Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Programming Businesses Hardware Hacking IT Technology Apple

iPhone Can Now Run Apache, Python, Vim 312

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the not-enough-memory-for-emacs dept.
An anonymous reader writes "After the first Hello World application, hacker NerveGas and the people at #iphone-shell have built Apache, Python and other Open Source apps for the iPhone using NightWatch's toolchain. Yes, your iPhone can now be a Web Server and do all sort of 1337 things. This also means that third-party applications for iPhone will happen no matter what. People, iPhone Doom could be just around the corner." It's fairly thin on information but if true, this will lead to good things. Like hopefully permission from apple.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iPhone Can Now Run Apache, Python, Vim

Comments Filter:
  • by niceone (992278) * on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:45AM (#19981983) Journal
    Really disappointing, why couldn't we have had a link to the story on a server running on an iPhone? Then maybe a video of it catching fire.
    • by vivaoporto (1064484) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:58AM (#19982117)
      Actually, we could mimic the success of Will it blend [willitblend.com] and create its counterpart, Will it melt (tm), displaying different pieces of machinery running a webserver while being slashdotted. Guaranteed laughter for all family!
    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      by Marcion (876801)
      Disappointing because now you have turned an iPhone into a 2G version of the Nokia S60, why not just buy a 3G smartphone to start with and save all the trouble?

      I personally am waiting for the OpenMoko Neo1973, comes with Python and these other things by default or a just few taps away through its package manager.
    • by alienmole (15522) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:56AM (#19982715)
      That's what it used to be like, back in the good old days (i.e., 1999). We even had links to web servers running on PIC chips [slashdot.org], which makes an iPhone look like a ridiculously oversized muscle car by comparison. But for some reason people are less willing to roast their iPhones than a PIC chip and a couple of resistors.

      I put it down to the kids these days, they're just not as adventurous as when I was a lad (i.e., 1999) and used to walk to work in the snow, uphill, both ways, with only a roasting Slashdotted PIC-based webserver for warmth.
      • Re:Disappointing (Score:5, Insightful)

        by phoenix321 (734987) * on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @09:51AM (#19983291)
        Please don't confuse any "webserver" with a potentially full-blow apache. Answering GET requests by streaming out plaintext html files is accomplished by freshman's programming examples - having a real webserver is much much more.

        Given that the iPhone is running some variety of MacOS X, it's highly likely that we see the full potential of this thing unlocked pretty soon. Having a fairly standardized environment, a fairly powerful CPU and a sleek form factor is good.

        Being turing-complete isn't good enough for the real world of computing. Any PCL printer is, but do you see anyone here breaking out the champagne over that?
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by shoptroll (544006)
          With a 4 GB drive, couldn't this turn into a potential nightmare for the RIAA/MPAA? Even though the upload rate will be horrid, imagine a thousand micro-Pirate Bays running around in people's pockets...

          Ideally, bittorrent would be a much bigger nuisance though.

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Com2Kid (142006)
            Cell phones each have a unique identifier. Unless you have a prepaid account and paid for your iPhone with cash, this unique identifier is easily traced to your credit card + billing address.

            Thus, you win the Worst Pirating Idea EVER award.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by alienmole (15522)

          Please don't confuse any "webserver" with a potentially full-blow apache.
          Quite right, when Apache hits "full-blow" it can melt servers that are much bigger than an iPhone.
  • Something that's got good Cocoa bindings, anyway, so you can write native apps in them...
  • my thoughts (Score:4, Insightful)

    by catwh0re (540371) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:50AM (#19982023)
    I think the demand for a SDK caught apple by surprise (possibly because the iPod didn't have many people hollering for a SDK, and since it's easy to see the iPhone as an iPod + phone functionality I can see how this was given a low priority.)

    I do however believe that apple will now release a SDK for the iPhone (apple pretty much do anything the consumers want these days, even managed some drm music, something i thought would never come while the RIAA existed.)

    I also believe apple stated ajax/web apps as the SDK because they didn't want to give people any reason to think the iPhone was incomplete (and hence to put off the purchase.)

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by peragrin (659227)
      Actually given that Apple pulled a MSFT and made everything on the iPhone run as root I doubt this at least in the short term. It shouldn't be hard to correct the situation though in an update. Since it is running a mini OS X it already has multi user support.
    • Re:my thoughts (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:18AM (#19982319)
      I think the demand for a SDK caught apple by surprise (possibly because the iPod didn't have many people hollering for a SDK, and since it's easy to see the iPhone as an iPod + phone functionality I can see how this was given a low priority.)

      There is plenty of demand for an iPod SDK, and has been since day 1:

      http://www.alteringtime.com/log/archives/96 [alteringtime.com]
      http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/09/21/macgamesip od/index.php [macworld.com]
      http://www.ipodhacks.com/modules.php?op=modload&na me=Forum&file=viewtopic&forum=2&topic=1806 [ipodhacks.com]
      http://lists.apple.com/archives/studentdev/2001/Oc t/msg00437.html [apple.com]
      ...and so on.

      Apple has their reasons for not releasing an iPhone SDK, same as they have their reasons for not releasing an iPod SDK. I assure you that not knowing the demand has nothing to do with it.

      • Re:my thoughts (Score:5, Informative)

        by tji (74570) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @09:17AM (#19982921)
        Sure, some were asking for an iPod SDK.. But, for something with a wheel as an input device, your development options are pretty limited.

        The iPhone is much different, because

        - It has full input capabilities -- pointer, selection, keyboard input and more.

        - It's a much more powerful device (cpu/ram) than the iPods

        - Apple positioned it as a "smart phone", directly comparing it to the competitive smartphones, which do offer SDKs.

        - Apple represented it as running "True OS X". They even mentioned it supporting Cocoa. Why the hell would you talk about the programming interface if you don't intend to give your developers access?

        After watching the initial iPhone introduction, I just assumed developers would have access (based on the OS X / Cocoa stuff). Just after that annoyance of finding they were NOT making an SDK wore off, Apple came back with the "you don't need an SDK, just write web pages" bullshit, which re-opened the wound. That episode was the farthest off I have seen Apple in understanding their developers/customers. Hopefully they remedy it soon.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by pauljlucas (529435)

          That episode was the farthest off I have seen Apple in understanding their developers/customers.
          Yeah, they sure didn't understand the 700,000 (!) customers who bought the phone on the first weekend.
          • Re:my thoughts (Score:4, Informative)

            by iamdrscience (541136) <michaelmtripp&gmail,com> on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @12:32PM (#19985729) Homepage

            Yeah, they sure didn't understand the 700,000 (!) customers who bought the phone on the first weekend.
            Too bad that number's made up because Apple hasn't released how many phones they sold in the first weekend. AT&T, however, just recently said that only activated 146,000 iPhones during it's first two days on sale.

            While we still don't know how many phones they sold in the first weekend, this is the first hard number we have to estimate it. It obviously doesn't take into account any people who had trouble activating their phones at first, nor anybody who bought the phone on Sunday July 1st, but it gives us an idea. Adding in those people, it's entirely possible that your estimate 700,000 is more than twice as many as were actually sold. At best, I doubt they sold even 400,000.
        • Apple represented it as running "True OS X". They even mentioned it supporting Cocoa. Why the hell would you talk about the programming interface if you don't intend to give your developers access?

          For some strange reason the Sega Dreamcast popped into my mind with its Windows CE sticker right on the front. Since only licensed developers were allowed to make software for the system, it really didn't matter what the API was. Basically it was about as much useful marketing speak as "blast processing".

          As I un
    • Re:my thoughts (Score:4, Insightful)

      by toleraen (831634) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:20AM (#19982351)
      How could they be caught off guard? 90%+ of the operating systems in the smartphone/pda phone market have SDKs. They obviously did a little poking around in the market before deciding to make the thing...and if it really is based on OSX, it shouldn't have been terribly difficult to provide one.
      • How could they be caught off guard? 90%+ of the operating systems in the smartphone/pda phone market have SDKs. They obviously did a little poking around in the market before deciding to make the thing...and if it really is based on OSX, it shouldn't have been terribly difficult to provide one.

        As you say I doubt very much they were caught off guard. Other phone do have SDKs and such, but some of them also suffer from reduced stability because of them. I can't say whether Apple will ever release an SDK, but
        • Re:my thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)

          by phoenix321 (734987) * on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @10:09AM (#19983585)
          Apples claims of only wanting to "ensure the best possible user experience" by locking out SDK and user created software, they're no more credible than HP when they say the same about the chips and DMCA-spiked firmware in their ink cartridges.

          This is because foreign code may not only affect stability and "user experience" but the monopoly you have on that hardware. And reducing the monopoly means commodization of some sort and that's what Apple hates more than anything: fixed, exclusive, expensive 2-year contracts, secrecy around new products, higher-than-expected prices, strict limits on the user (changing the battery? a memory card?) - it's all oriented around their central marketing aim of being in THE special position among all hard- and software manufacturers.

          People are buying it, Apple is profitable like nothing and has a crowd of fans silencing all critics - it seems to work, I admit.

          I have quite some respect for their marketing and product strategy - they are doing everything right from a shareholder's perspective. (Stock inflation for unreal expectations is not that important)

          But don't make the mistake to consider Apple a corporation totally different from its arch rival Microsoft. They're following a different path, but their goal is comparable. If Apple's and MSFT's market shares were reversed, we had the same problems with Mac OS than we have with Windows right now, except their design and safety record wouldn't suck half as bad. But concerning anti-competitive maneuvers, vendor lock-in amd user restrictions, they'd be just the same.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Cpt_Kirks (37296)
      IIRC, Apple didn't release a SDK because AT&T is afraid of some buggy app crashing their network.

      Which is stupid. Did they REALLY think the iPhone wouldn't be hacked? Now they have no control over it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by dk90406 (797452)
      I am in two minds about this. I naturally would like the iPhone open and allow user developed content, but unfortunately Apple has not developed it as such. AFAIK all software on the platform runs as root; so I foresee a vast amount of abusive software/malware being developed. Imagine software calling 1-900 numbers from your phone without your knowing.
    • by alexhmit01 (104757) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @09:50AM (#19983251)
      Every analyst figured out that MP3-player Cel Phones were a threat to the iPod, obviously Apple knew that as well. The iPhone no doubt started simply as an iPod/Phone combo, and some basic Internet features probably evolved into the beautiful little device that you see now.

      There negotiations with Cingular/AT&T probably focused on getting iTunes activation, and AT&T focused on controlling the feature set.. The first phone I had with an AIM client was back in 2001, it's not a rare feature, but Apple probably yielded on iChat because AT&T was yielding on WiFi and didn't want people to avoid paying SMS fees.

      I think that Apple wanted to move product first, then aim for smartphone competition. If they move millions, then Apple, not AT&T, has the power in a renegotiation. Apple wanted to get the iPod-Phone out there and prove demand, then they can go after the pocket computer market.
  • by donaggie03 (769758) <d_osmeyer AT hotmail DOT com> on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:51AM (#19982029)
    Instant Messaging!
  • Question (Score:3, Funny)

    by weaponx86 (1112757) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:51AM (#19982035)
    Will it blend...a web server / development platform / gaming system? Yes.
  • by ajlitt (19055) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:52AM (#19982043)
    Since when do we ask permission to bend our gadgets to our will?
    • by Klaidas (981300) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:54AM (#19982067)
      When we still want to be able to use the warranty.
      • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:14AM (#19982277) Homepage
        Fools ask for warranty work when the phone is modded. Simply reinstall the OS and play stupid. works great, they have no idea, and you get that critical flaw that everyone discovers in two weeks fixed for free.

        Did it with many electronic items in the past. reload stock firmware and play stupid. works great, get replacement reload custom setup/firmware/unlock/etc and life is good again.

        I though all geeks knew that simple tidbit.
      • Has a company legally been able to void warranty for installing unauthorized software? I can understand it only if the software caused physical damage or had to be serviced because of what the unauthorized software did.
        • by FunkyELF (609131)
          I thought Dell did this when you installed Linux on one of their computers. It voided the warranty.
          Think there was a Slashdot article about it too.
      • by ookabooka (731013) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:57AM (#19982721)
        Exactly, I'm pretty sure bending the iPhone (or any gadget for that matter) would void the warranty. Then again no warranty can limit the reasonable life-expectancy of something. Check out the better business bureau [bbb.org] for a better idea of what actually voids warranties (most of the time the company is just spouting BS because they don't want to pay for a replacement/repair even though they should; it is either fraud or they just don't want to get on the bad side of the BBB). I think the BBB says the warranty for most consumer electronics is 3 years or so, so don't be afraid to say no to that extended warranty, nothing gets you customer service like opening a claim with the BBB for binding arbitration. My roomate had his mp3 player replaced after 2.5 years even though the warranty expired after 1 after I suggested he check out the BBB.

        Wow I started off with a joke and then made a decent comment. . I must need some sleep.
    • by Wordsmith (183749)
      I get you, and agree with you, but the answer is: When we want an efficient SDK that makes it easy to use all sorts of neat features.
    • by iphayd (170761)
      We don't, but it would be nice to hear Apple give permission anyway, as it would remove the fear of Apple breaking these apps in the future.
    • Since when do we ask permission to bend our gadgets to our will?


      Since people have tried to sell you non free software. You might remember something about BSD, modems and the phone company. The phone company has not changed much.


    • "Since when do we ask permission to bend our gadgets to our will?"

      You don't need to.

      But if you, you get your hands on all kinds of advanced, documented APIs that give you fancy graphics, direct access to functions that send data over the net, etc. In other words, you end up with a fancy iPhone that does fancier things in a pretty way. Instead of a fancy iPhone with a terminal that scares the crap out of your non-gadgety friends.

      "How did you break your iPhone?"

      "It runs Python now."

      "What's Python? What hap
      • by pohl (872) *
        Somewhat amusing, but...why go to an Apple store to fix it when you could just mount it on the doc and restore the original software?
    • by jmorris42 (1458) *
      > Since when do we ask permission to bend our gadgets to our will?

      Because the iPhone is from Apple and Cmdr Tack drank a full jug of the Kool-Aid. Seriously, replace Apple with ANY other entity and imagine seeing "It's fairly thin on information but if true, this will lead to good things. Like hopefully permission from _____." on the front page of Slashdot... written not just by an idiot editor like Zonk but by the Taco himself. If anyone didn't understand the power of the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion
  • It's one of those common things which don't really make any sense, but one of those rare ones which don't make any sense AND I'd really like to try them.
    Anyway, it's be interesting to see how it's handle the /. effect - maybe not a real website, but just a simple black page with a few words and a small photo.
    • by jrumney (197329)
      The fact that its Apache makes even less sense. Low footprint servers like thhtpd or lighttpd are the usual choices for this type of hardware platform.
      • by djh101010 (656795) *
        Well, I'm not so sure. I've built a lot of webservers, I'm familiar and comfortable with apache. Sure I can buy a RJ-45 jack sized webserver that runs thhtpd or whatever, it's just no t that impressive to use that webserver as a proof of concept. But, by using Apache, you not only get the added functionality that that brings, but you also demonstrate that this isn't a crippled webserver implementation, it's a full fledged Unix box that arbitrary app (n) will run on.
        • by jrumney (197329)
          Remember though, that the iPhone has 128MB of RAM, with no swap. It has more in common with your server in an RJ45 connector than the servers you are used to installing Apache on.
          • by djh101010 (656795) *

            Remember though, that the iPhone has 128MB of RAM, with no swap.

            No swap? Do you have somewhere I can read about that specifically? Seems like it'd be harder to de-implement that, than to leave it in. But anyway - point is, there's some really smart folks digging into this thing, and it's quite enjoyable to watch what they come up with. Am I likely to actually run one of my websites off of an iPhone? Of course not. But, from a geek factor - if I can get apache running on it (which I apparently can), and then use one of the javascript-based wikis, I could have a

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by cyfer2000 (548592)
      But it has a 600MHz CPU and 128M DDR SRAM, 10 years ago, we ran servers on much worse hardwares.
      • by LoadWB (592248) *
        But to be fair, ten years ago web servers had smaller foot prints.
      • by Azarael (896715)
        Certainly true, but those systems were probably just web servers. The iPhone has a bunch of other processes running that likely require a lot of those resources.
    • by *weasel (174362) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:30AM (#19982443)
      Put the wifi in a peering mode and suddenly it makes a lot more sense.

      Simple mobile myspace-type sites would be pretty huge for a mososo.
      Particularly if it's integrated with file/stream sharing and a decent discovery app.
  • iPhone Doom? How am I supposed to read that: the iPhone business collapsing because of this, or is the author talking about a slide show of the game with the same title on the iPhone's ARM processor? Doom, ARM, duh, ... no, that's not ironic.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Culture20 (968837)
      A doom( prboom?) clone runs great on open embedded with ARM cpus, but the iPaqs I played it on actually had buttons and a four-way toggle key for movement. I think playing an action game on an iPhone might be a little more difficult. Now, Day of the Tentacle with Scummvm would be neat...
    • Works fine on Rockbox [youtube.com]
    • Doom runs on a number of Nokia / Symbian phones with less powerful ARM chips than the iPhone (they have smaller screens too, however), so there's no reason to believe it's not possible on the iPhone. Doom on the Nokia 770 would probably be a similar experience, where the use of a stylus for controlling movement shows that it's really a 'because we can' idea, rather than a 'because it's worth doing' one.
      • by simong (32944)
        I can recall seeing Doom running on a Psion 5 [wikipedia.org] eight or nine years ago. Granted the Psion had to be connected to a PC which served the WAD file but it looked good. I have a fairly convincing looking turn based version on my Sony Ericsson W810i too.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Ant P. (974313)
      If a Game Boy's 33MHz ARM7 can run it, I'd think one with hundreds of MHz would be able to as well.
  • Redundancy (Score:2, Funny)

    by rriven (737681)
    I can just see it now, your boss makes everyone in the company with an iPhone run a distributed backup web server in case 365 Main Datacenter http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/ 24/2210255 [slashdot.org] Goes down again.
  • by JeremyGNJ (1102465) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:56AM (#19982101)
    I see voided warranties in people's futures! There's no way Apple (or AT&T for that matter) is going to give the "OK" on 3rd party applications. Apache web servers and python scripts? If people really wanted to try to get acceptance they would have started with a diet-calculator or bowling-score manager. Forget it now, I can see AT&T and Apply's lawyers scrambling for ways to avoid the maelstorm of hacks and scripts that could threaten their good name. Windows based phones have allowed 3rd part apps since their inception, but somehow it seems much less ominous. Perhaps because they're mostly used in corporate deployments, and pure geek-types?
    • by Laebshade (643478)
      What planet are you on? You have to pay $500 for the phone, you BUY it, it's yours. It's not like you're renting it. Yes, it may void the warranty, but you can do whatever you want with it.
    • by Lumpy (12016)
      Yes because suing and abusing your customers is the way to record profits.
    • by timmarhy (659436)
      why does apple need to agree with it? fuck apple in their assholes.

      sure it void's your warranty IN CERTAIN CASES, like if i hacked the firmware and suddenly i can't send sms all of a sudden.. well i would have to eat the bill to fix it. but that kind of thing goes on a case by case basis.

      You cannot however, just blanket void warranty on a product, even if they do something fucked up to their iphone. the fault has to be in some way related to their messing around with it, so say they place a 3rd party app

  • Erm. Anyone been able to make a phonecall on one of these yet? Didn't you all cancel your call agreements?

    Apologies.
  • even though it would be delivering information via edge. So you could set up an old school BBC on it or something.
  • Permission from apple? Yeah, sure...
  • no complaints (Score:4, Interesting)

    by toQDuj (806112) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:58AM (#19982113) Homepage Journal
    They didn't complain about the hacks of the iTV, so I haardly expect them to throw a tantrum over these few geeks willing to turn their iPhone into a webserver...

    B.
  • by simong (32944) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @07:58AM (#19982121) Homepage
    'Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail'. In that case every platform evolves until it can run Doom...
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Mattintosh (758112)
      Sooo.... When does DoomMail happen? I want to be able to run around my various mailboxes and delete spam with a BFG.
  • AIM instead of SMS? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Oink (33510) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:00AM (#19982135)
    I think AT&T is going to force Apple to lock this down. From what I hear (maybe I'm mistaken, I don't have one yet), the only texting available on the iPhone is SMS, and not iChat. If you were free to install AIM on your phone, there goes a large portion of AT&T's income from text messages. Again, I don't know the details of the forced AT&T plans . . . are unlimited text messages forced on you? If not then I suspect I'm right. =)

    Is this something that can be patched in a forced software update?
  • VLC ? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mbone (558574) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:01AM (#19982139)
    Anyone port VLC to the iPhone ? Its lack of RTP support was my biggest disappointment about it.
  • by 0xdeadbeef (28836) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:01AM (#19982143) Homepage Journal
    It's fairly thin on information but if true, this will lead to good things. Like hopefully permission from Apple.

    Ah, the blind faith of a True Believer. I suppose the crippled nature of the device is a test, and by defeating it you are found worthy in Jobs' eyes? And the next time you plug it into iTunes, instead of silently patching these "flaws", it will release everyone's phone from bondage!
    • But... but... I thought if we hacked FairPlay that they'd throw their hands in the air and just unlock all the protected AAC files they've ever released and only sell non-DRM protected music in the future. Are you saying that isn't true?
  • by martyb (196687) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:01AM (#19982147)
    FTFS:

    People, iPhone Doom could be just around the corner.

    Pshaw!! *I* am waiting for iDuke iNuke'm iForever! <grin>

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:03AM (#19982159) Homepage
    iphone webcam. See the world from someone's hip or side of their head.

    honestly though, how long before AT&T starts deactivating phone accounts for "data plan abuse" because people are actually using their data plan with these hacks and apps? they already try their hardest to scam their customers into buying the full data plan for their smartphone instead of the cheaper smartphone plan.

    I had a AT&T rep threaten me that if I dont change my plan he will have my service shut off.

    cingular and now AT&T pride themselves in the absolute crappiest customer service they can give. Threaten customers, scamming them into getting service plans they do not need (All I want is email, websurfing on a phone sucks and who cares about MTV videos on a phone)
  • by $RANDOMLUSER (804576) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:05AM (#19982175)
    Call me when it can run Emacs.

    Oh... Only 8Gb RAM. Never mind.
  • imagine (Score:2, Funny)

    Could you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these?
    • Packets of network traffic pass between all mobile phones and the networks continually.

      I can see no reason why a network of iPhones (or Nokia or whoever's) couldn't be used as a sort of distributed, redundant computing platform, using their idle cycles (~99%) to work on small, distributed pieces of a problem.

      This could be done with the 'opt-in' cooperation of the user, or unwittingly as part of the Terms of Service offered by the network operator.
      • by allanc (25681)
        Now what would be *really* awesome is if Apple set it up so iPhones' wifi could be used as a mesh network. Imagine being able to get full 802.11 speeds not just if you're close enough to an access point, but if you're close enough to someone who's close enough to an access point. Especially if they threw in a VoIP app.

        Saturate the world with enough wifi-enabled phones and who needs a phone company at all?
  • permission? huh? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by bombastinator (812664)
    reality check: "permission from apple"??

    Why after spending what was likely loads of time locking down the thing because they didn't want anyone messing with it would they suddenly change their minds because someone took a crowbar to the thing?

    I think from their point of view it's a bit like the roaches expecting you to lay out some cheese platters and stop spraying since they managed to get into your house anyway.

    I'm thinking they're going to see a fumigation tent a lot sooner than a bucket of veggie dip.
  • I don't know about anyone else, but one of the most useful features on my iPod (and I assume iPhone) is the shiny chrome backing. It's an iPod, it's a phone, an internet communications device, and a mirror!
    • by djh101010 (656795) *
      The only shiny part on the back of the iPhone is an Apple-logo-sized, er, apple logo. The rest of it is matte finished. That said, my iPod didn't stay mirror-like very long.

      That and I'm a geek, why would I want to look in a mirror? I checked this morning, I'm more or less within tolerance.
  • I missed a step in the constant stream of iPhone-hacking stories. I caught the "interactive forth-like PROM shell" and the "Hello World" stories, but I missed hearing any "interactive bash shell via wifi" announcement.

    The fact that you can run vim is neat, but can you save files to the filesystem? What's the filesystem like? More like HFS or more like ext3? Can you get ssh/wifi going so you don't have to tappity through a soldered cable anymore?

  • I think this is a neat trick, sure, and I'm a tinkerer as much as anyone, so I can appreciate this.

    But.

    What does this accomplish? I mean outside of it being "it's a neat thing I can do to it", it's not going to have serious practical implications for 99.9% of users. The writeup goes off onto this tangent of being able to run third-party applications on it, woohoo. I can't think of a single phone who has had a third-party application as a major selling point. And I have a Treo! The Palm stuff can be rea
  • by oneandoneis2 (777721) * on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @08:32AM (#19982475) Homepage
    My all-time favourite text editor, with its plethora of keyboard shortcuts, on a device with no keyboard!

    How have I lived so long without one?

    When they come out in the UK, I'll buy an iPhone for sure now!
  • Since apache is running on an iPhone now, it could host that iPhone exploit discussed earlier.
  • With the iPhone Safari exploit, this could actually turn into a (spam|scam|phish)er's dream. Imagine an army of iPhone bots doing nothing but serving up porn, pill, and pump-n-dump pages. They don't have to be fast to work on people. EDGE may be slower than 3G or broadband, but at 200kbps you can still send out a massive amount of spam and serve up small images.

    I'm interested to see where this all leads. Speaking of iPhone hacks, I may be completely out of it and missed them, but you would have thought
  • Yeah, of course it runs vi... when they get a version that can get emacs off the ground, then I'll be impressed!


    Sorry, I couldn't help myself! *ducks*

  • Not Quite There (Score:5, Informative)

    by DylanQ (1132855) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @09:08AM (#19982837)
    People are completely misunderstanding what's going on with iPhone development. We have no means of writing apps for the iPhone with a GUI, or even apps that handle user input. We CAN access the iPhone via SSH and run things remotely; that's about it. Some people are working hard on reverse-engineering current apps and frameworks (myself included) so that we may be able to compile a GUI app, but at this point, there is no Doom "just around the corner". For a while, the main focus of the iPhone hacking efforts has been unlocking. Hopefully this will change, but while people are focused on unlocking, not much else is getting accomplished (aside from what Nightwatch is doing with his toolchain).
  • by twoboxen (1111241) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @10:01AM (#19983471)
    Good gravy. When did the iPhone become the Paris Hilton of gadgets? I don't want to hear about it every day, either. Just think back... how many "iPhone spotted at _____" stories have their been in the past 9 months?
    Pretty soon we'll be seeing the iPhone being locked up and sent to rehab to get a fully functional SDK. Or maybe it will be hanging out with OLPC (Lohan).
    Unavoidable and becoming just as painful....
  • by Chief Typist (110285) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @10:20AM (#19983745) Homepage
    The hard part about developing apps for the iPhone is working with a completely new environment.

    For example, here are some of the problems with building a SSH client for the iPhone:

    http://furbo.org/2007/07/02/beyond-sweet/ [furbo.org]

    -ch
  • great! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by oohshiny (998054) on Wednesday July 25, 2007 @10:46AM (#19984167)
    I can now run Apache on a phone that's more expensive than my desktop system, and void my warranty and likely have it bricked on the next sync.

    Folks, if you want to have iPhone-like features with a programmable device, invest your time and effort into helping with one of the actually open phone platforms, don't waste it on trying to battle with Apple's DRM. Apple doesn't want you to run apps on the iPhone, period.

    Of course, recompiling Apache requires so much less smarts than actually creating a nice phone app.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the demigodic party. -- Dennis Ritchie

Working...