Ok that's actually kinda adorable.
The software differences are amusing as someone had to just take a shot and put out a sort of MVP of some of these features... or just do something else.
>The “Podcasts” app just opens YouTube.
>Apple Maps opens Google Maps.
The backdoors are interesting as... does anyone want to hack someone who buys a $100 iPhone, I guess so?
Having a backdoor on a mobile device means having a backdoor to any intranet that device connects to. A lot of people keep everything
accessible on their local intranets: files, printers etc.
If you get your compromised phone into your lawyer's office and he/she lets you use their unsecured intranet to get on the internet, chances are that then their network becomes compromised as well.
The device doesn't need to fool the user very long to be effective - just long enough to get them to buy it, and long enough to log in to their iCloud account. Those are the two big points where value is extracted.
> “The mismash of default apps preinstalled on the phone I was given are horribly insecure (if not outright malware),”
In short a modern smartphone.
Also, I'm curious, but if anyone has any insight, is this even profitable at $100 for them or is there a some sort of loss leading play for data behind such counterfeits.
The watcher might be tempted to take away "I can make an iPhone for $300," but actually it's more like "I can make an iPhone for $300 and ~$5,000 of my time".
Obviously the "$5,000 worth of my time" is actually the fun part fro some viewers. If you're the right kind of maker it might even be worth $5,000 to you.
The only special thing is the design (also of the CPU) and the software.
Is it really so lucrative that it beats applying those same talents at a real job?
The average software developer salary in China seems to be about 15,000USD a year (Glassdoor). I don’t think this is a years work.
But I’m curious as to how the work is funded. These ROMs get shared pretty liberally. So I’d guess once the work is done you have a limited amount of time to exploit it exclusively.
What if they didn't create an obvious attempt to create a direct knock-off of the latest iPhone? What if they created a comparable device to stand on its own? What if they clearly labeled everything that the phone was really doing? What if they weren't scraping every interaction he user has with the device?
What if they took all of that deceptive effort, and poured it into producing a device that could be trusted, and took all of those efforts to deceive, and instead poured that creativity into improving the fundamental device they wished to create?
What if they made something they could put their names on, without inviting all the consequences that their dubious behavior would surely result in, if we knew who was behind this sort of thing?
What if they could admit to what they were doing, because it sought to benefit their patrons, instead of posing obvious risks to anybody spending $100 on their stuff?
Most businesses do something that's identical to work done elsewhere. Many, many, many companies exist whose main line of business is to take a successful product and clone it cheaply for a market that can't afford the "authentic, professional" version. That is a perfectly normal, legitimate business.
I'm willing to bet that most of the engineers who did this phone never thought they were doing anything wrong. In fact, the "information should be free" arguments that many posters use on this site could be used to justify exactly the production of this phone!
IP protection gets interesting when it protects something you actually care about...
Then nobody would invest any money in releasing stuff and we would still live in the stone age.
The Real Reason for Germany's Industrial Expansion?
Did Germany experience rapid industrial expansion in the 19th century due to an absence of copyright law? A German historian argues that the massive proliferation of books, and thus knowledge, laid the foundation for the country's industrial might.
Found at http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/no-copyright-l...
What sort of "trouble" are they talking about here?
> So maybe this phone isn’t Apple’s iPhone X, but it is an iPhone X.
Ridiculous. If the phone can't run iOS apps (arm64 binaries compiled for Darwin+UIKit) it's not even close. What a racket.
Turns out, making the software to do cool stuff is most of the cost of building new products.
With your average Intel desktop almost everything is in the Linux kernel, you don't have cellular, and you use UEFI or BIOS to boot.
With your average Android phone, you are lucky if you have kernel code. This does not include drivers for most things, and the code is of such quality that even when manufacturers try to update the kernel version they are having too much trouble.
I could have used a better summary. Now I had to read half the article anyway.
a) android skinned to look like ios
b) based on a mediatek reference chipset/rf baseband platform
c) riddled with buggy apps with huge security vulnerabilities
basically if you go to dealextreme, aliexpress, dhgate or a similar website. search for android phones, find things that cost right around $70-100, they'll all be very similar.
The more amazing part to me is that they actually bothered to duplicate a lightning port rather than use microusb or usb-c for charging.
If you've ever wondered where your prehistoric iPhone 4 ended up, some Thai teenager is lovingly using it (with the software home button, because this is Asia).
"It's because of the fear that the home button may be broken. iPhones are not cheap in China so people take care of them while using. Several years ago people began to complain about their home button being easily broken and it has somehow been a widely recognized truth, so even the home buttons are not that easy to be broken, they tend to use AssistiveTouch instead. When you buy an iPhone in China the salesman would automatically turn on this function while helping you to do the settings. I myself have not experienced a broken home button during 4 years with my iPhone 4; however, I did have a broken sleep button from my 3rd year, which proved that the rumours are, in some way, true. So I turned on AssistiveTouch..."
I'm not sure why I went through them quickly. I started to use the software home button right away on the 6 and it's still kickin. The 6 Plus I didn't do it to misses a click every so often.
Do you mean that the increased availability of these fakes could tarnish Apple’s brand? I suppose we’d wind up in a situation where folks can only buy Apple devices from Apple authorized dealers. “Exclusivity” seems already thoroughly baked into Apple’s brand so I’m not sure this would actually hurt them. Is this not how it already is?
In most wealthy countries for sure. However the target market for these devices might be different countries, where Apple products are not that common and well known. Or where people don't care that much, because "looks like Apple" is still better than the alternatives.
My friend bought a fake Rolex watch.
He knew it wasn't real gold, and that half of the complications did not operate, but he still bought it and wore it.
There are enough people out there these days that see brands as style trends imho and will do anything to "rock" them.
I kinda like it if only because it is absurd.
It makes me wonder if we could make an all screen, every surface phone, and then as styles change the "look" of the phone would change.
"Bezels are back with the latest software update!"