The manufacturer has no say on the usage, simple as that. That there are better ways to tinker is irrelevant. It doesn't preclude the right of people to tinker with anything they own at their own convenience, including an iPhone if that's what they got.

It’s all a “think of the children” race-to-the-bottum where rent-seekers abuse fear and sycophanty to monopolize critical infrastructure.

But Apple's security measures definitely help against virtually anything else. Over-zealous police and border patrol. Script kiddies. General spyware and malware.

I think you're forgetting how bad mobile security was before both Apple and Google started adding these hardening measures to their flagship devices. You really couldn't trust your phone at all. Now, you somewhat can.

My comment was specifically targeting the fact that jail breaking somehow encourages people to develop means of circumventing the security of devices. This is when this becomes dangerous - suddenly it has the potential to hurt unsuspecting users. Saying that the responsibility is with Apple (or Google) to make this possible feels like a straw man argument - their job is to earn money (no illusions there) and keep users safe, even if it means making it harder to tinker (which also helps them earn money)

Where does this end? Should all devices that have computers attached be capable of being 'rooted'?

You would not have the expectation if for example you purchased an MRI machine, that it should be able to emulate a Game Boy. A phone is also a special purpose computer; and the phone's software is designed to guarantee that those special purposes always work.

In my opinion this is the main thing that this root crowd does not understand; the iPhone is not a general purpose computing device. You should not have bought one if that's what you wanted. The market is full of general purpose computers that can make phone calls.

- Set a background wallpaper - Reply to SMS in a quick reply window (I still miss BiteSMS) - Create albums in Photos. - An "Android Like" (back then) quick toggle.

Nowdays all these features and more are part of iOS, but back then Jailbreaking let you do so many things that Apple hadn't gotten around to including in iOS.

I'd argue it still is.

I can't install a third party web browser that doesn't use WebKit.

I can't select alternative default apps to most apps bundled with the OS.

I still can't unlock the bootloader.

I still can't browse the entire filesystem.

People who espouse the virtues of jailbreaking on iOS tend to forget one big thing... the exploits that are used to jailbreak are also exploits used by malware creators to compromise the system.

The items you just listed matter only to people like the posters here. We have philosophical differences with the limitations in place today, but back in the heyday, those limitations were just fundamental gaps in functionality available to users.

With the many major new APIs available to devs over the years and with the maturation of the App Store, those original drivers behind jailbreaking just aren’t there for the most part.

I don't know too may users who care only about a specific aspect of their phone when backing up. I do have non-technical friends who do iTunes/local backups because they "don't trust the cloud", but I've never encountered a person trying to do this piecemeal.

For what it's worth, there are decent 3rd party tools like iMazing that are easy to use and do give you more granular control.

In most cases it’s a valid reason - the app is malicious, poorly made or somehow in conflict with local law. Also imagine if you are an app developer an suddenly your project (on which you’ve spent countless hours of hard work) is unexpectedly leaked as freely available for download and side-loading. I’m not talking big Corps like epic and blizzard … but people like you and me.

Open source apps can be loaded easily, so developers who really want to make their stuff available can still do so and users won’t need to hack their phones to get such apps. But of course this can’t happen en masse.

Interesting, I do the opposite. When something is available in the Mac App Store or through other means, I will generally buy it in the App Store. Why? Application sandboxing is mandatory for Mac App Store apps and I strongly prefer that applications are sandboxed by default.

The second, less important, reason is that I can just install the applications with just one click and don't have to download them from different places, look up their serial numbers, etc.

That said, I‘m struggling with the constraints Apple puts on the business models of developers, for example when it comes to upgrade pricing. While I have a fair amount of software Mac/iOS subscriptions running (8 by my current count) there‘s definitely software I passed on because it moved to a subscription model.

Factually wrong. You can run apps on iOS without jailbreaking that weren’t approved by Apple, or even ones banned by Apple. This has been true for years. Yes, the required resigning of the app every seven days is a major hindrance, but it is still something you very much CAN do.

It is a kludge designed to make the process as unpleasant as possible but just so enough that Apple can claim they don't block sideloading.

It's disingenuous.

You don’t need an Apple system to codesign. Two results on first page of search results:

https://github.com/zhlynn/zsign

https://weisser-zwerg.dev/posts/ios-app-without-mac/

> make the process as unpleasant as possible but just so enough that Apple can claim they don't block sideloading

Apple doesn’t claim they don’t block side-loading. Actually I believe they claim the opposite in the Epic case (even though it is possible via a supported process) because it was “necessary to ensure the safety of their user base” or something like that.

> It's disingenuous

Shifting goal posts from “you can’t” to “you can’t without X” once someone points out the first was factually incorrect is considered disingenuous by many too.

(Edit for formatting and provide links)

First off, you're making a huge assumption here.

Second, the only goalpost shifting here is your attempt to pass off complex and temporary workarounds intended for developers as resulting in a device that is somehow the same as jailbroken devices. This is incorrect for the obvious reasons pointed out already.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with jailbreak and didn't know apps installed via jailbreak don't need to be constantly renewed and resigned? Installing apps long term is still something you can't do, as I originally said.

Attempting to pass off a lesser solution that doesn't come close to matching what I originally mentioned and pretending it is the same is dishonest and disingenuous.

> Perhaps you are unfamiliar with jailbreak

Considering I wrote one of the first high traffic'd jailbreaking guides for iOS and have been involved in the JB scene in various capacities (never a key role admittedly) since the very beginning, I'm pretty sure that isn't the case. ;)

> your attempt to pass off complex and temporary workarounds

> apps installed via jailbreak don't need to be constantly renewed and resigned?

I'm surprised someone who claims to be involved in the scene so long would overlook such an obvious difference.

Pure anecdata, but the vast majority of folks I see talking about AltStore outside HN are not developers. YMMV!

Again, there are other options for both. Android wear devices are still a thing, and there are multiple options that aren’t SMS that are available to the Android ecosystem.

If you want to live in the Apple ecosystem, that comes with some tradeoffs. Can’t have it both ways.

The entire point of the saying that you can't have your cake and eat it too is that, well, it can't be both in your hands and in your stomach. But it's perfectly possible for me to be able to call Apple and get a bootloader unlock code, without any other change to anything.

That's essentially what the parent comment is trying to do. When offered the Android ecosystem as an alternative, the counterpoint was to lament the lack of Apple Watch and iMessage support in the Android ecosystem.

This is textbook "I want it both ways".

This is the definition of wanting it both ways.

I don’t think anyone would argue that it’s technically impossible, but that should not be mistaken with “practically impossible” given Apple’s business model.

On iPhone you don't have that option, and you have no way of knowing if your phone was compromised.

I'm not able to sideload iOS apps easily (apart from using AltStore), or downgrade apps at all. This becomes possible with a jailbreak.

Also, with a jailbreak, I own my data. iOS (Android too, I believe) actively prevents some data from being backed up or copied otherwise.

The primary area you see this is with applications which have flagged that data as sensitive so it won't be included on unecrypted backups (which includes iCloud). This is somewhat important for security — for example, you reasonably do not want TOTP seeds floating around invalidating your second factor security model — but it means you have a problem if an application you care about uses that feature in a way you don't anticipate.

Also with a jailbreak, other people own your data too. A jailbreak is an exploit. A hammer can be used to drive in a nail (jailbreak) or it can be used to smash windows (malware.) Same tool in the end.

The very act of jailbreaking is what keeps your system vulnerable to the same exploits used by malicious actors.

Regarding data, all user data on iOS is backed up either through iCloud and/or on your Mac.

Incorrect. It is still the case with nearly all Android phones. You can install any OS version, gain full permissions, mess with kernels, modules, frameworks, recoveries, ...