Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

165 comments

Remember, not illegal! (5, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139338)

Go for it guys! Jailbreak your iphone all you want, completely legal! Ruled as such by the Library of Congress! ... why doing the exact same thing to the black sony box setting next to my tv isn't legal, I'll never understand.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139364)

IIRC, the exception was limited to mobile phones.

Which is stupid anyway, such lock down shouldn't be permitted.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139466)

Exactly my point. What differentiates the mobile phone in my pocket from the console on my desktop.

Both are essentially custom-designed personal computers. I install and run programs on each. Each has a microprocessor, storage, ram, etc. Hell they both have usb connectivity and run linux (my mobile phone being android).

Is the difference that the phone has a screen built in, is portable, and has built-in wi-fi connectivity??Pretty random way to differentiate, but let's say that for some strange reason that is the case, wouldn't that criteria mean that my PSP is fair game to jailbreak?

Re:Remember, not illegal! (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139496)

Remember, in this country, you are supposed to be grateful that you are allowed to hack your iPhone, and just accept that you cannot do the same to your PS3. You are only supposed to use your computer in the manner dictated to you by its manufacturer, with a handful of excepts granted by the government. The business of the United States is, after all, business.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (-1, Offtopic)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139768)

Stick it to the man, brother. Business is evil. Pass the weed.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140472)

The antidote to dishonesty is not more dishonesty.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (3, Funny)

magusxxx (751600) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140032)

You are only supposed to use your computer in the manner dictated to you by its manufacturer

So that's why I got a cease and desist from TI when I turned my calculator upside down and spelt BOOBS.

Wrong (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140640)

Remember, in this country, you are supposed to be grateful that you are allowed to hack your iPhone, and just accept that you cannot do the same to your PS3.

No, in this country we ignore stupid laws. When's the last time you saw most people going the speed limit? I would wager not one single person ever hesitated jailbreaking even when the legality was under question, just as I'm sure someone wanting to open the PS3 wouldn't hesitate to to so. After all, they can't even put Geohot in jail, so obviously nothing would happen to an individual modder.

Hurray for the spirit of individualism, alive and well.

The only prison you live in is the one you make for yourself.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139568)

The mobile phone is heavily subsidized by the carrier that issued it to you. Stop supporting this model and buy a phone of your own, not one that the carrier is basically leasing to you.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139590)

The carrier is not leasing the phone, they are selling it. They might be selling it at a discount, which makes sense since it is crippled (would you buy a car that was sabotaged to only travel at 30MPH for the same price as a car that was not sabotaged?), but they are still selling it. My phone is my property, not anyone else'.

How does one stop supporting this model? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139844)

Stop supporting this model

All three major video game consoles use this razors and blades business model of selling the console near or below cost and making a profit on a tightly controlled software developer licensing program enforced with a digital imprimatur. Replacing the video game console with a home theater PC doesn't work because PC game publishers tend not to include multiplayer modes designed for a home theater PC [pineight.com] , in turn because there are not enough other people who own a home theater PC [pineight.com] .

and buy a phone of your own

How can one do this in an area where T-Mobile has poor signal? T-Mobile has "Even More Plus" plans available in-store or over the phone, and its MVNO Simple Mobile offers a similar plan, but the other three major U.S. carriers don't give a discount for bringing your own phone.

Re:How does one stop supporting this model? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140028)

Wah wah wah wah.

To not support the video game lock in, you probably have to give up having video games. This is achievable.

For the cell phones, you can just buy a carrier-locked phone from a carrier that actually sells cheap phones without a contract. There are quite a few cell companies in the U.S. offering quite reasonable contract free services these days, and the argument that a $40 phone is an onerous condition for switching a service that probably costs $200 a year (and might cost $600) is a little silly.

I'm a bit surprised, you usually remember to confine your whining to smart phones, where the discounted phone+contract is still a better option that trying to bring your own phone.

Re:How does one stop supporting this model? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140424)

you usually remember to confine your whining to smart phones

I thought the article had done that for me. This is an article about iPhone, and by extension iPhone's close substitutes (mostly phones running Android or Windows Phone 7) and other devices following a lockdown model similar to that of iPhone (namely all video game consoles), not "disposable" feature phones on carriers such as TracFone. The only exception that I've noticed is Samsung Intercept, an Android powered phone that Virgin Mobile USA recently started carrying.

Re:How does one stop supporting this model? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140050)

Stop Lying.

Nintendo Wii has NEVER been sold that way. it always has made a profit without game sales. Please educate yourself on the facts before you spout them in a public forum.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2006/09/7752.ars [arstechnica.com] for only ONE article pointing to it. There are many more out there.

Re:How does one stop supporting this model? (2)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140166)

I completely believe this. After all, all the development money was sunk into the project back when it was called the gamecube, what with the wii essentially being the miniaturized and clock speed boosted equivalent of two gamecubes duct taped together. i.e. profitable hardware.

Near cost, not below cost (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140308)

selling the console near or below cost

Nintendo Wii has NEVER been sold that way. it always has made a profit without game sales.

I didn't say "below cost"; I said "near or below cost". As I understand it, Wii consoles are sold above cost but still near cost. A Wii with the certificate to install your own code costs roughly $2000 plus the lease for a dedicated office.

Re:How does one stop supporting this model? (0)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140070)

>>>How does one stop supporting this model?

Simple. Buy your "subsidized" Sony, nintendo, or microsoft console at $50 below actual cost, but make sure not tot buy any of their games at full price. Only buy them if they are less than $20 (which is actually a loss for the company).
.

>>>the other three major U.S. carriers don't give a discount for bringing your own phone.

And why would they? The service cost is the service cost, so why would it be any less just because you use your own phone?

Re:How does one stop supporting this model? (2)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140254)

You are an asshole and an idiot. No "subsidized" phone is actually subsidized. Instead, the carrier rolls the monthly payment for your phone into your monthly bill. The problem is that this payment isn't itemized as-such. Therefore, when you bring your own phone, they conveniently ignore that some of the monthly fee is for the phone they aren't giving you.

Service cost plus phone subsidy (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140360)

The service cost is the service cost

What the subscriber pays is the actual service cost plus the part of the hardware cost that the carrier has subsidized.

so why would it be any less just because you use your own phone?

If there were no subsidy, the carrier wouldn't have to recoup any subsidy as part of the service cost. Hence the cheaper "Even More Plus" plans from T-Mobile.

Re:How does one stop supporting this model? (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140666)

but the other three major U.S. carriers don't give a discount for bringing your own phone.

I don't know what the market is like over there (I'm in the UK), but I've bought my own phones separate from my carrier for some time (after finding out I *had* to buy new DRMed MP3s instead of being able to use my own for tones or just for playing as music because Vodafone had locked the ability to play unprotected MP3s).

It is true that you can often get the same deal with phone as you can get without when it comes to contract renegotiation time (effectively meaning you get no cost benefit from having bought the phone elsewhere, though you do still have the not-locked-down-artificially-by-your-carrier benefit). What I do then is get the highest value phone that I can get for free on the plan I would be signing up to anyway. I then either flog that phone on eBay (or for less to a friend or family member if one is looking for a cheap upgrade) or designate it my spare phone and flog the one that is currently designated "spare".

The only slight problem I have with this is that I know with a fair degree of certainty that last time I sold a contract upgrade phone as "brand new, box unopened, probably locked to network" is was immediately sold on by the buyer as "brand new, box unopened" (no mention of operator locks, or operators at all) for an extra £20 so someone somewhere got a little ripped off if they weren't on the right network (though I shouldn't really be bothered - it isn't like I knew beforehand or was otherwise at all responsible and that sort of dishonest selling goes on day in day out whether I sell honestly or don't sell at all).

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140586)

The only serious comment I can make is, "Who the hell cares if it's legal?" As so many others have pointed out - when I buy it, it's mine. I WILL do as I please with my own property, licenses be damned. It might actually cause me to feel a little bit of pride if the American public finally stood up, and told Corporate America that "We aren't honoring ANY licensing schemes! We'll use what we buy in any manner we dream of, and we don't NEED your permission!" I'd pay to see a video of Bill Gates reading such a manifesto to his board of directors, LOL

Re:Remember, not illegal! (5, Insightful)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139518)

Just to play devil's advocate here, why should lock-down not be permitted?

No, really. There are plenty of devices that you can buy that are not locked down. Most of the Nokia line offers non-locked-down phones. There are a decent handful of Android devices. Blackberries are generally available in an unlocked flavor.

Yes, they are more expensive, but that's because you aren't being subsidized by a damned phone company when you get it. It's your phone, and all the features belong to you. The phone company can't turn off your GPS like Verizon likes to. They can't turn off the WiFi like AT&T likes to. You put their SIM in the phone and you use it for what you want to use it for, and pay accordingly.

AT&T seems to welcome unlocked GSM phones (admittedly, their discount for using an unlocked unsubsidized phone is nonexistent, and they'll still force you on a data plan for certain phones whether locked or unlocked). From what I've heard, Sprint not only loves 'em, they offer a discount. There aren't as many unlocked phones available for Verizon, since they are LTE and the rest of the world is pretty much GSM, but it's not like there aren't offerings for unlocked phones.

It's only the fact that we USAians are so used to having our phones subsidized that we've forgotten there is a whole universe of unlocked phones out there that we can use, if we want to get off the mobile carrier teat and buy them ourselves.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139570)

Nobody said that lock-down should not be permitted; go ahead, let them lock down the phones, and game consoles, and tablets, and desktops, and any other system. The real question is, why should we not be allowed to disable their restriction systems and use the computers we buy in any manner we see fit? If these companies want to subsidize phones, that is their problem; why should consumers have to worry about getting sued when they free their phone from some arbitrary restriction system?

Re:Remember, not illegal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139720)

Nobody said that lock-down should not be permitted

GGP did:

Which is stupid anyway, such lock down shouldn't be permitted.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

olsmeister (1488789) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139738)

I can really only come up with 2 good reasons. One is that they are concerned people might brick their electronics, or screw them up so badly that companies will get barraged with people looking for assistance. The second, and more likely, is that they are concerned people will expose functionality that they would otherwise have been able to charge money for.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139838)

Interestingly, your first reason seems to be the one they talk about publicly -- they are trying to protect consumers from themselves -- and the second seems to be the only actual reason, at least judging from my experience (as I said elsewhere, I saw my cell phones' modem capabilities disabled a while back, for no apparent technical reason, and was told that I should pay for a mobile broadband plan as a replacement). Frankly, if it was just a case of the carriers pulling these sorts of underhanded tactics, I would not care; but we should have the right to hack our devices and defeat these sorts of restrictions.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140074)

Big red letters on the front of the manual. "YOU BRICK IT WARRANTY IS VOID!"

solves the first problem.

Second problem? stop selling hardware crippled that needs to be unlocked with a secret "unlock code" to pump profits. Be honest and sell your $690.00 item for $690.00

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

joocemann (1273720) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140562)

It's like selling a badass car with a plastic block under the gas pedal as a governorl that you could very easily remove and then actually use the badassdedness of the car... I don't know a single person who, after knowing how easy it is to remove the plastic block, would not get MORE VALUE from their car....

Matter of fact, I know many people, lets call them 'enthusiasts', who would notice the ease of modification and deliberately buy the governed car knowing that it would be a badass car with the simple removal of the plastic block.

In the competitive world of 'low price' and 'best value', these companies are quite clearly asking for it.

That's what contracts are for. (1)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139584)

That's what contracts are for.
If the phone is subsidized by the phone company and you lose/trash your (theirs, really) phone, you are still on the hook for the 3 year contract, regardless of what you do. The lock-down is moot.

Re:That's what contracts are for. (2)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140002)

(0) For those who haven't heard, Verizon is punishing high-bandwidth users. The top 5% shall be limited to dialup speeds for two months. See here - http://slashdot.org/submission/1462912/Verizon-Imposes-Limit-on-top-5#comments [slashdot.org]

(1) My provider VirginMobile may have given me my phone for free (cost of $40 minus $40 sale price), nevertheless it is still MY phone and will be my phone even after I quit the company. (Just as I kept my Cingular phone after I quit them.)

(2) Contracts are not as binding as you may believe. If the carrier changes the term of the contract, such as raising the price or imposing a 5GB datacap, you have ~60 days to reject the new contract and be released from further payments.

(3) The phone argument does not apply to the PS3, which is neither leased nor subsidized by Sony. It is Your property just as surely as your house or car or TV is your property. There's no reason why we can't jailbreak consoles.

Re:That's what contracts are for. (2)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140460)

(3) The phone argument does not apply to the PS3, which is neither leased nor subsidized by Sony. It is Your property just as surely as your house or car or TV is your property. There's no reason why we can't jailbreak consoles.

Yes, and Sony is well within their rights to deny access to their PSN servers to anyone who jailbreaks a console. Hooray for personal freedom!

Re:That's what contracts are for. (2)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140428)

I'm on the side of being able to do what you want with the device, but to play devils advocate to your post means I have to suggest that no, contracts do not make lock-downs a moot point - its been well established that there are plenty of people here on Slashdot that don't care one iota for hte limits the contract places on your usage.

Take tethering for example - data usage patterns varies wildly depending on whether you are using the data on the device itself, or via a connected PC (it really does, I logged my own usage of both for a week and was surprised). The problem is, there are a lot of vocal posters who take the stance of "well, I paid for 'data', I should be able to use it any which way I damn well please" and a contract isn't going to stop them refusing to pay the tethering charge... Should the phone company just charge the higher rate for the more intensive usage patterns to everyone?

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139784)

Depends on how means locked down:

SIM unlocked devices can be purchased with some ease. It is tough with iPhones, since one probably would have to make a drive to Canada and physically get an unlocked one there. Android devices tend to be easier.

Unlocked as in fully rootable and ROM-able. Good luck. The only Android phone on the market in the past six months that has this ability is the Nexus S. Other phones, the ROM cookers have to go to great pains to make sure their stuff works with the signed kernel, work around the eFuse crap, and so on.

The perfect example of this is the Droid Pro. This would be the perfect unlocked phone because it groks CDMA and GSM. However, even unlocked, the versions sold in the US will not get on T-Mobile or AT&T, supposedly due to baseband booby-traps (nobody has been able to do this.) If the Droid Pro didn't have the eFuse crap, signed kernels, and other nasty things, it would be an ideal phone for a lot of people.

Unlocked has a lot of meanings. What would be ideal is a phone SIM unlocked and able to have custom ROMs flashed to it with a fastboot oem-unlock.

However, the only devices that will be able to do this will be Google's. It is somewhat ironic that the only true free (as in being able to do what you want with them) Android devices are sold from Google.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (0)

joocemann (1273720) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140626)

Depends on how means locked down:

Wtf are you, a lawyer? White is white. Black is black. Words have meaning and only a lawyer can manipulate them to mean what they don't actually mean while everyone else has similar interpretations of the language we speak.

Free speech; no CSIM on Sprint (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140010)

why should lock-down not be permitted?

If all devices in the relevant market are locked down, which is the case in the market for set-top video game players, and all makers of devices in the relevant market decline to allow someone to develop and market software for their devices, then any statutory or regulatory support for this lockdown would have free speech and antitrust implications. A video game is an audiovisual work, and audiovisual works are speech, so a government restriction on circumvention that is necessary to publish speech likely violates constitutional guarantees of free speech. Even if not, it could also run afoul of the essential facilities doctrine [wikipedia.org] .

[AT&T's] discount for using an unlocked unsubsidized phone is nonexistent

Darn right. I recently helped my aunt add her son to her family plan on AT&T, and the representative in the store acted surprised when I mentioned that T-Mobile offers a $20 per month discount on a voice and data plan (branded as Even More Plus) for bringing your own phone or buying a phone up front.

From what I've heard, Sprint not only loves [unlocked phones], they offer a discount [unlike AT&T].

Everything I've heard suggests that among major U.S. carriers, T-Mobile is the only one to offer a discount. Verizon and Sprint currently use CDMA2000, not GSM/UMTS, and as I understand it, they program the subscriber identity directly into the phone instead of using a CSIM card [wikipedia.org] . Where have you heard that Sprint likewise offers a discount? Or are you referring to Virgin Mobile USA, a division of Sprint specializing in prepaid service?

lock-down is permitted, duh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140494)

Lockdown is permitted, even if it shouldn't be because of some of the abilities lockdown enables (remotely disabling a device is close enough to vandalism for my taste!)

On the other hand lockdown isn't PROTECTED. There's no foundation for device lockdown to be protected in copyright law, or even the DMCA so long as the breaking of this lockdown isn't done specifically for the breaking of a digital media protection scheme.

Also, please don't talk about cell carriers use of sims and unlocked phones, you clearly don't understand what you're talking about.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140772)

Alright, Devil's Advocate - I say that nothing should be "locked down" because it's a deceptive practice. Both you and I have our geek sides, and we can look at a phone, computer, console, or other electronic device, and satisfy ourselves that we are, or we are not, getting value for our money. But, what about the REST of the world? That 92% or more who don't have a geeky bone in their bodies? They see the claims of (fill in the blank) but fail to see how restrictive all the REST of that contract really is. I want the phone companies to put those phones up for sale, with the real prices on them. Doesn't matter if the phone costs 40 bucks, 400 bucks, or 4000 bucks - put the real price tag on them. I don't much care if the phone company finances the phones - just send out an ITEMIZED bill each month, showing that x amount was applied to the outstanding purchase price, and the rest was applied to whatever services. When the phone is paid off, you see it, you know it, because your monthly bill drops by 25, 50, or 100 dollars - depending on your purchase price and financing agreement. As is, the largest part of the American population is being deceived, and they aren't smart enough to figure it out.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (2)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139478)

... why doing the exact same thing to the black sony box setting next to my tv isn't legal, I'll never understand.

Because the MAFIAA pays waaayyy better.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139554)

What is the point?
It's one thing to jailbreak your phone so you can unclock the carrier and another to allow arbitrary app deployment. In my case I unlock my at&T iphone to use tmobile (AT&T does not allow iphones in my zipcode if they use more than 1/2 their minutes here). But I find the jailbreaking a Giant pain in the ass since it means I can't easily update my phone to the latest OS. The process of doing it is so fragile and so poorly documented that one takes a risk every time of bricking it or ending up with a base band you can't change to the carrier you want. (and please don't argue that it's easy to do, I've done it many times. it's always a bit crazy and takes hours of time to make sure you have the right pieces for your phone model and iOS and baseband.)

I always wonder who these folks are that want to jailbreak for purposes other than unlocking. What is the point? oh sure there are a few convincing reasons for developers to do it. But ordinary people? who cares? For those folks that say it's about "freedom" then Isn't knowing you could leave the prison any time you want as good as taking the gate off it's hinges? it's much safer to leave the gates in place to avoid intruders.

In the case of verizon then, why unlock? what can you do with an unlocked verizon phone? maybe sell it to some other country that uses CDMA? SO unlocking is as pointless as jailbreaking.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (3, Informative)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139612)

"I always wonder who these folks are that want to jailbreak for purposes other than unlocking."

Emulators. Apple strictly prohibits any app from running or emulating, or executing in any way, code that hasn't been Apple approved. A lot of people like their retro gaming. Jailbreak a mobile and you can run emulators on it. A NES or SNES in your pocket. Or a gameboy - it's smaller than the original. Aside from that... pirate apps, various wireless network utilities Apple prohibits due to their potential hacking uses, and the big one: Tethering.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (2)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139756)

Tethering has been moot since AT&T went away from unlimited data plans. And moreover they are going to allow tethering shortly since Verizon does.

Most people can live without pirate-ware utilities. And as for NES and such, do you really need to run that on your phone? Just get a gameboy or something. Is it possible this is actually in demand by more than a few people? or is it simply the novelty of running linux on your netgear router or toaster that excites people, who then forget about it after achieving the challenge.

I'm not complaining. I just don't get it? surely this is a tiny number of poeple, all of them could live without it, and the cost in time,effort, and risk (to the device and their security) is not even cost effective?

What I'd like for my AT&T phone is something that unlocks it but does NOT jail break it. (I tried using a rebel sim and it nearly broke my sim slot before I tossed the POS). I want something that does not install any software besides causing the unlock and does not interferre with updating the phone. I want a relible phone. I just want it on T-mobile. I would think I'm in the majority of people who use jailbreaks.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139808)

What I'd like for my AT&T phone is something that unlocks it but does NOT jail break it. (I tried using a rebel sim and it nearly broke my sim slot before I tossed the POS). I want something that does not install any software besides causing the unlock and does not interferre with updating the phone. I want a relible phone. I just want it on T-mobile. I would think I'm in the majority of people who use jailbreaks.

It seems like this should be possible. Many companies will provide an unlock for the phone that is permenant (once you pay it off). This is done via Itunes and some magic code. Why can't someone crack that code right in iTunes? That way the phone is not altered and can be updated.

Carrying two devices (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140210)

And as for NES and such, do you really need to run that on your phone? Just get a gameboy or something.

For one thing, getting a Game Boy Advance SP would involve carrying two devices, and if I wanted to carry two devices, I'd buy a dumbphone and a PDA because dumbphone service is an order of magnitude cheaper. For another, not all NES games are ported to the Game Boy or GBA.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140268)

AT&T is limited now? What's the limit? All the carriers have limits and always have, they just don't publish them. The limits are set to only hit the heaviest 5% or less of users who are mostly just heavy bittorrent movie downloaders. If all you can see someone using tethering for is high bandwidth stuff like bittorent then I can see why having a limit would kill it's usefulness. Depending what you do tethering can be a very useful feature if you have work that needs to be done without requiring more than a few hundred megabytes a month. It can also be nice sometimes if you just want to see a site on a screen bigger than the palm of your hand.

As for Verizon allowing tethering... They charge just as much money to 'allow' you to tether as they charge for the dataplan itself. You have to buy this in addition to the dataplan and you are still under the same 5GB cap that the dataplan is on w/o the tethering. To tether with Verizon's blessing you are paying twice for the same bandwidth! That's BS, just root/jailbreak the phone and use your bandwidth however you want to. You already paid for it once!

Re:Remember, not illegal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140390)

If you buy the Verizon Tether option you also get more data too. You are paying more for the simple reason that tethers use more data as a rule. And they give you more for that reason.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Port1080 (515567) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140714)

"Tethering has been moot since AT&T went away from unlimited data plans. And moreover they are going to allow tethering shortly since Verizon does."

AT&T has allowed tethering for a while now, actually, but only USB tethering. The Verizon iPhone will allow you to create an ad-hoc hotspot and do wireless tethering, and supposedly AT&T will be adding this feature as well when iOS 3.2 comes out (this is something you've been able to do on jailbroken iPhones for quite a while now, though). The big advantage to jailbreaking in either case is cost - both Verizon and AT&T charge you about $20 a month to enable tethering (plus data charges). MyWi (the jailbreak app that allows tethering) costs $20 up front, but that's it - AT&T has no way of knowing that you're tethering (the app obfuscates it and makes it look like normal phone data traffic), so there is no monthly charge beyond your normal data plan rate. Now, yes, you're not going to use it as your main ISP or anything due to the data caps, but there have been plenty of times when I'm on the road or in a place that doesn't have free wifi, where it's been nice to be able to tether my laptop to my phone and do some basic web browsing, deal with e-mails, etc.

Lack of D-pad and homebrew game paucity (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140184)

Jailbreak a mobile and you can run emulators on it. A NES or SNES in your pocket.

For one thing, few smartphones have a D-pad and physical buttons designed for gaming. A multitouch surface doesn't cut it because without tactile feedback, it's hard to tell whether your thumb is properly aligned over the buttons. For another, there are very few good homebrew games for NES [pdroms.de] and fewer still for Super NES [pdroms.de] . It's easier for a programmer to write a native Android or iOS app than to write an NES game in assembly language, even though that doesn't stop some people [pineight.com] . Or are you talking about making infringing copies of commercial video game ROMs?

Re:Remember, not illegal! (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139682)

I always wonder who these folks are that want to jailbreak for purposes other than unlocking

How about to keep features that are arbitrarily taken away? I used to use my phone as a dialup modem, low bandwidth but enough to fetch some email, which is all I really want. My phone broke; my new phone is programmed to always say "CARRIER ERROR" when I try to use the modem feature. I am not paying less, and when I demanded an explanation, I was told that only people deploying telemetry devices or doing government work were allowed to use their phones in that manner, and that I should just sign up for mobile broadband.

There is no technical reason for this restriction; jailbreaking can remove it. Why would I not jailbreak? The phone still has a built-in modem, the network still supports it, and the carrier is still going to get paid (since I use minutes just like I would for a voice call).

Cry Me a river (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139884)

What unmitigated whining. Just get a different phone. Buy one on e-bay for $20. A lot cheaper than your time to jail break your iPhone.

Re:Cry Me a river (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140728)

"Whining" does not mean "caring more about something than I do". And yes, that absolutely IS what you meant.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Fusen (841730) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139928)

I love that sort of attitude, "I don't need it so you shouldn't need it either".
Here's just a few reasons to jailbreak;
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/3563/photomnk.png [imageshack.us]
The iPhone lacks so many features or seemingly obvious functions that without the tweaks that jailbreaking provides, I'd probably swap phones.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139990)

Ha, LOL. I suppose you don't know that infinispell is a keystroke logger and Trojan password stealer? oopsie, I hope you don't access your paypal account on your phone!

Re:Remember, not illegal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140178)

I love that sort of attitude, "I don't need it so you shouldn't need it either".

Here is what the parent actually wrote:

I always wonder who these folks are that want to jailbreak for purposes other than unlocking. What is the point?

Parent does not express the atitude you claim he did. Are you stupid?

Re:Remember, not illegal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140272)

Here's just a few reasons to jailbreak;
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/3563/photomnk.png [imageshack.us]

I have read that the ispell app is reported to phone home and thus may be a backdoor. On some forums people claim they removed the app but still saw it was running something in the background that was accessing the web. Claim is you have to re-install the OS from scratch to rid yourself of it. Never used it myself.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (4, Informative)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139936)

There are plenty of reasons to jailbreak. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of apps available through Cydia that Apple doesn't allow on their App Store for one reason or another. Many of those apps are simply not in line with the way Steve Jobs and his employees think your phone should be allowed to operate.

Case in point - an app called iBlacklist that lets you set up filters for incoming phone calls and test messages. If you block an incoming phone call you can choose to have it go straight to voicemail, get a busy signal, simply pick up & hang up, etc. Very handy if you ever get harassing phone calls from people you don't want to hear from (like sales & marketing people, etc)

Then there's RemindYou, which is an app that displays your upcoming calendar events on the screen every time you pick up your phone. Very handy for people who live by their Outlook or iCal schedules.

Nettalk adds Apple's network file sharing protocol to your iPhone, making it much easier to transfer files to/from the phone instead of having to rely on iTunes. It effectively turns your iPhone into a large thumb drive.

Those are just a couple examples of apps that many people want and find extremely useful, but Steve Jobs and Apple say you can't have. So by jailbreaking your phone you can tell Apple to bugger off and install these apps anyway.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (2)

astrokid (779104) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140062)

I always wonder who these folks are that want to jailbreak for purposes other than unlocking.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would jb for two major reasons.

  • 1. BiteSMS - Ability to send/receive SMS within another application. Not having iOS exit my current application in order to just read an incoming messages makes me wonder why this isn't a part of the core OS yet.
  • 2. 3G Unrestrictor - It is nice to be able to download or use various applications without having to be near a WiFi spot.

People who play games made by developers (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140088)

I always wonder who these folks are that want to jailbreak for purposes other than unlocking. What is the point? oh sure there are a few convincing reasons for developers to do it. But ordinary people?

Ordinary people who want to play games made by developers who are too small to meet the console makers' minimum criteria [warioworld.com] might choose to jailbreak. See, for example, the story of Bob's Game [wikipedia.org] . And in the case of iPhone and iPod touch, there are whole classes of applications that Apple will never accept into its App Store; to run those without jailbreaking, you have to buy a Mac and then pay $99 per year for a developer certificate.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140104)

Other people posted already an answer to why one would want to jailbreak. As to the hassle of jailbreaking - that is why I like Android. Since it is based on an OSS project you can always go around the carrier/handset manufacturer to get updates. I have a nice easy to use App installed on mine that lets me choose between a number of 3rd party roms. It alerts me when there are updates available and almost entirely automates the process. I just have to click install and then answer yes, I do want it to perform a backup first. You can never get that from an Apple product. It's either their updates plain and unmodified or a painful hack with fears of bricking.

I guess some of these newer Android phones have been giving people issues with the fuse bits and all. I wouldn't know much about that, my Motorola Droid (first version) was easy to root and is still easy. With overclocking I don't miss much from the newer phones. Actually, they are underclocked from the factory so pushing it up to a more up to date speed isn't that big of an overclock.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (3, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139704)

Because Sony has more lobbying money to bribe Congress?

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

joocemann (1273720) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140678)

by Congress, I think you mean judges.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (2)

alen (225700) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139792)

iphone jailbreakers didn't re-engineer the apple digital cert or codes. they just found a way to install their own software via apple's security holes

Re:Remember, not illegal! (2)

Amouth (879122) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140052)

i would say having a random number generator spit out the same (not so random) value each time in each unit for the seed for the keys.. qualifies as a "security hole"

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139902)

Simple,

The DMCA statute requires the Librarian of the Copyright Office to do a periodic review of requested exceptions to the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA. Someone (I think the EFF) submitted a request for a jail-breaking exceptions for mobile phones using rationale that would not necessarily apply to game consoles, and the request was granted.

The exception could expire in a few years, so don't blow it by using the jailbreak for money laundering, terrorism, child porn, or drug trafic.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139948)

Jailbreak your iphone all you want, completely legal! Ruled as such by the Library of Congress!

Not to dispute what you say, I'm sure it's true ... but, really, the Library of Congress?

How is it that they have any authority on this issue? I'm totally confused by this.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140134)

The Copyright Office is responsible for the list of fair use exemptions to the DMCA and the LoC oversees the Copyright Office. Of note, the ruling is only valid for 3 years so this will expire in July 2013 (not sure exactly what day) if no further actions are taken.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140448)

I think it was actually the "Copyright Office" but they apparently work with the LoC a lot... Wired link... [wired.com] .

Every three years, the Librarian of Congress and the Copyright Office entertain proposed exemptions to the DMCA, passed in 1998.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140596)

US Copyright Office determines exceptions to the DMCA, which is what you run afoul of by jailbreaking.

Re:Remember, not illegal! (1)

matt_gaia (228110) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140126)

Simple... If you jailbreak your iPhone, the main reason you would probably want to do so is to change carriers, which would be perfectly legal. If you want to jailbreak your PS3, chances are, you're in the 99.999% of owners that would want to jailbreak it for mods (e.g. the Call of Duty debacle formerly known as their multi-player) or piracy (obviously illegal). You can be as idealistic as you want to think that people would want to use a jailbreak for homebrew, but get real...It's going to be abused for piracy.

Yeah, Sony's acting like a bunch of douchebags for the way that they're going after jailbreakers, but they are trying to protect their IP. Had they not shot themselves in the foot (PR-wise) and perma-banned any psn account and/or console with CFW, they would have saved themselves a lot of trouble.

Can you hear me ....bzzz.... CARRIER LOST (1)

astern (1823792) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139472)

Did you hear it? It's as if a million voices just cried out... ...they can't hear you now.

Seriously, I hope VZ is ready for the massive crush of weight these iPhones bring in data use. Backhaul upgrade much?

Re:Can you hear me ....bzzz.... CARRIER LOST (2)

cob666 (656740) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139526)

Did you hear it? It's as if a million voices just cried out... ...they can't hear you now.

With very few exceptions, everybody I know that is getting a Verizon iPhone already has some type of smart phone. I'm sure there will be a few rough patches for the next couple of weeks but Verizon has a much more robust infrastructure than AT&T does.

Re:Can you hear me ....bzzz.... CARRIER LOST (4, Interesting)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140020)

We'll see, the iPhone doesn't tend to pull "mobile" sites like most other phones do, it pulls the entire real site and renders it down to a smaller screen. Blackberries, for example, tend to load preview versions of images by going through BES or BIS, and this is a lot more gentle on mobile bandwidth. I use my Blackberry 83xx (EDGE) all the time, and I have yet to break an average of about 1-2 megabytes per day. Now, admittedly, I don't use a lot of streaming media (would suck over EDGE anyway), but I use Google Maps, corporate and personal email, Gmail, Facebook, and a decent amount of web browsing. And I have yet to break 40 megabytes in a whole month. My phone does not have WiFi, so every bit it gets comes through the mobile network.

Email is done via IMAP and seems to pull entire emails down, not just the first few kilobytes with a "view more" option like the Blackberry's built in email solution.

The iPhone is, in terms of data usage, a pretty inefficient phone. That's not to say it's a bad phone, in fact it looks pretty cool, but its data usage is more computer-like and less phone-like than many other smartphones. There was also some mention about it turning the radio on and off aggressively, which gave it more frequencies on the tower than it really should have had (but saved battery life). I don't know if that problem has been fixed, or even if it was just some bad rumor, but if true that would have a negative effect on any network it operated on.

Having said all that, in at least one way I agree. Verizon is limiting the iPhone to its 3G network, which does not allow simultaneous voice and data (similar to AT&T's 2G EDGE network, but with faster data). If you make a call, your data connection will be interrupted for the duration. If you send or receive SMS/MMS, your data connection will also be interrupted (though for a very short duration).

Contrast this to AT&T where you can be talking on the phone and surfing the web at the same time, something the iPhone happens to be really good at (and if my Blackberry supported it and 3G speeds, I'd probably be gobbling up a lot more monthly bandwidth than I do today, even with all the BES/BIS compression that goes on).

That means the potential impact to Verizon's network is cut nearly in half, because the VeriPhone can only do one thing at a time, whereas the ATTiPhone can do both at the same time. A single phone will have a much lower impact to a given tower on Verizon, because it can't do as much at the same time.

I still think Verizon is going to see some significant hits once the AT&T iPhone defectors start hitting them in droves. Which is great, because I'm on AT&T. The Verizon network is welcome to 'em. :)

I'm still waiting for the reports from early VeriPhone adopters. Verizon caught a LOT of flack in the 8000-series days (a few years ago) when they announced that they were locking down the GPS radios in all 8000-series Blackberries unless you bought their TeleNav service, and even then you could ONLY use the GPS for their TeleNav service and nothing else (that was a very large part of the reason I went AT&T with my 8300, because a smartphone without a GPS is like a bicycle without pedals). I hope Apple has a lot more clout and won't allow Verizon to pull that on their iPhone customers, because that would be a real shame.

Sales figures (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139536)

> 500k iPhones were sold on the first day

And? About 1.4 billion mobile phones were sold in 2010. That's about 4.4 million each and every boring day.

So Verizon and Apple managed to grab 12% market share on their peak day of sales. Not so impressive.

Re:Sales figures (3, Informative)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139644)

Verizon stopped taking pre-orders [usatoday.com] in less than a day because they couldn't handle the volume. How can you claim this is a peak day of sales when it's just pre-orders? The phone isn't even available in retail stores yet, it won't be until Thursday. Just wait and see what the sales figures are after then, and in the days/weeks to follow.

Oh yeah, and the 1.4 billion number you mentioned is world-wide. Last I checked, Verizon isn't a global phone provider. If there had been 1.4 billion phones sold just in the USA then every man, woman, and child in the country would have 4.5 mobile phones. Try comparing the sales figures to just US sales and it's just a little bit more impressive.

Re:Sales figures (1)

mjpaci (33725) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139918)

That means that on a single day Verizon sold 13% -- a single phone on a single carrier in a single country. Pretty good if you ask me.

Re:Sales figures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139700)

Aren't you comparing US sales (500k/day) vs Worldwide sales (1.4billion/year) ???

Re:Sales figures (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139818)

Hey, look, another anonymous Apple basher shows up in an Apple article. It's cute how you use a worldwide sales figure.

I love how you claim it's a peak day of sales when this was just the first day of pre-orders for existing Verizon customers, and they ran out and had to stop taking orders by the end of the day. The phone becomes available to retail customers as well as those wanting to switch carriers later this week.

Over half a million sold blows away Verizon's previous one-day record of 100k for the DROID back in 2009.

Re:Sales figures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139984)

Sorry to say it (I'm not the same AC btw) but the iPhone is overrated. I really think > 500k people jumped the shark. But I guess that is what "follow-the-crowd" does to you.

Re:Sales figures (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140298)

Sorry to say it (I'm not the same AC btw) but the iPhone is overrated. I really think > 500k people jumped the shark. But I guess that is what "follow-the-crowd" does to you.

You're a snob, making judgements about people based on the products they buy. What's ironic is that the sort of affectation that relegates a huge group of people to "follow-the-crowd" just based on the purchase of a phone is itself just a form of group-think.

"When all was said and done I was just another, goddamn, trendy ass POSER." - Stevo, SLC Punk!

No more "Low" data plans on Verizon?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139624)

Apears that Verizon has pulled the 200MB data plan priced at $15/Month from the choice of data options.

Can anyone confirm this? Only the unlimited or 2GB options?

Read your contract (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35139806)

I don't know the wording Verizon uses in their contracts, could someone affected look that up?

Even if there's an expection that allows for people (in the US) to jailbreak their phones, it doesn't remove any contractual obligations to not use the data plan with other devices.

is there any value in JB'ing your iphone? (1)

alen (225700) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139840)

because i had mine jailbroken for a few months last year and got tired of it. don't care about pirated apps or the themes. don't want to pay $10 for sbs settings or tethering apps either. and i don't tether so i don't care about it

with the iphone 3g and before ios4 there was multi-tasking. but now is there any feature i'm missing because i'm not jailbroken?

Re:is there any value in JB'ing your iphone? (1)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139870)

You're missing memory leaks, program crashes, diminished battery life and a slew of mostly unremarkable apps.

Re:is there any value in JB'ing your iphone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140140)

So Apple's validation process catches any apps that ever crash, hang, or have memory leaks? Wow. I didn't realize they'd solved the Halting Problem. Did they publish something about this?

Re:is there any value in JB'ing your iphone? (1)

tixxit (1107127) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140154)

Switching carriers is one of the big, legitimate, value adds to jail breaking your phone. Tethering is also another good value add. I pay for xGB of data, so why should my carrier care how I use it up? Tethering was a Godsend during my last vacation (2.5 week road trip). My wife or I would upload photos, download music, and whatnot while the other drove. My phone (an Android) actually allowed tethering when I got it (and during the vacation). The feature was actually removed after a recent update from my carrier...

Re:is there any value in JB'ing your iphone? (3, Informative)

Conception (212279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140156)

There is value but if you don't use the items that have value, then for you, no.

I just use a few things in jailbreak... If these sound interesting, then there is value for you.

1) Replacement SMS app - Let's you do things like reply from the SMS notification instead of having to unlock your phone, open the messaging app, and then send on.
2) Tethering and Hot Spotting - Let me and others use my phone as a mobile access point.
3) Auto3g - Disables 3g when the phone is locked so it uses far less battery power. Doubles battery life for me.
4) Lockscreen replacement - Makes my lock screen have calendar information. It also does stuff like remind me if I haven't acknowledged an event and sets quiet hours for SMS and stuff like that.
5) Application Backups - If you have to restore your phone, all your saved games and information on the phone is gone.
6) SMS export - Let's me archive and delete my SMS messages.
7) Unlock - Useful when traveling abroad.
8) Notification Replacement - Gives me Growl (the program) like notifications.
9) SBSettings - Which is free, is just nice to be able to turn certain things off and on with a quick swipe. Also, fixes the status bar to have things like the date.

If there is no value in these things for you, then no, don't jailbreak your phone.

Re:is there any value in JB'ing your iphone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140258)

what? sbsettings is free and you can enable tethering via forum instructions if you dont want to pay $2

the ability to put more than 12 apps in a folder.
the ability to lower power consumption when creating a wireless AP.
unrestrict wifi only apps
browse and manipulate the filesystem
install apps apple denied/removed from their appstore
create your own voice commands to launch any app you choose
5 icons on the dock
close folders automatically after executing an app within
have your lock screen display weather, current emails, texts, missed calls, voicemails, and calendar events
display status icons in the upper right to remind you of unread texts, mail etc
vastly improve the severely lacking multitasking bar
this is just some of the things i do. others out there do much much more.

Re:is there any value in JB'ing your iphone? (1)

lieden (897813) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140368)

I use it primarily for tethering, which is important to me. Also to use Skype on 3G, but not often. I've added some of the themes and UI tweaks, app monitors etc, but only since I figured that if I was going to deal with jailbreaking the phone, I may as well get the most out of it. I could drop those in a second. However, you're correct, there are often more hassles than advantages to jailbreaking, especially with the current v of iOS. It used to be more useful, but now unless there's a dealbreaker for you (tethering and Wifi->3G in my case) than I honestly wouldn't recommend it.

Yes (1)

Powercntrl (458442) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140468)

Off the top of my head...

XBMC media center
ScummVM
DOSBox
MAME/Snes/Nes/Genesis Emulators
Lockinfo
3G Unrestrictor
Mobile terminal (root shell access)

But hey, if you don't mind that your device isn't actually "yours", then no, you don't need to jailbreak. I own an iPod Touch 4th gen and it'll be the last Apple product I ever buy if Apple finally beats the jailbreakers at some point in the future.

Re:is there any value in JB'ing your iphone? (1)

nblender (741424) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140830)

There are a few cydia apps that I have installed and they are mostly unremarkable... The one I use _all_ the time was Wififofum... Such a thing used to be on the itunes app store but it disappeared and nothing took it's place. Wififofum is a wifi scanner and connection manager that lets you connect to access points that are quieter than what Apple's wifi manager will report... Sometimes it's the quiet ones that are open access points... Since I choose not to pay for a data plan, I rely on occasionally getting Wifi access... I can quite often get connected using Wififofum where I wouldn't be able to if I just used Apple's connection manager.

There's another one called Wifipass which is good if you want to tell a friend the Wifi password of some restaurant that you happened to get last time you were there from a friendly waitress... It prints out all of your wifi passwords.

I also use the synergy client but I can do without that.

I bought my girlfriend's iPhone unlocked (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35139980)

Imported, from the UK to Germany. When the purchase of an iPhone here would mean tying our souls to T-Mobile for two years, I adamantly refused. I really can't understand how folks put up with that bullshit: "OK, you can buy the phone cheap, but you will be locked into a contract for years, which will offset the discount on your phone." And if I buy something, I don't want to have to jailbreak it. I paid for it, it's my phone! What's up next? Buy a GM car, but only be able to tank it at GM gas (petrol) stations?

Re:I bought my girlfriend's iPhone unlocked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35140478)

Imported, from the UK to Germany. When the purchase of an iPhone here would mean tying our souls to T-Mobile for two years, I adamantly refused. I really can't understand how folks put up with that bullshit: "OK, you can buy the phone cheap, but you will be locked into a contract for years, which will offset the discount on your phone." And if I buy something, I don't want to have to jailbreak it. I paid for it, it's my phone! What's up next? Buy a GM car, but only be able to tank it at GM gas (petrol) stations?

Were you able to get a cheaper plan to use that phone with? We put up with it because basically I can buy an unsubsidized phone and pay a certain amount for the plan to use it or buy the subsidized phone and pay the same amount on the plan to use it. The only thing the phone company is getting is a guarantee that I'm not leaving them for another provider within two years...at least not without paying them some money to get out of the contract. Generally, I don't go about switching mobile providers every month, so that arrangement doesn't bother me.

And no, pay as you go plans don't come out cheaper when you include data services, which is the entire point of a smartphone.

Re:I bought my girlfriend's iPhone unlocked (1)

lieden (897813) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140480)

Obviously if you pay full price for the phone, that should be the case. But as much as I despise most phone carriers, it's a little unfair for criticizing them for wanting to recoup the money they spent subsidizing your phone. Which way you go is a choice, but do you honestly expect them to subsidize the phone without anything in return? Also, I've had a few times in the past where I was relocating/traveling internationally. I called AT&T and they unlocked the phone... granted haven't tried with my iPhone.

Caveat emptor; (I'd wait a while) (2)

Bearhouse (1034238) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140234)

FTA: "If you happen to own a Verizon iPhone and are willing to give it the jailbreak treatment using Greenpois0n RC5_4, we wish you best of luck for that and hope you could share your end result with us. Thanks in advance."

Methinks worth waiting for some keen bleeding edge early adopters to iron out the wrinkles before rushing off to brick your expensive new toy, fellow /.ers

Re:Caveat emptor; (I'd wait a while) (1)

anethema (99553) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140386)

You cannot brick an iPhone through jailbreaking. It simply is not possible. Nothing permanent is written to the phone. A restore will fix essentially anything.

The only way to brick an iPhone now a days is to either smash it, or yank the cord during a baseband update flash. Anything else is (easily) recovered from by a restore from DFU or recovery mode.

Re:Caveat emptor; (I'd wait a while) (1)

anethema (99553) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140410)

Er sorry to reply to my own post, but forgot to say I agree with you though on waiting until more reports come out though. While you cannot BRICK the iPhone, a buggy jailbreak can be annoying and/or frustrating to work with.

Re:Caveat emptor; (I'd wait a while) (1)

Cronock (1709244) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140508)

It shouldn't be possible, but that doesn't mean that it truly isn't possible. I'd hate to be the poor guy that finds out that it is. As always, only the brave/foolish should be trying it and everyone else should wait. Being safe is underrated, but I've bricked plenty of devices to say "I'm going to have you do it first".

The risk on verizon... (2)

Skuld-Chan (302449) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140466)

Is that your ESN will get banned and your phone is pretty much a pda unless your can get another cdma provider (sprint/us cellular/cricket etc) to activate the phone...

Re:The risk on verizon... (1)

tomz16 (992375) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140818)

Is that your ESN will get banned and your phone is pretty much a pda unless your can get another cdma provider (sprint/us cellular/cricket etc) to activate the phone...

Based on what?

This isn't the first phone that can be "jailbroken" or "hacked". People have been loading custom firmware onto windows mobile and android devices for a while now. AFAIK, verizon has never blacklisted any ESN for software modifications to the phone. In fact, as far as I know, the only phones with banned ESNs are those reported as stolen, unpaid, or damaged w/ insurance payout.

Furthermore, the exact same thing exists in GSM. A carrier can definitely blacklist an IMEI. (AFAIK no carrier in the US actually does this).

iPad firmware? (2)

angrytuna (599871) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140516)

So, I'm a little unclear on this. The last I heard, the latest jailbreak code relied on using some iPad firmware that was a much higher version number than current built iterations of the iPhone codebase. The downsides of installing this, as spelled on on the dev team blog [iphone-dev.org] , revolved around revealing to Apple unequivocally that your phone was jailbroken (and violating TOS for warranty), as well as being unable to come back down from this jailbroken state due to newer version numbers still being lower than this iPad version. Is this no longer the case with the Greenpois0n update?

Your Apple ID has been disabled. (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 3 years ago | (#35140810)

On a related topic, who has gotten a "Your Apple ID has been disabled." error on their iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad or iTunes application lately? Were you buying a song, an app, installing a free update to an app? What seemed to be the trigger for you?

Note: this is not the "This Apple ID has been disabled for security reasons." error you get for mistyping your password too many times. This error cannot be fixed by updating your password. It also appears unrelated to jailbreaking: my iPod Touch 4th gen is unmodified.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...