Your favorite Apple, iPhone, iPad, iOS, Jailbreak, and Cydia site.
11-09-2010, 12:18 PM #1
"Software Should Have Screws:" saurik's TED Talk
Jay "saurik" Freeman, the creator of Cydia and Winterboard, gave a talk at an independent TED event in California on the fundamental philosophy behind jailbreaking. Given on Binary Day 10/10/10 at the inaugural TEDxAmericanRiviera in Santa Barbara, his talk compared jailbreakers with people who like to tinker with their cars.
In a riff on the old open-source "hood welded shut" analogy, Jay noted how people like to customize their cars, adding things from air-fresheners and radar detectors to custom rims. He also referenced the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act that states that car manufacturers can't void car owners' warranties just by adding third-party accessories. And he explained how phone owners - like car owners - "bond" with their devices, allowing it to "become an external representation of self." However, as we all know, Apple's OS "jails" your experience inside apps. As Apple famously says, "there's an app for that:" their belief is that anything you could want to do with a mobile device can and should be done with an app. Jay explained to his audience why this is not so.
Some of the most useful added functionality that is available to rooted Android devices and jailbroken iPhones, Jay observed, does not come from apps but from tweaks: extensions like custom launchers, dialers, and widgets. In a post on Hacker News, Jay aired his frustration with the argument that Apple should just open up the App Store. "In a future where Apple did exactly what you are asking them to do," Jay wrote, "almost nothing will have changed: people will still need to jailbreak their phones and developers will still be writing and distributing all of this cool software using Cydia."
According to saurik, rather than pushing Apple to open up the Store, we should be pushing to get them to open up their device, and to keep Macs open. "Until users are able to install whatever software they wish on the hardware that they own," he writes, "we will not truly have won back any of our freedom."
Last edited by Paul Daniel Ash; 11-09-2010 at 12:39 PM.
11-09-2010, 12:26 PM #2
Oh come on, this video is over 2 weeks old already. I know it's a slow news day and all, but seriously...
11-09-2010, 12:39 PM #3
man i'm happy i got the galaxy tab unlock with full cell capability,i dont have to deal with apple and their bull anymore.
11-09-2010, 01:22 PM #4
11-09-2010, 01:47 PM #5
Techie people just don't seem to get it.
The vast majority of iPhone users don't care about custom launchers or dialers or widgets or openness or any of that. They want a smartphone that does what they want, and does it well, which is exactly what Apple has provided them. Yes, it's closed, but that also means its more stable and secure, since the end user cannot compromise the OS.
The Following User Says Thank You to mohaas05 For This Useful Post:
11-09-2010, 02:00 PM #6
There are plenty of ways of ensuring that non-techie end users "cannot compromise the OS" while still maintaining openness that techie users would enjoy. Unfortunately, Apple will NEVER willingly relinquish control of the gate.
11-09-2010, 02:12 PM #7
There are plenty of ways of ensuring that non-techie end users "cannot compromise the OS" while still maintaining openness that techie users would enjoy. Unfortunately, Apple will NEVER willingly relinquish control of the gate.[/QUOTE]
well said my brother lol.
11-09-2010, 02:12 PM #8
The gated approach is favorable because Apple, as the gatekeeper, ensures the good ones are let in, and the shady ones stay out. The recent controversies over malicious apps in the Android market only serves to verify that approach.
Furthermore, when buying apps, I would trust Apple over an independent developer any day to handle my financial information.
I'm not saying that Saurik's point isn't valid. Of course, it is wonderful to have an open playground where anyone can do anything at their free will. But Apple's model is different, and it isn't going to do any good, nor is it terribly moral to demand them to switch to your own perception.
11-09-2010, 02:15 PM #9
Correct me if i am wrong but this so called "secure" OS that you speak of has exploits used by iPhone hackers to inject jailbreak code could also be used to inject malicious code hints the reason for their security updates every time a jailbreak is released right? So if the right person knew what they were doing and wanted to could use the Unjailbroken code say via WEBSITE like jailbreakme.com to install malicious things on your device.
Sorry that may have been off track a bit but the fact that you said because its "closed" meaning more secure. i think that is an incorrect statement. But what do i know i am no hacker. I just love jailbreaking my iDevices and believe its the only way to own one, and without it, i dont think i would own one.
11-09-2010, 02:22 PM #10
And with that, it is also why Apple closes these holes, not to spite jailbreakers, but because it would be irresponsible to leave it open. The PDF exploit (and the publicity surrounding it) means that it would be horribly easy to direct an unsuspecting user to a rigged website, which then infiltrates the OS.
The closed system is inherently more secure, not just to protect against malicious code (and since the iPhone is the most popular smartphone in the world, is a very opportune thing), but also bugged software. Everyone knows all too well that when updates come, tweaks and modifications in Cydia more often that not can leave you with a nonfunctioning device (It's also why developers on the App Store are restricted to public API's).
11-09-2010, 02:26 PM #11
where to get such a shirt?
11-09-2010, 02:29 PM #12
Last edited by Rokesomesmeefer; 11-09-2010 at 02:32 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Rokesomesmeefer For This Useful Post:
11-09-2010, 02:33 PM #13
The Following User Says Thank You to vantheman169 For This Useful Post:
11-09-2010, 02:47 PM #14
These are all well thought out comments (well most of them anyway) But just remember that at the end of the day, it's your device and you should be able to do with it what you want...
In 2007 when the first iPhone was released there wasn't a lot you could do with it, that's when "hackers" thought it would be a great idea to be able to install games and tweaks on it. A year later we got the app store. In 2008 we finally got 3G on our iPhones and now we wanted MMS and the "hackers" did that too and a lot more the next thing you know we have an iPhone 3GS, now we have the speed to do even more.
2010 iPhone 4, iOS 4 and it has all the things most of us have had sence iOS 3. I think it funny how Apple comes up with all this stuff AFTER the jailbreak community and the "hackers" have already done it....
The Following User Says Thank You to Doran For This Useful Post:
11-09-2010, 04:00 PM #15
11-09-2010, 04:03 PM #16
I never bothered with the first iPhone or the 3g because of the limitations and the pain that was jailbreaking at the time. Had it not been for jailbreaking (and made easy), I would never have jumped in when the 3GS was released, and I would certainly not own an iPhone 4 now.
11-09-2010, 04:04 PM #17
11-09-2010, 05:16 PM #18
The Following User Says Thank You to rayzeur22 For This Useful Post:
11-09-2010, 05:24 PM #19
11-09-2010, 05:30 PM #20
Yes there maybe shady developers, but Apple makes sure they can't do anything to harm you. That's the whole reasoning behind the review process.
Now this is the part where you're starting to get absurd. I'd trust Apple with my credit card information because Apple is a large company, and holds itself liable for it. Who would you rather provide access to? A company that actually is in the public eye and is subject to strict regulation, or an individual who can easily take it and run? It's not a subjective question, It's damn common sense.
Apple doesn't care much for your opinion because unlike you, Apple actually has marketing experts who know the most profitable way to sell their product. Unless you're suggesting that you can create and sell a product better than they can, your arguments pretty much fall flat.
Also, an open system is definitely not more secure than a closed one. Obviously you've been breathing the spew open source zealots pour out because it just couldn't be farther from the truth. Apple is the only one working with the code, why should they have to reveal it to the whole world? More eyes on the code means greater chances of it being circumvented.
Even Android can hardly be called open source because the only people allowed to touch it are Google developers.
Of course, if Apple thought it would make sense to open up iOS, they probably would have already done so. But even though they haven't, you don't have the right to demand it, because Apple has never promised or advertised anything of the sort that would require it. Obviously when you bought an iOS device, you were fully aware of this fact.