

The iPhone 4S Has Been Jailbroken - zeratul
http://www.iclarified.com/entry/index.php?enid=17645

======
parfe
Now you can actually own the device. A win consumers should not need to fight
for.

edit: I take it back and agree wholeheartedly with cryptoz.

Now you don't need permission from Apple to run some of your own software on a
device you paid for.

~~~
illumin8
I thought when I walked into the Toyota dealership and bought a car, I owned
it too, however, I guess I really don't because I can't load custom software
onto my in car navigation system.

This is a ridiculous logical fallacy. People want a car or a phone that works.
Outside of a few hackers and geeks, nobody cares if they can load their own
custom software on it.

~~~
cryptoz
You can, however, take apart your car and replace the parts. Your analogy
fails because nobody has any expectation of replacing or changing the software
in a car, the way nobody expects to be able to change the logic in a GPS chip
in your phone.

However, when people purchase a small computer, it's reasonable to assume that
the ability to modify the software on it is something that could define
"ownership", just the way car tinkerers own their cars and show that by
fiddling around with the insides.

~~~
anamax
> You can, however, take apart your car and replace the parts.

However, if you do certain mods, said car is no longer street legal.

> Your analogy fails because nobody has any expectation of replacing or
> changing the software in a car

Not so fast. There are lots of folks who want to change the engine control
software, specifically the software related to engine performance. There's
even an industry that serves (and sometimes cheats) such people.

See <http://www.goapr.com/support/chip_tuning_faqs.html> .

~~~
baddox
Certain car mods being illegal is a safety (or perhaps environmental) issue,
not an intellectual property issue. It's completely unanalogous.

~~~
anamax
The "street legal" bit is almost always environmental, but neither the car
companies nor Apple have police.

Does Apple claim that jail breaking is breaking the law or breaking a
contract?

FWIW, the car companies do go after (some) folks who produce "mods" on
intellectual property grounds. They haven't yet gone after users but there
doesn't seem to be any any reason why they couldn't, using exactly the same
reasoning as Apple.

> It's completely unanalogous.

It may not be exactly the same, but there are significant similarities.

In both cases, we have IP claims and (some) users want to "not manufacturer"
software mods.

~~~
wnight
>Does Apple claim that jail breaking is breaking the law or breaking a
contract?

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_jailbreaking#United_States_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_jailbreaking#United_States_legal_issues)

Apple claimed it was illegal under the DMCA. They were shot down, and now only
claim it voids the warranty.

> It may not be exactly the same, but there are significant similarities.

Don't defend broken analogies. And yes, it is broken. They're supposed to help
in making a point, not prove it, anyways.

~~~
anamax
> Don't defend broken analogies. And yes, it is broken.

Since apple isn't claiming a law violation, the only remaining difference is
that some people don't know about chipping cars. Is that a serious problem?

~~~
wnight
> Since apple isn't claiming a law violation

They were. Steve Jobs and everyone who still works at Apple would have been
okay with it if you were in prison for tinkering with your iPad.

~~~
anamax
> They were.

That's an argument that the analogy didn't work before. We're talking about
now.

~~~
wnight
It doesn't matter. You can''t compare some car mods to all iPhone mods, and
you can't assume that the companies' claims have any weight.

Even if your analogy didn't stink, and it does, it would still be meaningless
because it's just a thing you said, not a validated and useful model. So give
it up.

~~~
anamax
> You can''t compare some car mods to all iPhone mods

I didn't, but there isn't a lot of diversity in the iPhone mods. The vast
majority are jailbreaking whereas the car mods change behavior.

> it would still be meaningless because it's just a thing you said, not a
> validated and useful model.

Validated? It's just as "validated" as iPhone jail breaking.

In fact, since some car mods can result in illegal behavior, not just IP
violations, ....

Which reminds me - why is it so important to you that iPhone mods be
considered "rad", "sticking it to the man", unique, etc?

------
tsycho
Nice. This might lead to some cool Siri-based hacks.

------
ashleyw
How much effort does Apple put into securing the devices nowadays? The hackers
seem to be getting quicker and quicker with each release, it's as if Apple
isn't even trying anymore!

~~~
swombat
Are they even trying?

You've paid your 500 bucks. They lock it down so that the 99.999% of people
who have no interest in jailbreaking don't screw themselves up and don't get
infected by viruses. If a fringe minority decides to jailbreak that, that's
not a problem for Apple so long as it remains a fringe minority.

~~~
Kylekramer
If that is the logic, why make jailbreaking difficult at all? Say Apple took
the Android model of hiding installing apps from unknown sources in settings
and warning users about the dangers, but didn't take the Android model of
allowing almost any app in the store. The review process would still weed out
the viruses for the 99.999%, and the .001% can be happy and not have to make
security holes public just so they can install any app they like.

Seems like a win-win.

~~~
lazerwalker
The problem with that (from Apple's perspective) is that the number of users
who are going to somehow get tricked into toggling the 'allow from unknown
sources' switch and get their phones messed with is almost certainly larger
than the number of people who would legitimately be happy from having the
capability.

~~~
jrockway
So you make it a hardware switch. "To jailbreak your iDevice, open up the case
with this special screwdriver, and short jumper X." No person is going to
accidentally be tricked into doing that by a popup window, but it's easy
enough for people that actually care.

(Even Google's Chromebook strategy is good; a hardware switch.)

------
mgkimsal
Not clear as to whether it's tethered or not.

------
veyron
Didn't they do a similar announcement in the past (for older versions of the
phone) that turned out to be vaporware?

~~~
britta
The Dev Team has distributed jailbreaks for all the previous iPhones (and
basically all the iPod touches, and the iPad 1, and one Dev Team member
published a jailbreak for the iPad 2 on one version of iOS).

That said, MuscleNerd states very clearly in his tweets that this 4S jailbreak
is a work in progress ("Huge missing pieces prevent public release. LOTS of
work left") with no promised release dates.

------
theseanstewart
This is great news. I've been missing my LockInfo app.

~~~
palish
What's LockInfo?

~~~
w1ntermute
Guessing from the name, probably an app that displays information on the lock
screen. One of the (many) features that Apple does not deem worthy of iOS,
thus forcing customers to jailbreak their phones to have it.

~~~
frou_dh
I for one was shocked to discover that my consumer device was not infinitely
customisable.

~~~
iron_ball
It's a handheld computer. You can certainly argue against having the right to
customize it, but there is no technical reason you shouldn't be able to. It's
not a toaster.

~~~
calloc
Hey now ... that's not fair to us toaster hacking people ... we too like to
enjoy our modified toasters.

<http://www.embeddedarm.com/software/arm-netbsd-toaster.php>

~~~
watmough
I hacked my dinosaur toaster so it toasts a picture of RMS. it's awesome.

------
zyb09
Good news. I want Apple developers to go and debug their apps without access
to the devices filesystem and tell me how that feels!

