6 ms·

Tell HN: The iPad is open to hacking

65 points by cpr 17y ago

I don't get the hate. Pay your $99 to become a developer, and, once the NDA is lifted, share your code freely with others on github or some other public venue. Think of the $99 as the cost of the SDK. (Even though the SDK & associated tools are freely downloadable.) If you're really interested in sharing arbitrary code with people, this is even perhaps the best way to do it. They download the code, and build & go in Xcode. You're running on a Mach/BSD Unix-based system, so go hog-wild. Port terminal programs, or write your own. Yes, it's true that apps are sandboxed, but now you've got inter-app file sharing (oops, is that under NDA?). Apple has zero interest in what you do with the iPad that doesn't go through the App Store. Think of the App Store as the public roads for the iPad--the state has a vested interest in making sure that drivers are minimally competent, so they have a gatekeeping function in the form of a license. On the private roads, or roads you make yourself, go crazy.

AndrewWarner 17y ago
A better option is to have healthy competition in this space so we have options, but until then, I'll take all the suggestions I can get.
barrkel 17y ago
I didn't realize it was 99$ per year. That's much worse than I thought. Apple just keeps getting eviler.
blhack 17y ago
Am I buying this device from apple, or am I licensing it? Why on Earth should I have to pay $99/year fee to run code on my own device?
- lukifer 17y ago
  The $99 is a one-time fee. (Edit: Oops, I guess not.) If you don't want to go that route, though, you can bet this thing will get jailbroken in the first month. :)
  - forgotmypasswd 17y ago
    Did they recently change this? It used to be $99 yearly
- cpr 17y ago
  You're not--you're paying $99/year to keep updated on their dev tools. (Let the downmodding begin. ;-)
ozten 17y ago
Did you just tell me to go fuck myself? I believe I did Bob.
jncraton 17y ago
I'll probably just wait for a more open android tablet to be released like this one: http://convergeddevices.net/products/vega.html http://convergeddevices.net/products/vega.html
teeja 17y ago
Pay to become a developer. A-ha-ha! Don't see much future in that! "What got you into programming?" "The thrill of paying all those great companies to improve their product!" (True enough of the great majority of those "100,000 apps" they keep touting.)
david3smith 17y ago
Except the $99 is per year, not a one-time cost. Apple really needs to figure out some kind of open development plan for iPad. I'd argue it's not so important for the iPhone, but for the iPad, I think it may be critical...
- jacquesm 17y ago
  It's the new subscription model, subscribe to rights that you should have by default. Such as the ability to program the computer that you just bought. Early computers all came with built in programming capability, then we lost some of that and then open source happened and suddenly it seemed ridiculous to ask developers money to support your platform. It's like charging the guys that sweep your street toll. Be happy that people want to develop for your platform and make it as easy as possible for them. Things like this will incrementally push developers away from closed platforms. Why on earth would anybody pay a subscription to a toolchain. Open source tools are abundant and free, run on practically any piece of hardware from small embedded controllers all the way to supercomputers. When switching from a windows environment to open source for my main dev box a couple of years ago, I was worried about not being able to bring my tools along. Now I feel completely unable to do anything useful on a machine that does not come with at least a full complement of unix tools. I can see a device like the ipad as a target, but if development is going to be limited to apple-only then the subscription fee is the smaller part (we do have an imac here, but I doubt that everybody that wants to develop for the pad has a mac ready to go). So for some the cost is significantly higher than just the subscription to the SDK. I prefer software without a built in expiry date anyway.
  - cpr 17y ago
    The apps you built will never expire. (I know that from personal experience; we let our iPhone dev certificate expire for a while due to lack of attention, but our apps never failed to work.) The SDK you've downloaded will never expire. Yes, the ability to sign apps will disappear, but you could run them in unsigned debug mode forever.
    - jacquesm 17y ago
NathanKP 17y ago
It still doesn't feel right to have to pay $99 just to test your code on the device.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  Think of it as the cost of the device. You have a consumer-grade device and a developer-friendly one that costs $99 more. It doesn't feel right, really, because they are the same device, but I suspect you can get used to it. Besides that, it's a question of time for the device to be jailbroken. A jailbroken iPad is a very nice thing to have, IMHO.
  - gcheong 17y ago
    $99 for every year you want to develop for the device.
  - jonknee 17y ago
    ... Per year. So if you have the device for three years, make sure you tack on $297.
- GHFigs 17y ago
  That isn't all you get for that $99, though. Unless you have absolutely no interest in distributing or selling anything through the App Store (in which case, what a waste!) it's a better deal than that makes it sound. (Yeah, the App Store isn't a magic money machine, but my point is you're not just getting what you say.) It's also an amazing deal compared to most mobile platforms and game consoles.
jacquesm 17y ago
> Think of the App Store as the public roads for the iPad--the state has a vested interest in making sure that drivers are minimally competent, so they have a gatekeeping function in the form of a license. That really makes no sense at all. You are basically saying that in order to produce software you have to pass a 'driving test', but in fact there are millions of people producing open source software that would make the majority of these apps look like the toys they are. Sorry, but that really doesn't fly with me, the app store is simply a method of control that has nothing to do with quality. Or were those google programmers that got their application refused somehow incompetent? The only arbiter of what is 'good enough' and what isn't is the user, not some approval process. If all they did was scan for malware I'd have no problem with it.
- cpr 17y ago
  Ok, perhaps the analogy was weak. Perhaps it's more like you're building cars for people to drive, and some third party needs to check before people get in the car and kill themselves because you've made a steering wheel that falls off under slight stress.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    Notepad computers don't kill people, worst case your stuff doesn't work and they won't use it again. This is not 'mission critical' by a long shot. It all boils down to the safety vs freedom argument, we can be 100% safe or we can have a lot of freedom. Personally I'll take the freedom, if you want to be 100% safe but only able to run vendor approved applications then that's fine with me, but it is one step too many in the direction of 'trusted computing' for me.
    - cpr 17y ago
      No, worst case your app steals their credit card info (witness the recent Android bank phishing app) and costs them tremendous time and bother (not to say potentially money) cleaning up the mess. In this case, at the first sign of malwareism, Apple can disable the app immediately for everyone, limiting the damage.
drcode 17y ago
I hope we can expect at least some loosening of app store restrictions for the iPad- This pad would be great for an "iphone game construction kit" and I think it's a bit irrational for Apple to argue that it would be harmful for folks to create such an app on a full-screen device like the iPad.
apgwoz 17y ago
> share your code freely with others on github or some other public venue. Did anyone notice if it's still a terms of service violation to do this? It is for the iPhone/iPod as far as I remember.
- TrevorJ 17y ago
  I have no reason to expect that they will lift that from the TOS.
  - cpr 17y ago
    Except that it's not in the TOS.
- cpr 17y ago
  http://developer.apple.com/iphone/terms/registered_iphone_developer_20081020.pdf http://developer.apple.com/iphone/terms/registered_iphone_de... I don't see anything in the iPhone developer agreement that addresses this point. If all you're sharing is your code, and not any of their headers, documentation, etc., then you're free to do so. There's a good deal of high-quality open-source iPhone library code out there on github right now.
  - apgwoz 17y ago
    http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/why-free-software-and-apples-iphone-dont-mix http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/why-free-software-and-app...
ableal 17y ago
> (Even though the SDK & associated tools are freely downloadable.) "[citation needed]", as they say - today I looked into it, and that does not seem to be true anymore. I did bump into the free university program ( http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/university.html http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/university.html ), which is tucked a bit out of the way. And there's the free "Online Member" (at http://developer.apple.com/products/membership.html http://developer.apple.com/products/membership.html ). But the path to the SDK does seem to be paved with 99 USD. I have no particular objection to that, just curious to know if there is a free peek at the goodies or not.
- cpr 17y ago
  You appear to be right--you have to login as a developer to get at the currently-available & public 3.1 SDK. Edit: Oh, but you can register for free just to get access to the SDK. I guess that means you can't test on a real device, though.
  - natch 17y ago
    Yes exactly (to your edit).
- mbreese 17y ago
  The SDK that works for the iPad is 3.2, and it's in beta. So, that requires the $99. I assume that as soon as it is no longer in beta, that it will be open just like the regular SDK. If I were to guess, they are doing it this way to gain some protection in the form of a NDA. My guess is that as soon as the device is public, that will be lifted.
mooism2 17y ago
When will the NDA be lifted?
- bkorte 17y ago
  Likely when the product is released to the public.
plinkplonk 17y ago
"Pay your $99 to become a developer" Correct me if I am wrong but I think you have to pay this every year? (I remember something like this for IPhone dev). Insane to pay year after year for the privilege of developing and deploying your code on your device. yeah we don't "hate" Apple/IPhone/Ipad but it is natural for people to resist being treated like idiots/serfs/sharecroppers.
- rimantas 17y ago
  How much would hosting your app and doing payment processing yourself cost you a year?
  - plinkplonk 17y ago
    "How much would hosting your app and doing payment processing yourself cost you a year?" Ahh but I am not talking about the 30% Apple takes off the price of my app when sold through the Apple Store ; The AppStore itself is another sharecropper management device but never mind that for now I am talking of how much it costs me per year to put my program on my device. The commission on sales (which arguably pays for hosting and payment processing) is a separate issue. The latter is arguable. The former is indefensible. Look, no one is arguing you shouldn't sell your soul to Apple. It is your money, go right ahead. The OP asked why people balked at paying 99$ (every year). I was just explaining why some of us unenlightened developers refuse to see the light ;-).
nollidge 17y ago
Or I could wait for the next device to come along, one that's just a flat PC, and not have to jump through any hoops whatsoever.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  I've been looking around but I can't find anything that comes close and isn't vapourware. But I don't think it'll be long.
  - joezydeco 17y ago
    The Android-based MIDs are really close. Just ask Dell.
    - jacquesm 17y ago
      I googled a bit and found this: http://www.slashgear.com/dell-android-midsmartphone-prototypes-spotted-3048259/ http://www.slashgear.com/dell-android-midsmartphone-prototyp... http://www.slashgear.com/dell-streak-5-inch-3g-android-mid-leaks-2161220/ http://www.slashgear.com/dell-streak-5-inch-3g-android-mid-l... neat!
  - buster 17y ago
    Or archos. Or the Vega ( http://convergeddevices.net/products/vega.html http://convergeddevices.net/products/vega.html ) Or Dell. Orrrr the Nook. And i guess i could find a lot more to come this year if i would just start to google.
dbz 17y ago
I think you get the hate very much so- In fact I think you get the hate and disagree with it, which is why you made that post. I hate. I apologize, no wait I don't. I'm not willing to sign my work away to Apple to code for them. I have chosen NEVER to apply to a job for apple, and this would be like giving my life's work away to them. I don't sign NDAs for no reason. (I'm lying when I say this:) Sorry again. But No.
icey 17y ago
Personally, I'm just going to wait until some enterprising soul turns one of the slate PCs announced at CES into a hackintosh. Then I'll be very interested in the "Apple tablet".
- gcheong 17y ago
  There already is the Modbook.
  - icey 17y ago
    The Modbook is expensive ($1649 if you don't have a machine to sacrifice, $699 if you do). I hope that the slate PCs that are coming are able to stay at the $1000 or less price point.

65 points by cpr 17y ago

AndrewWarner 17y ago

A better option is to have healthy competition in this space so we have options, but until then, I'll take all the suggestions I can get.

barrkel 17y ago

I didn't realize it was 99$ per year. That's much worse than I thought. Apple just keeps getting eviler.

blhack 17y ago

Am I buying this device from apple, or am I licensing it? Why on Earth should I have to pay $99/year fee to run code on my own device?

lukifer 17y ago
The $99 is a one-time fee. (Edit: Oops, I guess not.) If you don't want to go that route, though, you can bet this thing will get jailbroken in the first month. :)
- forgotmypasswd 17y ago
  Did they recently change this? It used to be $99 yearly
cpr 17y ago
You're not--you're paying $99/year to keep updated on their dev tools. (Let the downmodding begin. ;-)

ozten 17y ago

Did you just tell me to go fuck myself? I believe I did Bob.

jncraton 17y ago

I'll probably just wait for a more open android tablet to be released like this one: http://convergeddevices.net/products/vega.html http://convergeddevices.net/products/vega.html

teeja 17y ago

Pay to become a developer. A-ha-ha! Don't see much future in that! "What got you into programming?" "The thrill of paying all those great companies to improve their product!" (True enough of the great majority of those "100,000 apps" they keep touting.)

david3smith 17y ago

Except the $99 is per year, not a one-time cost. Apple really needs to figure out some kind of open development plan for iPad. I'd argue it's not so important for the iPhone, but for the iPad, I think it may be critical...

jacquesm 17y ago
It's the new subscription model, subscribe to rights that you should have by default. Such as the ability to program the computer that you just bought. Early computers all came with built in programming capability, then we lost some of that and then open source happened and suddenly it seemed ridiculous to ask developers money to support your platform. It's like charging the guys that sweep your street toll. Be happy that people want to develop for your platform and make it as easy as possible for them. Things like this will incrementally push developers away from closed platforms. Why on earth would anybody pay a subscription to a toolchain. Open source tools are abundant and free, run on practically any piece of hardware from small embedded controllers all the way to supercomputers. When switching from a windows environment to open source for my main dev box a couple of years ago, I was worried about not being able to bring my tools along. Now I feel completely unable to do anything useful on a machine that does not come with at least a full complement of unix tools. I can see a device like the ipad as a target, but if development is going to be limited to apple-only then the subscription fee is the smaller part (we do have an imac here, but I doubt that everybody that wants to develop for the pad has a mac ready to go). So for some the cost is significantly higher than just the subscription to the SDK. I prefer software without a built in expiry date anyway.
- cpr 17y ago
  The apps you built will never expire. (I know that from personal experience; we let our iPhone dev certificate expire for a while due to lack of attention, but our apps never failed to work.) The SDK you've downloaded will never expire. Yes, the ability to sign apps will disappear, but you could run them in unsigned debug mode forever.
  - jacquesm 17y ago

NathanKP 17y ago

It still doesn't feel right to have to pay $99 just to test your code on the device.

rbanffy 17y ago
Think of it as the cost of the device. You have a consumer-grade device and a developer-friendly one that costs $99 more. It doesn't feel right, really, because they are the same device, but I suspect you can get used to it. Besides that, it's a question of time for the device to be jailbroken. A jailbroken iPad is a very nice thing to have, IMHO.
- gcheong 17y ago
  $99 for every year you want to develop for the device.
- jonknee 17y ago
  ... Per year. So if you have the device for three years, make sure you tack on $297.
GHFigs 17y ago
That isn't all you get for that $99, though. Unless you have absolutely no interest in distributing or selling anything through the App Store (in which case, what a waste!) it's a better deal than that makes it sound. (Yeah, the App Store isn't a magic money machine, but my point is you're not just getting what you say.) It's also an amazing deal compared to most mobile platforms and game consoles.

jacquesm 17y ago

> Think of the App Store as the public roads for the iPad--the state has a vested interest in making sure that drivers are minimally competent, so they have a gatekeeping function in the form of a license. That really makes no sense at all. You are basically saying that in order to produce software you have to pass a 'driving test', but in fact there are millions of people producing open source software that would make the majority of these apps look like the toys they are. Sorry, but that really doesn't fly with me, the app store is simply a method of control that has nothing to do with quality. Or were those google programmers that got their application refused somehow incompetent? The only arbiter of what is 'good enough' and what isn't is the user, not some approval process. If all they did was scan for malware I'd have no problem with it.

cpr 17y ago
Ok, perhaps the analogy was weak. Perhaps it's more like you're building cars for people to drive, and some third party needs to check before people get in the car and kill themselves because you've made a steering wheel that falls off under slight stress.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Notepad computers don't kill people, worst case your stuff doesn't work and they won't use it again. This is not 'mission critical' by a long shot. It all boils down to the safety vs freedom argument, we can be 100% safe or we can have a lot of freedom. Personally I'll take the freedom, if you want to be 100% safe but only able to run vendor approved applications then that's fine with me, but it is one step too many in the direction of 'trusted computing' for me.
  - cpr 17y ago
    No, worst case your app steals their credit card info (witness the recent Android bank phishing app) and costs them tremendous time and bother (not to say potentially money) cleaning up the mess. In this case, at the first sign of malwareism, Apple can disable the app immediately for everyone, limiting the damage.

drcode 17y ago

I hope we can expect at least some loosening of app store restrictions for the iPad- This pad would be great for an "iphone game construction kit" and I think it's a bit irrational for Apple to argue that it would be harmful for folks to create such an app on a full-screen device like the iPad.

apgwoz 17y ago

> share your code freely with others on github or some other public venue. Did anyone notice if it's still a terms of service violation to do this? It is for the iPhone/iPod as far as I remember.

TrevorJ 17y ago
I have no reason to expect that they will lift that from the TOS.
- cpr 17y ago
  Except that it's not in the TOS.
cpr 17y ago
http://developer.apple.com/iphone/terms/registered_iphone_developer_20081020.pdf http://developer.apple.com/iphone/terms/registered_iphone_de... I don't see anything in the iPhone developer agreement that addresses this point. If all you're sharing is your code, and not any of their headers, documentation, etc., then you're free to do so. There's a good deal of high-quality open-source iPhone library code out there on github right now.
- apgwoz 17y ago
  http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/why-free-software-and-apples-iphone-dont-mix http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/why-free-software-and-app...

ableal 17y ago

> (Even though the SDK & associated tools are freely downloadable.) "[citation needed]", as they say - today I looked into it, and that does not seem to be true anymore. I did bump into the free university program ( http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/university.html http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/university.html ), which is tucked a bit out of the way. And there's the free "Online Member" (at http://developer.apple.com/products/membership.html http://developer.apple.com/products/membership.html ). But the path to the SDK does seem to be paved with 99 USD. I have no particular objection to that, just curious to know if there is a free peek at the goodies or not.

cpr 17y ago
You appear to be right--you have to login as a developer to get at the currently-available & public 3.1 SDK. Edit: Oh, but you can register for free just to get access to the SDK. I guess that means you can't test on a real device, though.
- natch 17y ago
  Yes exactly (to your edit).
mbreese 17y ago
The SDK that works for the iPad is 3.2, and it's in beta. So, that requires the $99. I assume that as soon as it is no longer in beta, that it will be open just like the regular SDK. If I were to guess, they are doing it this way to gain some protection in the form of a NDA. My guess is that as soon as the device is public, that will be lifted.

mooism2 17y ago

When will the NDA be lifted?

bkorte 17y ago
Likely when the product is released to the public.

plinkplonk 17y ago

"Pay your $99 to become a developer" Correct me if I am wrong but I think you have to pay this every year? (I remember something like this for IPhone dev). Insane to pay year after year for the privilege of developing and deploying your code on your device. yeah we don't "hate" Apple/IPhone/Ipad but it is natural for people to resist being treated like idiots/serfs/sharecroppers.

rimantas 17y ago
How much would hosting your app and doing payment processing yourself cost you a year?
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "How much would hosting your app and doing payment processing yourself cost you a year?" Ahh but I am not talking about the 30% Apple takes off the price of my app when sold through the Apple Store ; The AppStore itself is another sharecropper management device but never mind that for now I am talking of how much it costs me per year to put my program on my device. The commission on sales (which arguably pays for hosting and payment processing) is a separate issue. The latter is arguable. The former is indefensible. Look, no one is arguing you shouldn't sell your soul to Apple. It is your money, go right ahead. The OP asked why people balked at paying 99$ (every year). I was just explaining why some of us unenlightened developers refuse to see the light ;-).

nollidge 17y ago

Or I could wait for the next device to come along, one that's just a flat PC, and not have to jump through any hoops whatsoever.

jacquesm 17y ago
I've been looking around but I can't find anything that comes close and isn't vapourware. But I don't think it'll be long.
- joezydeco 17y ago
  The Android-based MIDs are really close. Just ask Dell.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    I googled a bit and found this: http://www.slashgear.com/dell-android-midsmartphone-prototypes-spotted-3048259/ http://www.slashgear.com/dell-android-midsmartphone-prototyp... http://www.slashgear.com/dell-streak-5-inch-3g-android-mid-leaks-2161220/ http://www.slashgear.com/dell-streak-5-inch-3g-android-mid-l... neat!
- buster 17y ago
  Or archos. Or the Vega ( http://convergeddevices.net/products/vega.html http://convergeddevices.net/products/vega.html ) Or Dell. Orrrr the Nook. And i guess i could find a lot more to come this year if i would just start to google.

dbz 17y ago

I think you get the hate very much so- In fact I think you get the hate and disagree with it, which is why you made that post. I hate. I apologize, no wait I don't. I'm not willing to sign my work away to Apple to code for them. I have chosen NEVER to apply to a job for apple, and this would be like giving my life's work away to them. I don't sign NDAs for no reason. (I'm lying when I say this:) Sorry again. But No.

icey 17y ago

Personally, I'm just going to wait until some enterprising soul turns one of the slate PCs announced at CES into a hackintosh. Then I'll be very interested in the "Apple tablet".

gcheong 17y ago
There already is the Modbook.
- icey 17y ago
  The Modbook is expensive ($1649 if you don't have a machine to sacrifice, $699 if you do). I hope that the slate PCs that are coming are able to stay at the $1000 or less price point.