4 ms·
I think we are ascribing too much to this as some corporate apple policy when the reality is closer to a single engineer or engineering lead believes the hardwa
by nemothekid 4y ago
I think we are ascribing too much to this as some corporate apple policy when the reality is closer to a single engineer or engineering lead believes the hardware would be open, but Apple is not going to spend any resources behind that.
So you have engineering teams with hacker ethos building "open" hardware, but Apple the company doesn't really give a shit and is not going to spend money on documentation for a feature the company doesn't care about.
- Wowfunhappy 4y agoI take your point, but I have to imagine Tim Cook (or someone just under him) signed off on opening the bootloader. It's not like the executive team doesn't know about it. Allowing an engineer to answer questions for half an hour a week would be practically a rounding error in terms of resources, and certainly less of a commitment than rewriting iBoot policy, which they already did.
- bombcar 4y agoWe're not really privy to how it got through (I could imagine some engineer/manager somewhere arguing that allowing it open would change some obscure tax/import filing somewhere).
- kaba0 4y agoI’m fairly sure that it is not as easy from a legal standpoint. Apple does manufacture some of their own components, but they still have plenty of third-party ones, where the usual licensing applies - so the same reason why it’s hard to run third-party OS on android phones.