Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th May 2012 18:28 UTC
Apple "I think that Apple could be just as strong and good and be open, but how can you challenge it when a company is making that much money?", Wozniak told a crowd in Sydney, according to ITNews. They'd score so many brownie points the internet would explode.
Permalink for comment 518199
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12


I assure you I'm not making this up:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=jailbreak+criminalise


That's their lobby a few years ago to make jail breaking illegal, this is something different than your claim they were sending cease and desist letters.

At least in the US jail breaking is legal.


Not offering consumers nor developers an opt out and actively banning apps that link to sites with their own stores (as they had done with Amazon and Dropbox, to name but two high profile cases) is literally forcing own developers to use Apple's own store and pricing model.

Hence why I'd welcome that over seeing their core products open sourced. As an open platform is more useful to more people than open source.


Well, that's the deal they offer and you can take it or leave for Android, WP or BlackBerry. Don't know about Amazon, but apps with a Dropbox function are back.

That's pure conjecture and quite honestly the argument of jailbreaking vs cracked software has been done to death on multiple platforms.

As I said before, if people are really that bothered to save < $2 per app and happy to download from untrusted sources and install god knows what, then jailbreaking is the least of their worries.

So yeah, you might see a slight incline in the distribution and installation of cracked software if Apple relaxed their stance on jailbreaking, but it would likely be minuscule - far less than what's already around and far to small of an increase to argue that Apples strict anti-jailbreaking rules are an effective anti-piracy measure.


Okay, but what's in it for Apple?


You're putting words into my mouth. I never suggested Apple should police 3rd party apps.

Plus if people install apps outside of any app store (be it official or unofficial), then that's their own responsibility. If the official app store is an opt out (a point I keep stating and you keep ignoring), then you're also stopping the very stupid from installing such apps and thus putting the onus on the individual when things cock up. And unofficial app stores will likely police their own catalogue of apps else gain a negative reputation (app stores with a negative reputation will thusly be avoided by users).


It sounds like your making the whole iOS ecosystem much more complicated and open to malware. Opting in, out, different app stores, so probably different accounts.


You've seem to have bought into this weird belief that Apples way is the only safe way and anyone that strays from that path is automatically a pirate and anything outside of Apples ecosystem is full of malware. The world outside of Apple really isn't that grim ;)


I live in many different worlds, but I'm seeing that Apple is making loads of money so it's hard to claim they are doing it wrong. Any iDiot can use an iPhone and figure out how everything works. Most people prefer simple, why complicate it? Apparently iOS users are more active users of their device than other users. I think complicated devices don't motivate users to use them.

Your suggestions complicates the situation and doesn't offer Apple any benefits. Why should they do this while gaining nothing in return?

Reply Parent Score: 2