I bought an ipod touch about 1 week ago and im not sure if i should jailbreak it or not. My mom wants me to get the new apps but im not sure if i should jailbreak it or not. Isn't apple going to let you use 3rd party apps in febuary?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Should I jailbreak?
- Thread starter pbcrazyboy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What firmware are you running? 1.1.1 is the easiest to jailbreak. There's a bit of a trick to 1.1.2 and 1.1.3 takes the longest (and there isn't a way to do 1.1.3 on a mac yet)
Really you should decide whether or not you need more apps.
Or instead of Jailbreaking you can get all the iPhone apps for $20 dollars from apple.
right now im downloading the 1.1.3 on dial up(supposed to be about 16 horus to download at 21.5mb). I'm not sure what I should do. What are some of your favorite apps once you jailbreak it? Can you download ttr from installer app?
customization is what i like the most. there are some cool apps as well such as the iphone ones, iphysics, blackjack etc
What is iphysics? Can't apple tell if you jailbreaked it and lock it? If that happend can you restore it. I still need to get the protection plan from bestbuy. If apple locks it do you think i can still get the protection plan??
It's a game where you draw line and interact with objects. On some levels it also makes use of the iPods accelerometers. Search for it on YouTube, it'll be easier to understand
I'm not too sure what you mean by lock it but Apple can't tell if it's jailbroken if you surf there site for example. If you have hardware issues and you have to send it in for repair then do a Restore and it will be taken back to factory settings and they will be none the wiser.
Jailbreaking is a dead-end. Clearly the future of applications development for the iPhone and the touch is in the SDK.
Why? Are you thinking maybe the SDK won't be released? Are you thinking maybe when it is released, developers will prefer to create hacked rather than legitimately developed and installed software?
If neither of these, then what?
I wouldn't. ...Just reminds me of the PC users who customize and hack Windows beyond recognition, make their case light-up like a UFO, and then wonder why their computer crashed a week later.
Wait for the SDK to be released next month. As IJ Reilly said, that's clearly the future.
Wait for the SDK to be released next month. As IJ Reilly said, that's clearly the future.
I'm sure the SDK will come out. I'm also sure professional developers will gravitate towards that, instead of the "unofficial" jailbreak scene.
But what I also know... is that end-users will stick with whatever environment gives them the apps and utilities they enjoy most.
Let's say Apple is very restrictive about what kinds of apps they offer up for download. Let's say they have a strict review program, and only "general interest" (ie: vanilla) apps get approved and offerred for sale on the iTunes Store. Do you really think we'd see iSteamy (the porn downloader/viewer?) Or VOIP-SIP for that matter? What about SMB/AFP apps that make it trivial to swap tunes? There are tons of othr examples of "fringe" apps I could see Apple not wanting to "support" by allowing them access to their ecosystem. Those apps would only be available via unofficial sources. Which means... via a jailbreak.
If I had to choose between having access to PopCap Solitaire and Backgammon "officially" , vs. iPhysics via the jailbreak, I'd choose iPhysics in a heartbeat.
Hopefully it won't come to that. Hopefully any app developer that wanted to would have no friction getting their app official distribution through whatever means Apple devises... which will probably closely resemble how GAMES are sold for classic ipods and nanos currently... via the iTunes store.
If not, hopefully the hackers fine a way to give us the best of both worlds.
What if the terms that Apple sets forth are egregious... like demanding 50% of all revenue for apps sold through them?
The point is, none of us know much of anything at this point... and suggesting otherwise about the SDK is "clearly" premature, that's all.
Well said Fofer,
I don't see why we should have to choose at all, and when apple say no to VOIP-SIP and others (which they will) then these developers will start to think installer app may be the way to go.
Looks like we have another bluray vs hdvd style battle to look forward to
I don't see why we should have to choose at all, and when apple say no to VOIP-SIP and others (which they will) then these developers will start to think installer app may be the way to go.
Looks like we have another bluray vs hdvd style battle to look forward to
That's a lot of ifs. There's no reason to believe that any of these restrictions will come to pass. Apple does not vet applications developed or create other arbitrary restrictions of the kind you have theorized for OSX, so I can see no reason to anticipate them for the touch and iPhone.
Well, you're surmising just as I am surmising.
But here's what we know is fact. In the "open letter to customers" announcing the SDK, Steve Jobs explicitly wrote that they would be signing apps, to ensure security. They don't want malware or viruses running rampant on their flagship smartphone nor on AT&T's network.
Ya think they'll be quick to sign an authorized key for iSteamy?
Take a look at how games are for sale on the iTunes Store (for previous gen iPods.) How long has it been around, and how many games are available? Is there a reason for that? Ask a professional game developer (like Carmack for example) and you'll get your answer. Apple (and Steve Jobs) aren't always the easiest to work with.
That said... this started because you said the SDK was "clearly" the future and that jailbreaking is a dead end road. There's absolutely nothing "clear" at this point, is all I am saying. Anything is possible.
If all the OP wants is Mail and Maps on his touch, going to 1.1.3 officially might be wise for him. Others, who like to tinker and have ALL the options, may prefer to stay jailbroken and install the previous versions of those apps unofficially.
It's up to each person to decide for themselves. And we ALL will see how the SDK ecosystem plays out soon enough. Just like I don't have all the answers, nor do you... "clearly."
But here's what we know is fact. In the "open letter to customers" announcing the SDK, Steve Jobs explicitly wrote that they would be signing apps, to ensure security. They don't want malware or viruses running rampant on their flagship smartphone nor on AT&T's network.
Ya think they'll be quick to sign an authorized key for iSteamy?
Take a look at how games are for sale on the iTunes Store (for previous gen iPods.) How long has it been around, and how many games are available? Is there a reason for that? Ask a professional game developer (like Carmack for example) and you'll get your answer. Apple (and Steve Jobs) aren't always the easiest to work with.
That said... this started because you said the SDK was "clearly" the future and that jailbreaking is a dead end road. There's absolutely nothing "clear" at this point, is all I am saying. Anything is possible.
If all the OP wants is Mail and Maps on his touch, going to 1.1.3 officially might be wise for him. Others, who like to tinker and have ALL the options, may prefer to stay jailbroken and install the previous versions of those apps unofficially.
It's up to each person to decide for themselves. And we ALL will see how the SDK ecosystem plays out soon enough. Just like I don't have all the answers, nor do you... "clearly."
Except Apple is relying on the SDK to sell more iPhones and promote an iPhone ecosystem. Apple will undoubtedly adjust the security measures and limitations of this system based on customer feedback to provide the best experience, and sell the most iPhones.
Games are a different story, however. Apple isn't relying on games to sell iPods; the iPods sell themselves.
Based on this difference, I would expect the iPhone SDK to be operated very differently.
Not really. Your surmising is full of speculations and dire predictions. Mine is based on what Apple has told us. You seem to think it likely that Apple will do something that they've never done before. I have heard no reason to believe it. Digital signing is not a censorship scheme. It's a method of tracing software back to the source for purposes of security. Leopard supports digital signatures too. Is that also some kind of censorship scheme?
From what I am hearing, many of the jailbreakers seem to be more interested in the subculture aspects of hacking the iPod than what they get in return. I think this is clearly a dead end because I think clearly the vast majority of iPod touch owners will prefer legitimately created and installed software.
You're both missing the point.
Mark my words: applications developed via the SDK, for distribution through Apple's "approved" method, will be via the iTunes Store. Just like games are being sold currently for classic iPods, which is why I used that as an example.
Do you really think it'll just be some free-for-all, with apps loadable via SSH? Or via Installer.app?
Get real.
That said... do you really think Apple would offer up iSteamy via the iTunes Store? It's unlikely. And that's just one example.
...and a whole lot of wishful thinking. It's just not realistic, bro.
Mark my words: applications developed via the SDK, for distribution through Apple's "approved" method, will be via the iTunes Store. Just like games are being sold currently for classic iPods, which is why I used that as an example.
Do you really think it'll just be some free-for-all, with apps loadable via SSH? Or via Installer.app?
Get real.
Steve Jobs said:
That said... do you really think Apple would offer up iSteamy via the iTunes Store? It's unlikely. And that's just one example.
...and a whole lot of wishful thinking. It's just not realistic, bro.