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.
Thread beginning with comment 518187
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12


They've sent plenty of cease and desist letters to web sites that offer advice as well as campaigned for it to be criminalised.

As no websites nor individuals have the resources nor income to take on Apple, cases never make it to court.

So my point stands.


I'm not sure it does, when I do a search on "cease and desist apple jailbreak" I get nothing related to actual jail breaking and Apple making a problem of it. It seems that their stance on it is that it may void your warranty.

It also seems they only go after people abusing their logo's, trademarks and systems.


Because when I buy an iPhone, I own said phone. It's now my hardware and I can do anything I want with it so long as that doesn't break any laws (eg I cannot bludgeon kids to death with it). Installing your own software does not break any laws, it only contradicts an EULA which is nether law nor been upheld in a court of law.

Hence my car comparison. I own the hardware and thus I can drive it / install whatever (legal) software I want. Apple cannot -edit: should not- dictate this to their users.


Like I mentioned it doesn't appear Apple makes a problem of it. So go ahead and do whatever you want to do with your iPhone, but don't expect Apple to assist you to do what you want to do or help you out when you mess it up.


Boohoo, so Apple will miss a cut on sales of products they contributed nothing towards the development of. How unfair that would be to Apple. *rolleyes*

Worse yet, they charge twice for the distribution (both the devs for adding to the app store and a percentage for each sale).

Given they pride themselves on appealing to the creative industry, the least they could do to give back to their key demographic would be to stop robbing them blind.


Being in the app store makes it easier for your product to be found. Apple takes care of the hosting and financial bit. Apple just doesn't steal your money, they give something in return.


That's all FUD.
People who want cracked apps can already jailbreak and don't care about the ramifications of doing so. So that market wouldn't change.

And as for the malware issue, Apple could still pull apps plus if it's an opt out feature (as I suggested), then the really stupid (or paranoid) wouldn't be exposed anyway.

So your points are moot.


No doubt if you don't need to do anything special to install cracked apps more people would install them.

And you want Apple to spend money and recourses to police apps you install outside of their app store? I don't think they'll do that.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I'm not sure it does, when I do a search on "cease and desist apple jailbreak" I get nothing related to actual jail breaking and Apple making a problem of it. It seems that their stance on it is that it may void your warranty.

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

Being in the app store makes it easier for your product to be found.

I'm not saying they should remove the app store. I'm saying it shouldn't be mandatory. They are two completely different points.


Apple takes care of the hosting and financial bit. Apple just doesn't steal your money, they give something in return.

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 developers to use Apple's own store and pricing model.

Hence why I'd welcome an app store opt out rather than seeing their core products open sourced. In my opinion an open platform is more useful to more people than open source.

No doubt if you don't need to do anything special to install cracked apps more people would install them.

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. They'd likely already be jailbroken so Apple are clearly already ineffective at stopping piracy.

So why punish everyone - or more specifically: you're genuine paying customers - for the unpreventable actions of a small few (relatively speaking).

And you want Apple to spend money and recourses to police apps you install outside of their app store? I don't think they'll do that.

You're putting words into my mouth. I never suggested Apple should police 3rd party apps. I'm just saying that the remote nuke option is still there if known trojans are discovered.

However I don't think Apple should even need to do that as 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).


Furthermore you seem to have bought into this weird belief that Apple's 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. ;) So while Apple might make arguments about their walled garden being for users own protection, in reality it's just a way of locking you guys into Apple's pricing structure.

Edited 2012-05-15 11:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

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