Beta
×

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!

Jail-Breaking iPhones at the Apple Store

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago

Hardware Hacking 162

An anonymous reader writes "According to an article in Xconomy, iPhone hacker and author Jonathan Zdziarski was invited to speak at an Apple Store in Cambridge, MA last week where he talked about the history of iPhone hacking, jail-breaking, and limitations of the official SDK. From the article, "Zdziarski was one of the first software engineers to figure out how to hack the iPhone, and he's the author of a forthcoming O'Reilly Media book called iPhone Open Application Development, which gives readers explicit instructions on jail-breaking iPhones. So for Apple to give Zdziarski the podium at an Apple retail location is a little like Steve Ballmer inviting Linus Torvalds to speak at a Windows product launch." Zdziarski reports in his own blog how the open source community was on the iPhone developer scene as early as 2007, long before enterprises got there, and estimates that nearly 40% of all iPhones have been jail-broken to run the third-party community software installer. Finally, this story from Top Tech News suggests that open source software might actually create competition for Apple's "official" developers, because applications using the open source iPhone compiler are not subject to the same limitations as official Apple SDK programs are."

cancel ×

162 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (5, Insightful)

inTheLoo (1255256) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905254)

Both Apple and ATT have non free practices at the core of their business. It is not surprising that they would each pretend to be more customer friendly than they really are. The iPhone suffers restrictions from both companies that are integral to each company's business model.

It would be better to have free software [gnu.org] devices that could use free spectrum [reed.com] . This would remove the ability of others to restrict your communications and such things are vital if we are to undo the damage broadcast media has done to democracy.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (4, Insightful)

Telvin_3d (855514) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905580)

And people have tried to develop such devices. And no one has bought them. No one has bought them because the UI is bad, the industrial design is worse and when people have problems they are told to fix them themselves or to search the forums.

Apple is extremely customer friendly. They make it easy and pleasant to use their devices for the purposes advertised. However, they are not particularly Open Source friendly. Not as bad as some, not as good as others. Open source and customer friendly occasionally overlap, but most open source is not particularly customer friendly and many of the basic devices that make our lives easier are not open source.

What devices are you talking about? (1, Troll)

inTheLoo (1255256) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905938)

The EEE PC proves that your logic is backward. It's not that "Open Source" is unfriendly it's that most hardware vendors are. EEE PC uses free software and has one of the easiest interfaces to use of any portable device. It also boast accelerated graphics which can be used by other free software to do what Apple's iPhone does. There are plenty of YouTube movies of the EEE running Compiz Fusion's nifty cube interface. Free software will make it's way to other devices because the devices make money for the vendor. At that point, it will be the phone company that objects, yet another layer of unfriendly people.

The beauty and real joy of free software is that you can chose the interface you like rather than having it forced on you, so you will get the interface you want along with privacy and security. GPE and Opie are both better interface than Windows Mobil and better interfaces are on the way that will rival iPhone in every way. People love graffiti for text input and it's still available with X stroke. Really, it kicks handwriting recognition's. Complete platforms have been available through OpenZaurus and Familiar for years, despite the lack of cooperation and outright sabotage by most vendors. Apple's multitouch interface has much to be admired but these features should be trivial to reproduce and will be if Apple does not block the user community with bogus software patents. The move to free software by other vendors began with Zaurus and is now picking up speed. These devices will kick ass.

I'm sorry that you have had bad experiences in user forums. If you want to see a really ugly exchange, try this forum on for size [creative.com] . Nothing is less friendly than non free software because it's owners all ultimately think they way Creative does. Apple seems to be moving away from that with this lecture but the iPhone is still customer hostile because it won't let you do what you want.

Hardware iPhone unlocker? (1)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906072)

"It's not that "Open Source" is unfriendly it's that most hardware vendors are."

I have no experience with it, but here is a hardware company that says they make a SIM that unlocks the iPhone: 2008 new turbosim unlock iphone [magicsim.com] . (The web site is written in Chinglish.)

Re:Hardware iPhone unlocker? (4, Interesting)

willyhill (965620) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906318)

Note that "inTheLoo" is one of twitter's sockpuppets, along with "Mactrope", who just happened to also post (or rather, shill) in this thread.

What? (1)

StarKruzr (74642) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906652)

Who do you suppose he was shilling for? The Open Source movement, who I'm sure pay him thousands of dollars to do it?

Re:What? (3, Interesting)

willyhill (965620) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906930)

Actually, I'm not sure. I would say himself? Some people say that twitter is a paid Microsoft troll, whose activities are designed to bring ridicule and dismissal to the free software and Slashdot in general.

He's already ground two multi-thousand post accounts into negative karma hell because of things like these [slashdot.org] . Now he has five accounts he uses to reply to his own posts and pretend he's multiple people arguing about the same thing.

In my book, that kind of behavior is dishonest and unacceptable.

Re:Hardware iPhone unlocker? (2, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906762)

Sock puppet or not,you really should read the creative thread.They have a history of purposely boning their customers with no drivers/crippled drivers,especially when a new MSFT OS comes out.It is extra pathetic as creative cards haven't really changed much on the consumer side for years.As someone who has a bunch of these cards(was never stupid enough to buy creative but get a lot of them in gamers rigs traded in when they choose me to build them a new machine)I have had to go out of my way just to find non bricked drivers for their cards.


I just hope that since creative is shooting themselves in the foot by going with S/W sound that some company will come along with an affordable replacement.IMHO onboard sound will never beat a dedicated card anymore than an all in one sound effect chip will beat dedicated rack effects.But that is my 02c,YMMV.But you really should read it--How many companies can you name that would threaten legal action for providing a WORKING Vista driver for their product for free?

Re:Hardware iPhone unlocker? (3, Interesting)

willyhill (965620) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906900)

Creative's behavior is reprehensible, but the topic is irrelevant. twitter now has a grand total of five Slashdot accounts (that I know of). How would you like to be involved in a thread where you think you're talking to different people that are actually the same person? What possible purpose would having all these accounts possible have other than gaming the moderation system?

Re:Hardware iPhone unlocker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906916)

For the record you should mention the fifth account: Erris... who has been busy on other threads today.

Re:Hardware iPhone unlocker? (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 6 years ago | (#22907024)

I agree the guy is more than a few cards short of a full deck,in fact he has no deck,he has a 3,LOL.But seriously,can't slashdot simply toss his accounts and block his IP(that is if it is static)? I thought that was what mods were for?IMHO they should AT LEAST get rid of his mactrope account which was obviously set up to try to fool folks into thinking they were talking to macthrope.Sorry if I didn't spell it right,but I'm sure you know what I mean.How is this guy any different that some V1@6RA splogger?


But while I do think this asshat needs a good banning,I never realized that creative was an atomic bomb of asshatery until I read that thread.I just thought they were pulling a Lexmark/ATI/Nvidia and releasing crappy crippled drivers for last years models on new OSes.I has no idea they were threatening legal action against those that released working drivers for free.It would be like Nvidia suing Guru3D for releasing new forceware for the 5xxx series.Just amazes me the level of FU towards those buying creative cards from the management.But this is just my 02c,YMMV.


And as a matter of disclosure this is my only slashdot account and those who look at my past posts will see that I try to speak my mind without flaming,which is why I use MSFT instead of M$(which was cute in the DOS days,but really,just let it go twitter.It just ain't funny anymore.IMHO it is like using 80's valley speak.Funny then,lame now).

Re:Hardware iPhone unlocker? (1, Funny)

Macthorpe (960048) | more than 6 years ago | (#22907198)

Sorry if I didn't spell it right
I have most of the cards in my deck still so I don't mind ;)

Re:What devices are you talking about? (1)

mini me (132455) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906646)

The EEE PC proves that your logic is backward.

But has anyone, relatively speaking, bought them? I know several people who have iPhones, and they aren't even for sale in this country! I don't know anyone who has an EEE PC.

And I live in a country where they sell the iPhone (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906816)

And still have yet to meet anyone with one. A couple of folks I know have Eee PCs though. Go figure.

So very, very wrong. (1)

littleghoti (637230) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906822)

[quote]The beauty and real joy of free software is that you can chose the interface you like rather than having it forced on you, so you will get the interface you want along with privacy and security.[/quote]

The interface I want is the mac OS. It is (IMHO), the best. I am willing to pay money for it. It saves me time and it makes me happy.

If gnu/linux had anything anywhere near as satisfying for me to use I might use it. But it doesn't.

At least this is true for me. Others have different priorities.

Sometimes choice means paying (free as beer) or giving up perusing the source code (free as in speech) for the better option. I'm willing to pay for the best stuff, either with speech or beer.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (1, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906130)

Apple is extremely customer friendly.
This is a very subjective thing to measure. For one person, "customer friendly" might mean "makes a product that the customer thinks makes him cool" and for another it might mean "helps the customer adapt a product to his own purposes, rather than expect the customer to adapt to the purposes of the manufacturer".

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906740)

This is a very subjective thing to measure. For one person, "customer friendly" might mean "makes a product that the customer thinks makes him cool" and for another it might mean "helps the customer adapt a product to his own purposes, rather than expect the customer to adapt to the purposes of the manufacturer"
Worst attempt at objectivity ever!

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (3, Interesting)

s20451 (410424) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905596)

I read the website to which you linked, and I was following along and kind of agreeing until the author says:

The problem with his argument is that his understanding of information theory and communications is pre-Shannon - when we begin measuring the utility of the spectrum in terms of its information capacity and options to connect, rather than the number of frequency channels, the scarcity argument does not apply.

This statement is bizarre to me because, according to Shannon, information capacity is directly proportional to bandwidth. So it seems like the scarcity in bandwidth also exists in information capacity. Care to comment?

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906578)

The problem with his argument is that his understanding of information theory and communications is pre-Shannen
This statement is bizarre to me because, according to Shannon, information capacity is directly proportional to bandwidth.
No, no, no. You got it all wrong. He means pre-Shannen Doherty. He is saying that the argument only worked before 90210 and is not Charmed at all, kind of like a Little House on the Prairie instead of Our House in the modern city.

In fact, in a post-Shannen Doherty model, information capacity is directly proportional to boobwidth.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906712)

Seems simple enough to me. The author is pretty weak on technical understanding, instead choosing to use fuzzy social arguments.

Spectrum is like land. Its limited, and in demand. It can be public or private. If its to be useful at all, everybody has to agree on how it is to be used, otherwise the guy with the biggest gun (transmitter) wins.

Like land, the solution is to both sell some of it (with specified requirements for how it is to be used) and to keep some of it for public use (with specified requirements for how it is to be used). No matter which option you choose for a particular piece of spectrum, somebody has to build the infrastructure to make it useful.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905610)

Is broadcast media making your city council miserably dysfunctional too?

The problems you have with democracy are probably more related to getting what you asked for than they are artful manipulation.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (4, Interesting)

SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905658)

Pretend to be more customer friendly than they really are? From some of the anti-Apple stuff I've read on here, it seems that Apple is, in fact, more customer friendly than they appear to be. After all, if this was Microsoft or many other companies, I'm sure DMCA letters would have been sent out by now. I think it just goes to show that Apple are generally only as restricting as they need to be.

Not all of us mind paying for software, you know. That's one thing I have never understood about the OSS movement -- that some people think that everything should be free and that anyone who tries to make a profit from software is somehow "bad". The two worlds can co-exist together.

It's easy to understand. (-1, Troll)

Mactrope (1256892) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906022)

Software freedom does not keep people from profiting. IBM makes billions each year from free software and there are thousands of other companies making other gobs of money with embedded systems and software services. Google is a free software maker and user.

The moral objection comes from stripping people of their software freedom. People who do this pretend that it's the only way for them to make money but it's clearly about means of extortion now. Non free software is bad for you, even if it does one or two things you like. It's owners think they have a right to tell you what you can and can not do. If you give them that they will simply take more from you.

Re:It's easy to understand. (4, Insightful)

SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906290)

Software freedom does not keep people from profiting.

I agree, and it comes down to different business models. There is room for different business models, and in Apple's case, they have choose one business model over another. Perhaps they could make it work by being more like IBM, or perhaps for the kind of products that Apple wants to sell, their business model works better for them. And why shouldn't they have that choice?

The moral objection comes from stripping people of their software freedom.

But that assumes that the product would otherwise have been made using another business model. It also assumes that putting one's own interests above others is immoral. Uncompassionate or selfish, perhaps.

People who do this pretend that it's the only way for them to make money but it's clearly about means of extortion now.

Really? everyone who charges for software pretends that it's the only way? Perhaps for some, it actually is, and for some, it's simply a choice. And I'm sure there are some who pretend that, too. I'd hardly call it extortion in most cases.

Non free software is bad for you, even if it does one or two things you like. It's owners think they have a right to tell you what you can and can not do. If you give them that they will simply take more from you.

How is it bad for me? If Apple didn't follow their business model, they may have simply chosen not to do it at all. Then I wouldn't even have the choice to buy it. Your argument hinges on a false premise and makes assumptions about what I value.

Re:It's easy to understand. (1)

willyhill (965620) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906376)

Be aware that "Mactrope" and "inTheLoo" (the person who posted the original message) are the same person, both sockpuppets of well-known Slashdot troll twitter.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906058)

apple primary sell hardware, not software. as long as a jailbreak leads to a hardware sale, they are happy.

and a jailbreak voids warranty iirc, so you cant go to them if a future update bricks your jailbroken phone.

now, if someone found a way to copy the iphone software onto a similar hardware platform (like say the fic neo or freerunner) then i think the DMCA would be rattled.

hell, just look how they hunt for insider identities, when just about every other corp just hands out the kind of info those insiders are spreading. apple get a lot of its press from playing coy or being secretive. at times its like watching a damn striptease.

even now there are unanswered questions around the SDK and what kinds of apps apple will allow into their appstore.

what one have to keep in mind about apple is that it has more in common with HP or dell then with microsoft. that they choose to use in-house software rather then third party do not change that. their real products are hardware based.

There are no unanswered questions.. (1)

StarKruzr (74642) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906476)

The lack of freedom in the Apple SDK is quite clear. "No background applications" kills off entire categories of useful software.

I'm just waiting for Dan Eran to come in and explain to all of us how being forcibly restricted in software on hardware we paid for is really beneficial to us, we just don't know it.

If Apple officially allowed the existence of jailbreak, with the caveat that you would lose all software support outside of "restore the iPhone to its original software load," none of this would be an issue.

Re:There are no unanswered questions.. (1)

Durandal64 (658649) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906720)

If Apple officially allowed the existence of jailbreak, with the caveat that you would lose all software support outside of "restore the iPhone to its original software load," none of this would be an issue.
That's pretty much the existing policy [engadget.com] . Apple won't go out of their way to hinder jailbreaking efforts, but they won't support them or test iPhone updates against jailbroken phones either.

Re:There are no unanswered questions.. (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906954)

in other words, its a cat and mouse game, just like with the appletv (basically a locked down mac mini ones one pop the cover).

all this makes me suspect that if apple can get away with it, they will over time phase out the mac line of computers fully, and instead create a kind of console that they can better control.

thing is that the appletv and the iphone do not have the legacy expectancy of the mac line. so if they can get people over on devices like the iphone and appletv like devices, most likely with all software and service distribution going via itunes/itms (either via clients built into the products directly or itunes running on top of windows) they can pull of the transformation that microsoft is attempting with xbox360, live and zune.

hell, now that i think about it, .mac is the apple equivalent of live, appletv is xbox360 and we all know ipod and zune are head to head. microsoft is even going up against the iphone with its next windows mobile versions. from what i recall, the news is that the next wm version will have stronger ties to live.

as the chinese say, may we live in interesting times...

Re:There are no unanswered questions.. (2, Informative)

DECS (891519) | more than 6 years ago | (#22907048)

Since you asked for it:

Phone 2.0 SDK: The No Multitasking Myth [roughlydrafted.com]

The short version: remember the headlines gasping that the iPhone could have spy software installed that took pictures with its camera and mailed them to the Terrorists? That can't happen with SDK software. It can (hypothetically) happen with jailbroken phones. That's why Apple has engineered safeguards into its SDK. Because it's trying to be responsible, unlike the current state of Windows, Java, Flash and other filthy platforms.

The fact that you'd rather spew forth ignorance than recognize that obvious fact demonstrates that you're either a moron or highly disingenuous. You don't have to support Apple's outlook, but representing it as a pointless limitation that hurts users is simply irresponsible.

its free as in, "Libre" (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906228)

Not all of us mind paying for software, you know. That's one thing I have never understood about the OSS movement -- that some people think that everything should be free and that anyone who tries to make a profit from software is somehow "bad". The two worlds can co-exist together.

When OSS people use the word "free", they are referring to freedom, not price.

Re:its free as in, "Libre" (1)

SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906572)

I know. I should have been clearer. But the same thing still applies. I don't mind buying software and not having the source code or having certain licensing restrictions applied to it. Licensing restrictions are something I weight up among many other things. If I find the restrictions acceptable for my use, I have no problem agreeing to follow them. Perhaps it's because I'm a bit of a realist, and although I support the idea of OSS, I also don't have a problem with reasonable use of current IP laws. Of course, what is reasonable and what is not is a highly subjective area.

Re:its free as in, "Libre" (1)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 6 years ago | (#22907074)

When OSS people use the word "free", they are referring to freedom, not price.
Actually, I doubt this is true (most of the time). There are some who are "true to the movement" who have freedom as a top priority, but I'll wager that most people who use OSS do so because it's free (beer) and/or they just like the software Just my observation; could be wrong.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (1)

McDutchie (151611) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906490)

That's one thing I have never understood about the OSS movement -- that some people think that everything should be free and that anyone who tries to make a profit from software is somehow "bad".

No one in the Free Software and Open Source movements actually thinks that. Seems like you've fallen into the old Free vs. Free [wikipedia.org] trap. Freedom does not mean free of charge. What F/OSS proponents think is bad is restricting people from modifying the software they use as they see fit and from helping others with their modifications.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (1)

SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906592)

Yeah, sorry, see my reply to the previous poster.

Re:Good Cop, Bad Cop? Both Bad. (1)

pohl (872) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906768)

Both Apple and ATT have non free practices at the core of their business. It is not surprising that they would each pretend to be more customer friendly...

I should hope that they have non-free practices, given that a business is a money-making endeavor, and a customer is someone who pays for goods and services.

SDK king (1)

ThePromenader (878501) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905260)

...why not invite the person most knowledgable on the subject?

Re:SDK king (1)

Divebus (860563) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905542)

Is there a new Apple Store Manager job opening now? I'm sure sentiments are running hot and cold at Apple... weighing this potential support minefield against number of iPhones sold.

Trap... (1, Funny)

Manip (656104) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905298)

I wonder if this is like that police sting in which they told criminals they had won a boat / car and got them to basically walk into jail...

I for one won't be surprised if Apple loses an expensive piece of equipment while he is there and it mysteriously turns up in his jacket pocket. :P

DMCA circumvention? No. Re:Trap... (1, Redundant)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905336)

If the book he's publishing is not a DMCA circumvention, his talk was not. Still, it would not be surprising for Apple to want this guy to get lots of attention before they smear and sue him.

Re:DMCA circumvention? No. Re:Trap... (3, Insightful)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906098)

Well, if he voluntarily "tells on himself" at the open request of apple, it would be really difficult for him to claim ignorance or deny much of the charges.

I give kudos to him but I would still be cautious in what and how something was said. Simply switching an attitude of It's mine, I bought it to a everyone should have the right to not be limited by corporations can go a long way in persuading a judge or jury to take a specific stand. I remember having a car malfunction and losing control and running off the road once. I told the cop that "I noticed problems and pulled over to park while it became increasingly hard to control the vehicle". He tore up a "failure to control" ticket because I ran into a ditch that I rightly should have gotten and instead gave me a fix-it ticket where if I could show the car had been fixed in a certain amount of time, it wouldn't cost me anything. There was no mechanical error until after I left the road, I wasn't paying attention and came upon a corner too fast.

Still, this would only work a couple of times so maybe it is to collect evidence on other people?

Re:Trap... (4, Interesting)

s20451 (410424) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905638)

I wouldn't be surprised if, in the specific case of the iPhone, Apple is perfectly happy to let the hackers hack.

I was at a seminar given by reps from RIM, the Blackberry maker. The guy -- fairly senior -- said there are features that they would love to include on their Blackberrys (blackberries?), which the customers want, but the carriers won't allow them to provide those features because they want to offer their own services and charge customers high rates for them. So, by analogy to RIM, Apple probably needs to provide a veneer of protection to keep its contract with the carrier, but is quite happy when somebody hacks their phone, as it helps them to sell more phones.

Re:Trap... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905848)

I was at a seminar given by reps from RIM, the Blackberry maker. The guy -- fairly senior -- said there are features that they would love to include on their Blackberrys (blackberries?), which the customers want, but the carriers won't allow them to provide those features because they want to offer their own services and charge customers high rates for them.

While I don't doubt your honesty, RIM makes available a fully documented SDK and has done so for years. If the carriers don't want RIM to provide these features, nothing is stopping anyone else from doing so. There are lots of 3rd-party applications available for the blackberry platform.

Apple probably needs to provide a veneer of protection to keep its contract with the carrier, but is quite happy when somebody hacks their phone, as it helps them to sell more phones.

True, but Apple gets a monthly tribute from AT&T for every iphone that is active with AT&T. Which is bigger, Apple's margins on iphone sales or AT&T's tribute to Apple?

iPhone (4, Interesting)

koan (80826) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905302)

Not jailbroken, an overpriced pretty piece of junk (yes I own one) jail broken and with installer, an awesome tool and I love it.
I get the feeling Apple secretly likes the fact that it's been cracked and made useful, regardless of how ATT feels about it.

Re:iPhone (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905482)

So what are your favorite apps to run on your jailbroken iPhone?

Re:iPhone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905586)

If you read his post carefully, you'll note that he owns a not-jailbroken one.

Re:iPhone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905916)

he said: "jailbroken... a wonderful tool and I love it."
Converter,
HP-12C,
LocateMe (is faster in finding more or less where I am than Maps),
OpenSSH (essential),
BossTool (nice), ...

Re:iPhone (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906166)

Overpriced pretty piece of junk? You mean to tell me that you don't use any of the features that the original phone comes with? You don't like to use wonderfully easy-to-use browser that zooms into the text you want to read (I love this feature)? You don't care for the way that the phone so elegantly fades the music in and out when answering calls? Don't you use the handy on-screen keyboard, the easily swapping orientation from portrait to landscape with a simple tilt of the phone? All this equals to junk to you?

I for one haven't found any really useful tools on the installer. Sure there are some novelties like irc/terminal clients, running an ssh server, etc, but these aren't nearly as handy as the features that I mentioned above. Sure the apps on iPhone aren't perfect, but they're definitely much more refined than most, if not all, of the stuff you can find on installer. I thought you were trolling, but apparently many fellow slashdotters feel the same way. What gives?

Here is what gives (3, Interesting)

StarKruzr (74642) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906502)

Most Slashdot users are technical people. We find having an ssh client/server on the phone to be enormously useful. We like having access to the BSD underpinnings of the machine. We like being able to use AIM without going through a slow website. We like being able to stream music from our iPhones to computers at the houses that we're at with Firefly Media Server. We even like having MobileScrobbler around.

And no, Apple's apps are not more refined than all the stuff on Installer. MobileScrobbler, Sketches, and MobileChat are examples of how you're wrong, especially when you compare them to something like MobileMail.app which STILL cannot delete multiple emails at once or switch between accounts in any kind of convenient way.

The jailbreakers have, in fact, shown Apple up at every turn.

this is a hoax -- iphones are 100% secure (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905316)

This article is a hoax. iPhones are provably 100% secure.

Re:this is a hoax -- iphones are 100% secure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905728)

MOD PARENT UP +5 INSIGHTFUL

"shocking" Except for one thing (5, Insightful)

drhank1980 (1225872) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905368)

"So for Apple to give Zdziarski the podium at an Apple retail location is a little like Steve Ballmer inviting Linus Torvalds to speak at a Windows product launch."

I would say very little like this if at all, when you use a hacked iphone you still had to shell out the bucks(to apple) for the device. When you run Linux you can completely avoid giving any cash to Microsoft.

Re:"shocking" Except for one thing (1)

tonsofpcs (687961) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906314)

I would say it is more like Dell inviting Linus to speak at a Dell product launch.

Only One SDK App Available! (0, Troll)

BoldAC (735721) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905394)

Apple is really running behind in this battle. Currently, there is only one SDK-created, legit application for the iPhone/iTouch that has been released in the wild. [tech-recipes.com]

Will people give up the ability to run really nice iTunes unfriendly apps like the NES emulator? Or will developers see the potential and follow the Mac party lines so they can make money on their legit applications...

So far... only one legit app.

Re:Only One SDK App Available! (1, Informative)

Henriok (6762) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905584)

Seriously? This is not insightful, this is retarded. There isn't supposed to be any at all! There are currently only one way to legitemately distribute applicaitons for the iPhone, and that is if it comes bundled with it. The SDK will allow distribution through the second way, namely the App Store and it won't be online for many months. If anyone had asked me, I'd say that one legit third party app is exactly one too many at this stage. I'm really surprised that there are any at all since there isn't any legit way of distributing them, and no legit way to have it installed on an iPhone.

Re:Only One SDK App Available! (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906750)

Hey mods, lay off the crack and get some integrity. Parent is absolutely right: the number of legit applications at this point is no indication of anything. Ten minutes after the App Store goes online there will be hundreds or thousands of quality apps. I expect my iPod Touch will remain hacked, but the app store will be a great addition to the platform.

Re:Only One SDK App Available! (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905626)

Merely because an app is built with the iPhone SDK does not necessarily mean it is legitimate. If the number of apps out there that were made prior to the release of the SDK are any indication, we can expect many of them to be re-released using the SDK, and plenty of those will never receive sanction by Apple. If Sadun's app appears in the simulator, as some example sanctioned by Apple, I suppose it is 'legit,' by my guess is the vast majority of apps that will soon be available will never even be acknowledged by Apple.

Re:Only One SDK App Available! (3, Informative)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906178)

Who modded the troll up?

Apple's SDK is in beta, and no applications can be installed on the iPhone/iPod touch UNLESS that person has a $99 Apple certificate key to install that app for testing purposes. Until June, when Apple releases the 2.0 software upgrade, nothing can be installed for anyone.

To correct the parent, there are zero legitimate applications that have been released into the wild. The link you gave is for source code or something that can be run on an emulator. By June, there will be more than the hundreds that the jailbroken installer.app has

Re:Only One SDK App Available! (2)

BoldAC (735721) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906248)

The official chain of distribution will be SDK -> iTunes -> user.

This will likely be very similar to iTunes podcasting delivery service.

There is the first app to be released that will be able to use this pathway. I agree there are a ton of jailbroken apps... and that was the point of the post. Apple's way is way behind the current developers' methods.

Re:Only One SDK App Available! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906396)

Correct, but the to-do app shown is not the first. Many other apps are in the works or already done, like NES.app [zdziarski.com]

Riiiiiiight (5, Insightful)

Twid (67847) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905398)

open source software might actually create competition for Apple's "official" developers

Riiiiiiight, just like the homebrew scene creates competition for Sony, Nintendo, and the Xbox 360. If someone want to goof around with doing homebrew iPhone apps, great! But, there is no way that jailbroken apps will be any sort of successful business model for the iPhone. No business will pay for it or install it, and too few consumers will be brave enough to jailbreak. 40% of iPhones are jailbroken? Ridiculous.

If devs really want to do open source phone applications why aren't they using Android or OpenMoko? :)

Re:Riiiiiiight (5, Insightful)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905416)

If devs really want to do open source phone applications why aren't they using Android or OpenMoko? :)

Get back to me when there's actually a userbase for either.

Re:Riiiiiiight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905680)

Twid has a point. Homebrew is big on the PSP and slightly less so on the DS. How big is the commercial homebrew scene on either?

Re:Riiiiiiight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906138)

"Homebrew" is a very fancy way to describe piracy (via emulators & copyright-infringing ROMs, in case you didn't know.) Much nicer than "backups."

Oh those clever gamers...

Understanding Competition. (2)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905536)

I don't have to make money from a program for that program to compete with another. If I give my program away with freedom [gnu.org] it will be a better competitor than one without freedom. Pull your business model out of the 80s and you will make more money.

Re:Understanding Competition. (1, Funny)

WhatAmIDoingHere (742870) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905726)

Twitter, why do you even bother to come back and post? Seriously. I'd rather read GNAA posts than yours.

Re:Understanding Competition. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906230)

You already posted [slashdot.org] on this article with three of your sockpuppets, including shilling [slashdot.org] your own posts on the same thread.

Re:Riiiiiiight (2, Interesting)

esquizoide (834082) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905884)

At least in Chile, ALL the iPhones are jailbroken to work on our cellphone networks.

OpenMoko (1)

StarKruzr (74642) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906538)

is what you get for synonyms when you look up "miserable failure" in the dictionary. What's it been, two years now, and there has been hardly any progress in the project? They're still working on the damn keyboard, ffs -- not that a virtual keyboard is of any use with a resistive touchscreen.

I'm waiting for the last gasps of that project to finally expire. It is going exactly nowhere at about Mach 5.

I was really excited when I heard about Android, and then I found out that everything runs in its own separate little Java sandbox. No thanks.

"But, there is no way that jailbroken apps will be any sort of successful business model for the iPhone."

Actually, people are already selling jailbroken apps.

Is the Office license GPL-Compatible? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905456)

I'd like to port an application I've been working on to the iPod Touch and iPhone. But my application is GPL; even if I didn't intend it to be, some of its dependencies are, so I have no choice.

If my code runs under the official SDK, given its rather restrictive license, will installing it be GPL-compatible?

The GPL has some kind of exception for linking to libraries that come with the system.

How do GPLv2 and GPLv3 compare in this respect?

Oopsy - s/Office license/Official license/ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905532)

I should not drink and post.

Re:Is the Office license GPL-Compatible? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905562)

Despite how much GPL advocates like to talk about FREEdom, proprietary libraries are more FREE in this case.

GPL application linking and using non-GPL libraries: ok.

Non-GPL application using LGPL libraries: ok

Non-GPL application using GPL libraries: not ok.

Welcome to Bizarro world! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905650)

What is free about a Non-GPL (non-free) piece of software?

I suggest you read about free software on http://www.gnu.org/ [gnu.org] for a couple of hours to assimilate the concept.

Re:Welcome to Bizarro world! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905820)

Have you ever read the BSD license? That's free software. The GPL and all infected software is toxic and is to be avoided at all costs.

Fuck all of you Torvalds Kool-Aid drinkers who will now mod me down because you don't understand that moderation is not meant to be a mechanism for silencing dissenters.

Re:Welcome to Bizarro world! (1)

msuarezalvarez (667058) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906156)

Well, your post is surely not one of the very well thought out, very well reasoned out, argumentations that one from time to time finds around here. It containesfour sentences: one retorical question, a statement of opinion, an unsubstatiated claim and a nice flamebait line combined with the standard practice of condemning moderators while insulting them. I would say that it deserves any downmoderation it gets quite well by itself...

Re:Welcome to Bizarro world! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906558)

Well gosh, I guess you're way smarter than me. Thank you mister internet person for showing me the error of my ways.

Re:Welcome to Bizarro world! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906702)

wow did someone forget their Prozac today?

Re:Is the Office license GPL-Compatible? (1)

david_thornley (598059) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905762)

Linking to non-free system facilities is acceptable. You can distribute GPLed software that you compiled using Visual Studio and linked in the MS libraries. At a quick glance through the licensing I agreed to, I didn't see anything that would stop GPLv2.

GPLv3, however, requires releasing installation instructions, which is going to be a problem. If I were to write a program using GPLv3 software, I couldn't distribute it on the iPhone unless I could give out complete installation instructions, including a valid certificate. I don't think I'm allowed to do that, so there will be no GPLv3 software on the iPhone legitimately.

Of course, if you include instructions on how to jailbreak the iPhone and install it yourself, you should be good to go.

Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking OK (4, Interesting)

3-State Bit (225583) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905462)

This is not a mistake on Apple's part. Their contract with AT&T probably prevents them from releasing an unlocked phone within the time period of the contract, and if Apple were to release unlocking instructions themselves it would legally be almost the same as releasing an unlocked phone: ie contract violation. Instead, they have been careful to remain neutral about it, in order to respect their contract with AT&T. At the same time, they are very happy that people all over the world use (unlocked) iPhones, and Apple executives have probably spent a lot of time thinking about how they could have played the game differently with AT&T to still get the contract with them (which you'll remember took a major infrastructural investment on AT&T's part to bring the iPhone -- and only the iPhone -- visual voicemail) , while not having to wait on their laurels for third parties to purchase, unlock, and ship their phones to the rest of the world. It must be very painful to have to keep mum, when the whole world wants your product, and you have a contract you've signed in your home country that keeps you from giving it to them. The news that they are inviting a speaker who is active in iPhone unlocking just confirms this suspicion, and of course the biggest confirmation will be seeing if Apple suddenly changes policy upon the expiration of the AT&T contract. We don't know the terms of that contract, but it's safe to guess it's a 12, 18, 24, or 36 month contract. I'm betting it was a 12-month contract, which is a very long time in the mobile phone world, and that upon the anniversary of the release of iPhone you will see an end to the silence on Apple's part regarding unlocking.

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (1, Interesting)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905576)

You are mistaken. As yesterday's thread [slashdot.org] clearly demonstrates, Apple and its admirers are firmly on the side of restricting your devices for your own "protection".

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (3, Interesting)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905670)

A post on ZDNet and /. threads from anonymous internet users "clearly demonstrates" Apple's internal corporate policies and intentions? Are you serious? I would say this article "clearly demonstrates" the exact opposite. In other words, no one really knows if Apple is pleased with the situation or not.

Personally, I think they are pleased, yet cautious. If they damage their relationship with AT&T they will not have future relationships with any carriers, and the iPhone will die. Yet the iPhone's popularity appears to be viral partly from unlocking. So they have to walk a fine line for now.

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (1)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905700)

I would suggest that Apple aren't keen on jailbreaking and will be less so in the future. When it first came out it was easy to jailbreak them when they were using 1.1.1 firmware, and it has got steadily harder since. If you want to jailbreak an ipod touch/iphone you still have to downgrade to 1.1.1 so you can exploit a hack that they did fix in 1.1.2. I think this puts more people off than anything - I don't want to run a hacked firmware from a source I don't know on an application that I use to sign into various sites...

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (4, Informative)

bnenning (58349) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906426)

If you want to jailbreak an ipod touch/iphone you still have to downgrade to 1.1.1

Not any more. With ziPhone, jailbreaking and unlocking any iPhone up to 1.1.4 is trivial; details here [unlock.no] .

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (2, Interesting)

catmistake (814204) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905746)

I agree with you, and the (grand?)-parent post. Another glaring indicator by what Apple isn't doing is the lack of legal retaliation. Apple has a history of meticulously tracking down and punishing, or at the very least, settleing with NDA violators. If Apple cared about keeping the iPhone in-jail, or locked-down, we'd hear about it in the form of NDA and intellectual property lawsuits. But the Apple legal team is quiet... a little too quiet. The first Beta of the iPhone SDK appeared on torrents and usenet almost immediately after its release... but we haven't heard of any complaints from Apple about it.

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (3, Interesting)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905804)

No, their official statements and the EULA of the iPhone SDK demonstrate their policies and intentions. Have you not been paying attention?

Wishing for something hard enough does not make it come true, and your speculation is just wishful thinking.

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906778)

You have noticed the progression here, right?

Apple at release: No third party apps.

Apple a few months later: Web apps only.

Apple a year later: Here's an SDK for third party development. There are a couple of restrictions. Yes, you may put wifi VOIP on the iPhone.

Hm. Apple seems to be saying one thing and doing something entirely different. I wonder why?

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (1)

SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905750)

Yeah, they are actually. They want to protect the user experience so that people don't end up with flat batteries in 30mins and stop using 3rd party apps or stop using their iPhone altogether. Those that really want to can always jailbreak their iPhone and manage the whole thing themselves. Or buy another product. Is this really so "evil"? Apple's decision is just a sound business decision, because that's what they are. No need to read any more into it than that....unless you're a conspiracy theorist.

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (1)

FIT_Entry1 (468985) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905656)

You, along with most people, are confusing jail-breaking with unlocking, unlocking modifies the sim so it works on networks other than ATT, jail-breaking is just modifying the phone software so you're able to upload programs to it. This guy was involved in jail-breaking not unlocking. The two are completely unrelated.

Reading Apple's Entrails (1)

meehawl (73285) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905974)

they are very happy that people all over the world use (unlocked) iPhones, and Apple executives have probably spent a lot of time thinking about how they could have played the game differently with AT&T to still get the contract with them (which you'll remember took a major infrastructural investment on AT&T's part to bring the iPhone -- and only the iPhone -- visual voicemail)

I'm always impressed at how some people can apparently divine altruistic motives from Apple's management decisions. Every unlocked phone deprives Apple of a large chunk of potential revenue from the sale of its device in the form of monthly cash payments. Several reports last year estimated the cost to Apple of so many unlocked phones as ranging from $500m to well over $1 billion (the difference comes about depending on whether you account for the "missing" devices as languishing in the supply chain or reshipped to Asia).

But critically, apparently believing Apple's propaganda regarding the "difficulty" of implementing visual voicemail functionality leads me to lose trust in any of your assertions. Visual voicemail is not hard to do [lifehacker.com] - it was around [callwave.com] for several years before Apple's version, and if it's so difficult [simulscribe.com] , how is it that companies like GrandCentral/Google can retrofit visual voicemail onto basically any phone [grandcentral.com] with either a WAP browser or SMS facility? Add in a 3G+ network and a real web browser and it really shines. Given enough network neutral bandwidth, many things are possible. Microsoft can add Visual VOIP [microsoft.com] to phones with Portrait. Apple's continued invocation of the Herculean nature of its visual voicemail is a marketing smokescreen designed to convince its more fannish customers that bedding down with the telcos comes from necessity, not avarice.

Re:Reading Apple's Entrails (1)

bnenning (58349) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906482)

Every unlocked phone deprives Apple of a large chunk of potential revenue from the sale of its device in the form of monthly cash payments.

Assuming that the purchaser would have still bought the iPhone even if she couldn't unlock it. That's unlikely in most cases, and impossible in nations that don't have official iPhone carriers. "Losses" due to iPhone unlocking are even less plausible than the inflated "losses" from software piracy.

Apple's continued invocation of the Herculean nature of its visual voicemail is a marketing smokescreen designed to convince its more fannish customers that bedding down with the telcos comes from necessity, not avarice.

True. They've developed a disturbing habit of justifying anti-consumer policies with BS. See also: "we can't allow unsigned apps because they could take down the cell network".

Re:Reading Apple's Entrails (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22906722)

Several reports last year estimated the cost to Apple of so many unlocked phones as ranging from $500m to well over $1 billion
Okay, genius, then find one of these many reports that actually quotes someone from Apple saying anything to that effect. (You won't, because they don't say that, because they don't think that.)

Re:Very clear signal from Apple that jail-breaking (0)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906338)

Correct, Apple has said in the past that they will not actively prevent people from installing apps (they didn't say the word jailbreak, but it wasnt a common term at the time), BUT they would work to prevent unlocking of the phone itself. They just won't support it if you do.

I'm guessing that they cannot allow unlocking both for profit issues and also because ATT probably put it in their contract. For example, Apple's iTunes contract with the record labels says that Apple MUST [apple.com] patch any DRM-circumvention within weeks or all that label's music would be pulled from the store.

Best way to hack Apple (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905502)

Ignore them, don't give them attention, money or whatever.

They need us, they want OUR money. Let them jump through OUR hoops to get it.

Have you forgotten YOUR place in the world? Seems you have.

You are the same people that have forgotten what the constitution is, its just a piece of paper until you remember what it is.

Until then. Continue being assfucked.

hacking is niche (4, Insightful)

dten (448141) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905604)

Open source/unlocked apps will be a competitive option only for those who have the technical gumption to risk bricking or otherwise crippling their phone, and the burden of time and attention required to learn how to uncripple it. This is acceptable to the hacker community, but not to the majority of iPhone users, who just want a stable, uninterrupted user experience.

s/Linus/Stallman and s/Open Source/Free Software (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22905758)

why not? What happens that FLOSS references are constantly made using the OSI-politicaly-oriented speech ?

Jailbreaking != Unlocking (5, Insightful)

wickerprints (1094741) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905898)

I keep seeing these two concepts being confused. Jailbreaking is the act of circumventing the original OS to run arbitrary code. Unlocking is the act of disabling the link between the handset and the AT&T SIM, thereby allowing the use of other mobile providers. The former does not imply the latter.

I have said it before and I will say it again. Apple is a publicly held corporation. Their fiduciary duty is to their shareholders. Their goal is to be profitable. However, their business model (strategy of doing business in order to be profitable) centers around making well-designed, elegant, easy-to-use, robust products. (By 'robust' I mean in a design/UI sense, not necessarily in a hardware sense.) They believe that controlling and streamlining the entire consumer experience from start to finish is the best way to deliver their product--this is the reason behind the Apple Retail Stores, the near-obsessive attention to the packaging, and the restrictions of the iPhone OS. Make no mistake; Apple doesn't do this out of the goodness of their hearts. They do it because it is a way to stand out in a competitive and rapidly shifting industry, and be profitable. But this long-held strategy of attention to the consumer experience and design excellence has created a community of Apple enthusiasts, and they often misinterpret Apple as being more altruistic than they actually are.

The hacker philosophy runs completely counter to Apple's view because they believe devices are meant to be experimented on, each component dissected, analyzed, and understood. They are unafraid of taking something apart and reassembling it to meet their needs. Apple's model is geared not towards these hackers, but to the average consumer, who, if allowed to tinker, would probably break something and have no idea how to fix it. The wildly popular success of iPods and the increasing market share of Macs in the face of the MS monopoly demonstrates that Apple's strategy is the correct one to adopt--the average user values stability and predictability over the ability to play Dr. Frankenstein with their precious, beautifully designed Mac/iPod/iPhone. The idea that "it just works" is in itself a kind of freedom.

Apple knows they can't keep the iPhone OS locked down forever. They knew it before they even had built the thing. They realized, however, that (1) upon initial release, the OS would not be complete, (2) they needed to buy themselves time to establish a user base and fix stability issues, (3) locking the OS would prevent the casual user from messing around and then complaining that the iPhone sucks because it's too easy to break, (4) it fits with their business model. The only good thing the hackers/jailbreakers have done is to push Apple to develop the SDK faster, and put more emphasis on security. I don't see their actual jailbreaking as being particularly relevant, because it is still not something that most users would do. Many users so strongly enjoy the integrated, streamlined Apple experience that the last thing they want to do is run some "shady" code and open themselves up to the unknown. It all goes back to the philosophical dichotomy mentioned above.

IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) (4, Interesting)

baka_toroi (1194359) | more than 6 years ago | (#22905934)

Can anyone provide IPA on Zdziarski? Gee, that's seems unpronounceable

not really though (4, Funny)

foo fighter (151863) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906206)

This got cut from the submission:

"And when I say it's like Torvalds speaking at a Windows launch what I mean is its not like that at all."

Argh! (1)

Bootle (816136) | more than 6 years ago | (#22906896)

I came this close to driving to an apple store (or AT&T) and getting an iphone today. I was able to restrain myself, barely, due to reticence over breaking my verizon contract, as well as all the rumors of a 3G iphone.

I'm very skeptical of a 3G iphone being introduced with iphone 2.0 in June, or even announced, because that will detract from the new software. I doubt Apple will ever ambush us with new iphones like they do with everything else, since the FCC has to vet everything and they don't want people renewing their contracts right beforehand. But it may still drop in 2008. What do you guys think?

So right now I'm waiting for 3G or my contract expiration, whatever comes first, but damn it's hard...

Bad Analogy (4, Insightful)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22907014)

So for Apple to give Zdziarski the podium at an Apple retail location is a little like Steve Ballmer inviting Linus Torvalds to speak at a Windows product launch."

I'd say it's more like Citibank inviting Mitnick to talk about security, or the MPAA inviting DVD Jon.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?