Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

xda-developers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 204 posts

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#71

Post by summm »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #53

While that is a bummer for advanced and/or privacy seeking users, it is understandable. I have considered membership in the CalyxOS Institute where you get a Google Pixel 4a phone all set up with CalyxOS. Something similar with the most modern hardware would be better, but the situation with Samsung, is what it is.

It is not understandable, and we shouldn't accept asshole behavior like this. If we do, other manufacturers will follow one by one, and in 2 years you won't have any options left. Like it was with removable batteries. SD cards. Headphones jack.

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#72

Post by scoopertrooper »

devney wrote: post #34
JCWasmx86 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably somewhere deep in the EULA/ToS and furthermore it is shown, while unlocking the bootloader. Whether this is legal or not, is surely an open question.

That raises whole other legal questions.... One basic pillar of contract law basically everywhere is that one can not be bound by a contract that they didn't read, even if they signed it. Usually these cases involve coercion or not knowing the language. If nobody can read the EULA because it's 10 pages of densely written legalese, can they even be bound by it? Since BigCo deliberately made their EULA harder to read t…

It's printed quite clearly in the quick start guide that it'll break your phone if you do it. Maybe people should read the little booklet, but as you can see it's not hidden under a pile of text.

> Approved firmware versions

> This device will only operate with

> firmware versions that have been

> approved for use by your wireless

> carrier and the device manufacturer.

> If unauthorized firmware is placed on

> the device it will not function

https://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/UM/202108/2021081...

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#73

Post by dmm »

jankotek wrote: post #31
Abishek_Muthian wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel LineageOS + F-Droid is often underrated when it comes to these discussions about alternate ecosystems. If we're ready to let go of name brands, then F-Droid has some very high quality apps[1] built with passion over profit. But I agree that the initial friction to setup LineageOS on the device is far too high for a non-technical customer, Something which could be only resolved if a devices ships with LineageOS…

I had run LineageOS for some time. It works, but FDroid is missing too many apps, even opensource like Signal. I have to update apks manually every few months.

If you install signal from the apk they(moxie, signal) provide it works without google play services and it will update itself automatically, just requiring you to click a confirmation every few weeks.

Calyxos ships with Signal installed. I think it's an install time option? And it updates in an identical fashion.

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#74

Post by scoopertrooper »

InitialLastName wrote: post #48
devney wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That raises whole other legal questions.... One basic pillar of contract law basically everywhere is that one can not be bound by a contract that they didn't read, even if they signed it. Usually these cases involve coercion or not knowing the language. If nobody can read the EULA because it's 10 pages of densely written legalese, can they even be bound by it? Since BigCo deliberately made their EULA harder to read t…

> One basic pillar of contract law basically everywhere is that one can not be bound by a contract that they didn't read, even if they signed it. Wait, there has to be more nuance to this, right? Like, I can't just sign a contract and say "I didn't read it" when a term I don't like comes into force. Is there a precedent for where that line is?

There is much more to it and I wouldn't trust any legal advice given to you by OP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_est_factum

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#75

Post by hdjjhhvvhga »

danuker wrote: post #22
ddtaylor wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average consumer only wants to purchase the cross-section between what is the cheapest and works the best. For most consumers Open Source is not a feature.

With various right-to-repair legislation popping up everywhere, I am not so sure. Software restrictions are one way to ensure planned obsolescence.

Actually, there is a specific set of features that guarantees planned obsolescence:

* Irreplaceable battery (or one that is difficult to remove by the user).

* on the iPhone, the Lightning socket and the Home button. The former starts to wear out after ca. 5 years; the Home button lasts a bit longer. Apple will repair both these for you but at this point you will be tempted to buy a new device instead because of the costs involved.

* the support for older devices is being dropped from SDKs. With time, it becomes more and more difficult to develop apps for your device. For many developers this is something completely natural and reasonable. For me it's not. I'm not asking Apple to support iPhone 4s (would be nice, but it's unrealistic), but just to let me still run and provision apps on my old MacBook with a previous version of Xcode. It used to work well in 2012, why can't I do it now? Upgrade, upgrade, upgrade, produce tons of electric waste, buy more, buy more. OK, I am buying new devices, but I care about the old ones. I won't throw away a perfectly working phone that will serve me another 10 years just because it is not considered modern enough.

EOL-ed smartphones are powerful computers, they have tons of different uses, I wish manufacturers recognized it and collaborate with their customers to reduce the amount of electrowaste.

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#76

Post by atatatat »

danuker wrote: post #14
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #12

I can almost guarantee this is due to licensing issues with the camera firmware. Modern cameras aren't just hardware any more. They're a mix of hardware and advanced processing algorithms that really do make a huge difference in the final output. Those algorithms are often licensed from 3rd parties with specific licensing requirements. Sony has been reasonably good about enabling open-source and fixing these things i…

> they'll try to find a way to enable the cameras on unlocked phones in the future. In the meantime, I will only buy what ACTUALLY gives me control RIGHT NOW, namely, what is supported by LineageOS: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/

You'll have the control to...not even lock your bootloader.

Use GrapheneOS, if you want something resembling security.

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#77

Post by PeterisP »

amelius wrote: post #39
sneak wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter whether it's the tyranny of Samsung being dicks or the tyranny of the copyright cartel jamming the fiction that is intellectual property down our throats (and thereby being dicks) that is fucking up one's phone. Perhaps the law needs to recognize that buying hardware should come with rights to the firmware. If all hardware is useless without firmware, then all hardware is useless without additional…

I think we should have a clear separation between hardware and software companies. This is how it worked in the old days when the internet was built. Hardware companies are getting too much power over our data, and we need more freedom of choice in how our data is treated and by whom, regardless of the hardware that we own. A company can be "good" one day and "bad" the next day. We shouldn't be forced to throw away a…

IMHO mainstream consumers are clearly voting with their wallets that the benefits of hw/sw integration are more important to them than the drawbacks of hw/sw integration.

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#78

Post by baybal2 »

xiaq wrote: post #4

It could be for compliance with Japanese law which forbids taking photos without a shutter sound? This in principle doesn't apply when you're not in Japan, but after unlocking Samsung has no way to tell. Edit: reading the article about SONY ( https://www.xda-developers.com/sony-xperia-android-pie-unloc... ), DRM keys seems to be a more likely cause, which drcursor's comment also mentions.

> Japanese law which forbids taking photos without a shutter sound?

Why???

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#79

Post by bluGill »

falcolas wrote: post #42
sp332 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really an after-sale thing. They sold a phone with a booby trap set already. If the customer springs the trap, that's a customer action, not a Samsung action.

Most laws tend to frown upon traps. And the blame goes to the one who sets the trap, not the one who trips it, even if the victim was engaging in otherwise illegal actions.

That depends on the trap and how you set it. If you dig a hole for a house and someone falls in you are not liable.

Re: Samsung kills the cameras on the Galaxy Z Fold 3 if you unlock the bootloader

#80

Post by amelius »

PeterisP wrote: post #77
amelius wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we should have a clear separation between hardware and software companies. This is how it worked in the old days when the internet was built. Hardware companies are getting too much power over our data, and we need more freedom of choice in how our data is treated and by whom, regardless of the hardware that we own. A company can be "good" one day and "bad" the next day. We shouldn't be forced to throw away a…

IMHO mainstream consumers are clearly voting with their wallets that the benefits of hw/sw integration are more important to them than the drawbacks of hw/sw integration.

That's because consumers are greedy and shortsighted actors which need help from an external entity to prevent them from getting trapped in a local optimum.
Post reply on HN