Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for December 5, 2013
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
Apple: why iPhone jailbreaking should not be allowed
Posted Feb 17, 2009 16:01 UTC (Tue) by tgall (subscriber, #217)
Perhaps it is a little ironic to complain as a community about jailbreaking the iPhone for the purposes of unbounded development, but on the other hand complain about wine where the source is fully available.
Open source only works when folks pitch in to help with something that is of importance to you.
Posted Feb 20, 2009 3:13 UTC (Fri) by jmorris42 (guest, #2203)
Your point would be what exactly? That a Free Software type should focus their efforts to get Wine up to being able to run the closed iTunes app that Apple will most likely break as soon as you get it running on Wine? And even if they don't break it as soon as it runs you still have a closed source app talking to a closed platform. A temporary solution at best.
I really don't understand the mental machinery of a Mac zealot posting on LWN, how you can doublethink your way around the contradictions. Maybe if you are a pure Open Source pragmatist you can avoid the head explodes part.
Posted Feb 20, 2009 3:58 UTC (Fri) by tgall (subscriber, #217)
My exact point would be when I hear a lot of griping about freedom and wanting to tinker with a device or system, it gets to be an interesting question as to how many of those individuals have invoked a compiler in the past week. Does it invalidate the 'right' of the smaller number of legitimate people? No. But neither does it invalidate the right of the designer of the device to create what was their vision, closed tho that may be.
> That a Free Software type should focus their efforts to get Wine up to
> being able to run the closed iTunes app that Apple will most likely
> break as soon as you get it running on Wine? And even if they don't
> break it as soon as it runs you still have a closed source app talking
> to a closed platform. A temporary solution at best.
Indeed. But one does have to pick your battles in life. Likewise, crack a phone's OS where the crack has a limited useful life span, or maybe go with something from the get go where all the code is open? With that we kinda come full circle... there isn't much point to cracking an iPhone.
> I really don't understand the mental machinery of a Mac zealot posting
> on LWN, how you can doublethink your way around the contradictions.
Yup Mac Zealot. Wonder what gave it away .. all these boxes of mine running Linux? Maybe it's those Linux patches I posted today... *sigh*
> Maybe if you are a pure Open Source pragmatist you can avoid the head explodes part.
How about if I rotate my head 360 degrees and spew green goo?
Posted Feb 23, 2009 3:03 UTC (Mon) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646)
And, let me tell you: you are a deceiving member of the open source community, if you obviously don't even see that people might want to use their fully-paid hardware without resorting to lock-in software (iTunes et.al.) that only runs on closed-source operating systems and is security-wise extremely obnoxious.
Lastly, but not respectfully, Sir, you show exactly one fact: We really need the functionality of KILL-files on LWN. Sigh, to paraphrase Henry: »Those who do not understand Usenet, are condemned to reinvent it, badly.«
Posted Feb 21, 2009 20:06 UTC (Sat) by macros (subscriber, #6699)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds