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

How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 122 posts

Re: How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

#71

Post by coldtea »

josteink wrote: post #21
nwh wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been balmy little bits of stuff like this all the way through OSX and iOS for ages, though maybe not quite as flippant. Every Mac has the kernel extension "Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext" for example, which loads into RAM a short poem. There once was was a user that whined his existing OS was so blind, he'd do better to pirate an OS that ran great but found his hardware declined. Please don't steal Mac OS! Really,…

Every Maccard on the planet seems to think pirating OS X is an oh so terrible thing to do (to the point that parent post is bringing up poems about it like its a cute, non-weird thing). At the same time pirating everything else on the planet seemingly is OK. I've never understood the rationale behind this. Keep in mind I'm a software developer myself and run strictly non-pirated software, and open-source as much as p…

>Every Maccard on the planet seems to think pirating OS X is an oh so terrible thing to do

First, who are those "Maccards" you are reffering to? Perhaps you meant to say "OS X user" or "persons who likes Apple stuff".

Second, a lot of us OS X user could not care less if you pirated OS X or not. Matter of fact, I know several people with genuine Macs that also run a Hackintosh (and I experimented with one a while ago).

>(to the point that parent post is bringing up poems about it like its a cute, non-weird thing).

The poem is placed by Apple developers, inside the OS X internels. IIRC, it's loaded in a .kext (a kernel extension). That's cute, especially it being a flippant poem and not some 20 page long legal text. In essense, it's a small easter egg.

It's not like random Apple users write poems about not pirating OS X, which seems to be your impression.

>At the same time pirating everything else on the planet seemingly is OK.

"Maccards think pirating OS X is very bad" (wrong) "At the same time pirating everything else on the planet seemingly is OK" (wrong again).

Even if "Maccards" (sic) thought that pirating OS X is bad, who told you it's the same persons that think pirating everything else is OK?

>I've never understood the rationale behind this.

The problem might be that what you believe goes on is not happening in the first place.

Re: How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

#72

Post by drharris »

icebraining wrote: post #44
nicholassmith wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With OS X there's no license key you need to enter, they have a poem instead asking you not to steal it. That's a nice thing, rather than assuming you're going to steal it they have a poem to jokingly ask you otherwise.

Sure, no license key, except for the key used to decrypt protected binaries only on authorized hardware. There is a license "key", it's the whole computer.

I don't get why people are still whining about this in 2013. Is it really that unreasonable for an OS manufacturer to restrict the devices on which it can be installed? I write firmware for a specific known hardware platform; do I really want the pain of people using it on an Arduino? The appeal of OSX is that it just works, and works beautifully most of the time. Opening it up to all the devices dilutes the main thing it has going for it.

Sometimes there is freedom in restriction.

Re: How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

#73

Post by andyhmltn »

nicholassmith wrote: post #52
andyhmltn wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just talking about BETAs in general. The one I have at the moment is a bit better but I tend to charge my phone at work so I don't usually notice

Fair enough, the early ones were awful for battery. B1 turned my iPhone 5 into a hand warmer and meant I couldn't be away from a plug for more than 4 hours.

Oh yeah, I remember unplugging my phone at 100% then a few hours later having the 10% warning flash up. Luckily, it's at least better than that.

Re: How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

#74

Post by pcwalton »

derefr wrote: post #51
icebraining wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, no license key, except for the key used to decrypt protected binaries only on authorized hardware. There is a license "key", it's the whole computer.

What are protected binaries? This is something I've not heard of OSX having. As far as I know, as long as all the hardware is stuff OSX has drivers for (and you generate a DSDT to describe that hardware) then you don't need any special "authorization." You just put in the OSX installer USB/DVD and it works.

Certain apps, such as the Finder and the SystemUIServer, are encrypted and this kernel extension will only decrypt the executable pages if it considers your Mac to be genuine (consulting the TPM, I believe).

Re: How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

#75

Post by pcwalton »

raverbashing wrote: post #20
nwh wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been balmy little bits of stuff like this all the way through OSX and iOS for ages, though maybe not quite as flippant. Every Mac has the kernel extension "Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext" for example, which loads into RAM a short poem. There once was was a user that whined his existing OS was so blind, he'd do better to pirate an OS that ran great but found his hardware declined. Please don't steal Mac OS! Really,…

I wonder if this has (or had had) some legal significance. I remember some issues with the Apple II rom being copied and that they had to add a "Copyright Apple" or something similar to the binary data.

The idea is that this poem is copyrighted as a creative work, and therefore Apple can control its distribution. The actual key contains a copyright message after the poem.

Re: How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

#76

Post by [deleted] »

drharris wrote: post #72
icebraining wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, no license key, except for the key used to decrypt protected binaries only on authorized hardware. There is a license "key", it's the whole computer.

I don't get why people are still whining about this in 2013. Is it really that unreasonable for an OS manufacturer to restrict the devices on which it can be installed? I write firmware for a specific known hardware platform; do I really want the pain of people using it on an Arduino? The appeal of OSX is that it just works, and works beautifully most of the time. Opening it up to all the devices dilutes the main thi…

[deleted]

Re: How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

#79

Post by DominikR »

optymizer wrote: post #70
DominikR wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can definitely understand that, having pulled and Android app from the store because of piracy recently. (in app purchase is really hard to circumvent by pirates, but apps where you pay upfront are pirated like crazy)

How does pulling the app from the store benefit you?

By re-releasing it again as a free app with in-app purchase (which is very hard to pirate)

You can't change a paid app to free on the Google Play store. All you can do is to pull it, and submit it again.

Re: How Apple hides new functionality in iOS: isYoMamaWearsCombatBootsActive

#80

Post by rahoulb »

josteink wrote: post #56
Kudos wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a Maccard? I've never heard anyone say that pirating OS X was more ok than any other kind of piracy.

Maccard = Mac user. And the attitude I've seen (especially in the OSX 86 community) is that general piracy is completely OK, but you have to buy OS X from Apple, otherwise you are doing something super-duper wrong. Then they move on to pirate Photoshop. It's a mind-bending sort of ethics, and I was curious about what the reasoning behind it was.

By OSX 86 community do you mean Hackintosh users?

If so, Hackintoshes are, from Apple's point of view, piracy anyway. Apple makes no money on the OS (which they sell for a few dollars) and all their money from the hardware the Hackintosh user is avoiding buying. So whatever ethics are involved are already in a dubious state.

If you mean general Mac users, then, as I and others have said, there isn't a prevalent attitude of condoning piracy (everyone I know who uses Photoshop/Illustrator/InDesign has paid for it).

Post reply on HN