Microsoft To Disable Windows Phone 7 Unlocking 237
Alex writes "In the first update to Windows Phone 7, Microsoft is planning to block ChevronWP7, which allowed users to unlock any retail Windows Phone 7 device for application side-loading without having to pay $99 per year for a WP7 marketplace account. The update, which is slated for release this month, will also introduce copy and paste functionality, among other improvements. ChevronWP7 was discontinued less than a week after its release about two months ago. ChevronWP7's three developers, Long Zheng, Rafael Rivera, and Chris Walsh were approached by Brandon Watson, Director of Developer Experience for Windows Phone 7, and decided to kill their app."
So how much did they get for this? (Score:4, Insightful)
So how much did they get for this?
Re:So how much did they get for this? (Score:5, Funny)
Unbroken kneecaps, unslashed tires, and a partially unburned-down house.
RTA (Score:3, Informative)
"Zheng, Rivera, and Walsh have said Microsoft wants them to become more involved with the shaping of the homebrew scene on the Windows Phone platform, but ChevronWP7 will not be the way to do so. In fact, the trio has a meeting with Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 team next week in Redmond, and they will be focusing on homebrew as well as stronger protection of WP7 developer intellectual property."
Re:RTA (Score:5, Insightful)
Translation: They were bought off.
Re:RTA (Score:5, Insightful)
No, no, no, no, no....you misunderstand. They were HIRED. Yes, hired, because of their "potential" to add to the company. Of course, MS hasn't figured out what their job descriptions will be, but still. Being hired for a job you don't go to is completely different than "bought off". Completely different. Really.
Re:RTA (Score:5, Insightful)
Presumably hired to patch any apparent 'exploits' they would have otherwise caught.
Not a big fan of this, but it is more than a shade better than Sony trying to sue their problems out of existence.
Re: RTA (Score:2)
No, no, no, no, no....you misunderstand. They were HIRED. Yes, hired, because of their "potential" to add to the company. Of course, MS hasn't figured out what their job descriptions will be, but still. Being hired for a job you don't go to is completely different than "bought off". Completely different. Really.
Well, there's the Homer Simpson by-out, as precedent.
There's also a position in Ballmer's office for Chair Repairman. Probably masonry work there, too, for the damage to walls when he throws one.
Re: (Score:2)
Being hired for a job you don't go to is completely different than "bought off". Completely different. Really.
Not really. You get bought off and then become "sell outs" and work for them. It is 2 things wrapped into 1. Bought off, and sold out.
Re: (Score:3)
Translation: They were assimilated.
FTFY.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not surprised MS bought them off. I wouldn't be surprised of any corporation acting in the same manner. That makes me suspicious. If you need to pay a developer license fee to unlock your phone, it's a pretty clear indication what the vendor thinks of that ability. ChevronWP7 is such a clear contradiction of that -- regardless of what we think of it politically -- that the developers couldn't possibly have thought MS would react in any other way. Could this have been their plan all along? It's a g
Re:RTA (Score:5, Insightful)
I love the doublethink there; "and they will be focusing on homebrew as well as stronger protection of WP7 developer intellectual property."
It's one or the other kids. They were bought off.
Re: (Score:3)
So obviously Microsoft thinks that the future of mobile computing is that of entirely vendor-controlled console-style hardware.
Thanks but fuck you Microsoft.
Re:RTA (Score:5, Insightful)
More like they *want* the future to be vendor-controlled. They always hoped that, but never thought the consumers to be *that* self-destructive until Apple essentially did it. Now they hope they can ape Apple's success on that front.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Translation: Kill the application and we won't sue. Otherwise by the time we're through with you, you'll wish you've never even conceived of this application. Sure we might not win, be we'll make sure the stress induced shave a good five or ten years off your natural life expectancy.
Re: (Score:2)
He made them an offer they couldn't refuse.
So... (Score:2)
Or even that copy and paste was held back for this reason?
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not if you buy a good one dumbass. Heck, mine is not even running a vendor or carrier built OS.
Buy? A phone? Few do this. (Score:2)
Let me guess (Score:2)
Brandon Watson made them an offer they couldn't refuse?
Re: (Score:2)
What about the law that says you have the right to (Score:2)
What about the law that says you have the right to unlock your own phone?
Re:What about the law that says you have the right (Score:4, Informative)
What about the law that says you have the right to unlock your own phone?
You still have that right. But there's no law that says the manufacturer has to make it easy for you.
Re: (Score:2)
There are laws that say a car manufacturer can't refuse to honor a warranty if you do work yourself, as well as various other things to keep from locking you into dealer-only service. Why are electronics different?
Re:What about the law that says you have the right (Score:5, Insightful)
Because the auto industry got bad enough at a time we still cared about protecting consumers that we actually passed laws targeted at automotive companies abusing them.
I think we should pass similiar laws protecting consumers of other items, and in general. But lately all we pass are laws protecting corporate interests.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no law stating they have to provide you access to do so...just that you can do what you want with your phone...your still free to look for or build another solution, just no Chevron. Rather suprising move though, you would think MS would overlook this simply for fear of upseting and driving away an already fragile userbase.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure you still need to pay something to Microsoft for XBLA Indy development, and to run your game on your Xbox 360.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a law, it was just an exemption to the DMCA. read more [eff.org]. And it only covers you and your phone, not the people that write the tools you use.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not a law, it was just an exemption to the DMCA. read more [eff.org]. And it only covers you and your phone, not the people that write the tools you use.
And the exception is only temporary. With a few years of 20 20 hindsight, we can now see that DMCA has not yielded real benefits to anybody but lawyers, thugs and would be monopolists. DMCA is not a law, it is pure evil.
Re: (Score:2)
That's how property works, if they're not actually providing you with that freedom, then they ought to be brought up on fraud charges.
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh but then that little nagging issue of "Licensing" comes up. That's where you don't own it, you're paying to borrow it. And in that case they're allowed to dictate terms of use of their property.
But then all the consumers don't want software to be licensable, and all corporations do, and you know who wins that war.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not your phone. It's Microsoft's.
If it wasn't, they wouldn't be acting like they owned it by placing locks on it only they have the key for.
the perfect response... (Score:2)
I might be upset (Score:3, Insightful)
If I was to have a Win7 device.
But as I view Win7 devices as akin to strolling about town with an albatross around my neck, it ain't gonna ever happen.
So I'm not going to be upset.
Isn't that wonderful? Just think, one less totally $#*(@% pissed off person in the world. (c:
Shouldn't they have waited... (Score:5, Insightful)
...until a few more suckers bought their product first? Consider it a loss leader. Are they so optimistic that they're gonna win against android and apple, that they can already afford to alienate their user base?
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft cant allow side-loading in its current form because it would cause major backlash from carrier partners concerned about things not otherwise permitted (e.g. tethering) as well as from vendors releasing paid software in the marketplace concerned about piracy.
I suspect Microsoft wants to allow side-loading but only if they can lock things down enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft cant allow side-loading in its current form because it would cause major backlash from carrier partners concerned about things not otherwise permitted (e.g. tethering) as well as from vendors releasing paid software in the marketplace concerned about piracy.
That doesn't make any sense, because those carriers all have Android phones already. Where were the concerns about side-loading when they added those?
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you think AT&T has asked manufacturers to disable side-loading on every android handset they sell?
Idiot phone (Score:5, Insightful)
Fundamental question: What makes a smart phone smart? Answer: Ability to run applications you want that actually improve your life in some small way. Taking away the ability and deciding for me what apps I can run and at what cost is a dealbreaker. Same reason I won't touch an iPhone no matter how many lame fart apps appear for it. DRM lockdown turns a smart phone into an idiot phone -a dumb piece of shit. Certainly not worth hundreds of dollars to me. Microsoft, keep it, and shove it!
Re: (Score:2)
Heh. Well put. I chose android on my last handset upgrade for similar reasons, even though I haven't got any apps except from the marketplace. To hell with DRM.
Re:Idiot phone (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a phone not a computer.
Negatory, it's a computer. It just happens to be small, fit in your pocket, and take phonecalls as well. This "it's not computer, it's a phone therefore it's special and NEEDS DRM" is a load of bull being fed to everyone by vendors and carriers as an excuse for locking them down.
1. Total and utter freedom to install anything on your phone.
Yes. I should have to explicitly activate it, but yes. It's my property, it's my decision.
But miss a very important phone call due to a badly programmed application running down the battery or locking up the phone. Just think, that call could be a job offer, an ex-girlfriend wanting some fun or the news that someone is in trouble.
Not like that hasn't happened before, with dumb phones. I've had older pieces of crap that would the same shit.
2. Less freedoms but a better experience, higher quality software, less chance of battery rundown or lock ups?
You mean no freedoms, but not necessarily any of the other benefits are guaranteed. The core purpose for lock down with no opt-out is explicitly to route you into their services and their store.
If restrictions and licence fees weed out all the bad coders then it's a good thing.
I can assure you this will not weed out bad coders. It will weed out more than a few good coders, however.
Re: (Score:2)
1.
Restrictions and license fees will never weed out bad coders, the worst software I have ever seen has been some of the most expensive.
Genetic fallacy (Score:2)
Restrictions and license fees will never weed out bad coders
Congratulations on not falling for the genetic fallacy [wikipedia.org]. But try telling that to CronoCloud and other console fanboys, who think video game developers working from home deserve for console makers not to give them the time of day and deserve not to have a platform on which to make and sell games in genres ill suited for desk play. Console fanboys tend to think the reason Nintendo rejected Bob's Game [wikipedia.org], for instance, was because failure to meet Nintendo's (published) arbitrary organizational criteria was a sur
Re: (Score:2)
It's a phone not a computer.
No, it's a computer coupled to a radio transmitter that happens to make phonecalls. I'm tired of reminding people that their 'phones' are computerized radios first, phones second, when they bitch about signal loss.
1. Total and utter freedom to install anything on your phone. But miss a very important phone call due to a badly programmed application running down the battery or locking up the phone. Just think, that call could be a job offer, an ex-girlfriend wanting some fun or the news that someone is in trouble.
Problems like this manifest as complexity increases. If reliability is that important to you, you shouldn't be using a smartphone at all..
2. Less freedoms but a better experience, higher quality software, less chance of battery rundown or lock ups?
You make a rather blatant suggestion here. Back it up. Shitty software is shitty software and plenty of it is open and closed.
If restrictions and licence fees weed out all the bad coders then it's a good thing.
That's just it, they don't. Th
Re: (Score:2)
You imply that the only options are #1 and #2. It is quite obvious that this is not the case. For example, MS and Apple could restrict what kinds of applications get into their respective app stores, same as today, but allow side-loading of apps disregarding the store. It can be even disabled by default, with a checkbox that you have to find and enable hidden somewhere under "Here be dragons" property page in settings, and popping up a nasty warning dialog, so that casual users don't accidentally install so
Re: (Score:2)
Scenario #1 is basically Android. Scenario #2 is basically iPhone. If you want to know which scenario most people want, check out the latest market share reports.
iPhone coming soon to Verizon Wireless (Score:2)
If you want to know which scenario most people want, check out the latest market share reports.
The latest report is that Apple will double the number of U.S. wireless carriers that offer the iPhone this February. A change like that is likely to shake up market share numbers and help figure out how much of Android's lead is "iOS sucks" and how much is "AT&T sucks".
Then where should I buy a PDA? (Score:3)
It's a phone not a computer. A phone is something you depend on more than a computer.
So I'm already happy with my phone. Why can't I easily buy a separate handheld computer that isn't locked down? There used to be PDAs, but the PDA manufacturers have largely switched to making only "smartphones" (PDA and phone joined at the hip). Google won't even allow an Android device officially access the Market unless it's joined at the hip to a phone, except for one Samsung product not sold in the United States.
Did you ever own a Windows Mobile phone before WP7? every single one of them had a reset button and boy did you need it!
That was because the CE kernel used in Windows Mobile 6 wasn't exactly designed for telecom
Get an Arduino (Score:2)
I want to go back to the days when we [...] could open up any hardware, solder in whatever components we wanted.
I have one word for you: Arduino.
Jeeze, Is it just me or (Score:2)
Is microsoft becoming more evil by the day? At least they could never possibly catch up to Apple's stream of pure evil. If you can't buy something and do whatever the fuck you want with it, as long as that whatever doesn't hurt other people, then it is a ripoff, a scam, a dirty lie, a DRM infested horses shit-hole at best, and extremely evil at worst. Go android.
Re: (Score:2)
Another deep fear of MS would be the digging down to hardware that was sealed off for value added teclo partners. They get full camera use, you dont.
Sony will rootkit you, Amazon will reach in and remove your ebooks.
What is left? A large cash payment for a pure Linux phone?
Re: (Score:2)
Google may track you, but you have some control over how much data they collect on you, and they don't have a history of using that data for evil. Sony has become so evil in how they operate the PS3 market that it is absolutely disgusting, and definitely illegal, although they will never see the consequences (reducing functionality of a sold product, which is about 10 kinds of advertising fraud). Microsoft has a very creepy intent to just crawl into everything you do and collect information on you that you
Re: (Score:2)
Is microsoft becoming more evil by the day?
However evil this latest stunt may be, its also an own goal and as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft is welcome to score as many own goals as it wants.
Nintendo's own goal (Score:2)
However evil this latest stunt may be, its also an own goal
Was it also an own goal [wikipedia.org] for Nintendo to put the lockout chip into the NES? At the time, it appeared to have been required because the U.S. video game market was in a recession [tvtropes.org], ostensibly due to a flood of unenjoyable game releases for second generation consoles.
What your phone maker doesn't allow this? (Score:2)
Thankfully Palm tells you how to do this for free on any WebOS device. Download the tools for free and install your own apps over a USB cable. I think someone actually has a way of doing this wireless too.
http://developer.palm.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1552&Itemid=59#dev_mode [palm.com]
Really nice OS, sensible company. Pitiful marketshare. :(
Re: (Score:2)
Android does not even need that. Just check one box and install any apk you want.
Mine went a step beyond. (Score:2)
And hopefully they'll continue to do so.
My N900 [nokia.com] allowed me to trivially gain root access by enabling a repository and installing a package that enabled root access. I was able to then add additional repositories and do whatever the hell I wanted.
I don't expect it to always be that easy, and would prefer at least a hardware latch before such activation (proper security with strong defaults) but there should ALWAYS be an "opt-out" for users to assume. The vast majority won't, but it'll keep the handful that w
Freaking copy and paste (Score:2)
What the hell is wrong with the major phone OS's these days - iOS, Android and Windows Mobile 7 all being initially released without freaking copy and paste. I had that on my shitty palm m100 about 15 years ago.
Grrr! Try typing in a 64 character WPA key without it.
Re:haha, what? (Score:5, Informative)
But don't let me get in the way of your anti-Microsoft ranting, informed or not.
Re: (Score:2)
You should have to pay to put your app in the store, but NOT to release it to the wild. Users should be free to download any app from any website, and install it on their Macs or PC or Phones. For either MS or Apple to block this ability seems rather dictatorial.
Re:haha, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's called a "business strategy". You may think its either smart or foolish, but it's a strategy. No one said businesses had to act in a democratic way.
Re:haha, what? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That's what he said: "dictatorial".
Seriously, in 2010, what is the difference between "business strategy" and "dictatorial"?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Seriously, in 2010, what is the difference between "business strategy" and "dictatorial"?
2011?
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, in 2010, what is the difference between "business strategy" and "dictatorial"?
It depends on which company you're a fanboy of.
Re: (Score:2)
One comes from a business.
The other comes from a government.
In the beloved United States of Corporations, there's no fucking difference any more.
Re: (Score:3)
Because.... um.... Capitalism!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's called a "business strategy". You may think its either smart or foolish, but it's a strategy. No one said businesses had to act in a democratic way.
And we as consumers have to make clear what we expect from businesses, punish the ones that act in was that disagree with our desires, and reward the ones that are better behaved. That's a consumer strategy. If the marketplace is any indication (Android taking over, Windows Phone 7 struggling), the market is speaking.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Trending toward fitting quite well, actually:
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/09/android-market-share/ [wired.com]
And just for giggles:
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/04/windows-mobile-android/ [wired.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Android just overtook iPhone in U.S. market share. That's how.
Re: (Score:2)
you mean a whole host of different phones built by a whole host of different OEMs finally caught up to one OEM?
More like, open caught up to and passed closed.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple may be a lone knight in shining armor, but such a knight is still vulnerable to a mob attack done by dirty, illiterate barbarians with sticks. After all, Apple's technology was always pretty good, and that earned them what percentage of the market? IBM's PS/2 and OS/2 technologies were also good, but hordes of clones with Windows 3.1 casually stomped both into the ground.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but remember, it is up to the majority of consumers. And its not necessarily what gets a company the most customers, but what brings a company more profit. If they find that it is indeed more profitable to do things like this, instead of having an open system, then they will do things like this.
Re:haha, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a dictatorial business strategy. Yes, it is evil. Open computing has changed our world dramatically for the better. And every phone company out there apparently wants to put a stop to that.
Re:haha, what? (Score:5, Interesting)
Where do you think botnets come from? Users who download and install software from websites that they shouldn't but they aren't smart enough to know the difference, or skilled enough to notice the data usage spikes.
You really don't want that kind of power on limited bandwidth cell networks. Remember the average person is an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
The average person will use the store, but you can still let others run their own code on their own devices. Note the lack of botnets made of android phones.
Re: (Score:3)
Demonstratably false. If the user wants something, they will follow steps blindly to get it. If the instructions for SuperCoolApp.apk says to turn their phone into a botnet by typing various adb commands, users will do it.
First, jailbroken iPhones had a worm in them. The worm used the well-known root/alpine login to log into the phones via SSH. And why
Re: (Score:2)
You too can be a /. editor! [slashdot.org]
Re:haha, what? (Score:5, Informative)
That is patently false. All you have to do is check the box labeled allow unsigned software.
Rooting software? I flashed a new image right on my phone. Your spewing FUD.
Re: (Score:2)
Not every phone has this. IIRC, the AT&T Android phones disallow loading software from non market sources.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a desktop app that gets around this, does not even require rooting.
Re: (Score:3)
FWIW, my Motorola Defy on T-Mobile shipped with the "Allow Non-Market Sources" option enabled by default. I thought it was a little odd, but it might be because T-Mobile wants to ship you some of its own apps OTA without going through the Market...
Re: (Score:3)
Why does this suddenly matter? At some point there is some part of the OS I did not create yes. Welcome to 2011.
You review the code in your Windows desktop OS?
Face it, it is far more likely that you will get some infection on your windows desktop then the repositories I use will be poisoned.
Re:haha, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
>>>You really don't want that kind of power on limited bandwidth cell networks
Yes I do.
I should not be prevented from loading VLC Player or Opera or any other 'free' program on my Phone (or PC or Mac), just because most users are idiots. Let's not downgrade our phone, laptop, and desktop computers to Lowest Common Denominator uselessness. Otherwise we might as well not have computers, if we can't run the programs we want to run. We might as well wrap chains around the computers instead, and bow down to kiss Microsoft's smelly feet : "Oh please sir, please let me run jEdit on my phone. Please master, please."
Bullshit.
If that's how "smart"... correction: dumb phones will be, then count me out. I'll stick with my open, not blocked computer rather than waste money on a phone that won't let me run the programs I desire to run.
Botnets come from insecure software (Score:2)
Why are you blaming the user? Blame MS for their crappy OS .
What really annoys me is this attempt to lock down hardware. I refuse to buy a computer I can't install whatever I like on it.
Re:haha, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Where do you think botnets come from? Users who download and install software from websites that they shouldn't but they aren't smart enough to know the difference, or skilled enough to notice the data usage spikes.
But why does that only seem to happen to Windows users?
You really don't want that kind of power on limited bandwidth cell networks. Remember the average person is an idiot.
Is that why you feel comfortable posting your logical fallacy?
Re: (Score:2)
The source of the malware? go for it? most of them are coded with nice open source software.
Do you want your ISP controlling your internet? telling you when you are using to much? how about a cutoff right in the middle of your download?
Botnets are from compromised machines, whether it was a whole in the OS or hole in the people who installed the software. I use Open Source all the time, but I can state I never check the source. 99.99999999999999% of the users never check the source code of Firefox, lib
Re: (Score:2)
You should have to pay to put your app in the store, but NOT to release it to the wild. Users should be free to download any app from any website, and install it on their Macs or PC or Phones.
It's called "The free hand of the market". Was it here or somewhere else I saw the comment that the free hand of the market has a preference for fisting?
Re: (Score:2)
Only if you're a developer. Apple charges the same fee, if I recall. But don't let me get in the way of your anti-Microsoft ranting, informed or not.
And Google charges $25 for access to the Android Market Place. But you could also set up your own. Most Android phones can be configured to allow apps from outside the Android Market Place too.
Re: (Score:2)
And if you want that ability, you should be buying an Android phone, and developing for Android. If it still remains profitable to do things the other way, the phone companies will do it that way.
Re: (Score:2)
You have to pay $99 a year to put apps into their store. This isn't a bad price for what both MS and Apple offer.
The problem is that if you don't want to go through their store, you must pay $99/yr to join their development program and load (temporarily) your software on your phone.
This is why I don't own an iPhone or a WP7 device.
Re: (Score:2)
To publish in the store.
Then why is this news, exactly? And I ask this as someone who wouldn't use a Windows phone even if they were giving them away.
Re: (Score:2)
you must be an expert on deciding something to be news worthy.
Yeah - I thought we'd all agreed on that already...?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It's $99 to publish apps (which also allows you to side-load apps without going through the marketplace). Same as iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> This will affect all of what...11 or 12 Windows phone users?
Who knows? Maybe that's a significant percentage.