Turns out my N95 got jailbroken!

My N95 got hacked. Sorry. What I meant was it got jailbroken. By me.

As Mr.X points out in his comment to this post, I've hacked my N95. Does this come in direct contradiction to what I've stated a while ago, in this post? Do I feel bad now? Do I feel good?

Hardly either.

In what was a rare moment of ignorance (I've used tougher words on myself, not to worry), I published a post describing a procedure to sign and install unsigned apps. Since that particular procedure had nothing in common (procedure-wise strictly, mind) with the 'hacking' method(s) described all over the internets, I obviously figured that it had nothing to do with that. And was actually very happy that I had found (rather quickly) a solution to an annoying problem.

The Problem

What to do when there are all this interesting (if not all very useful) apps floating across the net, but in unsigned form?

Well, the simplest solution would have been to sit around and wait for them to get Symbian Signed. For days, weeks, maybe months, perhaps years. Until the Symbian gods decide "it's time". Time to care about freeware. Not a good perspective. Not to me, at least.

So, off to find a solution.

Again, what to do? To hack or not to hack? Honestly, I couldn't be bothered with complicated "hacking procedures". Arguably, I can normally be bothered to do a lot more than your average normob would, but I have my limits. Admittedly, when news of the 'great hacking' first occurred, I scanned through the 'steps' and never got the urge to try. I might have, see as I'm what they call a 'power user', and, well, the more power (read: capabilities), the better. But that's just theory. I just couldn't be bothered.

So back to the Problem. The most appealing solution to me? Use mighty Google (I say that with half-respect and half-fear of world domination, naturally) and find an alternative solution.

Which I did. Took 5 minutes to do what I've described. It works. It just works. It is, therefore, probably developed by Apple.

So

I decided to blog my experience. Perhaps more people would easily get past the hurdle of not being to install unsigned apps. And quickly and easily.

And then

Mr.X said that despite all my claims, what I describe is basically a hack, because it takes advantage of something that was developed for hacking.

So do I now have access to C:\Sys? I don't know. I don't care. Haven't even checked. Don't plan to.

That's the whole thing. Being able to bypass Symbian's carelessness towards freeware is something I do care about. A lot. Why? I don't earn anything out of blogging. And what I do is really a piece of cake compared to the work developers put into such freeware apps. Sure, they accept donations (most, anyway), but the software is free. They do what they do out of sheer passion and I can relate to that. Which is why I care.

And I must say (I think it was the All About Symbian forum where a while ago I said the same thing), I surely hope that the mess Symbian Signed is in right now (and has been for, literally, years) is not because when they imagined the software signing procedure, they didn't consider freeware to be a valid distribution model. I would definitely not agree with such tactics. We live in the always connected world, where content is more and more expected to be served instantly. And much of that content is and is expected to be free. Would you now be willing to pay for personal webmail bringing you, say, an amazing 6MB of storage? Didn't think so.

The expected ratio of freeware to non-freeware apps to be available in the upcoming Apple App Store for the iPhone should clearly point out (if anyone still felt the need for that) that pay-to-purchase is only one of many monetization strategies out there. And the one that's most rapidly decreasing its spread (see the desktop app vs. app in 'the cloud' dilemma and inherent difference in revenue model). Oh, and there are people with no immediate monetization scheme well thought out. Twitter, anyone? A VC's nightmare, no doubt, but still, such silly creatures, working only out of passion, still seem to exist.

Here's the thing, Symbian

You look like you're trapped in the '90s. And let it be clear that I'm only referring to the signing procedure. I do enjoy the fact that there practically are no viruses out there to target Symbian because there would be no point for anyone to develop them - that is thanks to the signing procedure. But something has got to be done. Today. Now. Not in 'the long run', because in a few years there may well not be any 'long run' left.

Companies that are universally considered as innovative (and tend to outlive their non-innovative counterparts, strangely) do it quick. They respond to the way the market changes, they respond to the way people's needs and (more importantly) habits change. And they react quickly. That's also a great way to build brand loyalty.

So hopefully Symbian will not go the way of the recording companies and movie studios. The stupid way that they react to something they will never be able to control anyway, namely torrent distribution. That's a classic "how not to". Not to say such companies will disappear in the near future, but there is no way that they will be the ones to influence a change in people's habits. It's ALWAYS the other way round.

So do I encourage jailbreaking your S60 phone?

No.

The word hacking is panic-inducing to the normobs. I've seen a lot of use of it lately, and that's only so that a few people can brag. It's a powerful word, sure. But pushing it into the world of the normobs is dangerous for S60. That's why I'm 'afraid' of hacking, Mr.X. Of the word itself and how easily it can be misinterpreted. Not of the procedure. I'm not a fan of that, but I know many other 'power users' are. And there's no problem in that.

See this is the issue. This is something that is clearly appealing only to power users, and of those only to some. It's a niche inside a niche. And that's a really limited target.

And I am not going to encourage anyone to do anything that sounds that bad. Not enthusiasts, because I can't (yet) see a true gain. Not normobs because I don't want service centers flooded with hacked phones. There's just no point.

And one more thing. Learn from Apple. Please. Learn. To jailbreak. Sounds so romantic. So idealistic. So...good!

Ok? Jailbreak.

So will I change my earlier post?

No.

Ok, so it's not as documented as it could have been, granted. Ok, that procedure may rely on hacking. Fine. But what it actually is is a simple and, frankly, useful, erm, use, of that.

Simple and useful.
And it works.
You sure it isn't Apple's guys behind these hacks? Because if that was the case, even the use of the word hack would make more sense (competition, you know...).

And I recommend it to anyone who wants to use unsigned apps in 2008. Next year, who knows...

So I guess I am in favor of hacking after all. If it is referred to as jailbreaking and if it turns out to actually be useful.
Go ahead, blame me.

Ease of use is THE thing

Right?

My bet is that you've heard this at least once in the past year. Since Apple 'revolutionized' the mobile industry, with their 500-years-ahead-of-the-competition product. It is understandable that Apple would want you to believe this. The main thing that makes the iPhone stand out (except from the absurd pricing) is its ease of use.

Fine. They can use any buzzwords they want. Marketing is like that. And if you have incredibly clever marketing (like Apple), then you come up with such catchy words.

But the problem is this: even those that usually don't get fooled by marketing stunts fell hard for this one. It now seems like this is THE focus that the whole industry should have. Which is good in principle. Yeah, there's no point to loads of features if they can't be easily accessed and/or used. Anyway, let's not get ahead of ourselves here, shall we?

WHO exactly is ease of use for?

I have not heard/read ONE good answer to this question. Nobody seems to care. "It has to be done". And that's it. Believe and do not doubt, that's what this is.

I for one DO doubt. Again, generally speaking, you know, "good is good" and "bad is bad". So ease of use is good as a principle.
But focusing the whole industry on this? Why?

Ease of use, the way the average Joe understands this concept, comes with lack of features. Always. The more features, the more the average Joe will be confused.
So the iPhone is easy to use. Good. Is a Nokia 1200 not easy to use?

Not to be misunderstood. The iPhone browser is the most easy to use browser out there. Which is nice, since that will push normobs to use mobile data more. Which is good for everyone. Operators obviously, but the rest of us as well, since presumably prices for data will keep going down.

But UI? Give me a break. The way Apple sees things, they know what you want better than you do. I know, this may be true, if you're a normob. But if you aren't, the last thing you should do is preach an Apple-like 'vision' of UIs. They have created a phone that is good for nothing else than calling, texting (in light of recent firmware updates only) and browsing. So it should be 'better' than the aforementioned 1200 because it also features that wonderful browser. THAT'S IT, ladies and gentlemen.

If Nokia came up with a UI similar to Apple's, I would not buy a Nokia smartphone. Period.

People might argue that this is only valid for so-called "power users". Exactly. It is. And what power users should do instead of constantly whining that the iPhone UI is not replicated by Nokia, Sony Ericsson and all others is actually SHOW a normob how to use those other, oh-so-complicated UIs. Which would make normobs either not want an iPhone or anything else overly simplistic, or make them suddenly realize that all they actually need is a Nokia 1200. Any other conclusion would solely be based on the desire to show off. Which I don't care for. I've seen way too many people that use N95s only for calling. I wonder what's worse: a holstered Blackberry or an N95 used for nothing else than calling? I haven't made up my mind yet, but at least the Blackberries are presumably given to such, erm, users, by their companies.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Hacking and quacking

Read this, if you haven't already.

I would not have bothered with this "news", had it not sparked heated arguments (like we need any more of those) in the blogosphere.

First of all, the word. "Hacked". Really? Why not "jailbroken"? Oh, I see, that is trademarked and to be used only for Divine products.

So is Symbian 9.2 or S60v3 FP1 hacked?

NO.

A FEW DIRECTORIES. A few directories were jailbroken. That means that there was no previous method of accessing them. And now there is. These are the directories that hold an important part of your device's 'kitchen', so to speak. So if you use the method described on Symbian Freak, you'll get access to those directories. That's it.

I, unlike others, understand why Symbian Freak have used the term "hacked". To create hype and drive traffic to their site. Is that bad? I don't know. Is Apple's shoving of Safari up your throat bad?
I don't even care. Would I have posted such news had I 'invented' the 'method'? Definitely. I would not have used "hacked" to describe it, though.

So back to me not caring. I don't. I do not want access to those folders. I don't care what goes on inside them. I have bricked my N95 once in a way a lot easier to accomplish. That is, I didn't do anything special. It just didn't want to boot anymore. I know how frustrating that experience was, and am not planning on taking such risks again.

Point is: I am a geek. Not an uber-geek (whatever the correct spelling for that is). Doing this is certainly not appealing to average consumers. It's not even appealing, I would say, to geeks. The only group that find this even remotely interesting are the uber-geeks. Fine. Let them see those directories. Maybe that will spark genius ideas that some day will be implemented in the OS. Who knows? As for this opening the door for viruses, grow up all! Steve Litchfield explained this better than I could.

Why am I writing this post?
Because I am sick of the Echelon-like scanning that mainstream news blogs do. See, there isn't much time to properly read (or, God forbid, understand) something, since you absolutely have to be the first (of such mainstream sites, obviously) to report something. So you scan for keywords. "Hacked" is a very strong such keyword. You read it, then write "news" posts. Based on one word. Cool!

And then it's on to the paranoia.
"Normobs will read this and feel threatened - they are going to buy useless antivirus apps or even worse, try this at home". SO WHAT?

This is being said with an assumption that when the average Joe reads "Symbian" or "S60" he knows what those words mean. Well, good morning everyone: he doesn't. He has absolutely no clue. Ok, so he does know "Nokia". Will the normobs flood Nokia Service Centers asking for, erm, protection? Very good. They should be getting the right answers there. That's what Service Centers are for.

And what is so bad in normobs trying this at home? They risk bricking their devices. Wow, that's so...unseen! Like you can't brick an S60 device in any other way. Let them try, if they're willing to. Let them brick their devices. Let them buy antivirus apps. Why not? It's their own money they're wasting. If Nokia doesn't clearly say the fact that there is no need whatsoever for an antivirus app on S60 devices, furthermore one such app is even available in the Download folder on almost every device...

This was supposed to be news of real interest to maybe a few hundred people worldwide. Because it wasn't left that way, it has turned into a case of hysteria. Bad.

And a note: The discussion on the forum at All About Symbian has again gone from rather civilised to the absurd. Keep in mind, whatever you do, that when you see someone defending paid software (as a concept, I don't mean specific examples) over free software, that person is very likely to be working for a commercial software developer. Otherwise, tell me: if you had to choose between two identical apps, one of which is free, one of which isn't, what would you pick? OR if innovation is taken into account, shouldn't all software fall into only two categories: innovative or not? Not "yes, innovative, but it's freeware, so it's not good" and "maybe it isn't that innovative, but hey, at least I can pay for it". Got it?

As for using the jailbreaking method to run unsigned apps, please, control yourself! Wait. A few days, a few weeks maybe, and all the independent freeware developers will change their apps' code so you'll be able to sign them using Open Signed Online.

Blogged with the Flock Browser