THE MOST LAME POST PRODUCERS

[Sneaky]

I'm gonna jailbreak my ipod touch 2g soon.

yay

[Spectere]

I'm gonna jailbreak my ipod touch 2g soon.

Sweet.  Let us know how that goes.

It's a shame that my iPhone isn't technically mine, otherwise it would definitely get that treatment.  Oh well.

[Sneaky]

Just finished now.. Followed this video guide, it's still semi-tethered, so you need to use DFU mode and an exe every time you reboot it, which shouldn't be much effort anyway.


edit: my little excited nerd video

[Spectere]

LOL NOOB U MISSTATED A PROCESSOR OR SOMETHING

But yeah, awesome.  I love the one-handed Gradius attempt.  Now I really wish I could do that with my iPhone.

As for the whole "two hours to imitate a ten minute video thing," I know the feeling.  It took me a while to originally awesomize my PSP, mostly due to me quadruple checking every step out of paranoia.

Edit: As it turns out, the Logitech LCD software does support iTunes, it's just really finicky about when you start iTunes (i.e. if you start up the Media Display after iTunes is already running it doesn't work).  It also provides the global hotkeys.  Whatever, I much prefer the way that mine displays the information so I'm just going to keep developing it.

The only thing that I have to work out now is a good way to handle iTunes shutting down and starting up.  The iTunes COM control is really badly designed (i.e. it completely closes the COM connection when iTunes shuts down, which wouldn't be so bad if it reliably fired events...my code is a try-catch nightmare because it's just not firing events and I'm trying to prevent my own app from simply crashing) and it's very poorly documented to boot.  Way to go, Apple.

[Bobbias]

The only thing that I have to work out now is a good way to handle iTunes shutting down and starting up.  The iTunes COM control is really badly designed (i.e. it completely closes the COM connection when iTunes shuts down, which wouldn't be so bad if it reliably fired events...my code is a try-catch nightmare because it's just not firing events and I'm trying to prevent my own app from simply crashing) and it's very poorly documented to boot.  Way to go, Apple.

Well, it certainly doesn't help that COM is confusing as fuck by itself, does it?

[Spectere]

COM isn't so bad when you're using it with either a managed .NET language or VB6.  It's only really annoying and confusing when you're using unmanaged C/C++.

The problem with the iTunes COM library is that it's just awful.  Like I said, the events simply aren't firing (and I know I have that part right...it's not easy to screw that up), the COM interface kills the connection when iTunes quits, causing exceptions up the ass if you try to do anything.  Probably the most annoying feature is how it automatically starts iTunes when you create a new iTunesApp class.  Seriously, ARGH.  Why should I have to check to see if iTunes is running before I try to connect to it?  Shouldn't the external COM object take care of that?

I don't even want to get into the documentation.  If you're morbidly curious, check it out here: http://developer.apple.com/sdk/itunescomsdk.html.  It's a small download.  Just open it up in WinRAR or whatever and check the CHM.  Good luck trying to figure out what the hell is going on with the COM object using just that.

The whole thing is just...bad.  I'd rather deal with a fully blown SDK (ala Winamp or foobar) than that crap.  But oh well, I'm kind of determined to hack around it and make it work at this point.

If nothing else, this should serve as a perfect example of code that has to be made convoluted and inelegant to wrap itself around something far nastier.  Do take note.

[Alice]

can u jailbrake one of those new iPod Nanos

[Sneaky]

@spec

I believe you can successfully JB the iPhone/Pod, then just restore it thru itunes incase you need to return it for damage/button malfunction or [knock on wood] job loss. I'd read up some more on it, because if that's the case, then no harm no foul, you JB your iphone, have awesome sexy time with it, then in the future when you quit/move on [or not] you can just restore it to it's factory firmware and everything without anyone knowing anything

[MooMan1]

Last night I dreamt that a0 was still up all this time, but that nobody had gone in three to five years. It was very strange. I distinctly remember seeing a post of mine asking where everyone had gone in the "most recent post box" and it was dated sometime 2006. STRANGE STUFF.

[Alice]

I wonder if I should do anything special with my 666th post

[Sneaky]

You should start a new thread in General and call it Satanic post day. Anyone that has any combination of 666, 999, or like 1666 or 6661 posts etc, will post what they want when then get it.

[MortifiedocAlot]

So it would be just like this thread? I remember when I hit 666 too, WHAT A WASTE. 

[Spectere]

can u jailbrake one of those new iPod Nanos

If anyone ever works out how the firmware on the new iPod Classic/Nanos is encrypted you'll be able to flash it with something speshul.  Otherwise, no.  It's also not going to be "jailbroken" like an iPhone/iPod Touch would be (i.e. Apple OS with the ability to use unencrypted content), it's going to be all-new firmware.

Long story short: not really. :s

I believe you can successfully JB the iPhone/Pod, then just restore it thru itunes incase you need to return it for damage/button malfunction or [knock on wood] job loss. I'd read up some more on it, because if that's the case, then no harm no foul, you JB your iphone, have awesome sexy time with it, then in the future when you quit/move on [or not] you can just restore it to it's factory firmware and everything without anyone knowing anything

Oh yeah, I have no doubts that that's possible.  The PSP works in pretty much the same way -- you can bring a hacked PSP back to factory spec without much trouble.

The only thing that I worry about is if the thing spontaneously stops working or something like that, they bring it in, and they tell my boss that they can't replace it because the warranty is void.  If it were my device it would be a different story, but since I don't technically own it I don't want to take any risks.

[Bobbias]

If nothing else, this should serve as a perfect example of code that has to be made convoluted and inelegant to wrap itself around something far nastier.  Do take note.

Yes, there are the odd times where you need to hack something together, but in all honesty, you can still make mostly elegant code for some things. I mean, you can always do some nice exception handling and so-on so things don't just explode when the exception does arise.... However, once you hit something that is actually nasty enough to require some hacking (proper use of the term ), the situation is bad enough to make elegant solutions for the rest of it almost impossible, or at least not worth it enough.

[Spectere]

Throwing in exception handling doesn't make the code more elegant or better.  In cases like this where the control itself is flawed you have to put exception blocks around things that shouldn't need exception blocks (we're talking entire chunks of code here, not just a few lines here and there relating to connecting/disconnecting and such).  It makes the code a gigantic mess.

So yes, the base or interface is as important, if not more important, than the new code.