G2 Detects When Rooted and Reinstalls Stock OS 406
Posted
by
samzenpus
from the back-to-the-beginning dept.
from the back-to-the-beginning dept.
RandyDownes writes "And you thought the Droid X's kill switch was bad. HTC and T-Mobile's new G2 can detect when it's been rooted and responds by reinstalling the factory OS. This seems like a violation of the Apache license Android is licensed under and is especially ironic given Eric Schmidt's recent statement about not requiring carriers to give consumers the option to install Google's own version of the OS. Schmidt called it a violation of the principles of open source."
Update: 10/06 17:47 GMT by S : As readers have noted, the G2 is not from Motorola. Here's a better source, and here's the XDA Developers thread discussing the issue.
Motorola's Droid G2...? G2 with MotoBlur...? (Score:2, Informative)
What is he talking about...?
Vendor confusion (Score:2, Informative)
Someone here's messed up bad (Score:5, Informative)
G2 is by HTC, and I'm fairly sure isn't running MotoBlur.
I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:2)
Oh, the war will be won. It will be one by the carriers and hardware manufacturers and lost by the consumers. The market for people who want control of the software on their devices is simply too small.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:2)
The battle will be won, almost certainly. As for the war, it's anyone's guess.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Interesting)
I have an EVO (HTC Supersonic) right now. I didn't plan on rooting it as I was somewhat happy with the entire phone, but what really started to bug me is that I couldn't delete the default Sprint apps. Then with the 2.2 Froyo update, I didn't have the option to use the Android launcher/homescreen (instead of Sense). It's not that Sense was bad, I just wanted to try something else on my "OPEN PLATFORM" Android phone and was prevented from doing so.
I finally decided to take the plunge, root it, and install a custom ROM, and I couldn't be happier! I now have control of my phone; I can install/uninstall/modify whatever I want. I don't need NFL/NASCAR/SprintZone/facebook/twitter/peep/flickr taking up space and constantly launching when I don't even have accounts set up for those services.
Oddly enough, since I've tried some of the AOSP stuff I realized I don't necessarily hate Sense; the HTC Dialer, Contacts (People), MMS app, and even their Browser are quite nice.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:5, Interesting)
...battle for control over our mobile devices. Fuck it, I don't care anymore. The war certainly won't be won in its current direction. It needs fundamental change at the consumer level.
This is why I recently bought a n900 after reviewing the current situation and comparing many devices with articles, reviews, asking friends or colleagues about their models. Albeit with a (around) 450 € sticker price it was not cheep. But out of the box I do have to worry about changing carriers (if I do), needing to get root (if I want to), app prices, and app licensing.
Oh did I mention it has been out for little over a year and is stable and has a really cool community constantly building open source apps ?
http://maemo.org/ [maemo.org]
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:2)
suppose to be _do not have to worry_ damn typo's
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Insightful)
app prices
What is different from Maemo than Android, iOS, or WinPhone 7 (when released)? The OS vendors aren't the ones controlling the prices, the developers are.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:4, Insightful)
app prices
What is different from Maemo than Android, iOS, or WinPhone 7 (when released)? The OS vendors aren't the ones controlling the prices, the developers are.
I think he was talking about "apt-get install packagename" type applications. In that world, the price is pretty much set in stone by the license, usually GPL, and for end-users is effectively zero no matter how you measure it.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Informative)
What is different from Maemo than Android, iOS, or WinPhone 7 (when released)?
Maemo - at least on the N900 - has a different target audience as the other ones you named. It is a full-blown Linux - apt-get and all. Many existing Linux applications can be run on it, with the hardware being the limiting factor. The downside is that the interface across applications is far from having the polish of iOS or even Android, and that there is little in terms of your 'typical' iPhone apps. The upside is that the platform is truly open and immensely powerful. You can ssh into your phone, you can run a full Apache server stack, you can run OpenOffice (or LibreOffice, for the Oracle haters) and so on. All the new libraries and technologies you see in current Linux distributions are - or will be - available on your phone, further closing the gap between your devices.
Maemo (or MeeGo, its successor) still has a long way to go until it will be as accessible to 'normal' users and as visually polished as, say, iOS. But it offers a powerful platform for more specialised needs.
I did the same thing (Score:2)
Dell (of all people) had a sale -- and I got one of these at a nice discount. I've been quite pleased with it -- and have barely begun to scrape the surface in terms of what it can do (and the software that is available).
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:2)
I have an HTC Magic, my next phone will be MeeGo/Maemo based though. (assuming they don't remove features such as root access in MeeGo)
I will wait for the N9 though, the N900 is better than my current phone but it seems a waste to get one now that N9 is on the horizon.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Interesting)
I bought the N900 as soon as it was released in the US. I had been waiting for it since I got my N810, which I instantly fell in love with. The N900 was great out of the box, but over the next 4 months I became increasingly disappointed with it. I even changed from AT&T to TMobile because I wanted 3G data. The Maemo platform is still incredibly immature as anything other than a hobbyist/developer platform. As a smartphone it's nearly useless. And Nokia did nothing but pay lip service to the platform after launch. I say this as a long time Nokia fan and Maemo booster. I jumped to Android, the Nexus One, and haven't missed my N900 for a second.
Not only does the software platform suffer from terribly integration and missing features, the hardware itself is poorly designed. The slide mechanism is cheap, and wound up putting scratches into the right side of the keyboard area. There is a magnet on the OUTSIDE of the battery cover that performs two actions. It helps hold down the useless kickstand (it's positioned too far to one side to reliably keep the N900 upright if you play on touching it) when the kickstand is closed, AND it also triggers a sensor on the phone so it knows the battery door is closed. When that magnet falls off, the phone won't mount the SD card because it thinks the battery door is open. The only solution is to go to Nokia warranty and have them send you a new back.
If you lose the stylus, Nokia won't even SELL you a new one. They sell them to warranty service centers, but PEOPLE can't get them.
Nokia has completely lost any clue they had how to satisfy customers anymore. They keep putting out great designed phones with Symbian, a dead OS (don't even tell me how awesome it still is, it's not. It's a dead OS that no one told is dead. iOS, Android, even WinMoPhoneCE 7 is better than Symbian.), and crappy hardware with a POTENTIALLY fantastic OS, Maemo. And then they decided to merge Moblin with Maemo. It'll never take off, any chance it had is dead. Meego is the new Taligent. And the N900 is just dead in the water.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Informative)
~15 years ago is "fairly recent?" A few seconds' googling turned up this [qualcomm.com]:
I'd hesitate to call any of these dominant at any time in the present or past. TDMA is no longer with us, but GSM is supported by two of the four major carriers and CDMA is supported by the other two carriers. If any system had market dominance at any point, I'd have to say it was AMPS, which was the only game in town from the '80s through the mid-to-late-'90s.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Interesting)
Where change can happen is in the media or in companies that have a lot of power. Google might be able to do something. Individuals, not so much.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is happening in the EU.
Consumers are buying unlocked phones. I am definitely not buying any more contract phones and I could not care less what is exclusive and what is not. Android did with that. There is enough of the same from all carriers and unlocked as well so no need to fight for that coveted spot in the queue in front of the shop when a new gadget comes out.
An average smartphone costs 230£ to 400£ for most models. That is well within what most people can afford nowdays and most carriers have pretty good SIM-only tariffs.
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I'm so sick of this... (Score:3, Interesting)
Driod does... (Score:2, Funny)
Droid does.... screw you over if you want to customize it.
Re:Driod does... (Score:4, Informative)
This is disingenuous. I have a Droid-X. Rooted it right out of the box and installed software that Verizon would prefer I didn't use (Wi-Fi tethering). Recently upgraded it to Froyo (Android 2.2) and was still able to root it.
The Droid-X doesn't have a "kill switch" against rooting. It has a kill switch against installing a new OS. If you want to install a different ROM image than the Droid-X isn't for you. If you simply want to customize the Android OS to do whatever the hell you want then there is nothing in place to stop you. Root it, uninstall all the bloatware, run wi-fi tethering to your hearts content.... it will do all of those things.
Re:Driod does... Dell streak really does. (Score:2)
Re:Driod does... (Score:3, Informative)
Actually it only has a "kill switch" against unsigned /boot partitions. The /system partition is only signature checked after it is updated via the stock recovery partition. If you update things (or 100% replace) /system/ via something like Koush's Boot Strap Recovery that check never occurs. This is how some groups are working on getting AOSP based Android builds up and going for testing on the Droid X. As long as they can get it to work with the official /boot/ they are fine.
Also, it should be clear what the "kill switch" is. It isn't an eFuse like so many falsely said early on. The bootloader simply won't hand over to /boot/ and sits in a state waiting for RSD Lite to flash a new properly signed SBF to it.
It's not open source (Score:3, Insightful)
You get what you pay for.
If you really want to have an "open" device, you should have supported the various open hardware platforms that eventually failed because of your lack of support.
You can't really complain that you don't have choices when you made no effort to support the good choices that you had.
Re:It's not open source (Score:3, Interesting)
Openmoko failed as much because of bad management.
Or at least the software platform did. Developers (paid ones) were just allowed to go off and do what they liked, so you got people spending six months rewriting the onscreen keyboard when half the time the sound subsystem didn't work (kind of important on a phone) along with a variety of other massive problems. Oh yeah, and the two or three full-stack rewrites they seemed to have going at any one time.
It didn't even get good press amongst geeks because open was all it had going for it, and they burned through whatever capital they had by pissing into the wind.
The N900 is the most FOSS-geek friendly thing I can find at the moment, and I love it.
One thing wrong with the N900 (Score:2)
Re:It's not open source (Score:2)
That seems a bit counterintuitive to me. Seems more likely that if I had done that, nothing would be substantially different except that I had hurt myself a bit.
(or is it possible that you making the all-too-common mistake of thinking that "everyone" is a single entity that makes decisions all together and should be rewarded and punished as such?)
Re:It's not open source (Score:4, Interesting)
You get what you pay for.
If you really want to have an "open" device, you should have supported the various open hardware platforms that eventually failed because of your lack of support.
You can't really complain that you don't have choices when you made no effort to support the good choices that you had.
Oh my fucking god man, whaaa whaa whaa. I really try to support open source, but THIS is the fucking reason why open source isn't more widely supported. Everyone developing for them says they're the best thing ever, and then when users don't adopt, the developers blame the USERS.
WTF? Did you not ever take a business class in your life? Consumers do what they want, and you either provide them with what they want or you get left behind. If you don't see it that way, you will also get left behind. If consumers don't pick up your device, its YOUR FAULT.
If the CEO of a poorly performing company came out and said "We lost money this year because consumers refuse to support us." that CEO would get fucking FIRED.
This mentality upsets me so much, because every year I download Ubuntu and give it a shot. I *want* it to be awesome and I want to switch. But every time I have some menial little issue that ends up taking a week to sort out, and I give up. Then, when I mention that experience to people who strongly support linux, they say it was my fault. That "All you have to do it edit .asoundrc. If you won't RTFM we can't help you.", as if you just click "edit" and its done. No one on the forums could tell me *what* I needed to do in the editor (and I searched, and asked nicely - I know how to ask things on forums) and I *tried* reading the manual, and reading everything else I could find, but all I was trying to do was get my media center to properly mix the audio for 5.1 channel surround! In windows you just check a box. In linux, I spent a week on it and then gave up.
As long as people keep developing crap software and then blaming it on the user, they will never succeed. That said, I am still excited for Ubuntu 10.10. Just like I was for 7.10,8.4,8.10,9.4,9.10, and 10.4. Lets hope *this* time its money...
-Taylor
Re:It's not open source (Score:2)
Re:It's not open source (Score:2)
I don't know about Ubuntu but Debian's had 'check a box' surround sound support for a while now and since Ubuntu is Debian based...
Hmm. Well 9.04 certainly didn't have it. I'll check again when i get 10.10 going...
Re:It's not open source (Score:3, Interesting)
If the CEO of a poorly performing company came out and said "We lost money this year because consumers refuse to support us." that CEO would get fucking FIRED.
Seems to work great for the MAFIAA. They even get senators fawning over them because of it. Where's my senators?
(yes, no need to spell out the painfully obvious fact that I don't bribe senators).
Re:It's not open source (Score:4, Funny)
#152037 +(3036)- [X]
<dm> I discovered that you'd never get an answer to a problem from Linux Gurus by asking. You have to troll in order for someone to help you with a Linux problem.
<dm> For example, I didn't know how to find files by contents and the man pages were way too confusing. What did I do? I knew from experience that if I just asked, I'd be told to read the man pages even though it was too hard for me.
<dm> Instead, I did what works. Trolling. By stating that Linux sucked because it was so hard to find a file compared to Windows, I got every self-described Linux Guru around the world coming to my aid. They gave me examples after examples of different ways to do it. All this in order to prove to everyone that Linux was better.
* ion has quit IRC (Ping timeout)
<dm> brings a tear to my eye...
<dm> So if you're starting out Linux, I advise you to use the same method as I did to get help. Start the sentence with "Linux is gay because it can't do XXX like Windows can". You will have PhDs running to tell you how to solve your problems.
<dm> this person must be a kindred spirit of mine
Re:It's not open source (Score:2, Insightful)
The G2 is also available for $500 from T-Mobile free and clear with no contract. It will be interesting to see what justification T-Mobile comes out with for locking down the bootloader on the G2 when it is bought outright like this.
Re:It's not open source (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm writing from my laptop tethered to a myTouch Slide running CyanogenMOD and Barnacle wifi tethering, so I'm getting a kick out of these comments.
Getting about 1Mbps HSDPA from inside a building. I really notice when it drops down to 64kbps EDGE, though.
I try to be responsible with me tethering though... I'm not running any streaming music or anything. I've generated about 5MB down, 1MB up in the past hour.
I don't see why they would get so upset about tethering when people running Google Navigation on cross-country drives or Youtube vids would burn through much, much more. Aside from if they want to charge extra for that feature (like SMS, yech... charging extra to use low QoS?)
Re:It's not open source (Score:2)
I don't think companies should give up on this model (selling and supporting an unsubsidized phone). Google failed, but my understanding is they didn't have the right support infrastructure (and the phone with the carriers available had too many initial problems requiring support). But a better phone and organized support could still succeed in the US (elsewhere is easier I hear). But there needs to be better promotion of how much it will cost you assuming you don't break your phone in the first 2 years (most won't) compared to plans that subsidize phones. I don't even know what the best US carriers are for offering unsubsidized plans. How much cheaper are they per month? Since phones are often subsidized $350 or more, they'd have to be $15/mo cheaper compared to a 2 year subsidized phone plan.
I'm sure most slashdotters know of this phone (geeksphone.com, great video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mC1M77xKn6w [youtube.com]) , but I just found out about it - out of the box rooted. That's the way all phones should be, but how many will by this one (which is seriously outdated now - I'd only consider their next model).
Re:It's not open source (Score:2)
This...
Mod up parent etc...
I bought LG GT540 because that was the only android phone I could afford. Do I complain that there is no flashing support? Do I complain that it is only 1.6 Android? Do I complain that it sometimes defaults to Russian character set?
No! Because I made the decision to buy this piece of shit.
Yes, if I could afford it, I would have bought a dev phone from Google. Then I would have top-spec phone with all the freedoms. But whining that my 200€ phone does not give the features and freedoms as the €600 phone is just retarded.
Oh, hmm.. Just realized my phone is unlocked and is fully paid for. Anyway, parents point stands.
Re:It's not open source (Score:3, Insightful)
Google tried to sell you one, none of you cheap bastards bought one.
I think you have it all wrong.
The Nexus One only was available for T-Mobile (not exactly the biggest carrier state-side) and AT&T, which was going up against the extremely popular iDevices.
Lack of consumer demand didn't kill the device- the boardroom politics did. Why does AT&T love the iPhone? It's surely not the infrastructure problems they gained with the mass of users all wanting to watch videos of dogs skateboarding on Youtube. It's the fact that they have a highly desirable device that you can only get on their network. Even if AT&T wasn't already a household name, they are now attached to a device that is. That's big.
Compare this to the N1. Google comes to Verizon and wants to sell them on a new smartphone that they will have zero control over and is not going to win them any new customers at all, because it will exist on all carriers. Why would Verizon take the time and energy to get the handset working on their system for no gain, when they can work with Motorola and create a snazzy new Droid that, just like AT&T's iPhone, will only exist on their network thus attracting new customers. Not only that, but accepting Google's new phone would possibly hurt their relationship with their other business partners- I'm sure that there were some heated discussions between Verizon and Motorola's bigwigs when the N1 was first announced, and I wouldn't be surprised if there was some bad blood between them and Google seeing how Google worked with them on the original Droid right before announcing their own super phone.
No, the N1 experiment never even got off the runway. It was an experiment to see if a device catering directly to geeks (who else would pay an extra $300 for an unlocked phone?) would have enough marketing power to sustain itself, and of course forcing carriers to open up a bit. It sadly failed on both accounts.
Re:It's not open source (Score:3, Insightful)
The main reason no-one bought one was they did the math ; if you are sufficiently organised to set a calendar event to remind you to change your phone plan at the end of your contract, it's cheaper to get the phone on a contract. If you actually use the capacity of the larger plans (as opposed to just going for the more expensive plan to get a phone subsidy), then it's DEFINITELY cheaper to get the phone with a contract.
If they offered an equivalent talk + data plan, cheaper over 2 years than the cost of a smartphone, I'd be all over it. But they don't.
Wut? (Score:5, Insightful)
This seems like a violation of the Apache license Android is licensed under
Yes, it "seems" like a violation of the Apache license because you don't like it (i don't either for that matter), but please explain to me how it is an actual violation of that license. Have you ever read the thing?
Re:Wut? (Score:5, Funny)
please explain to me how it is an actual violation of that license
Section 3, paragraph 11, about a third of the way down, "Don't be evil."
Re:Wut? (Score:2)
What idiots are moderating that as "interesting". He's making a joke, people. Moderate it as funny. (Section 3 has 1 paragraph, and it doesn't say "Don't be evil").
Re:Wut? (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, so you want people to read the license agreement, Really? Next thing we know, you'll want them to RTFA. You must be new here (yes, I said it!)
Re:Wut? (Score:3, Insightful)
please explain to me how it is an actual violation of that license
Section 3, paragraph 11, about a third of the way down, "Don't be evil."
Indeed. For anyone under misapprehsion that Google does not have the propensity for evil, or is not already evil, this should remove any remaining doubt.
If the issue is not resolved satisfactorily, and by that I mean by Google and not by the usual ever-vigilant outside developers, I will simply return the G2 I bought yesterday. I was perfectly happy with my nonsmart Nokia music phone, which has the additional advantages that it fits comfortably in my pocket and runs for several days without a recharge.
Re:Wut? (Score:3, Insightful)
For anyone under misapprehsion that Google does not have the propensity for evil, or is not already evil, this should remove any remaining doubt.
Because a third party added a nasty feature to the third party's phone, without Google's knowledge or consent, and once public the Google CEO makes a statement of being against it? Yeah, proof of being evil right there
Re:Wut? (Score:5, Funny)
Submitter seems to have "Apache" confused with "GPLv3." It's a common mistake; Richard Stallman has been known to collect scalps.
Looks like early adopter was the right choice (Score:3, Insightful)
...but now I feel bad for even supporting Motorola/HTC. We have a Droid and an Eris, which are fine, but the G2 and D2 are going in the wrong direction. I will not renew with either of these companies if they continue with these retarded shenanigans.
Re:Looks like early adopter was the right choice (Score:2)
I'm coming to the same conclusion. I love my Eris but only after I put 2.2 on it. One of the requirements for my next phone (if it's android, which 3 months of go would have been certain) will be root. My Eris also runs Debian so it has usefulness beyond that of a phone if I need it.
I guess I'll find out in about 10 months when I can upgrade...
The Reason Why (Score:5, Interesting)
This and a number of other consumer ills I think can be reduced to a single statement: "The consumer is not the customer"
Re:The Reason Why (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, the consumer is the customer. You, however, are not the consumer. It's intended for the 99% of users whose phone will never be rooted by anything other than malware.
Re:The Reason Why (Score:4, Insightful)
This is why I'd like some type of thing akin to a seal and a printed notice, "warranty void if seal opened". The N1 had this when flipping on OEM unlock.
Perhaps this is the best compromise. To keep Joe Sixpack from getting exploited by a Dancing Bunnies exploit, what would be ideal is to require ADB to be installed, a command issued from the PC that would pop up a lengthy, scary as hell to uneducated users that they are about to cross into Mordor, and that they can easily back out right now with no harm done, or proceed and void their warranty. Some warning dialog that even someone who is drunk, baked, high, coked up, and tripping has a good chance of understanding. User clicks "proceed", fastboot is opened, signature checking is relaxed to allow any keys to sign recovery, boot, and OS ROMS, ro.secure is set to 0, /bin/su is enabled and a .apk file for the confirmation part of su installed.
Of course, there would be a method to put this all back and shut the barn door if the user wants to have the phone back for service, similar to a DFU reinstall on iOS devices, but that will be buried in the fine print. This way, if someone does hose up their phone, it isn't hard to get them back to a known good OS level.
Re:The Reason Why (Score:3, Insightful)
Installing a different OS on my PC doesn't void its warranty; why should installing a different OS have to void the warranty on my phone?
I think what's lacking here is enforcement of consumer protection laws. Cellular manufacturers/carriers are screwing around with phone owners' personal property rights, and should be punished for it!
Re:The Reason Why (Score:2)
So much nerd rage on this subject it's ridiculous.
Re:The Reason Why (Score:4, Informative)
To prevent me from owning my own hardware is intrinsically evil. If your claim was true they would offer a simple, press Z on the hardware keyboard while you boot to not have the OS replaced or something.
Re:The Reason Why (Score:2, Redundant)
If you buy it you own it, complete with this feature and the legal right to bypass it if you can figure out how.
Why would they do that? They don't care about you. You are not the target market. They know they are likely to lose your business. There aren't enough of you to make it worth their while to do as you suggest.
Re:The Reason Why (Score:2)
You make a compelling argument, clearly regulation is needed to protect the rights of this minority. As we do for other minorities.
Re:The Reason Why (Score:3, Insightful)
The right to own and do what I want with my owned property. This software is meant to prevent the owner of his property using it in the way he sees fit.
Re:The Reason Why (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a crap argument.
The only way to 'get root' on many of these devices is to attach a cable to the phone, invoke a special command to get a root shell, and only then can things be mucked with, by using a unix command shell.
How can malware get on the phone if 99% of the users will be only using it through the phone's on-screen menu system? On Android, arn't all apps sandboxed + running as non-root? If an app can break out of this process model, arn't there more serious problems @ stake here?
How can malware 'trick' the user into 'getting root' when that same 99% doesn't know wtf that is?
I want a portable data terminal. I want to run my own scripts and programs on my portable data terminal that do what I want. I want a computer I can keep in my pocket and have it's network interface linked up to the wireless tower. I want to pay a reasonable fee for this service. Why can't any of the US carriers deliver that in a straightforward package?
Same thing different day (Score:2)
Android == Free? (Score:2)
Explain to me how this is better than the iPhone jail?
Time for Nokia to take a stand... I hate the name "MeeGo" but if it delivers a truly unlocked , I'm interested.
Re:Android == Free? (Score:2)
Nokia's stand appears to be with Symbian more than anything else unfortunately. They're still toying with MeeGo but I don't see the concerted effort to make is a large scale product.
Re:Android == Free? (Score:4, Insightful)
When I rooted my Droid X, all it took was a replacement of the Busybox executable to give me all the tools I needed. It isn't Maemo, but I have pretty much everything but gpg and mutt available [1].
An iPhone just doesn't require just an exploit to UID 0, it requires one to get out of the BSD jail() with root. It also requires the jailbreak to install a complete userland including an install system (dpkg), shells, an app (Cydia) to manage everything. Even worse, the jailbroken Mobile Terminal app is barely usable, and has to be hunted down from a repo, as the one that comes as default from Cydia does not work on iOS 4.
This doesn't say that the iPhone is bad; it means that a jailbreak on this device is a lot harder to do elegantly than rooting an Android phone.
[1]: Even in the days of Web applications aplenty, there is no faster mail reader than mutt on a decently responsive system, especially if the spool file is local.
The law says you can hack it so when it is bypasse (Score:2)
The law says you can hack it so when it is bypassed then there is not much they can do but put out a update that blocks the hack.
Re:The law says you can hack it so when it is bypa (Score:2)
Or not bother, as long as it isn't a remote hack. They don't actually care what you do to your phone.
Re:The law says you can hack it so when it is bypa (Score:3, Informative)
> Why should anyone accept and further abusive practices like this?
You don't. You don't have to buy it. Most people, however, have no desire to "hack" their phones and would be pleased to learn that they are protected against anyone else doing it.
Re:The law says you can hack it so when it is bypa (Score:3, Interesting)
So you're saying that I can progressively pull out of the market until I am forced to opt out of technology in general because I don't agree to being abused by OEMs?
Yes, that's exactly right. You don't have any right to the technology. I would love to have a magical flying unicorn, but nobody offers such a thing. I don't get pissed off when Breeders tell me "Nope, sorry. Don't carry them". You have the freedom to make any purchasing decision you like. At the same time manufacturers have the right to decide what products they sell. We can't force them to offer an open phone that meets our wants.
Realistically though you will never have no devices to buy. Someone somewhere will continue to market more open devices so long as there is a demand for it. Otherwise, you are totally free to build yourself whatever kind of phone you want.
Can't be updated? (Score:2)
So it can't be updated? Because if it can, this isn't a problem.
"...hardware itself limits the user's rights..." (Score:3, Insightful)
No. It limits their ability. Not the same thing.
Re:"...hardware itself limits the user's rights... (Score:2)
That's kind of stupid. If I told you, hey buddy, you have free rights. And then locked you in a cage. Then you said, hey, where are my free rights?
I'm not limiting your rights, just your access to them. WTF?
Rights quality = access * amount of rights
If your access is limited, the quality of your rightship is also limited.
Re:"...hardware itself limits the user's rights... (Score:3, Insightful)
Crappy analogy. Locked in a cage you are not free to do anything. Sold a phone that doesn't do quite what you'd like leaves you free to do anything else, including throwing it away or hacking it.
You *chose* to buy the damn phone. If you now find that it doesn't do what you want (but does do as the vendor promised) throw it in the trash. If it doesn't do what the vendor promised demand your money back. "Rights" != "Entitlements"
Pointless to even bother discussing (Score:2, Insightful)
It will be hacked in 2 weeks time. If you don't want that crap on your phone then buy a different phone. There are lots to choose from.
Re:Pointless to even bother discussing (Score:2, Informative)
The problem is that no Android phone since the Nexus 1 has allowed rooting. Motorola has told modders and developers to go elsewhere explicitly. HTC has always given out source, drivers, and access to dumps so people could easily mod their devices. However because of pressure from the cellular companies, they had to cave in and start making their devices modder hostile.
It would be nice to have a phone that is unlocked and friendly to modders. Problem is that the N1 crashed and burned, and no carrier would want to carry such a device. Likely the only future solution will be having Google carry ADP phones that are unlocked/moddable versions of existing phones, although there has not been an ADP since the ADP2 (the N1 technically does not count.)
I'll Ask (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I'll Ask (Score:3, Insightful)
It shows this android owner that he will have to be very careful about his next phone purchase. Honestly if I cannot get a phone I can use as I want I will go back to a non-smartphone.
Re:I'll Ask (Score:4, Insightful)
I thought the entire appeal of Android was that it was your phone and you could put what you wanted on it
You can. Google exerts no control over the Android marketplace. They sell apps that compete with their own Google apps (would Apple ever allow this?), apps that compete with the default carrier apps and apps that even allow you to violate the terms of service you agreed to with Verizon/AT&T/etc.
Re:I'll Ask (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I'll Ask (Score:4, Interesting)
and how long until verizon locks you out of the android market and substitutes the v-cast market instead? soon. the only reason the carrier relinquished a little control to google, allowing their phones to make google money through search, is because they had nothing to compete with the iphone.
now that they have android, watch the noose tighten. carriers just can't stop trying to squeeze a dime out of every aspect of the mobile web. they'll never allow themselves to be relegated to being a pipe.
of course, they don't get that they really don't have android. google sold it to them like "look, it's open source, how much control can we really exert over you?". ha ha. thousands of google employees that are infinitely familiar with the source code means more than they think.
Re:I'll Ask (Score:2)
Decline the software agreement (Score:2)
I wonder what legal limbo you would get into if you declined the software agreement (which they like to call a contract) and yet force the software on you anyway.
Re:Decline the software agreement (Score:2)
I wonder what legal limbo you would get into if you declined the software agreement (which they like to call a contract) and yet force the software on you anyway.
How can they force it on you if you're not using the software? You're not allowed to use it if you don't accept the license (you can return it instead).
Re:Decline the software agreement (Score:2)
This really makes me want to get and return such devices. That way I cause these vendors the most economic harm I can.
Re:Decline the software agreement (Score:2)
It'd be just like owning a car but having no driver's license.
Not really. A drivers license (and the requirements for one) vary state to state and are simply government stating that they grant you the permission to drive on their roads.
Contrast that to this phone.
The software license being pushed as a contract between two independant entities, in this case, the owner of the software, and the prospective user of the software. The hardware is owned by you. If the license is refused by you, it is implicit that you are NOT granting the software permission to operate on your equipment.
This would be like someone coming up to you and saying, "I want to sell you this upgrade to your car's emission control software." However, when you decline, the person sneaks into your garage and installs the software against your will, and then declares that you are NOT allowed to use your car because you said you didn't want the software.
It raises an interesting concept because you are prevented from rejecting the contract.
Walled gardens. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that companies like Google and HTC bend to the will of the carriers. They openly permit garbage on these phones. The irony here is that they're decimating their own brands this way.
The carriers themselves have this desperate hope that consumers will accept their walled garden as willingly as they accept they accept Apple's. The problem is that their garden is overrun with weeds and has an overflowing outhouse sitting right there as a centerpiece. People tolerate, even embrace Apple's practices because there's a good level of quality and consistency. A lot of money and effort is invested in maintaining this quality. These other carriers, however, cut corners everywhere they can and put no effort whatsoever into maintaining quality. All they want to do is keep consumers locked in forcibly. They're deluded into believing they can offer something competitive with Apple's app store. They might drive away that consumer at some point, but for now they've got them trapped.
This is one of the consequences of having separate companies develop the OS and the device. Beyond the problem of countless variations of the same basic thing, a user experience that isn't seamlessly integrated these companies simply don't have the leverage Apple enjoys.
This is not to say that I believe that the iPhone reflects some wonderland of technology but simply that the iPhone and the app store have become the benchmark.
Nice try HTC and/or T-Mobile... won't work (Score:2)
The geniuses and gurus are at it with the analysis and dismantling. It's actually fun for them. So when they are done, there will be a package to copy to internal storage followed by a special reboot and an "update" process. All they have to do is disable whatever it is that is checking for root and disable or deceive it in some way. After that, it's business as usual.
There's no doubt that the illegal distribution of software on the android platform is pretty high. And we could make arguments about why that is forever using all the same old arguments and excuses we always have. The fact that it is easier on Android phones than others (is that true? I am not so sure about that) is a matter for consideration. But that, in and of itself, is not the reason carriers need to get into the mix by making it less useful for users.
I suspect they have their own interests to protect such as money they get through software bundling. In the case of PC makers, there are legal issues and even laws limiting this type of behavior. Personally, I don't see much difference between a PC and a smartphone any longer and would argue that they are pretty much the same thing at this point. The right to use and remove software on any device I own is still my right. (It is their right, I suppose to make it difficult if they want to though! No law says they have to make it easy.) It is the motives of the carriers that bother me the most. Not only am I being "sold" to other parties through such deals, but those deals, which are separate from my deal with my carrier (except in the legalese fine print that says I agree to it in the past, present and future) have managed to have a serious affect on user experiences. And to me, that affect is one demonstrating the complete lack of respect for their customers.
Re:Nice try HTC and/or T-Mobile... won't work (Score:5, Informative)
There's no doubt that the illegal distribution of software on the android platform is pretty high. And we could make arguments about why that is forever using all the same old arguments and excuses we always have. The fact that it is easier on Android phones than others (is that true? I am not so sure about that) is a matter for consideration. But that, in and of itself, is not the reason carriers need to get into the mix by making it less useful for users.
You misunderstand. You can install "pirated", not-downloaded-from-the-Market software on ANY stock android phone. Pirating software is not made any easier by rooting. Go grab a 2GB torrent of every damn Android app out there, install on your stock phone. Not a problem.
This is all about hardware control. I have a T-Mobile MyTouch 3G, and if I had stayed stock, I'd STILL be on Android 1.6, which is fucking ANCIENT. I'm running 2.2.1, can do all kinds of actually useful stuff:
Modify /etc/hosts to block ads? Check
Over/underclock processor on demand, both increasing performance AND battery life? Check
Control LEDs and other lights (different colors for txt/email/etc notifications, blink patterns)? Check
Multitouch? Check
Optimized kernel images that run wicked fast? Check
Swap space on SD card to get some more RAM space? Check
Complete bit-for-bit backup of the internal flash memory so I can do a "bare metal" restore? Check
This phone fucking FLIES compared to the stock T-Mobile software, which is slooooow as hell. And THAT'S why I rooted.
Sure glad that you don't have to jailbreak... (Score:2)
... oops, I guess that "jailbreak" is evil, while "root" is good. Among Android phone purchasers.
Among Android customers (i.e. manufacturers and carriers), "rooting" is evil (along with "upgrading" and "non-bloatware").
[Android fans are just now realizing that Google's customers are the manufacturers and carriers, not end users. You may not agree with Apple's conception of an end user, and their conception may not fit you at all, but at least they are conceiving of the end user as their customer, not manufacturers or carriers. Not so for Android.]
AT&T and Blackberry Maps (Score:5, Interesting)
Why should that not be (felony) violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act?
Ditto about other stuff being written here...
There is no rootkit? (Score:5, Informative)
From... http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=794053&page=49#post8490526 [xda-developers.com]
There IS NO REINSTALLING ROOTKIT!!!!
Don't you get it? It is simply WRITE PROTECTED with REDIRECTED WRITES!
Re:Glad I don't have a smartphone (Score:3, Funny)
Life's better when you ignore that whole segment of the marketplace (smartphones, I mean, not women)
There's a name for women you get from the marketplace...
Re:Glad I don't have a smartphone (Score:2)
I hear ya! I'm still using a Moto RAZR from 5 years ago and AT&T is seriously pissed that I haven't upgraded. I got an iPod Touch, but only for widescreen mini-movies, the App Store is a worthless joke. A smart phone cannot make one smart. Although, I would like the stock Android OS auto-installed on my iPod should it get "rooted". That would be fine with me.
Re:Glad I don't have a smartphone (Score:4, Insightful)
AT&T probably isn't that pissed. Due to their pricing you're still subsidizing the new phones you never got...
Really? (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't shift into drive in my vehicle unless I have my foot on the brake. By your logic I should do without all the good reasons to own a vehicle and walk everywhere instead.
Re:Really? (Score:2, Insightful)
If I were to take out the blowtorch and modify my vehicle to bypass that interlock (perhaps it makes a better race car, tractor, electric generator power source, etc. that way), the company that I buy gas from would not remotely wipe out my modified creation without permission.
What if the modified car is being used to drill a well to provide clean water to starving orphans? Would you have them all drink mosquito-infested standing water from abandoned tires? (dumped by the greedy jailbreak-hating mobile phone carriers no doubt!) WHY DO YOU HATE ORPHANS?!?!
Sorry, got a little carried away there. I'll decline the karma bonus.
Re:Glad I don't have a smartphone (Score:2)
I was like you. I always had the simplest phone that was good at making calls and sometimes carried with me a PDA (a Dell X51v) if I wanted to watch a movie, have gps etc or a linux netbook if I needed to keep connected with the machines at the office.
Then the N900 came out. I always have with me a phone, a movie player, a gps and a linux machine. In addition, even with the netbook I never had the ability to SSH over 3G (I would have needed more than my simple phone for that, tether it etc), and I can do international calls that my voice plan prohibits (due to cost), since for the N900 calling via skype is as simple as hitting the key next to the phone call button. So, yeah, for domestic calls my old (and much smaller) phone was probably easier to use, but the N900 is not "bad" and saves me from carrying around extra devices, while doing things I couldn't in the past...
Agreed. (Score:2, Insightful)
Agreed. What's up with all these evil hackers who think that just because you buy a physical device, that somehow gives you the right to own it? What about the corporation that made it? Why should *they* have to give up control rights, just because someone else bought it from them?
Re:Sorry, I can't possibly get upset about this (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just once (Score:2)
Who on Earth said anything about an open phone? It's an open source project.
Re:Questionable article (Score:2)
An "unbricking" feature could have that as a side effect though - if the new OS didn't do whatever the "unbricker" is looking for to indicate it booted ok.
Though any such implementation that doesn't involve pushing a physical "reset device" button while turning it on (and having that button be one of those PITA to press watch setting style things) is playing with fire.
Re:Define "ironic" (Score:4, Insightful)
By the hardware manufacturer, of course. This has nothing to do with Google.