[terrortrain]

It's different when TV manufactures put Dolby in charge of advertising and supporting the feature. Then charge them a cut of their profit, with little to no recourse or dispute mechanisms.

Besides that, it could be argued that running software is the feature. What software does is not a feature of the iPhone. Like a recipe is not a feature of a stove.

We are buying the device, it's a tool, and we should control how it's used.

[simonh]

Apple's view is that the third party software that runs on their phones, which they provide to you and which they charge you for, very much is a feature of their phones.

I agree it's a tool and you should control how it's used, but you're demanding that Apple implement specific features for you that they don't want to implement. How do you intend to coerce them into doing that? Who gets to specify precisely how those features are implemented?

I agree that what you do with your phone after you bought it should be up to you. If you can find a way to jailbreak it, I think you should be allowed to do that. In fact I've jai-broken iPhones and iPod Touches before. However I don't think I have a right to tell apple how they make their products, or to force them to implement features for me that I get to specify.

[totalZero]

A stove is not a satisfying example. The recipe in this case is developed using Apple's kitchen utensils and delivered in a recipe book printed by Apple. There are entanglements between Apple and the Developer that go beyond the "tool vs method" abstraction. Some of these are forced on the Developer.