11 ms·

It's unfortunate how Apple and Google approach device ownership, and their attitude towards the concept of general computing is concerning. We do not control o

It's unfortunate how Apple and Google approach device ownership, and their attitude towards the concept of general computing is concerning. We do not control our own devices, we cannot stop certain processes on them, and we do not know where our personal data is sent. We either have to flash ROMs from questionable sources and apply temporary exploits to get some kind of resemblance of control of our own devices, or we have to spend years to learn the skills to unlock these systems ourselves.

snaky 7y ago
Do you consider https://download.lineageos.org/ https://download.lineageos.org/ a questionable source?
- dessant 7y ago
  I do not, but you have to be lucky enough to have a device that is supported by LineageOS, or you need to spend time learning the skills to build a custom ROM for your device. Why isn't there an option in developer mode that gives us a root shell on our Android devices? Why is an escape hatch that gives back control to the user so frightening for these companies?
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - threeseed 7y ago
    It's because that same escape hatch can be used by bad actors. And unfortunately as we have seen all too often users are willing to blindly do what they are told if they get something out of it e.g. free game, credits etc.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - StavrosK 7y ago
    I mean, it's not luck if you just buy one of those devices...
  - icebraining 7y ago
    You don't need a custom ROM to get root on Android, you just have to unlock the bootloader and replace the "su" executable. Moto (aka Lenovo) devices can be unlocked without exploits using their online tool, for example.
andreasley 7y ago
I think Apple's approach is the only reasonable one for the general population. The technological complexity of any smartphone is far beyond comprehension for most people. I write iOS software for a living, and even with complete access to the source code, I couldn't reasonably evaluate my iPhone's software - let alone the hardware. The idea that ROMs from questionable sources make your device safer sounds very strange to me. Basically every electronic device has countless security issues. Some of them are found of which some are published of which most are eventually fixed (by rather large teams of professionals). In that regard, Apple could and should do better. But the burden of making such a complex device secure simply can't be put on the end user. While I would welcome deeper access for technically inclined people, I'm not sure that option can really be given by Apple/Google without the risk of becoming a disadvantage for many users.
- thefz 7y ago
  > The technological complexity of any smartphone is far beyond comprehension for most people. Don't use it then. By shielding the stupid we are creating more stupid.
  - 420codebro 7y ago
    That’s not your call to make, ace.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    That idea is stupid in itself. The whole of civilization has been a process of shielding people from having to know stuff. The same way you don't know how to make fire from first principles, fix your car, make a CPU, or whatever... Even someone with a Ph.D in computer hardware is shielded from tons of complexities and never has to know the whole process end to end.
    - 9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
      But they are allowed to learn, which Apple doesn't want you to do. They could make it so your mom doesn't get root by accident, but you would still have the right to do so.
rimliu 7y ago
There are things I want to control, and there are things I do not want to control. Smartphone is not a "general purpose computer" and I want just use it not to babysit it. And more often than not having "control over your own" device means that is is just some malware that has this control, not the user.
- adrianN 7y ago
  Your smartphone has all the hardware that it needs to be a general purpose computer. If you could plug in a decent screen and connect a mouse and a keyboard it would be more powerful than the computers you used just a few years ago.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >Your smartphone has all the hardware that it needs to be a general purpose computer. Which is neither here nor there. Parent doesn't mean a smartphone doesn't have the cpu power etc. of being a general purpose computing, he says it is not one.
    - read_if_gay_ 7y ago
      But it has the capacities to be one if you plugged in peripherals.
      - alkonaut 7y ago
        Again: that doesn't matter. My lawnmower has more power than my first 3 PC's combined and could easily play quake if connected to a keyboard and screen. Not sure what difference that makes to the original question of openness?
        read_if_gay_ 7y ago
        The point is if it were open it could do that and then it'd be a general purpose computer. People were justifying locked down smartphones by saying they're not GP computers. Factually, if they were open, they could be GP computers. The only reason they aren't is because they are locked in the first place! That justification for locking phones is based on a consequence of them being locked, so it doesn't make sense. That's the difference it makes.
onevu 7y ago
It's fortunate I can buy an iphone for my mum and she hasn't had a single problem with it. On the other hand I bought my dad a laptop with Windows and despite having an antivirus he's had all kinds of problems with it, including some heavy duty adware.
- isostatic 7y ago
  Indeed, I wouldn't suggest anything other than a chromebook for my relatives
  - phatfish 7y ago
    You can setup Windows to be secure, just make sure to not give your parents admin accounts. Install the apps they use and give them normal user accounts. Provide the password for elevation and educate to only type that in when they are installing something they know is secure. Likely they will forget the password and have to check with their "IT helper" anyway, and sanity check there actions then. I have a Windows 7 machine setup like this for my parents and they have never had a problem with malware. The stuff that lives in the user profile gets caught by AV, and I have to install something for them maybe twice a year. I would rather put in a little extra work setting up a Windows laptop than send metrics for the entire system to Google. Their Android phones take care of that invasion of privacy.
    - onevu 7y ago
      You don't need admin access for anything. Without admin privileges I can install new software, sniff your passwords, encrypt your files, participate in a DDoS attack, mine Bitcoin...
    - isostatic 7y ago
      > You can setup Windows to be secure Or I could get them to buy something far cheaper that's already secure, rather than having to learn how to admin an OS that I have had no need to use for nearly 20 years. > check with their "IT helper" The whole point is to avoid being an "IT Helper", otherwise I'd just give them an ubuntu laptop. > The stuff that lives in the user profile gets caught by AV, Audio video?
coldtea 7y ago
Or, you know, buy something else. Before the"locked devices, people had the inverse problem: everything was two open ended and complicated, could cripple the system, stuff was open for exploit (much more so than in this case of unpatched vulnerability, viruses were everyday occurence). Techies didn't have this issue, but the general public did (heck, even techies did suffer somewhat). And that might have been OK for when the PC was an unconnected tool, but not when everybody has one with them, from school to nursing home, and everybody buys and does tons of sensitive stuff from it, while connected 24/7. Whereas you can give a 2-year old an iPad, and they can start using it just fine...
- DavideNL 7y ago
  > Whereas you can give a 2-year old an iPad, and they can start using it just fine... What makes you think that if Apple would provide a mechanism in iOS, like SIP (System Integrity Protection) on macOS which can be disabled by technical users if needed, would change anything? Right now, regular users do not disable SIP on macOS so there's no issue there. They don't even know/care that this possibility exists. So your 2 year old could still use the same iPad just fine.
- bluescrn 7y ago
  Give a child an iPad, and they’ll be bombarded with toxic advertising and apps wanting money, money, money. Back in ‘the old days’ (80s+90s), a child with access to a computer was likely to learn something, even if their primary use of it was playing games.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >Give a child an iPad, and they’ll be bombarded with toxic advertising and apps wanting money, money, money. Every been to the modern web? Or used 90s-00s shareware? Compared to those, the iPad is advertising and nagging free... And can be totally free, you don't have to buy (a) adware apps, or (b) games with in-app-purchases. I only get stuff that's in neither category, which all the best apps are...
- realusername 7y ago
globile 7y ago
Don't forget about Telcos. Your AT&T, Vodafone, Verizon & Co, put an enormous amount of pressure on Apple to limit and protect device unlocking. This is a cat & mouse situation where either party might benefit from tight unlocking controls. For example, MVNOs benefit from manufacturers with flexible and open unlocking policies that make it easy to unlock devices (without approval from the original operator), whereas long-term commitment contracts with traditional operators want to make it as hard as possible for you to leave with an unlocked device (regardless of whether you are legally entitled to or not - but that's a different story). The economics of whether Apple would benefit from less strict unlocking policies (ignoring Telco's wishes) are not that clear. You might think that unlocked devices would have longer lives, and therefore limit Apple's ability to push a new one to you, but you could also say that giving phones 2 or 3 different owners in their lifespans could help with app store purchases, limiting jailbreaking and possibly avoiding going with a newer less expensive android version. Disclaimer: We unlock phones for MVNOs and individuals who get bullied around by their telcos. Edit: Spelling
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  Apple sells plenty of unlocked phones, all you have to do is buy it from Apple. Lock restrictions only come into play if you want the mobile network to subsidize your phone.
  - globile 7y ago
    Agreed! But a big majority of phones out there, especially in secondary markets to the US like Latin America are locked by default from within the Telcos, and will go though several hands before ending on a shelf or refurbished and sent to the middle east. Each country has different policies when it comes to unlocking. Locked phones greatly outnumber unlocked ones. Take Chile, where phones must be legally unlocked by the telco or manufacturer to work WITHIN other operators in the country, but not necessarily abroad. Buy an "unlocked" phone from a Chilean and you might get stuck with a brick. The different and complex type of unlocking levels Apple has for its devices (and there are many) are designed to assist the Telco and any countrywide regulatory policies that need to be enforced. There are many parts to this jigsaw puzzle.
Angostura 7y ago
> general computing Apple does not consider phones devices for general computing and so prioritises stability, power consumption and security over flexibility and the ability to run arbitrary code. I'm happy with that trade-off.
- jtbayly 7y ago
  They clearly consider iPads general purpose computers, so we're back to the starting concern.
  - ohithereyou 7y ago
    I have never thought that Apple considered iPads general purpose computers. One of their biggest ads about the iPad Pro[0] even implicitly states that. The proposition, in my mind, that Apple is trying to sell with the iPad to the majority of people who use their computers for social media, content consumption, and office tasks like email and Word document authoring is "you don't need general computing flexibility for the vast majority of things that you do". [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llZys3xg6sU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llZys3xg6sU
- athrowaway3z 7y ago
  This is such an unfathomably incoherent thought from an individuals perspective that i don't even know where to start. Could you give your definition of 'general computing'?
  - joosters 7y ago
    Well, I can run a Turing Machine using javascript on my phone's Safari browser. Do you have another definition of 'general computing' ?
  - Angostura 7y ago
    Which part of it do you find unfathomably incoherent? I'll try to explain very simply.
- 7y ago
viraptor 7y ago
I'm not sure Google really belongs here. Telcos and some companies licensing Android - sure. But unlocking actual Google phones, like Pixel, is literally available from the menu in the developer settings. It's a well known/documented process.
- dessant 7y ago
  That only unlocks the bootloader, which then allows you to install a custom one. There is no built-in option on Android for gaining elevated priviledges in any form, not even in a restricted way to disable bloatware that might compromise your privacy, and rooting your device breaks OTA updates, which also include security patches.
- throwaway9d0291 7y ago
  It does. Unlocking and gaining elevated privileges through rooting trips Google's SafetyNet API which will lock you out of many apps and/or features. It also breaks your device's Widevine certification so you can't watch DRM-protected video from many services. As for the "We do not control our own devices, we cannot stop certain processes on them, and we do not know where our personal data is sent.", with stock Android provided by an OEM, you have no control over the opaque and invasive monolith that is Google Play Services and there's no way to control what data exits your device, aside from installing a VPN-based firewall. You can't even control when apps have access to your data, just a binary on/off switch.
  - lern_too_spel 7y ago
    Of course it breaks DRM. That's the point. > with stock Android provided by an OEM, you have no control over the opaque and invasive monolith that is Google Play Services and there's no way to control what data exits your device, aside from installing a VPN-based firewall. This is true of all systems (and even worse on iOS, which has the same data collection as Play Services but can't be disabled or avoided) and irrelevant to the discussion about whether a user can completely control their device if they wish.
  - UncleMeat 7y ago
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
zaroth 7y ago
You can get a developer account, build and sign your own executables, and run whatever you want on your iPhone. I don’t think those flashed ROMs give you appreciably more “control” over your iPhone than stock iOS provides, because actual control requires usable control surfaces. More likely, you are replacing the control surfaces provided by an accountable entity (Apple) who has prioritized your security and privacy and provides a constant stream of updates to maintain that, with what exactly? The entire iOS feature set is designed to protect your personal data, from outside attackers who would seek to compromise it, to insider threats like apps trying to siphon off more than you might expect, to end-users inadvertently giving away their own (or your) data without a care in the world. The security that a modern iPhone provides to its owner is truly a remarkable and commendable experience overall. I am extremely happy we as consumers have the choice to purchase exactly such a device.
- readams 7y ago
  The iOS feature set is intended to protect Apple's business model and revenue streams by forcing you to do things in Apple's jail. Getting a developer account is obviously an absurd and impractical approach to distribute software and proposing this is frankly ridiculous. It's not free, requires you own a Mac, and is way beyond the technical abilities of most users.
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    > requires you own a Mac I mostly agree with you, but you don't necessarily need a Mac in order to use your developer account for sideloading—you can also use Cydia Impactor which is available for Windows/Linux.
- chmod775 7y ago
  "You shouldn't be concerned about freedom because you're not gonna use it/need it anyways." That's what your comment boils down to. You really want to go down that road of an argument? On a website that has hacker culture in its very name?
  - 7y ago
zapzupnz 7y ago
Goodness me it gets tiring seeing a post like this every time an article about iOS comes up. It's a legitimate point to make, but it should rather be that we talk about the content of the article rather than bring out the 'Apple's taking our freedom away' soapbox. It inevitably turns into a debate between one side who values personal freedoms but won't be told to buy Android phones widespread safety, security, and privacy and tell the others to just buy Android phones. This goes around and around, usually getting nobody anywhere, and happens all over again the next time an article about iOS turns up on the front page.
- throwaway156503 7y ago
  So let me ask, why make this comment? Why reply like this? To shut people's concerns down? There's no value here. There's nothing to be gained. Conversely, sometimes it's OK just to let people complain: without the sentiment, how do you know if people still care?
  - adamisom 7y ago
    It’s pretty obvious what the point is. It’s to complain about the soapbox / complaints in hopes of seeing less such comments in the future.
  - 693471 7y ago
    It's off topic and people should start getting banned for it because it turns the comments into useless bikeshedding
- pathseeker 7y ago
  It's an article about enabling a jailbreak and you are mad that people talk about jailbreaking needing to be a thing?
- kgwxd 7y ago
  If a problem is presented, someone is going to bring up a solution. The right solution has been the same for a long time, Apple hasn't implemented it yet. Maybe they'll never implement it, but maybe someone will consider alternatives because of the comment.
mkane848 7y ago
For a second I thought I was in a thread about Windows
papermachete 7y ago
I don't think that's so bad, makes the developer's job easier when there is just one version of your target. Nothing worse than entitled tinkerers.

snaky 7y ago

Do you consider https://download.lineageos.org/ https://download.lineageos.org/ a questionable source?

dessant 7y ago
I do not, but you have to be lucky enough to have a device that is supported by LineageOS, or you need to spend time learning the skills to build a custom ROM for your device. Why isn't there an option in developer mode that gives us a root shell on our Android devices? Why is an escape hatch that gives back control to the user so frightening for these companies?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- threeseed 7y ago
  It's because that same escape hatch can be used by bad actors. And unfortunately as we have seen all too often users are willing to blindly do what they are told if they get something out of it e.g. free game, credits etc.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- StavrosK 7y ago
  I mean, it's not luck if you just buy one of those devices...
- icebraining 7y ago
  You don't need a custom ROM to get root on Android, you just have to unlock the bootloader and replace the "su" executable. Moto (aka Lenovo) devices can be unlocked without exploits using their online tool, for example.

andreasley 7y ago

I think Apple's approach is the only reasonable one for the general population. The technological complexity of any smartphone is far beyond comprehension for most people. I write iOS software for a living, and even with complete access to the source code, I couldn't reasonably evaluate my iPhone's software - let alone the hardware. The idea that ROMs from questionable sources make your device safer sounds very strange to me. Basically every electronic device has countless security issues. Some of them are found of which some are published of which most are eventually fixed (by rather large teams of professionals). In that regard, Apple could and should do better. But the burden of making such a complex device secure simply can't be put on the end user. While I would welcome deeper access for technically inclined people, I'm not sure that option can really be given by Apple/Google without the risk of becoming a disadvantage for many users.

thefz 7y ago
> The technological complexity of any smartphone is far beyond comprehension for most people. Don't use it then. By shielding the stupid we are creating more stupid.
- 420codebro 7y ago
  That’s not your call to make, ace.
- coldtea 7y ago
  That idea is stupid in itself. The whole of civilization has been a process of shielding people from having to know stuff. The same way you don't know how to make fire from first principles, fix your car, make a CPU, or whatever... Even someone with a Ph.D in computer hardware is shielded from tons of complexities and never has to know the whole process end to end.
  - 9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
    But they are allowed to learn, which Apple doesn't want you to do. They could make it so your mom doesn't get root by accident, but you would still have the right to do so.

rimliu 7y ago

There are things I want to control, and there are things I do not want to control. Smartphone is not a "general purpose computer" and I want just use it not to babysit it. And more often than not having "control over your own" device means that is is just some malware that has this control, not the user.

adrianN 7y ago
Your smartphone has all the hardware that it needs to be a general purpose computer. If you could plug in a decent screen and connect a mouse and a keyboard it would be more powerful than the computers you used just a few years ago.
- coldtea 7y ago
  >Your smartphone has all the hardware that it needs to be a general purpose computer. Which is neither here nor there. Parent doesn't mean a smartphone doesn't have the cpu power etc. of being a general purpose computing, he says it is not one.
  - read_if_gay_ 7y ago
    But it has the capacities to be one if you plugged in peripherals.
    - alkonaut 7y ago
      Again: that doesn't matter. My lawnmower has more power than my first 3 PC's combined and could easily play quake if connected to a keyboard and screen. Not sure what difference that makes to the original question of openness?
      - read_if_gay_ 7y ago
        The point is if it were open it could do that and then it'd be a general purpose computer. People were justifying locked down smartphones by saying they're not GP computers. Factually, if they were open, they could be GP computers. The only reason they aren't is because they are locked in the first place! That justification for locking phones is based on a consequence of them being locked, so it doesn't make sense. That's the difference it makes.

onevu 7y ago

It's fortunate I can buy an iphone for my mum and she hasn't had a single problem with it. On the other hand I bought my dad a laptop with Windows and despite having an antivirus he's had all kinds of problems with it, including some heavy duty adware.

isostatic 7y ago
Indeed, I wouldn't suggest anything other than a chromebook for my relatives
- phatfish 7y ago
  You can setup Windows to be secure, just make sure to not give your parents admin accounts. Install the apps they use and give them normal user accounts. Provide the password for elevation and educate to only type that in when they are installing something they know is secure. Likely they will forget the password and have to check with their "IT helper" anyway, and sanity check there actions then. I have a Windows 7 machine setup like this for my parents and they have never had a problem with malware. The stuff that lives in the user profile gets caught by AV, and I have to install something for them maybe twice a year. I would rather put in a little extra work setting up a Windows laptop than send metrics for the entire system to Google. Their Android phones take care of that invasion of privacy.
  - onevu 7y ago
    You don't need admin access for anything. Without admin privileges I can install new software, sniff your passwords, encrypt your files, participate in a DDoS attack, mine Bitcoin...
  - isostatic 7y ago
    > You can setup Windows to be secure Or I could get them to buy something far cheaper that's already secure, rather than having to learn how to admin an OS that I have had no need to use for nearly 20 years. > check with their "IT helper" The whole point is to avoid being an "IT Helper", otherwise I'd just give them an ubuntu laptop. > The stuff that lives in the user profile gets caught by AV, Audio video?

coldtea 7y ago

Or, you know, buy something else. Before the"locked devices, people had the inverse problem: everything was two open ended and complicated, could cripple the system, stuff was open for exploit (much more so than in this case of unpatched vulnerability, viruses were everyday occurence). Techies didn't have this issue, but the general public did (heck, even techies did suffer somewhat). And that might have been OK for when the PC was an unconnected tool, but not when everybody has one with them, from school to nursing home, and everybody buys and does tons of sensitive stuff from it, while connected 24/7. Whereas you can give a 2-year old an iPad, and they can start using it just fine...

DavideNL 7y ago
> Whereas you can give a 2-year old an iPad, and they can start using it just fine... What makes you think that if Apple would provide a mechanism in iOS, like SIP (System Integrity Protection) on macOS which can be disabled by technical users if needed, would change anything? Right now, regular users do not disable SIP on macOS so there's no issue there. They don't even know/care that this possibility exists. So your 2 year old could still use the same iPad just fine.
bluescrn 7y ago
Give a child an iPad, and they’ll be bombarded with toxic advertising and apps wanting money, money, money. Back in ‘the old days’ (80s+90s), a child with access to a computer was likely to learn something, even if their primary use of it was playing games.
- coldtea 7y ago
  >Give a child an iPad, and they’ll be bombarded with toxic advertising and apps wanting money, money, money. Every been to the modern web? Or used 90s-00s shareware? Compared to those, the iPad is advertising and nagging free... And can be totally free, you don't have to buy (a) adware apps, or (b) games with in-app-purchases. I only get stuff that's in neither category, which all the best apps are...
realusername 7y ago

globile 7y ago

Don't forget about Telcos. Your AT&T, Vodafone, Verizon & Co, put an enormous amount of pressure on Apple to limit and protect device unlocking. This is a cat & mouse situation where either party might benefit from tight unlocking controls. For example, MVNOs benefit from manufacturers with flexible and open unlocking policies that make it easy to unlock devices (without approval from the original operator), whereas long-term commitment contracts with traditional operators want to make it as hard as possible for you to leave with an unlocked device (regardless of whether you are legally entitled to or not - but that's a different story). The economics of whether Apple would benefit from less strict unlocking policies (ignoring Telco's wishes) are not that clear. You might think that unlocked devices would have longer lives, and therefore limit Apple's ability to push a new one to you, but you could also say that giving phones 2 or 3 different owners in their lifespans could help with app store purchases, limiting jailbreaking and possibly avoiding going with a newer less expensive android version. Disclaimer: We unlock phones for MVNOs and individuals who get bullied around by their telcos. Edit: Spelling

lotsofpulp 7y ago
Apple sells plenty of unlocked phones, all you have to do is buy it from Apple. Lock restrictions only come into play if you want the mobile network to subsidize your phone.
- globile 7y ago
  Agreed! But a big majority of phones out there, especially in secondary markets to the US like Latin America are locked by default from within the Telcos, and will go though several hands before ending on a shelf or refurbished and sent to the middle east. Each country has different policies when it comes to unlocking. Locked phones greatly outnumber unlocked ones. Take Chile, where phones must be legally unlocked by the telco or manufacturer to work WITHIN other operators in the country, but not necessarily abroad. Buy an "unlocked" phone from a Chilean and you might get stuck with a brick. The different and complex type of unlocking levels Apple has for its devices (and there are many) are designed to assist the Telco and any countrywide regulatory policies that need to be enforced. There are many parts to this jigsaw puzzle.

Angostura 7y ago

> general computing Apple does not consider phones devices for general computing and so prioritises stability, power consumption and security over flexibility and the ability to run arbitrary code. I'm happy with that trade-off.

jtbayly 7y ago
They clearly consider iPads general purpose computers, so we're back to the starting concern.
- ohithereyou 7y ago
  I have never thought that Apple considered iPads general purpose computers. One of their biggest ads about the iPad Pro[0] even implicitly states that. The proposition, in my mind, that Apple is trying to sell with the iPad to the majority of people who use their computers for social media, content consumption, and office tasks like email and Word document authoring is "you don't need general computing flexibility for the vast majority of things that you do". [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llZys3xg6sU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llZys3xg6sU
athrowaway3z 7y ago
This is such an unfathomably incoherent thought from an individuals perspective that i don't even know where to start. Could you give your definition of 'general computing'?
- joosters 7y ago
  Well, I can run a Turing Machine using javascript on my phone's Safari browser. Do you have another definition of 'general computing' ?
- Angostura 7y ago
  Which part of it do you find unfathomably incoherent? I'll try to explain very simply.
7y ago

viraptor 7y ago

I'm not sure Google really belongs here. Telcos and some companies licensing Android - sure. But unlocking actual Google phones, like Pixel, is literally available from the menu in the developer settings. It's a well known/documented process.

dessant 7y ago
That only unlocks the bootloader, which then allows you to install a custom one. There is no built-in option on Android for gaining elevated priviledges in any form, not even in a restricted way to disable bloatware that might compromise your privacy, and rooting your device breaks OTA updates, which also include security patches.
throwaway9d0291 7y ago
It does. Unlocking and gaining elevated privileges through rooting trips Google's SafetyNet API which will lock you out of many apps and/or features. It also breaks your device's Widevine certification so you can't watch DRM-protected video from many services. As for the "We do not control our own devices, we cannot stop certain processes on them, and we do not know where our personal data is sent.", with stock Android provided by an OEM, you have no control over the opaque and invasive monolith that is Google Play Services and there's no way to control what data exits your device, aside from installing a VPN-based firewall. You can't even control when apps have access to your data, just a binary on/off switch.
- lern_too_spel 7y ago
  Of course it breaks DRM. That's the point. > with stock Android provided by an OEM, you have no control over the opaque and invasive monolith that is Google Play Services and there's no way to control what data exits your device, aside from installing a VPN-based firewall. This is true of all systems (and even worse on iOS, which has the same data collection as Play Services but can't be disabled or avoided) and irrelevant to the discussion about whether a user can completely control their device if they wish.
- UncleMeat 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

zaroth 7y ago

You can get a developer account, build and sign your own executables, and run whatever you want on your iPhone. I don’t think those flashed ROMs give you appreciably more “control” over your iPhone than stock iOS provides, because actual control requires usable control surfaces. More likely, you are replacing the control surfaces provided by an accountable entity (Apple) who has prioritized your security and privacy and provides a constant stream of updates to maintain that, with what exactly? The entire iOS feature set is designed to protect your personal data, from outside attackers who would seek to compromise it, to insider threats like apps trying to siphon off more than you might expect, to end-users inadvertently giving away their own (or your) data without a care in the world. The security that a modern iPhone provides to its owner is truly a remarkable and commendable experience overall. I am extremely happy we as consumers have the choice to purchase exactly such a device.

readams 7y ago
The iOS feature set is intended to protect Apple's business model and revenue streams by forcing you to do things in Apple's jail. Getting a developer account is obviously an absurd and impractical approach to distribute software and proposing this is frankly ridiculous. It's not free, requires you own a Mac, and is way beyond the technical abilities of most users.
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  > requires you own a Mac I mostly agree with you, but you don't necessarily need a Mac in order to use your developer account for sideloading—you can also use Cydia Impactor which is available for Windows/Linux.
chmod775 7y ago
"You shouldn't be concerned about freedom because you're not gonna use it/need it anyways." That's what your comment boils down to. You really want to go down that road of an argument? On a website that has hacker culture in its very name?
- 7y ago

zapzupnz 7y ago

Goodness me it gets tiring seeing a post like this every time an article about iOS comes up. It's a legitimate point to make, but it should rather be that we talk about the content of the article rather than bring out the 'Apple's taking our freedom away' soapbox. It inevitably turns into a debate between one side who values personal freedoms but won't be told to buy Android phones widespread safety, security, and privacy and tell the others to just buy Android phones. This goes around and around, usually getting nobody anywhere, and happens all over again the next time an article about iOS turns up on the front page.

throwaway156503 7y ago
So let me ask, why make this comment? Why reply like this? To shut people's concerns down? There's no value here. There's nothing to be gained. Conversely, sometimes it's OK just to let people complain: without the sentiment, how do you know if people still care?
- adamisom 7y ago
  It’s pretty obvious what the point is. It’s to complain about the soapbox / complaints in hopes of seeing less such comments in the future.
- 693471 7y ago
  It's off topic and people should start getting banned for it because it turns the comments into useless bikeshedding
pathseeker 7y ago
It's an article about enabling a jailbreak and you are mad that people talk about jailbreaking needing to be a thing?
kgwxd 7y ago
If a problem is presented, someone is going to bring up a solution. The right solution has been the same for a long time, Apple hasn't implemented it yet. Maybe they'll never implement it, but maybe someone will consider alternatives because of the comment.

mkane848 7y ago

For a second I thought I was in a thread about Windows

papermachete 7y ago

I don't think that's so bad, makes the developer's job easier when there is just one version of your target. Nothing worse than entitled tinkerers.