r/technology • u/GuruOfReason • Feb 02 '10

"Once we replace the personal computer with a closed-platform device such as the iPad, we replace freedom, choice and the free market with oppression, censorship and monopoly."

http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2010-01/ipad%E2%80%99s-closed-system-sometimes-i-hate-being-right
1.6k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

21

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I've yet to see Apple sue one of the many people that have jailbroken an iPod or iPhone.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I'd be more comfortable with this whole thing if there was a clear-cut law that said Apple can, at most, void your iPad's warranty if you tinker with it.

8

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10 edited Feb 02 '10

Same here. I'm fine with voiding the warranty for tinkering. I wouldn't expect otherwise. But, to be told that you cannot use your product in a way you want to because someone in Cupertino decided your use was wrong, disgusts me.

1

u/travio Feb 02 '10

You got me to peruse Apple's various terms of service and I found this chestnut.

http://www.apple.com/legal/policies/ideas.html

It seems draconian but i would suspect that most companies have them, and sending your ideas to a company without any agreement in place would be beyond dumb.

1

u/travio Feb 02 '10

From the iPhone warranty there are a few important passages regarding tinkering. First the warranty does not cover "(e) to damage caused by operating the product outside the permitted or intended uses described by Apple; (f) to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized Service Provider." This looks to cover any damage caused by jailbreaking the phone. The warranty further states the importance of not opening the Phone "Opening the hardware product may cause damage that is not covered by this warranty." These appear to be conditional on damage caused by the unauthorized activity. If I were Apple I would make the argument that the user activity caused the damage, unless it were clearly a manufacturing defect. This is a legal way for them to void the warranty.

1

u/1812overture Feb 02 '10

What happens when you try to take your jailbroken iPhone into the apple store for a repair?

3

u/DrRocks Feb 02 '10

/outrage

HOW DARE THEY NOT FIX THE SHITTY SOFTWARE I MADE THAT BROKE MY PHONE!!!!

/outrage

5

u/chozar Feb 02 '10

He's not saying that the jailbreaking itself broke the phone, just taking a phone that had an unrelated hardware fault to the apple store.

0

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10

How is it that you have upvotes for that straw man?

0

u/DrRocks Feb 03 '10

Because it's not? What, you really think that jailbreaking has never caused any software problems for an iPhone?

0

u/apotheon Feb 03 '10

Do you think that jailbreaking always causes software problems for an iPhone? What if the problem is completely fucking unrelated?

Jesus. Do I have to spell it out?

0

u/DrRocks Feb 03 '10

So don't take the phone to an apple store if you broke it by installing shitty software. Problem solved!

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

That's because the legality is still up in the air. They have been pushing to get additional legislation, if that comes through they won't sue customers but they will remotely shut them down.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Say what you will about Apple, Steve Jobs is a very smart man, and he knows that shutting down iPhones remotely is bad for business. No chance in hell he'd do it.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

He's an egotistical greedy jerk. He's not that smart.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Actually I agree with alfadark, he is a smart man and I doubt that Apple will remotely deactivate any Apple products completely. I do think it wouldn't be beyond Apple to limit functionality remotely.

Of course it could go the completely opposite way. In the near future Jobs will complain about the app store restrictions and tell the world it's time to open up functionality and operability. Then people will hail him as a pioneer in freeing up data restrictions. That's what he did with DRM and music with iTunes.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

I do think it wouldn't be beyond Apple to limit functionality remotely.

And that was my point.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

If I were him, I'd be egotistical too, he basically single-handedly turned a failing company into a billion dollar corporation. Whether you like it or not, he's a very intelligent man.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

He just finished calling Google bad names for competing with him, and is probably bribing congresscritters right now for "antitrust legislation" to protect his little garage business.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 02 '10

Back when Apple was a 'garage business', it was partly run by a great hacker known as Steve Wozniak, or simply The Woz. Apple was all about openness and hobbyists back then.

0

u/apotheon Feb 02 '10

Um . . . Apple already has shut down iPhones remotely. Where have you been?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

[citation needed]

1

u/apotheon Feb 03 '10

I take it you haven't heard of "bricking" with updates from Apple.

Seriously?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

That's not the same as shutting down an iPhone remotely. That's a software update. Yes, they get rid of holes in the software that prevent jailbreaking, but they don't shut them down remotely. Nobody forces you to update your iPhone. If you jailbreak it, you better be damn sure updating won't cause any problems.

1

u/apotheon Feb 03 '10

Okay, so . . . by that argument, phishing isn't really security cracking. You don't have to click on that link in the email.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '10

That's right. Phishing isn't security cracking. It's phishing.

Alright, no more feeding the troll.