4 ms·

What about the term "jailbreak"? The problem is also vendor lockin and customer loyalty (often times because people don't like change). You can leave, but mos

What about the term "jailbreak"? The problem is also vendor lockin and customer loyalty (often times because people don't like change). You can leave, but most users won't or don't want to.

nkrisc 9y ago
And most users would never take advantage of a truly open platform phone. Maybe it's a prison, but it's a prison that might as well not even exist for most people because they'll never even see the walls.
freeone3000 9y ago
It's a prison because they make it so enjoyable most people don't want to leave?
lghh 9y ago
If they don't want to, what's the problem? It's more of a hotel than a prison.
KyeRussell 9y ago
Jailbreak is a viral marketing term, and says very little about the actual situation. Is that really the leg you want to stand on?
joosters 9y ago
I'd say that vendor lock-in is unrelated; any platform can have it regardless of the openness of the platform. Jailbreaking is not part of the lock-in. It's a way of doing more stuff with the hardware than the original software allowed you to do. The fact that the term has 'jail' in it doesn't make the users more locked in than they already were, they were free to enter and leave without jailbreaks. Tangentially, I used to jailbreak my iphone because it offered me useful extra features that I couldn't otherwise get (e.g. a SSH client back when Apple didn't have such apps). But I haven't felt the need to jailbreak iOS for years now, because just about everything I could want to do with the system is already possible. Finally, 'jailbreaking' is effectively another word for 'security hole'. If my iOS device can be jailbroken, it's actually a worry to me, not a benefit. Google's chromebooks do offer a better alternative to this, whereby you can flush out ChromeOS by making a physical change to your device (in my case, disassembling the laptop and turning a particular screw). But it still can be a security risk; if there was some physical means of replacing iOS on a phone with alternative software, you could never trust that a secondhand iPhone hadn't been maliciously tweaked to preload malware.
- mikegerwitz 9y ago
  > Jailbreaking is not part of the lock-in. It's a way of doing more stuff with the hardware than the original software allowed you to do. That's precisely what rms is referring to when he says "jail": https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html#jails https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html#jails "allowed you to do" is the key phrase in your sentence---software should never tell you that you can't do something just because its developers don't want you to do so (we call that an "anti-feature"); software should be a tool to serve the user, not hold their computer/device hostage to exert control over them.
  - dpkonofa 9y ago
    That link is really terrible and GNU should be embarrassed to be publishing something like that. Referring to people as "iMonsters" and the general tone of that page make it seem very childish. Some of those points are even worth discussion but it over-simplifies them to the point of being worthless and easily dismissible. That's a real shame.
dpkonofa 9y ago
The term "jailbreak" was coined by the users that broke into the first iPod/iPhone firmware, not Apple. The file with the key was called "lockdown.d" (or something of that nature) and so exposing the locked-down area was colloquially referred to as a "jailbreak".

What about the term "jailbreak"? The problem is also vendor lockin and customer loyalty (often times because people don't like change). You can leave, but most users won't or don't want to.

nkrisc 9y ago

And most users would never take advantage of a truly open platform phone. Maybe it's a prison, but it's a prison that might as well not even exist for most people because they'll never even see the walls.

freeone3000 9y ago

It's a prison because they make it so enjoyable most people don't want to leave?

lghh 9y ago

If they don't want to, what's the problem? It's more of a hotel than a prison.

KyeRussell 9y ago

Jailbreak is a viral marketing term, and says very little about the actual situation. Is that really the leg you want to stand on?

joosters 9y ago

I'd say that vendor lock-in is unrelated; any platform can have it regardless of the openness of the platform. Jailbreaking is not part of the lock-in. It's a way of doing more stuff with the hardware than the original software allowed you to do. The fact that the term has 'jail' in it doesn't make the users more locked in than they already were, they were free to enter and leave without jailbreaks. Tangentially, I used to jailbreak my iphone because it offered me useful extra features that I couldn't otherwise get (e.g. a SSH client back when Apple didn't have such apps). But I haven't felt the need to jailbreak iOS for years now, because just about everything I could want to do with the system is already possible. Finally, 'jailbreaking' is effectively another word for 'security hole'. If my iOS device can be jailbroken, it's actually a worry to me, not a benefit. Google's chromebooks do offer a better alternative to this, whereby you can flush out ChromeOS by making a physical change to your device (in my case, disassembling the laptop and turning a particular screw). But it still can be a security risk; if there was some physical means of replacing iOS on a phone with alternative software, you could never trust that a secondhand iPhone hadn't been maliciously tweaked to preload malware.

mikegerwitz 9y ago
> Jailbreaking is not part of the lock-in. It's a way of doing more stuff with the hardware than the original software allowed you to do. That's precisely what rms is referring to when he says "jail": https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html#jails https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html#jails "allowed you to do" is the key phrase in your sentence---software should never tell you that you can't do something just because its developers don't want you to do so (we call that an "anti-feature"); software should be a tool to serve the user, not hold their computer/device hostage to exert control over them.
- dpkonofa 9y ago
  That link is really terrible and GNU should be embarrassed to be publishing something like that. Referring to people as "iMonsters" and the general tone of that page make it seem very childish. Some of those points are even worth discussion but it over-simplifies them to the point of being worthless and easily dismissible. That's a real shame.

dpkonofa 9y ago

The term "jailbreak" was coined by the users that broke into the first iPod/iPhone firmware, not Apple. The file with the key was called "lockdown.d" (or something of that nature) and so exposing the locked-down area was colloquially referred to as a "jailbreak".