5 ms·

Seriously, the "only reason"?

zeveb 8y ago
Once someone has bought an iPhone from Apple, it's no longer Apple's phone. Apple no longer owns it. If the owner of the phone (who is, again, not Apple) wishes to trust only Apple-approved software, that is 100% his choice. But if he wishes to install software that Apple doesn't approve of, that's also a 100% legitimate choice. Sorry for all the emphasis, but this stuff is important. Once a manufacturer has sold a product, it no longer has any claim to it — none. It belongs to the purchaser, who is the sole owner.
- mschuster91 8y ago
  Most expensive phones, however, are not purchased by the consumer but rather financed via contract, which means the phone technically belongs to the phone company - and they usually disallow jailbreaking or any other thing that would void the manufacturer warranty.
  - nathankunicki 8y ago
    That's irrelevant. If the phone carrier wants to lock those phones down, fine, though Apple has typically fought against carrier mods. However the same App Store policies apply to all iPhone owners, regardless of how it was purchased.
- gpmcadam 8y ago
  OK but what does this have to do with the original point? There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. But "keeping people in their walled garden" isn't the _only_ reason, is it?
  - osmarks 8y ago
    Can you think of another one?
    - joemi 8y ago
      > There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. The comment you were replying to mentioned two others, right there...
  - zeveb 8y ago
    > OK but what does this have to do with the original point? There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. That was my whole point: once sold, those phones are no longer Apple's devices. Apple has absolutely no legitimate say in what the new owners choose to do with those phones. Nor does Apple have any legal or ethical exposure to what the new owners do with their phones: that is the owners' liability. Now, the owners may wish to enter an arrangement with Apple, and Apple may only choose to enter into that arrangement if the owners do certain things or refrain from doing certain things. That's completely fair. What's not fair is 'selling' someone a device, but retaining ownership of it. That's not a sale; it's a lease.
  - nathankunicki 8y ago
    I think you're limiting the use to "pirated app stores" yourself. There are other apps on those app stores, ones that Apple wouldn't approve, but are still useful. Taking away the question of whether Apple has the right to determine what is moral or ethical (I argue that they don't), I agree with the op in that the primary reason is to maintain the walled garden.
    - joemi 8y ago
      OP didn't say "primary reason"... OP said "only reason", and that is what the person you replied to is arguing against. While it may be the primary reason, it's not the _only_ reason.
  - olyjohn 8y ago
    When I jailbroke my iPhone 3G back in the day, Cydia was chalk full of amazing, useful applications that extended the capabilities of my phone. I was actually able to run Pandora in the background while using other apps. At that time, background apps would not continue playing music, and probably could not do much else either. I had dashboards and quick launchers at the time when Apple didn't allow those things. I didn't pirate a single piece of software. It did let me use free software and apps that were not in the App store. It's well known that there were some sketchy apps in there. But how was that any different from having a Linux or Windows desktop where in you can install whatever you want? I believe that the financial motivation (the walled garden) is the biggest one, but maybe not the only one.
    - dkonofalski 8y ago
      While it's definitely the biggest incentive, there's also a customer-focus piece. I used to do third-party repairs for these devices and I can't tell you the number of people that would get mad at me and/or Apple because they jailbroke their phone and then did something to brick it. They had someone else jailbreak it for them, so they had no understanding of what had actually been done, and then they attempted to run updates that broke them. When people expect support, it makes sense to me that Apple would want to prevent those types of situations from occurring when they're the ones that have to deal with people who don't know or understand what they've done.

Once someone has bought an iPhone from Apple, it's no longer Apple's phone. Apple no longer owns it. If the owner of the phone (who is, again, not Apple) wishes to trust only Apple-approved software, that is 100% his choice. But if he wishes to install software that Apple doesn't approve of, that's also a 100% legitimate choice. Sorry for all the emphasis, but this stuff is important. Once a manufacturer has sold a product, it no longer has any claim to it — none. It belongs to the purchaser, who is the sole owner.

mschuster91 8y ago
Most expensive phones, however, are not purchased by the consumer but rather financed via contract, which means the phone technically belongs to the phone company - and they usually disallow jailbreaking or any other thing that would void the manufacturer warranty.
- nathankunicki 8y ago
  That's irrelevant. If the phone carrier wants to lock those phones down, fine, though Apple has typically fought against carrier mods. However the same App Store policies apply to all iPhone owners, regardless of how it was purchased.
gpmcadam 8y ago
OK but what does this have to do with the original point? There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. But "keeping people in their walled garden" isn't the _only_ reason, is it?
- osmarks 8y ago
  Can you think of another one?
  - joemi 8y ago
    > There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. The comment you were replying to mentioned two others, right there...
- zeveb 8y ago
  > OK but what does this have to do with the original point? There are plenty of reasons why Apple might want to prevent pirated app stores from being used on their devices: legal, ethical and sure, financial. That was my whole point: once sold, those phones are no longer Apple's devices. Apple has absolutely no legitimate say in what the new owners choose to do with those phones. Nor does Apple have any legal or ethical exposure to what the new owners do with their phones: that is the owners' liability. Now, the owners may wish to enter an arrangement with Apple, and Apple may only choose to enter into that arrangement if the owners do certain things or refrain from doing certain things. That's completely fair. What's not fair is 'selling' someone a device, but retaining ownership of it. That's not a sale; it's a lease.
- nathankunicki 8y ago
  I think you're limiting the use to "pirated app stores" yourself. There are other apps on those app stores, ones that Apple wouldn't approve, but are still useful. Taking away the question of whether Apple has the right to determine what is moral or ethical (I argue that they don't), I agree with the op in that the primary reason is to maintain the walled garden.
  - joemi 8y ago
    OP didn't say "primary reason"... OP said "only reason", and that is what the person you replied to is arguing against. While it may be the primary reason, it's not the _only_ reason.
- olyjohn 8y ago
  When I jailbroke my iPhone 3G back in the day, Cydia was chalk full of amazing, useful applications that extended the capabilities of my phone. I was actually able to run Pandora in the background while using other apps. At that time, background apps would not continue playing music, and probably could not do much else either. I had dashboards and quick launchers at the time when Apple didn't allow those things. I didn't pirate a single piece of software. It did let me use free software and apps that were not in the App store. It's well known that there were some sketchy apps in there. But how was that any different from having a Linux or Windows desktop where in you can install whatever you want? I believe that the financial motivation (the walled garden) is the biggest one, but maybe not the only one.
  - dkonofalski 8y ago
    While it's definitely the biggest incentive, there's also a customer-focus piece. I used to do third-party repairs for these devices and I can't tell you the number of people that would get mad at me and/or Apple because they jailbroke their phone and then did something to brick it. They had someone else jailbreak it for them, so they had no understanding of what had actually been done, and then they attempted to run updates that broke them. When people expect support, it makes sense to me that Apple would want to prevent those types of situations from occurring when they're the ones that have to deal with people who don't know or understand what they've done.