AAC method because they don't want people making their own ringtones.
Yes, it is a pain, it's unofficial and undocumented, and for all i know will break again in a future patch?
Re:Don't need to jailbreak for wallpaper/ring tone (Score:5, Funny)
Someone has to protect you from yourself.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How did you go from, "one of the first things I tried was to make a ring tone, and it didn't work (the mthod above) until I switched to apple lossless" to "You have to use Apple lossless now. My understanding is that they disabled the AAC method because they don't want people making their own ringtones."?
Not to mention the fact that you can make your own ringtones both from within iTunes and from within GarageBand.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow, so much aggression. No, I didn't RTFA, sorry if that offends your sense of how the /. community works.
However, the summary stated that this jailbreak "will free your iPhone from the limitations imposed on it by AT&T and Apple" which I took to mean that the carrier lock (certainly a limitation imposed by AT&T) was also lifted. For that matter, SIM unlock is usually relatively easy (for non-smartphones at least) whereas breaking the application lock requires gaining root control of the operating