Database Info

seems like a whole lot of intense hacking for 'opensource'

Being a fan of Linux, and an Ubuntu user, I guess I thought Android was going to be a lot more openly tweakable, but from looking over these threads it looks like it's actually not that easy to do things that I would have assumed would be easily accessible tweaks... like theme/appearance/fonts/icons, etc... In fact it looks like some pretty intense hacking is going on with slow progress in bypassing , etc...
Maybe I'm not understanding correctly. I don't have the G1, but my girlfriend does and I've been enjoying it from over her shoulder... I guess I just expected something more 'open' along the lines of what I've become used to with Ubuntu.
I kind thought Android would be to iPhone, what Linux OS is to Apple OS, but it definitely doesn't seem like that's the case. It seems like Android is just as locked down as iPhone but with fewer apps and not-as-slick interface for the same price as an iPhone.
I had been thinking about getting this phone... maybe I just need to wait for more apps to come out?
Any thoughts?

As of right now we do have a little more opensource than anything else. And like all new software it will take time to learn what to do. Obviously people didn't get Mac OS 3 and immediatly know how to hack it so they could do things they weren't meant to do. And of course same goes with mobile phones. When WM5 came out they had to learn about the new OS and it takes awhile.
So far the freedom we have already surpasses that of any other. We have internet sharing (for those with root) that is far better than the old USB or BluetoothPAN method(which btw is going to be a new profile, it is in the source)
I am willing to bet that as soon as it hits 1.0 that we will see it go entirely open with the ability to flash the rom and all.

That makes sense... I just have to be patient Thanks for the reply!

Open source != open system.
Open source means just that... you can see the source code. That's it. It doesn't imply or confer any other right of access, and with most open source licenses the licensor (Google & HTC) is free to build closed systems just as locked down as one based on proprietary code. Many commercial systems (Android included) are underpinned by open source code for cost savings or stability/security reasons.
Edit:
what Linux OS is to Apple OS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's comparing apples to oranges. Linux is not an operating system; it is an open source kernel on which an operating system can be built.
Fact of the matter is, OS X's Mach kernel is partially descendant from BSD, so you could say the center of OS X is open source as well. More info at wikipedia's Darwin entry. For being a "fan of Linux" you don't seem to understand some of the core principles.

If I am not mistaken Mac's are unix based right? many the kernel is similar to linux... which is why the filesystem structure is similar as well.
But you are correct open source means you can see the source... but usually when someone can see the source they find a way to get around security holes that lock down the system.
With open source and developers an open system is possible. And we already know we can do it because we have modified the updates that are sent which change the system files. so all you need to do is put a new boot.img and a new recovery.img and replace the root system directory... before you know it you can have this running any version of android and/or anything else that will run on an ARM6 device.

Don't make it so complex. It's meaningless to play the words game.
To make it simple:
As a developer, on G1, we are not able to do what we can do on a linux PC, and that was my understanding about the open source smartphone OS.
To be practical, for the same project I ported for Android, Windows Mobile and iPhone, I would say: Windows Mobile is the most open one (friendly) for developer. You can even make your own driver on it. So I would say Windows Mobile = smart version of Windows Desktop. But I cannot say Android = smart version of linux.
I really hope Google can push a little bit to the carriers to open the root for us. Android really needs to be more developer friendly. Otherwise, it is hard to compete with iPhone, since the key part of Andorid was "openess".
jashsu said:
Open source != open system.
Open source means just that... you can see the source code. That's it. It doesn't imply or confer any other right of access, and with most open source licenses the licensor (Google & HTC) is free to build closed systems just as locked down as one based on proprietary code. Many commercial systems (Android included) are underpinned by open source code for cost savings or stability/security reasons.
Edit: That's comparing apples to oranges. Linux is not an operating system; it is an open source kernel on which an operating system can be built.
Fact of the matter is, OS X's Mach kernel is partially descendant from BSD, so you could say the center of OS X is open source as well. More info at wikipedia's Darwin entry. For being a "fan of Linux" you don't seem to understand some of the core principles.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

As a developer, on G1, we are not able to do what we can do on a linux PC, and that was my understanding about the open source smartphone OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's like you've never even heard of embedded linux before. Show me where on the G1 advertising or packaging it claims to be a Linux PC.
To be practical, for the same project I ported for Android, Windows Mobile and iPhone, I would say: Windows Mobile is the most open one (friendly) for developer. You can even make your own driver on it. So I would say Windows Mobile = smart version of Windows Desktop. But I cannot say Android = smart version of linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WM gives the developer deeper system access. That's awesome for developers maybe, but calling it a "smart" is probably going a bit too far.
I really hope Google can push a little bit to the carriers to open the root for us. Android really needs to be more developer friendly. Otherwise, it is hard to compete with iPhone, since the key part of Andorid was "openess".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android's security framework design is solely Google's responsibility. Tmo doesn't even remotely factor into it. If you don't like the default Android system lockdown then download the codebase and compile it yourself without the security settings. Security is there to prevent neophytes from opening shell and f__king their phones up.

jashsu said:
Android's security framework design is solely Google's responsibility. Tmo doesn't even remotely factor into it. If you don't like the default Android system lockdown then download the codebase and compile it yourself without the security settings. Security is there to prevent neophytes from opening shell and f__king their phones up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And run it, how?
From my understanding, the only way to get a firmware onto the phone ATM is from the recovery menu, which will only install signed updates from Google. Yes, we've got a way around that for now, but it requires root access.
How would you install a self compiled version of Android onto the G1 on the official RC30?

Gary13579 said:
And run it, how?
From my understanding, the only way to get a firmware onto the phone ATM is from the recovery menu, which will only install signed updates from Google. Yes, we've got a way around that for now, but it requires root access.
How would you install a self compiled version of Android onto the G1 on the official RC30?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No clue. I'd probably do it with a Freerunner or something that is specifically designed as an open system. The recovery menu is not the only way to write to internal memory; i'm sure the HTC bootloader has some provision for usb access.
You have all of the Android operating system at your disposal in the form of source code (provided you agree to the license). If you want to write/port low level drivers for it go right ahead. You just can't run it on the G1. They chose to lock down the Android implementation on G1 and you're dissatisfied with that. That's like being dissatisfied that a house has locks on it when the architect gave away the blueprints and floor plans for free.

jashsu said:
That's like being dissatisfied that a house has locks on it when the architect gave away the blueprints and floor plans for free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except when you buy a house, they generally give you the keys.

Gary13579 said:
Except when you buy a house, they generally give you the keys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I know, it's a flawed analogy.
If you want to have free reign over your Android, I suggest you get a Neo Freerunner to play with. I say play because the open source portion of Android is missing a lot of closed source Google added value apps (Maps, Gmail, etc) that define the G1. Also the porting process is still ongoing.

Android's security framework design is solely Google's responsibility. Tmo doesn't even remotely factor into it. If you don't like the default Android system lockdown then download the codebase and compile it yourself without the security settings. Security is there to prevent neophytes from opening shell and f__king their phones up.[/QUOTE said:
Stop playing the work game and understand the simple Thing that Developers want full Access to device in order to build Software Beyond Generalised Application, like bluetooth drivers, codecs, themes, different home shell the way we do in Windows Mobile
You said take OpenSource and Customise the OS by bypassing some security for shell access. Now Lets understand 98 % device get automatically f**ked with RC30 and there is no Reversal!!! If you can build any Customised Android Package which can bypasss Security for shell access and also Bypass Signature checking just do it for me so i can Revert to Shell Access from f**king RC30.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

hetaldp said:
Stop playing the work game and understand the simple Thing that Developers want full Access to device in order to build Software Beyond Generalised Application, like bluetooth drivers, codecs, themes, different home shell the way we do in Windows Mobile
You said take OpenSource and Customise the OS by bypassing some security for shell access. Now Lets understand 98 % device get automatically f**ked with RC30 and there is no Reversal!!! If you can build any Customised Android Package which can bypasss Security for shell access and also Bypass Signature checking just do it for me so i can Revert to Shell Access from f**king RC30.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
98% of G1s might get derooted with RC30, but guess what? 99% of users don't need root or don't care. Tmo and HTC didn't build the G1 as a device for devs to hack and play with. That's why its a subsidized $179 phone and your unlimited dataplan is $25.

99% Percent people dont want it but if we develop some Application which is beyond the SDK thing we must have to have root access to all device in order to Install it.
Adobe is releasing Flash Plugins for Browser lets see they can do it by just releasing APK Package in Market or a Pushed OTA Update. If Adobe requires OTA Update then Smaller Company and Developers see hard time to develop such Extension without Googles Permission.
Just make your Science clear before commenting it

hetaldp said:
99% Percent people dont want it but if we develop some Application which is beyond the SDK thing we must have to have root access to all device in order to Install it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course. I am just saying that there is a sense among some people that they are entitled to root access simply because G1 is built on Linux. You are not entitled to anything of the sort. If root is important to you then sell your G1 to someone who doesn't care about root (there are a lot of these people) and buy a Freerunner.

Every OpenMoko phone I have seen looks like they are competing for ugliest phone ever. I know the G1 isn't that pretty, but oh my god, I would be embarassed to carry that in my pocket.

I already own more then 6 Smartphone. And i don't use G1 also becuase of Microsoft Exchange things. I dont have any Complaint for Exchange Connectivity.
Here the Question is how can i develop some more powerful Application / extension / core Part and Distribute it across all G1 users the way we do it in Windows.
This means my core Application can run in free Runner (OpenMoko) but it will not be available in G1 user group. There will be handfull user who may use free Runner but its not my Market. I require bigger community to sell the Software buddy.

Here the Question is how can i develop some more powerful Application / extension / core Part and Distribute it across all G1 users the way we do it in Windows.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you need to get below the VM on stock ota G1 then most likely your product will need to become a part of the Android platform (meaning open sourcing). The integrity of the os and user data is one of the main reasons the Android sdk only supports the VM.
I'll be interested to see how Adobe's flash implementation for G1 works. Flash is closed source, and Google has explicitly stated that the entire Android platform is open source. My guess is they will patch the Browser to accept signed binary plugins. Perhaps Google's signature will require a peek at the source. I'm only speculating though...

Yeah using SDK we can only Develop Application which run itself in the Sandbox cna they can communication with other Application using intents, you can share Data using content Provider, share the Setting using Preference. We can develop some services in apps to handle Asynchronous process.
We we ca not do is recompile the Whole Modded Source, replace or test drivers, codec, low level binaries.
The SDK is fairly powerful out off the Box for Standalone things. !
Thats why i have made a different demand to google in this thread
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=444893
The only thing tmobile is worried is tethering, as they give unlock code after every 90% day Subsidized Handset unlocking is not a big worry for them.
Just think If you want to develop On Screen keyboard it require more powerful access to core system and its beyond Google Sandbox approach.

jashsu said:
It's like you've never even heard of embedded linux before. Show me where on the G1 advertising or packaging it claims to be a Linux PC..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Show me where did I say Android = a linux pc. Same, I didn't say Windows Mobile = Windows XP/Vista.
I hate to play the word game.
jashsu said:
WM gives the developer deeper system access. That's awesome for developers maybe, but calling it a "smart" is probably going a bit too far..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why I thought very high with Android. But the limited development access makes it worse than WM.
jashsu said:
Android's security framework design is solely Google's responsibility. Tmo doesn't even remotely factor into it. If you don't like the default Android system lockdown then download the codebase and compile it yourself without the security settings. Security is there to prevent neophytes from opening shell and f__king their phones up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you please show us how to get the root from the f__king rc30?
Do you rebuild the whole linux on your pc if you just want to make a simple application?

Transitioning: Jailbroken iPhone 3GS to Captivate

For anyone considering making the switch, I thought I would give some details on my experience having recently done this myself.
I had an iPhone 3G for about a year before I finally decided to jailbreak it and play with extra features. This led to all out phone modding with my 3GS, and finally the decision to move to Android for even more customization and utility. Here, i'll compare the experience I had with either device for inquiring minds contemplating a similar conundrum.
Jailbreaking and rooting; these words mean essentially the same thing: you gain full access tot he device's file system. There is, however, a distinct difference in the end result. With the iPhone, you typically jailbreak by running a utility that uses a software (or in some cases hardware) exploit to essentially exploit your way in.
Almost all of these will then install Cydia, a type of App Store that is not policed by Apple, and offers apps that only work on jailbroken devices because of their need to access parts of the file system that are typically restricted. From Cydia, you can download and install free and paid apps, and even gain access to black-market sources like Install0us where you can download pirated versions of paid apps.
Cydia contains what I consider to be the staple, or common, jailbroken apps. A few are:
MobileSubstrate: an underlying framework that provides an interface for the phones hardware that is common across many apps.
SBSettings: an easily accessible menu for controlling various functions, and displaying status information (wifi toggle, internal IP address, etc).
Winterboard: a theming app that essentially creates a layer on top of the existing UI to substitute a custom element for a standard one.
There are many others, many of which have been superseded by Apple's own improvements to their OS, such as Backgrounder for multitasking. The entire experience of theming and loading unapproved apps had a very under-the-table feel to it, and it was often difficult to find exactly what I needed, if even possible.
The upside of the iPhone with this is the nearly invincible nature of its systems. Barring hardware failure, or trying intentionally to do it, I can't see how it is even possible to brick an iPhone 3G or later. No matter what you do to it, you can restore it from iTunes and start over.
Android was a very different story. The initial path into rooting and flashing was scarce and difficult to follow at first. I heard a bunch of terms that I had no meaning for, and found it difficult to make sense of it all. Fortunately with the help of a few kind souls here on XDA, I learned what I need to know.
The rooting and modding experience did not have the slightly criminal feeling to it like my experience with the iPhone. I knew neither Apple nor Google was going to bother at all if I wanted to mess with my device; there was nothing to hide. The rooting process was very simple once I understood it, and using ADB from the Android SDK (I'll give details later) made the whole process feel comfortable with good directions. Adding non-market apps was a breeze with the Side-load Wonder Machine.
Finally I decided to try a custom ROM the day that I saw the leaked Froyo beta. Everything else had gone very well, so I felt confident as soon as I learned how to test 3-key download mode and found it successful. I had initially intended to try Cognition, but a recommendation for Assonance made me change my mind. Again, with good instructions, I flashed Assonance 3.1 with great success and have been enjoying the many benefits of custom ROMs since.
Thanks for reading if you've stuck with me thus far.
TL;DR (the experience broken down)
Rooting
iPhone: A full package process that is railroaded for better or worse. Even in the jailbreak community, you have very little options with iPhone. Some folks like--or need--it that way.
Android: At once it feels a little riskier at first, but if you play it safe, you'll find this just unlocks a door to more options.
Unapproved Apps
iPhone: Cydia, Rock, Install0us. What you see is what you get, and just pray the developer of your favorite apps doesn't quit. It can be hard to pay for things without paypal.
Android: It literally could not be easier. You don't even need to root first: http://www.androidcentral.com/sideload-android-apps-all-you-want-sideload-wonder-machine
Theming
iPhone: Tedious or slow; pick your poison. You can either manually replace each UI element yourself, making backups of the originals just in case, or you can use Winterboard, and deal with the performance hit. The plus side is that once you get the basics it is pretty standard across the board.
Android: Theming in general is much easier with LauncherPro, Desktop Visualizer, OpenHome, or ADW; but if you want to do the really detailed things like skin the dialer buttons, you are looking at something quite a bit more arcane than simple PNGs in iPhone. Some of this can be overcome by flashing various themes, but it still isn't individual control.
Functionality
iPhone: For functions not built into iOS, you have a few choices which aren't really choices as much as must-haves. Beyond that, you can just hope someone will happen to make what you need, and it will be maintained through iOS updates.
Android: The sky is the limit, but you need to be able to fly the plane. I can't make apps; no idea how, but the majority of my wishlist for the iPhone was built into Android 2.2 out of the box..
Reliability
iPhone: As I said before, a hardware failure is pretty much the only major dead end, but any piece, even the battery pretty much means a new phone.
Android: Software reliability will take more work than it will on the iPhone. You don't have iTunes making a full restore backup every few days, so you'll need to take the initiative yourself to make copies of pictures and music, and backup apps.
I know this ended up being a little scatterbrained, but hopefully it will help someone out in making the right choice for them. Remember, the iPhone is like James Bond: he is the best there is at doing exactly what he was meant to do. Then Android is like MacGyver: a little rough around the edges, but given the right tools he can do anything. One isn't better, they are just different. Choose what is right for you, stay in school, and don't do drugs.

Haha you got me with the last sentence.

agreed
I agree with what you said. I had an iPhone but couldn't stand to keep it for the full two years so I got rid of it early and got a Captivate. I jailbroke the iPhone and had the same experience you describe. I can't say that any of the jailbreak apps/tweaks were really an improvement over stock iOS, although they do slow the phone down pretty badly and cause it to crash frequently. I haven't rooted my captivate yet (still a few more weeks of getting used to the unrooted captivate) but even unrooted android is vastly more customizable than the iPhone. I just got ADW launcher and none of the regular/jailbroken iPhone apps could do anything like it.
Note one difference between the two: you can install only apps and "tweaks" into a jailbroken iPhone (like 'custom icons'), while you can install custom ROMs/OSs into the android. The iOS source code is not released publicly so devs can't modify the entire OS like they can with android. It is hard, in my opinion, to justify jailbreaking an iPhone because it adds nothing important, but does slow the phone down and make it crash.

[Q] Looking for an "app protector" app

Hey mates.
Im looking for a wm 7 alternative to the quite nice app protector android app called Smart App Protector.
What i need is the functionality to restrict my wm7 devices so the users cant enter IE, Settings and other functions than those i want them to.
When a user tries to open the browser on a android device with the smart app protector installed, they get prompted for a password, which is exactly what im looking for.
If there isnt an app that does what im looking for, does anyone know a way to restrict at least internet trafic in IE, i still need data connections, but the users wont be allowed to use data except for 1 app.
My first impression of the wm7 - 7.5 is that its very restricted compared to Android devices :S
Thanks a lot for your help.

A quick for-the-record: No such thing as WM7. Windows Mobile is dead. Although some of the underlying code got re-used in WP7, the upper part of the Windows Phone stack is completely new, and the low-level stuff has changed considerably as well. What you're asking for would probably have been quite easy on WinMo.
On WP7, it's a lot harder. There are three ways I can think of. The first and simplest would be a well-modified custom ROM. Another is to modify the policy system to prevent launching iexplore, settings3, and similar programs, but have an app that (once the password is provided) allows changing those policies. Note that we don't yet have full control over the policy system (as a community; Heathcliff74 knows quite a bit but is busy with his Root Tools project). The third would be to try modifying the registry entries for certain operations. The effectiveness of this depends on whether apps are launched directly (by executable) or indirectly (by GUIDs in the registry). If it's the latter, the launch request could be routed through an authorization app first.
Bear in mind, the only one of these changes that is permanent is a custom ROM. Otherwise, the user could hard-reset the phone (losing all data on it but bringing it back to factory default configuration). It's possible to hard-reset just using the buttons; you don't even need to use the touchscreen.

Thanks for the correction, WP7 ofc
Im rather impressed by the performance of the OS so far, but it has many unforseen restrictions for my needs.
Since i only had the windows phone 7 for 1 day so far, i dont have much knowledge about changing what you are suggesting.
I know what you mean, but no idea how to do on WP7.
A custom ROM would be great indeed, but i dont have any experience in that field. Would be great to get a nice configuration tool with a gui to make the needed changes and then a tool to upload the new ROM to the phone...in that simple order
Im also looking for a solution to install software that was supported by windows mobile. Im checking out cheronwp7 at the moment to see if that can do the trick.
It seems a lot like WP7 is 99% consumer minded than business minded compared to old WM, a bit shame imo.

ubuntu phone - yes, no, maybe?

It is possible to get 3 different phones with ubuntu phone now, none of them too expensive.
good.
i wonder what people's experience or informed opinion is?
ubuntu is pushing "convergence", which basically means that one operating system runs on all devices, that i can use my smartphone as a computer...
how far along is it?
now there's loads of blog articles and reviews out there, but most of them focus on comparing ubuntu phone (UP from now on) to other phone OSs - with their fully grown app universe. of course UP comes up short!
but that's not what i'm interested in. OS stability, and the standard browsing, music and video, and of course phone and sms is good enough for me.
but, i want the same freedom i have with my linux desktop install: to Do Things.
(my most important project is still to get a usable connection to the data & media stored on my kitchenserver.)
the day before yesterday i had a chat with someone on #ubuntu-phone - i think it was a dev.
i asked if i can use & upgrade it like any normal ubuntu/debian-based, install apps and utilities and so on.
basically he said, gui apps are difficult because UP uses a different gui model than Xorg, but basically yes, but you loose you guarantee that OTA (over the air) updates will work. but they should, regardless.
yesterday i was browsing the ubuntu phone section on ubuntu forums; of course people only post if something doesn't work - it looks like a normal and healthy distro forum to me.
OTA updates come in almost daily, i gather. very lively development.
there was, however, a lot of familiar discussions about how to get some app or other working; familiar from my 2 android phones: convoluted and fragile solutions, like installing ubuntu desktop in a chroot.
UP even recommends adb (android debug bridge?) as the only way to access the phone from your computer. or the standard mtp connection. so it's the same **** as everywhere.
the other aspect is this:
- ok, android is big, evil google, but there's a few established solutions around to use it without an account, use f-droid instead of play store, well documented security hacks and so on.
- UP certainly isn't the white knight here, but if not google, what do they use, is it really "better" than google and can i opt out easily?
yes, i am seriously considering to buy a UP phone, as soon as i get the feeling that it is an improvement freedom and security wise.
i wonder what people's experience or informed opinion is?

bump
...just a gentle one before the weekend ends.
i'd love to get some answers...

How did android reach this point?

As advanced android users, we quickly became obsessed with rooting, unlocking, and controlling our phone. On the other side of the poker table, we have device manufacturers and carriers trying to lock the ecosystem down. It's curious to me how this came to be.
Looking at personal computers: I wanted to install linux on my personal computer because I am a developer by trade, so I installed linux. I took a USB, loaded the linux ISO, and followed the installer (actually I didn't, arch btw). I did not need to get unlock codes from my device manufacturer or my internet company, I just did it and no one complained (aside from windows who was glitching out as I tried to reboot)
This computer ecosystem feels healthy, it's my computer, and I can use it as I wish. I'm curious how and why android got to this point where 90% of manufacturers:
1. Don't allow unlocking
2. Make you jump through hoops to get an unlock code
3. Have hardware root checks
Of course, before we even start talking about verizon (they forgot to lock my pixel )
Is the fact that mobile devices are harder to unlock and modify them computers a flaw in android? Is there some actual reason life is like this?
That's even before we start talking about update cycles. I used my old computer for 10 years, going from god knows what to windows 10 before finally deciding that I just could not. My device manufacturer did not control the updates I got, they just came. Why is it the case that updates come from the manufacture, not directly from modifications to the android codebase? Shouldn't the manufacture just add "drivers" to the device to handle the peripherals?
I presume in some way google is complient with this, because android is based on linux, and linux has no such problems.

Many times, consumers that bootloader unlock their devices have no clue that they will lose features such as banking and Widevine D1; these users are oblivious as to what rooting truly does to their device and instinctively contact their OEM's support to get a device replacement as many times relocking the bootloader is impossible.
Verizon's thought process is somewhat similar, but there is likely a darker undertone to their practices: preventing bootloader unlocks and processes of the sort could aid them when blacklisting their devices, as there is no way to circumvent something tagged to a permanent IMEI kept by the same bootloader and firmware. There is a reason why T - Mobile requires you to have your device completely paid off before you can make any modifications to the system firmware.
Compared to laptops and computers, it is, generally, a one - time purchase and not an investment; carriers depend on their consumers to keep paying their devices off time and time again to make money.
Drivers are essentially non - existent on Android; the only thing that comes somewhat close is the kernel and any OEM modifications to the firmware.

Xryphon said:
Many times, consumers that bootloader unlock their devices have no clue that they will lose features such as banking and Widevine D1; these users are oblivious as to what rooting truly does to their device and instinctively contact their OEM's support to get a device replacement as many times relocking the bootloader is impossible.
Verizon's thought process is somewhat similar, but there is likely a darker undertone to their practices: preventing bootloader unlocks and processes of the sort could aid them when blacklisting their devices, as there is no way to circumvent something tagged to a permanent IMEI kept by the same bootloader and firmware. There is a reason why T - Mobile requires you to have your device completely paid off before you can make any modifications to the system firmware.
Compared to laptops and computers, it is, generally, a one - time purchase and not an investment; carriers depend on their consumers to keep paying their devices off time and time again to make money.
Drivers are essentially non - existent on Android; the only thing that comes somewhat close is the kernel and any OEM modifications to the firmware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This explains why carriers do do this, and it makes sense, but how can they do this? The fact that should someone in the black box want to, loose control over my device no matter what I do is frankly scary. Could a laptop manufacturer do the same thing if they wanted to? (Ignoring the fact they could not because of the outrage). I had always thought somehow android as an operating system was connected to this, somehow complient, but perhaps it is really just a choice by the manufactures that android has nothing to do with. (Google could enforce this via GMS I think, but I don't expect them to)

Scaledish said:
This explains why carriers do do this, and it makes sense, but how can they do this? The fact that should someone in the black box want to, loose control over my device no matter what I do is frankly scary. Could a laptop manufacturer do the same thing if they wanted to? (Ignoring the fact they could not because of the outrage). I had always thought somehow android as an operating system was connected to this, somehow complient, but perhaps it is really just a choice by the manufactures that android has nothing to do with. (Google could enforce this via GMS I think, but I don't expect them to)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chromebooks are a prime example of locking down the bootloader. So is the same with macOS laptops and related devices - albeit Apple lets you boot into other operating systems, the process to do so requires jumping through quite a bunch of loopholes due to Apple's Secure Boot, file system, etc.

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment (because in reality, I, too, prefer to own my equipment).....
Security can be a lot more critical on mobile devices than stationary devices like desktop computers. Even in *some* respects, compared to rackmount servers. This is because it can be pretty simple to grab someone's phone and do what you want with it. Having physical access to a piece of equipment is 99.999% of the task of breaking into it. Its relatively far fetched for someone to break into your home or a high security datacenter in order to gain physical access to your equipment, so the need to have it protected against the kinds of intrusions that become possible through physical access is much lower than it is on a phone, which you just might accidentally leave on the counter at a coffee shop.
And that is about the only part of the move towards lockdowns that I actually understand. The rest of it is either ill-conceived "security" or coercion to separate you from your money.