4 ms·

It sounds kind of ridiculous when stated explicitly, doesn't it? Only if we assume your initial premise. How about this one? The average consumer is never goin

by ant5 16y ago

It sounds kind of ridiculous when stated explicitly, doesn't it? Only if we assume your initial premise. How about this one? The average consumer is never going to try to hack their phone unless someone more knowledgable than them provides the instructions and resources necessary to do it. In other words, average consumer using the phone will never, ever, ever have a bricked phone because of some sort of anti-tampering device. Motorola wishes to sell a device with a certain set of supported functionality. They do not wish to invest effort in dealing with hacked versions of their devices, and in fact they seem to have contracts with carriers that require them to protect the devices. Motorola sells you a device that does exactly what they say it does. If you don't like the feature-set of this device, then don't buy it -- Motorola is not required to sell you an open platform and you't not required to buy their closed one.

chc 16y ago
Again, your argument fails to justify the decision. Try reading your post with "Therefore bricking hacked phones is a good thing" at the end — it makes no sense. If the number of people who would attempt to hack it is that vanishingly small, it's just pointlessly mean with no benefit (since no one was going to try it anyway, right?). If a lot of people are going to try hacking, you're certainly one-upping any problems it would have caused without you bricking the phone.
- ant5 16y ago
  If the number of people who would attempt to hack it is that vanishingly small. The number of people that will try to hack it is vanishingly small, but it only takes one. Once that one person gets their hack working, the number of people that have no idea what they're doing but will still install a hack developed by someone else is surprisingly large. ... "Therefore bricking hacked phones is a good thing" at the end Therefor, bricking hacked phones is their prerogative, it truly doesn't matter to me or 99.99% of the people buying their devices, and if someone does care, they should buy a device from someone interested in serving the tinkerer market, rather than trying to jury-rig a product from a company that clearly has no interested in supporting your endeavor.

by ant5 16y ago

chc 16y ago

Again, your argument fails to justify the decision. Try reading your post with "Therefore bricking hacked phones is a good thing" at the end — it makes no sense. If the number of people who would attempt to hack it is that vanishingly small, it's just pointlessly mean with no benefit (since no one was going to try it anyway, right?). If a lot of people are going to try hacking, you're certainly one-upping any problems it would have caused without you bricking the phone.

ant5 16y ago
If the number of people who would attempt to hack it is that vanishingly small. The number of people that will try to hack it is vanishingly small, but it only takes one. Once that one person gets their hack working, the number of people that have no idea what they're doing but will still install a hack developed by someone else is surprisingly large. ... "Therefore bricking hacked phones is a good thing" at the end Therefor, bricking hacked phones is their prerogative, it truly doesn't matter to me or 99.99% of the people buying their devices, and if someone does care, they should buy a device from someone interested in serving the tinkerer market, rather than trying to jury-rig a product from a company that clearly has no interested in supporting your endeavor.