PDA

View Full Version : iPhone 1.1.1 Cracking Under 3rd Party Development Efforts




MacRumors
Oct 5, 2007, 08:05 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

The effort to develop native applications on iPhone Firmware 1.1.1 has made the most progress over the past 24 hours than it has since the release of the firmware, thanks to the efforts of the iPhone Dev Team.

Erica Sadun has been blogging her effort to recreate a solution (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/10/05/liveblogging-the-big-iphone-1-1-1-hack/) which gives access to the iPhone 1.1.1 file system. Such access is a big step to allow developers to recreate the third party applications that were available on firmwares 1.0 - 1.0.2.

iPhone 1.1.1 has seen its share of controversy (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/30/iphone-1-1-1-aftermath/) due to its "bricking" of unlocked iPhones and removal of any third party applications that a user had installed.

Recent rumors have detailed Apple's plans for future iPhone applications and SDK. Arstechnica had indicated that the SDK would remain web-based (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/03/iphone-sdk-to-receive-improvements-remain-web-based/) but see usability improvements including ability to use web-based apps off-line and access to the iPhone's home menu. Later in the day, 9to5mac posted that Apple was working with select developers to gain native access (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/04/apples-3rd-party-iphone-application-plan/).

In the end, both rumors may be true, with Apple-selected vendors agreeing to give Apple a portion of the sales getting iPhone-native access, and the rest of the community having to stick with web-based solutions, leaving the iPhone Dev Team's efforts as the only alternative avenue for native third party iPhone applications.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/10/05/iphone-1-1-1-cracking-under-3rd-party-development-efforts/)



bobbleheadbob
Oct 5, 2007, 08:15 PM
This seems to be happening pretty quickly. I thought it would take a lot longer.

ventro
Oct 5, 2007, 08:18 PM
Yay! Looks like they are making some progress! The future of the abroad unlocking community hinges on your work!

DMann
Oct 5, 2007, 08:43 PM
Things are moving more rapidly than imagined.... Kudos!

lovemyiphone
Oct 5, 2007, 08:48 PM
Keep up the good work we are pulling for you.

LastZion
Oct 5, 2007, 08:55 PM
Indeed, thanks for all your hard work. Really appreciated.

Masquerade
Oct 5, 2007, 08:58 PM
one question:
Seems that Apple wants to make some money with select parners through games. the rest of the world is trying to open the iphone secrets and therebefore, unlocking it.

Should at&t and others telecoms pressure apple to open iphone to all developers?

javaGuru
Oct 5, 2007, 09:22 PM
What I find funny about this is that as soon as 1.1.1 is successfully hacked Apple will release another update to block the latest hacking efforts.

daneoni
Oct 5, 2007, 09:46 PM
What I find funny about this is that as soon as 1.1.1 is successfully hacked Apple will release another update to block the latest hacking efforts.

Thats why its called a cat and mouse game...Apple tries to keep them out and they'll find another way in. Its the way the system works. The PSP underwent the same thing, heck windows viruses/malware and windows update follow the same pattern. Just more nefarious

shadowfax
Oct 5, 2007, 09:48 PM
What I find funny about this is that as soon as 1.1.1 is successfully hacked Apple will release another update to block the latest hacking efforts.

Who cares, though? they would have to offer some serious enhancements. I have 1.1.1, and I've been tossing around the thought of downgrading to 1.0.2 for the 3rd party apps again. They were a heck of a lot more fun than the "Wifi music store" or "double tap home screen macro." Apple would have to give me something compelling, like TRUE MAIL syncing (of folders and rules and everything) and JUNK MAIL FILTERING. I would kill all humans for a feature like that. Mail is really crummy on the iPhone (by comparison to the other stuff on it). I can't figure out why that stuff is missing, it's not remotely computationally intensive.

Bernie-Mac
Oct 5, 2007, 09:57 PM
Who cares, though? they would have to offer some serious enhancements. I have 1.1.1, and I've been tossing around the thought of downgrading to 1.0.2 for the 3rd party apps again. They were a heck of a lot more fun than the "Wifi music store" or "double tap home screen macro." Apple would have to give me something compelling, like TRUE MAIL syncing (of folders and rules and everything) and JUNK MAIL FILTERING. I would kill all humans for a feature like that. Mail is really crummy on the iPhone (by comparison to the other stuff on it). I can't figure out why that stuff is missing, it's not remotely computationally intensive.

Seriously^....Apple better include some serious applications with 1.1.2 to make me even consider updating, 1.1.1 with apptapp may very well be enough to never make me update my iphone again

Rocketman
Oct 5, 2007, 10:11 PM
What I find funny about this is that as soon as 1.1.1 is successfully hacked Apple will release another update to block the latest hacking efforts.

What's cool is if they do that every month or two, the iPhone will have a lot of needed Apple applications natively and the hackers will have had motivation, time, and feedback from multiple successes, to have lots of unapproved apps native to iPhone.

Then when ATNN is released, there will be dozens of apps.

Rocketman

Stella
Oct 5, 2007, 10:44 PM
Keep up the good work!

Free the iPhone!

<joke>
Suck it up Darth Jobs!
</joke>

massiv
Oct 5, 2007, 11:03 PM
Now this has no reference to anyone who has posted anything in this latest thread (so rant about why did i even post this) but I just don't get why people think that the iPhone has to be opened up by Apple. Why does everyone think Apple is an open source software/hardware provider? They are not. They are and always have been quite the opposite. Yes, they have most definitely used open source code to their advantage but never supported their bundled package as a base for it. It seems the entire CE community is against Apple on every step they take to further their iPhone platform.

I really do not mean this to be an argument starter, it is truly just an expression of my bafflement regarding this piece of consumer electronics platform. While I do think 3rd party development is a good thing, it is completely ludicrous to think Apple should embrace it against their own terms. I repeat, 3rd party development is good. But if such applications are erased due to a progressive update from the software team at Apple we shouldn't blame Apple at all.

Texas04
Oct 5, 2007, 11:33 PM
Apple you NEED to open up your ShZZZ!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:


I want SSH on my iPhone!!! :mad::mad:

megfilmworks
Oct 5, 2007, 11:34 PM
Great post by massiv, food for thought in dangerous territory. :)

buymeaniphone
Oct 5, 2007, 11:58 PM
i cant wait until you guys breakthrough again. I refuse to install 1.1.1 on my iphone until a solution is figured out.

pedroistheman
Oct 6, 2007, 12:09 AM
can't wait for the 1.1.1 hack. but seriously, with the security updates and all in 1.1.1 apple would really need something big to get people to update again.

Ajohn
Oct 6, 2007, 12:26 AM
I'm guessing I'm not the only one who is THRILLED there is this cat-and-mouse game going. Hope it continues for the entire useable life of my iPhone. In order for Apple to "break" the third-party apps they have to give us a new firmware update. And the only way we're going to download it is if it's got compelling new features.

Iterate this four or five times a year and we're going to have mass delete e-mail, a horizontal keyboard, folders in our mail app, and any number of other improvements much faster than we otherwise have. To both sides: keep up the fight!

kissmyaxe
Oct 6, 2007, 12:34 AM
I'm guessing I'm not the only one who is THRILLED there is this cat-and-mouse game going. Hope it continues for the entire useable life of my iPhone. In order for Apple to "break" the third-party apps they have to give us a new firmware update. And the only way we're going to download it is if it's got compelling new features.

Iterate this four or five times a year and we're going to have mass delete e-mail, a horizontal keyboard, folders in our mail app, and any number of other improvements much faster than we otherwise have. To both sides: keep up the fight!

Excellent point! Definitely something to think about.

P.S. I can't wait to install a hackable 1.1.1 on my phone and actually get some volume out of the thing!

sparkpoint11
Oct 6, 2007, 01:26 AM
Why does everyone think Apple is an open source software/hardware provider? They are not. They are and always have been quite the opposite. Yes, they have most definitely used open source code to their advantage but never supported their bundled package as a base for it.


This has nothing to do with open source software. "Open source" means just that -- the entire source code is "open" or available for anyone to look at, edit, change, or branch into a new program. The issue at hand is allowing applications to run on the iPhone that have been created by third party developers/companies. Just as Apple's OSX and Microsoft's Windows XP is closed source, the modified version of OSX on the iPhone is also closed source. The difference is that "Mac OSX" and Windows, like many other platforms, have the ability to run applications developed by third parties.
It doesn't seem like you truly meant to use the term "open source" as much as your meant to say "open platform" or some variant thereof. If this is the case, I apologize for elaborating on the difference, although I hope it helps a novice out there.
[/QUOTE]


I really do not mean this to be an argument starter, it is truly just an expression of my bafflement regarding this piece of consumer electronics platform. While I do think 3rd party development is a good thing, it is completely ludicrous to think Apple should embrace it against their own terms. I repeat, 3rd party development is good. But if such applications are erased due to a progressive update from the software team at Apple we shouldn't blame Apple at all.

I think the majority of people here support the idea that Apple shouldn't be forced to embrace 3rd party apps against their own terms. However, they should embrace 3rd party application development in a way that allows many developers access to the platform. With some good people at the helm, Apple could implement a very good system that makes everyone happy.
They should allow apps to be downloaded from iTunes after being vetted through a quality/certification check to insure stability and security. They could really create a thriving community of development and innovation, and even announcing it would eliminate the backlash they are currently experiencing.

What people DO NOT want to see is an Iron grip "our corporate partners only" type of system. Limiting application development to a few large companies would lockout thousands of great OSX developers, stifle innovation and creativity, and lead to a situation of stagnation, poor quality products, and high prices. If you look at the examples in the marketplace today of these type of partnership arrangements, you will find exactly that. Just look at the Danger/T-mobile Sidekick platform.
On the other hand, by allowing all interested 3rd party developers access to the SDK, they will no doubt foster a large, active community and great things will come from that. Again, my view is not completely open development where people are downloading every app they can find to their iphone. This would be a system with quality, security, and reliability checks in place. Sort of like a "Runs on Iphone" certificate that digitally signs an application to only allow applications to run which have been screened. (other than one-phone only digital certification keys so you can write and run your own apps without needing to be screened. )

IDANNY
Oct 6, 2007, 01:39 AM
i cant wait until you guys breakthrough again. I refuse to install 1.1.1 on my iphone until a solution is figured out.

haha, yah I want them to get through to. Cant wait good luck

guet
Oct 6, 2007, 04:01 AM
It seems the entire CE community is against Apple on every step they take to further their iPhone platform.
I really do not mean this to be an argument starter, it is truly just an expression of my bafflement regarding this piece of consumer electronics platform. While I do think 3rd party development is a good thing, it is completely ludicrous to think Apple should embrace it against their own terms. I repeat, 3rd party development is good. But if such applications are erased due to a progressive update from the software team at Apple we shouldn't blame Apple at all.

It's not a platform without third party apps, it's an appliance. Also I'd take issue with the your use of 'further', perhaps 'further lock down' would be a better description. The reason people are complaining is that this is bad for the consumer in the short term, and very bad for Apple in the long term. When other devices catch up and have things like an ebook/PDF reader, a spam filter and better email, VOIP, proper chat (not SMS), proper notes and todos, being able to save files on it, games etc etc, Apple will suddenly change their tune when people start to desert their 'platform'. If they had announced the possibility of an SDK people would be happy just to wait for that, with the promise of more functionality to come. Actually cutting off stuff like calendar entries on the touch is just mean spirited.

It'd also be nice if they treated their developers and users with a modicum of respect and didn't feed people bs about a 'web SDK' if they are intending to produce a real SDK.

If such applications are erased, I won't be surprised, I'll just be disappointed in Apple.

rjwill246
Oct 6, 2007, 10:45 AM
It's not a platform without third party apps, it's an appliance. Also I'd take issue with the your use of 'further', perhaps 'further lock down' would be a better description. The reason people are complaining is that this is bad for the consumer in the short term, and very bad for Apple in the long term.
It'd also be nice if they treated their developers and users with a modicum of respect and didn't feed people bs about a 'web SDK' if they are intending to produce a real SDK.

If such applications are erased, I won't be surprised, I'll just be disappointed in Apple.
First off, you are making assumptions as if they were facts. Relative of Stella?

You have no evidence that, across the board, Apple is treating its developers with disrespect. That inference is simply childish and does not port to a mature and ubiquitous relationship between business partners. Since there are enormous 3rd party applications for OSX, it is highly unlikely that the companies are in a constant contentious relationship with Apple.

You're assumption that half-arsed applications are good for the consumer is probably based on the input you are getting from the complainers here, a vast minority of iPhone users. Properly designed 3rd party apps would be great and here the assumptions are more compelling.

Of all the apps I put on the iPhone only iToner worked as it should. The others, were, by and large, buggy and incomplete, including the dictionaries, which could have been useful but were a drag on the system and were very buggy.

What is needed is a careful deployment of 3rd party apps that have Apple's blessing. They will work and will be professional. That is not to say that the huge amount of work by the "dev" team won't produce some great programs in the future but so far that has not been the case-- save the famous unlocking efforts.

Further, I hope you won't be disappointed to find that unauthourised 3rd party apps that crash the iPhone, will leave it a brick and that neither ATT or Apple should be responsible for fixing it. Indeed, you should expect that to be the case and so, without complaint, enjoy the mantelpiece ornament you have have just created!!!

shadowfax
Oct 6, 2007, 11:17 AM
First off, you are making assumptions as if they were facts. Relative of Stella?

You have no evidence that, across the board, Apple is treating its developers with disrespect. That inference is simply childish and does not port to a mature and ubiquitous relationship between business partners. Since there are enormous 3rd party applications for OSX, it is highly unlikely that the companies are in a constant contentious relationship with Apple.
I don't see that he made that assumption in the way that you suggest, I just see that he said Apple is treating developers poorly by leaving them out in the cold with some BS Web 2.0 SDK crap. Something along the lines of "hey, we're trying to stabilize this platform. Right now, all we can guarantee is that our own apps work on it. Our SDK isn't ready for you, but wait 6-8 months and we'll get you something." that would be nice. Whatever APPLE thinks, that would sell some units, both now and in 6-8 months.
You're assumption that half-arsed applications are good for the consumer is probably based on the input you are getting from the complainers here, a vast minority of iPhone users. Properly designed 3rd party apps would be great and here the assumptions are more compelling.

Of all the apps I put on the iPhone only iToner worked as it should. The others, were, by and large, buggy and incomplete, including the dictionaries, which could have been useful but were a drag on the system and were very buggy.
...?

These applications are the only thing these people have to debug the iPhone. They aren't half-assed, they are the definition of great work given the situation. Half-assed is what I would say about an application like Mail on the iPhone. It is developed in-house at Apple, with all their great debugging tools and great interface developers, and it's crummy. It's missing core email features--the textbook definition of a half-assed application. Many of the iPhone 3rd party hacks were lacking features, BUT they were getting feature additions literally on a weekly basis. And as far as bugs go, that's what happens when your debugging tools are all but non-existent. It's a tough road to be on--those developers are still figuring out how the API works.
What is needed is a careful deployment of 3rd party apps that have Apple's blessing. They will work and will be professional. That is not to say that the huge amount of work by the "dev" team won't produce some great programs in the future but so far that has not been the case-- save the famous unlocking efforts.
I don't know where you come off saying that, especially after accusing the guy of being "a relative of Stella." Apollo IM was getting really nice. several of the games were extremely good-looking and pretty darn stable. I have to admit, I stuck with only the most professional-looking apps, but I did have several on there, and I must admit that I have not noticed any "stability improvements" in 1.1.1 (which I am running now) over 1.0.2 with my 6-8 third-party apps. It's still crashing now and then for me for no apparent reason.
Further, I hope you won't be disappointed to find that unauthourised 3rd party apps that crash the iPhone, will leave it a brick and that neither ATT or Apple should be responsible for fixing it. Indeed, you should expect that to be the case and so, without complaint, enjoy the mantelpiece ornament you have have just created!!!
Well, that is, indeed, how it goes. I don't think that's what the argument is really about, it seems like we're well past that argument (whether it's ok/bad/awesome/whatever for Apple to brick/lock phnes) and it's irrelevant to the topic at hand.

This is just what's going to happen, the old cat and mouse. Hackers will hack the update within a couple of weeks, get their apps running again, fix them for the API tweaks/changes, and 2-3 weeks later Apple will release yet another update that breaks it all. And, contrary to all those silly people that said that hacking was slowing down the update cycle, it will actually speed it up like nothing else, because Apple can't afford to release updates once a month with a feature list like:

Bug fixes.
Security updates.
Breaks third party software.

rjwill246
Oct 6, 2007, 11:53 AM
Hackers will hack the update within a couple of weeks, get their apps running again, fix them for the API tweaks/changes, and 2-3 weeks later Apple will release yet another update that breaks it all. And, contrary to all those silly people that said that hacking was slowing down the update cycle, it will actually speed it up like nothing else, because Apple can't afford to release updates once a month with a feature list like:

Bug fixes.
Security updates.
Breaks third party software.


May be so but from your comments, we are not using the same iPhone and using AppTapp etc. After installing as many of the apps-- about 20-- on my version of the iPhone, I found that none of the games was useful, professional looking and acting, the dictionaries, which could have added value (unlike poorly executed games -- even Tetris flunked the useful and stable test) were sloppy and ultimately worthless, the wallpapers were pap--- for this people are clamouring?? I think not, unless the iPhone user is not the typical Mac user who expects everything to "just work."

Whether the hacking slows or speeds the cycle, in the end, is irrelevant. Who cares? One day, some day, very good apps. will be available. The comment about Mail is laughable, if you are seriously going to compare it to the 3rd party apps that turned up. It is a Testarossa compared to the Model T apps that have surfaced so far- save iToner-- though Mail certainly needs some more work, I expect Apple to make it as functional as we would all like it to be in the not too far future.

I think you might be in love with the hacking concept and not the results!!

JMax1
Oct 6, 2007, 11:59 AM
... I would kill all humans for a feature like that. Mail is really crummy on the iPhone (by comparison to the other stuff on it). I can't figure out why that stuff is missing, it's not remotely computationally intensive.

If you kill all humans who would you chat with?

shadowfax
Oct 6, 2007, 12:18 PM
If you kill all humans who would you chat with?It's a joke from Futurama, when Bender was hitting on some other robot--"Hey pretty mama, wanna kill all humans?" But as far as who I would chat with, there's always myself. Don't tell me you've never IMed yourself:

me: "Hi."
me: "Hi."
me: "What's up?"
me: "What's up?"
me: "Hey, I asked you first!"
me: "Hey, I asked you first!"
me: "Man, are you just repeating everything I say?"
me: "Man, are you just repeating everything I say?"
me: "dang it!"
me: "dang it!"

javaGuru
Oct 6, 2007, 12:19 PM
If you kill all humans who would you chat with?


LOL, this is too funny! :D

shadowfax
Oct 6, 2007, 12:29 PM
I think you might be in love with the hacking concept and not the results!!

Well no. I am looking to the future. I can appreciate that the hackers are doing something much more difficult than developing an application (like Mail) with no real SDK. I find that *some* of the applications are surprisingly stable, given that they are still figuring things out. Have you seen the update cycle on these apps? It's amazingly, blazingly fast (sometimes more than once a week), especially considering that they often add totally new features to the apps with updates, in addition to lots of bug fixes. So that's my point. 3rd party apps are "moving," and they aren't remotely as bad as you say (well, some of them are). But Apollo IM/MobileChat? are you kidding? Lights off? You use really bad examples, Tetris is pretty crummy.

pedroistheman
Oct 6, 2007, 12:30 PM
This is just what's going to happen, the old cat and mouse. Hackers will hack the update within a couple of weeks, get their apps running again, fix them for the API tweaks/changes, and 2-3 weeks later Apple will release yet another update that breaks it all. And, contrary to all those silly people that said that hacking was slowing down the update cycle, it will actually speed it up like nothing else, because Apple can't afford to release updates once a month with a feature list like:

Bug fixes.
Security updates.
Breaks third party software.


That's real. This "cat and mouse game" is only going to speed up apple with some real improvements on the iphone. I can't wait, but is there still a risk of getting your iphone bricked w/ installing 3rd party apps and then updating?

dustywaffles
Oct 6, 2007, 12:33 PM
Now this has no reference to anyone who has posted anything in this latest thread (so rant about why did i even post this) but I just don't get why people think that the iPhone has to be opened up by Apple. Why does everyone think Apple is an open source software/hardware provider? They are not. They are and always have been quite the opposite. Yes, they have most definitely used open source code to their advantage but never supported their bundled package as a base for it. It seems the entire CE community is against Apple on every step they take to further their iPhone platform.

I really do not mean this to be an argument starter, it is truly just an expression of my bafflement regarding this piece of consumer electronics platform. While I do think 3rd party development is a good thing, it is completely ludicrous to think Apple should embrace it against their own terms. I repeat, 3rd party development is good. But if such applications are erased due to a progressive update from the software team at Apple we shouldn't blame Apple at all.

Well... You just don't market a device as a smart phone and make it so it does less than a 50$ phone. Heck I've had free phones that let me download games and put a background on my home screen. Granted the things the iPhone does do, it does better.

You don't release a device with tons of features missing, things that early adopters would reasonably expect to be patched in within a few months, and then instead of adding these things you give people another way for them to give you money.

You don't release wireless ITMS when its been 4 months and people can't send a picture message, use a to do list, or have anything but a black background for home screen.

When the novelty wares off its astounding how little this phone actually does and how constrictive it feels.

At first I honestly didn't care who or where the features I wanted came from and I didn't mind buying them from apple. I just wanted my phone to do what I wanted it to do.

But now I think apple is getting a little to greedy. Missing features should have been a priority, not a music store. I don't trust apple enough to be their customer.

I hate my iphone, Im selling it and buying a real smart phone that has thousands of applications, customization, and an snes emulator. Seriously why wait 4 months for a freaking to do list, or have to freaking hack your phone to change an icon. Touch OS is way better than WM but geeze its not worth it anymore.

I hope hackers prevail for those of you who are sticking with the iphone, their the only ones who will give you what you want. I'm sick of iphone, I'm sick of itunes and DRM, I'm sick of all this restriction and control, and I'm sick of apple. Never buying their stuff again.

I think SJ wanted to make an ipod that had a phone on it, while everyone else wanted a phone that had an ipod on it. There's a big difference between the two.

CJD2112
Oct 6, 2007, 01:08 PM
Will anything lead to owners with bricked iPhones getting their software restored? Or is that already possible? I know Apple released software to its stores so Mac Geniuses can determine if hacking was involved, thus refusing to restore the device. As this is the case, can people with bricked iPhones get their phones back?

shadowfax
Oct 6, 2007, 01:39 PM
That's real. This "cat and mouse game" is only going to speed up apple with some real improvements on the iphone. I can't wait, but is there still a risk of getting your iphone bricked w/ installing 3rd party apps and then updating?
No, not if you're smart. You just have to restore the OLD, unhacked firmware before updating it (in the worst case). You didn't even have to do that with 1.1.1 update. So far, the only brickings have been mysterious (i.e. irrespective of hacks of any kind) or from baseband unlocked phones.

Stella
Oct 6, 2007, 03:54 PM
<sarcasm>

Haven't you heard? its not Apple's fault at all. Nope. Its AT&T forcing Apple to close the iPhone up tighter than a.... ( I'll leave the rest of your imagination ).


</sarcasm>



Well... You just don't market a device as a smart phone and make it so it does less than a 50$ phone. Heck I've had free phones that let me download games and put a background on my home screen.

<snip>

sblasl
Oct 6, 2007, 06:13 PM
Apple nor Steve Jobs ever marketed, called, or alluded to the iPhone as a SmartPhone. When Jobs made the announcement introducing the iPhone he questioned why SmartPhones were called "Smart" Phones.

Anyone who thinks that the iPhone is a SmartPhone or a PDA is wishful thinking on their part.

Well... You just don't market a device as a smart phone and make it so it does less than a 50$ phone. Heck I've had free phones that let me download games and put a background on my home screen. Granted the things the iPhone does do, it does better.

sparkpoint11
Oct 6, 2007, 06:54 PM
You have no evidence that, across the board, Apple is treating its developers with disrespect. That inference is simply childish and does not port to a mature and ubiquitous relationship between business partners.


He is obviously only talking about Apple disrespecting their developers in regards to blocking them from development on the iPhone. You are the one who expanded his original intention to mean "across the board".


You're assumption that half-arsed applications are good for the consumer is probably based on the input you are getting from the complainers here, a vast minority of iPhone users. Properly designed 3rd party apps would be great and here the assumptions are more compelling.
Of all the apps I put on the iPhone only iToner worked as it should. The others, were, by and large, buggy and incomplete, including the dictionaries, which could have been useful but were a drag on the system and were very buggy.


Do not take this as an insult, but I am wondering if you are a developer/programmer or have any development experience. The reason I ask this is because it seems fairly obvious why many (not all) of the third party applications developed so far haven't been real outstanding or "half-arsed" in your opinion. Have you ever attempted to put together a home-gym in a dark garage? Because that is exactly these developers are trying to do.
Although the iPhone does indeed run a version of OSX, it's heavily modified.
They have absolutely no documentation on the system, no reference material for the new APIs, no clue as to which components have been modified, etc. And on top of that, once they have something semi-functional, they have no real way to debug and profile their application other than trial and error and allowing people to download beta software and help to locate the bugs.
Finally, only a tiny fraction of developers have attempted to write any of these applications, and certainly not larger companies with financial interests and the resources required to invest alot of time and manpower into the projects.

I, myself, find it pretty incredible that even with all of these obstacles, some of the efforts so far are actually pretty good. You certainly can't expect ANYTHING CLOSE to perfection or anything reliable and polished.
BUT, what they have provided is some insight into the creativity and innovation that can be expected with a proper development community.


What is needed is a careful deployment of 3rd party apps that have Apple's blessing. They will work and will be professional. That is not to say that the huge amount of work by the "dev" team won't produce some great programs in the future but so far that has not been the case-- save the famous unlocking efforts.


Like many have said, it would be a great idea for apple to create a community of third party developers that have access to a review process for screening applications for quality, security, and reliability. They could then create an easy download and install/uninstall process through itunes and everyone wins.

Stella
Oct 6, 2007, 08:25 PM
Then SJ should have never compared iPhone against smartphones.

Remember, in the iPhone intro SJ showed a slide containing 4 or 5 smartphones. From that moment onwards, people will think iPhone as a smartphone and compare against.

The iPhone is not smart, in fact, its dumb ( apart from the UI ) and can do no more than any other phone out there .

Apple nor Steve Jobs ever marketed, called, or alluded to the iPhone as a SmartPhone. When Jobs made the announcement introducing the iPhone he questioned why SmartPhones were called "Smart" Phones.

Anyone who thinks that the iPhone is a SmartPhone or a PDA is wishful thinking on their part.

dustywaffles
Oct 6, 2007, 08:32 PM
Apple nor Steve Jobs ever marketed, called, or alluded to the iPhone as a SmartPhone. When Jobs made the announcement introducing the iPhone he questioned why SmartPhones were called "Smart" Phones.

Anyone who thinks that the iPhone is a SmartPhone or a PDA is wishful thinking on their part.


Your right it's totally wishful thinking to think the iphone would let me customize my home screen with something besides black, or that ical would let me have a to do list, or I'd be able to delete more than one e-mail at a time.

It was so stupid for me to think that they might add some of these missing features instead putting out an update that added a crappy music store and locked out the only people who tried to make this piece more functional and fun.


"iPhone introduces the most revolutionary user interface since the mouse, the most advanced software ever engineered, and true state-of-the-art technology that will change the way you think about a mobile device. With over 300 patents, iPhone is years ahead of any other phone available today."

There is absolutely nothing in this statement on apple's site to make me think that the iphone would be years ahead of any other phone or that it would change the way I think about a mobile device.

When you type 'smartphone' in the search bar on apple's site the iPhone totally wasn't at the top of the search results. iPhone never targeted smart phone users or has been called a smart phone by dozens of huge publications which also never compared it to other smart phones.

I should have known what apple meant was that even though the iphone doesn't do half as much as other similarly priced mobile devices or even as much as a 50$ music phone, what it does do it does very well. Cause thats the angle apple took in its advertising, right?

I'm sorry if this sarcasm irritates you, but you just took one part of my argument totally out of context to play semantics with me about something that wasn't even my main point. Who cares if apple never officially called the iphone a smartphone. They let everyone think it would have similar capabilities. They had adds for accessories right on their site that referred to it as a smart phone.

My point was that I expected more from my revolutionary mobile device than a cool interface with half the features of the piece of crap I got for free when I resigned my contract. I waited 4 months for a stupid wallpaper or to do list and got a music store that comes hooked right up to my bank account instead and its a huge slap to the face.

aristobrat
Oct 6, 2007, 08:57 PM
Who cares if apple never officially called the iphone a smartphone. They let everyone think it would have similar capabilities. They had adds for accessories right on their site that referred to it as a smart phone.
For someone who waited four months and was as familiar with the iPhone website as you, I'm wondering how you missed these two key areas, as they list virtually every feature and then visually demonstrate you how it works.

Both areas were up there for you to click on before the iPhone was launched.

With the iPhone pretty much "fully demonstrated" for you before it went out sale, how exactly did you "expect more"?

Stella
Oct 6, 2007, 09:05 PM
Your right it's totally wishful ....

<snip waffle>


So once again, why did Apple compare iPhone against smartphones?

Why did Apple present a slide of 4 or 5 existing smartphones?

You still haven't answered.

PS. The only thing the iPhone is ahead of is the UI, and nothing else. It does not show other functionality beyond any other phone on the market.

TurboSC
Oct 6, 2007, 09:06 PM
Man I hope the dev teams aren't giving up and pushing forward full speed. :)

I know the teams that are focused on unlocking aren't so hot and heavy anymore seeing how the first iteration turned out.

CJD2112
Oct 6, 2007, 09:11 PM
For someone who waited four months and was as familiar with the iPhone website as you, I'm wondering how you missed these two key areas, as they list virtually every feature and then visually demonstrate you how it works.

Both areas were up there for you to click on before the iPhone was launched.

With the iPhone pretty much "fully demonstrated" for you before it went out sale, how exactly did you "expect more"?

Well, I guess you're right, we shouldn't expect more from Apple.

pilotError
Oct 6, 2007, 09:13 PM
With all the reaction, I'm a little surprised over the lack of appreciation for all these hacking efforts.

With Leopard so close, I'm wondering how much effort folks should be going through to get this thing opened again.

It would really suck to have to start all over again in another 3 weeks.

For all those doing the Hacks, I extend a big Thanks.

Stella
Oct 6, 2007, 09:24 PM
Well, I guess you're right, we shouldn't expect more from Apple.

No we shouldn't.

We should think that Apple will try to get every penny out of the consumer as possible. We should think iPhone == negativity. Any thing that Apple can charge for, they will charge for. Ring tones, third party apps. I'm surprised they haven't started charging for background ( wallpaper ) images, yet.

With all the reaction, I'm a little surprised over the lack of appreciation for all these hacking efforts.


For the those who recongise and understand the term "consumer freedom" I think there is a lot of appreciation. For those Apple apologists, there isn't - hacking to make the iPhone open, for these people , is the devils work.

djgamble
Oct 6, 2007, 09:29 PM
Why is everyone assuming that the iPhone will be cracked? This current one shows that people with older iPhones might be able to get access by doing things before doing an update.

There has been no success with the iPod touch, and also on a heavy note there was absolutely no success with the 2nd gen nano (from the iPod Linux boys).

The drive has been encrypted, and someone is going to have to work out how to break the encryption without really knowing what it is because they can't have access to the drive in its encrypted state.

I wouldn't assume that it will always be cat and mouse with people finding gaping holes every month and Apple scampering to patch them. People have been working on that 2nd gen nano for ages with no results.

Stella
Oct 6, 2007, 09:36 PM
Don't be so naive.
Anything can be cracked, if there is the will. There is enough interest in the iPhone to make this happen.

The file system on the iPhone can already been accessed ( IFAIK )- that work is complete.

Why is everyone assuming that the iPhone will be cracked? This current one shows that people with older iPhones might be able to get access by doing things before doing an update.

There has been no success with the iPod touch, and also on a heavy note there was absolutely no success with the 2nd gen nano (from the iPod Linux boys).

The drive has been encrypted, and someone is going to have to work out how to break the encryption without really knowing what it is because they can't have access to the drive in its encrypted state.

I wouldn't assume that it will always be cat and mouse with people finding gaping holes every month and Apple scampering to patch them. People have been working on that 2nd gen nano for ages with no results.

aristobrat
Oct 6, 2007, 09:38 PM
Well, I guess you're right, we shouldn't expect more from Apple.
My point was simply that since Apple -- before the iPhone even went on sale -- stated (and then visually demonstrated) pretty much everything that it could do, I just don't understand how anyone could try to make the point "but Apple compared it to a smartphone, so I bought it expecting it to be just like a smartphone, and it's not -- I expected more".

PDE
Oct 6, 2007, 09:53 PM
My point was simply that since Apple -- before the iPhone even went on sale -- stated (and then visually demonstrated) pretty much everything that it could do, I just don't understand how anyone could try to make the point "but Apple compared it to a smartphone, so I bought it expecting it to be just like a smartphone, and it's not -- I expected more".

Didn't Steve Jobs also say that Apple would be adding lots of features with software updates? Isn't that the appeal of the iphone - that it can be updated easily with new functionality without having to worry about external hardware like buttons etc? Apple clearly made it sounds like we should expect more and that more was on its way. that's one of the reasons everybody is putting up with quite a limited feature set compared to other phones: because they expect that to be fixed by continuous updates.

Marcjcd
Oct 6, 2007, 09:56 PM
My point was simply that since Apple -- before the iPhone even went on sale -- stated (and then visually demonstrated) pretty much everything that it could do, I just don't understand how anyone could try to make the point "but Apple compared it to a smartphone, so I bought it expecting it to be just like a smartphone, and it's not -- I expected more".

We understand your point, but are you then saying that YOUR expectations of the iPhone is that it would have a mail application that doesnt allow you to delete more then one item at a time? Were YOUR expectations of the iPhone that it would have a messaging application that is vastly inferior? Were YOUR expectations of the iPhone that it wouldnt have even the basic applications that every, EVERY current cell phone has. Yes, never on the site were the words "smartphone" used, but arent you just playing with words here now? Using your logic that they never claimed this to be a "smartphone" then I would guess you would call this a "dumbphone" since it is lacking items that a $19.99 pay-as-you-go phone purchased at 7-11 has.

Someone earlier on another post maybe said it best... Jobs set out to make the best IPOD ever that happens to also make calls when he should have produced the best cell phone that IS ALSO an IPOD... because THATS WHAT HE MARKETED!

dustywaffles
Oct 6, 2007, 10:51 PM
My point was simply that since Apple -- before the iPhone even went on sale -- stated (and then visually demonstrated) pretty much everything that it could do, I just don't understand how anyone could try to make the point "but Apple compared it to a smartphone, so I bought it expecting it to be just like a smartphone, and it's not -- I expected more".


I'm not even saying I expected it to be just like a smart phone or to have full 3rd party support.

However if you're trying to make the argument that people should have assumed that apple would never add any feature besides the ones it launched with.... your wrong. It actually wouldn't make sense to assume that apple would make what they call the most advanced phone you can buy with the worlds most advanced operating system and then not do anything with it.

People were right to assume there would be more because they actually have added new features. ( i.e. double taping the home button and music store)

However they added a feature that makes them more money before adding the really basic ones. Ones that people expect from ALL mobile phones.

I've told several people who asked me if I liked the iPhone that I hated it because it hardy does anything. It's almost bizarre how almost everyone has the exact same response. First they say " What, isn't it supposed to do everything?" and when I told them what it doesn't do I get the same two words. " Thats weird."

I knew exactly what the iPhone could do when it was released. What I didn't know was what it would do 4 months later. I, along with many others, made some assumptions about that based on how apple touted it against other devices, things that every other phone with a color screen has, and our perception of apple.

We were totally wrong. However we know what apple compared the iphone to, and we know what other phones have. Thus it must have been our perception of apple that was wrong. They are greedy and out of touch.

Thats what you are getting from people, disillusionment.

Yes a lot of people had unrealistic expectations. That doesn't mean you take every one who's mad and lump them in the same category with those unrealistic expectations being our defining characteristic.

That may be why you don't understand where I'm coming from.

Some of us had very reasonable expectations about what would be patched in over the next four months.

The only thing to say to me is that it was unreasonable for me to expect something other than a black background after four months. Well thats your opinion and you have a right to it. Its my opinion that apple is the one who is unreasonable for not adding these things.

It's not that hard to understand why people expected their 300$ phone to at least have the features their first camera phone had 4 years ago.

aristobrat
Oct 6, 2007, 10:55 PM
However if you're trying to make the argument that people should have assumed that apple would never add any feature besides the ones it launched with.... your wrong.
Not making that point at all. Again, I'm simply stating that I don't understand how Apple having a slide showing the iPhone next to other smartphones to compare physical features would cause people to expect it to "have more functionality" when Apple did the best job I've ever seen a manufacturer do of visually demonstrating how the key features of how their product worked -- before the product ever went on sale.

Apple clearly made it sounds like we should expect more and that more was on its way.
And what did Apple clearly say that has caused some people to expect that v1.1.1 would contain every piece of "more to be added", as if Apple never planned on issuing another update in the future to add more functionality?

Yes, never on the site were the words "smartphone" used, but arent you just playing with words here now?
That is my entire point. What are the meaning of words when a manufacturer visually demonstrates the product, showing you how key features work, a week before the product goes on sale? How the iPhone uses "slide to delete" (or you have to press the Edit button) to delete emails and SMS conversations was in the demonstration videos.

DMann
Oct 6, 2007, 11:00 PM
We understand your point, but are you then saying that YOUR expectations of the iPhone is that it would have a mail application that doesnt allow you to delete more then one item at a time? Were YOUR expectations of the iPhone that it would have a messaging application that is vastly inferior? Were YOUR expectations of the iPhone that it wouldnt have even the basic applications that every, EVERY current cell phone has. Yes, never on the site were the words "smartphone" used, but arent you just playing with words here now? Using your logic that they never claimed this to be a "smartphone" then I would guess you would call this a "dumbphone" since it is lacking items that a $19.99 pay-as-you-go phone purchased at 7-11 has.

Someone earlier on another post maybe said it best... Jobs set out to make the best IPOD ever that happens to also make calls when he should have produced the best cell phone that IS ALSO an IPOD... because THATS WHAT HE MARKETED!

While several smart-phone features are yet to be delivered, the ones which do exist on the iPhone are dramatically smarter than others out there; It's a highly responsive phone with multi-tasking functionality in most categories sporting a brilliant interface, an iPod which functions extremely well while running other tasks, an internet device which blows away anything I've worked with, stunning screen resolution, video playback, incredible zoom capabilities, and best of all, a platform with unlimited potential which utilizes a quantum leap in technology called 'multi-touch,' all running on OS X. (I haven't touched my Blackberry 8830 since June 29th) Sure it needs more stuff, improved mail client functionality, copy, cut, paste, more 3rd party apps, etc., but three months is a relatively short time frame to be voicing concerns about missing features. We can expect more functionality and features once Leopard is released. (and once 1.1.1 is opened up)

aristobrat
Oct 6, 2007, 11:04 PM
I, along with many others, made some assumptions about that based on how apple touted it against other devices, things that every other phone with a color screen has, and our perception of apple.
This is the comparison chart that Apple used. It was used in a press release stating that the iPhone would ship with a glass screen and a battery that lasted longer than Apple had previously announced?

How on earth did you look at the chart below and make any other assumptions other than what was presented???

http://images.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/competitivedatachart2.jpg

dustywaffles
Oct 6, 2007, 11:11 PM
This is the comparison chart that Apple used. It was used in a press release stating that the iPhone would ship with a glass screen and a battery that lasted longer than Apple had previously announced?

How on earth did you look at the chart below and make any other assumptions other than what was presented???

http://images.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/competitivedatachart2.jpg

I was talking about this comparison

"iPhone is years ahead of any other phone available today."

Once again I am not comparing the iphone to smart phones, I'm comparing it to all phones.

Interesting chart though. I wonder if honda ever put anything similar out comparing a Civic's dimensions to a Porsche. No.. that wouldn't make sense unless honda was subtly saying that a civic is comparable to a Porsche. I know it's an extreme example but have you ever heard of something called subtext?

aristobrat
Oct 6, 2007, 11:20 PM
However they added a feature that makes them more money before adding the really basic ones.
Did the thought ever cross your mind that the WiFi iTunes Store was a feature that was competitively important for the iPod Touch (i.e. the Zune has had WiFi for about a year now, so Apple needed to get a MP3 player on the market that had WiFi and did something with it that the Zune couldn't) and that the only reason this feature ended up in 1.1.1 (ahead of non-revenue generating features) just might have been because the application had already been designed, developed, tested and put into production on the Touch and it didn't take major work to get it running on the iPhone?

And if Apple was only just doing money-grabs in 1.1.1, why on earth would they put in a feature that allows you to turn off EDGE roaming? Since Apple makes a slice of each users monthly bill, that's going to lower their revenue, no?

CJD2112
Oct 6, 2007, 11:21 PM
This is the comparison chart that Apple used. It was used in a press release stating that the iPhone would ship with a glass screen and a battery that lasted longer than Apple had previously announced?

How on earth did you look at the chart below and make any other assumptions other than what was presented???

http://images.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/competitivedatachart2.jpg

You're really going to use a simple chart to base your argument on? That chart doesn't state very much in terms of the iPhone's functions vs. other "smartphones" (or what have you).

I find it very interesting that people are so quick to defend Apple for taking features away from a product. That is what we are talking about right? Apple taking things away from its customers? Whether they were "supposed" to be available seems rather moot, as they certainly were available through developers (something Apple allows for their OS X platform). Why did Apple take third party applications away from its consumer base? Security? If that were the case, then none of their computers would be open to third party applications, so it can't be for security. Hmmmm. Stability? Well, if that were the case then Mac OS X would be completely closed off to Microsoft Office 2004 and other third party applications available online that Apple may not test. Hmmmm, I wonder why....

Oh, MONEY. I forgot about that one. Silly me. :rolleyes:

aristobrat
Oct 6, 2007, 11:30 PM
I was talking about this comparison

"iPhone is years ahead of any other phone available today."

Once again I am not comparing the iphone to smart phones, I'm comparing it to all phones.

Interesting chart though. I wonder if honda ever put anything similar out comparing a Civic's dimensions to a Porsche. No.. that wouldn't make sense unless honda was subtly saying that a civic is comparable to a Porsche. I know it's an extreme example but have you ever heard of something called subtext?
Again, if the major functionality of the device is explicitly and prominently demonstrated before it goes on sale, where does subtext factor in?

aristobrat
Oct 6, 2007, 11:33 PM
That chart doesn't state very much in terms of the iPhone's functions vs. other "smartphones" (or what have you).
Thank you for stating my point for me! :) AFAIK, that's the only chart where Apple mentioned the word "Smartphone" or did direct comparisons of the iPhone to other phones.

How anyone could look at that chart and walk away with expectations of iPhone functionality is beyond me, but apparently people have.

dustywaffles
Oct 6, 2007, 11:45 PM
Again, if the major functionality of the device is explicitly and prominently demonstrated before it goes on sale, where does subtext factor in?

To answer your question plainly the subtext is in the fact that they compared its size to the size of four other smart phones. It wouldn't make sense to do this unless it were like the smart phones in some other way. It's why Honda didn't put out the same chart comparing the dimensions of a Civic with a Porsche, a M3, and a Corvette.

Actually in your defense apple probably couldn't have found four other camera phones where you can't choose a home screen background to compare sizes with. They don't exist. I guess apple really does think different.

MacToddB
Oct 7, 2007, 12:01 AM
When Steve Jobs introduced the "Breakthrough Internet Communications Device", in January 2007, he compared it to several devices, including my Nokia e62. All of them had native Instant Messaging.

Here's more:

"Now, software on mobile phones is like baby software. Itís not so powerful, and today weíre going to show you a software breakthrough. Software thatís at least five years ahead of whatís on any other phone. Now how do we do this? Well, we start with a strong foundation. iPhone runs OSX. Now, why would we want to run such a sophisticated operating system on a mobile device? Well, because itís got everything we need. Itís got multi-tasking. Itís got the best networking. It already knows how to power manage. Weíve been doing this on mobile computers for years. Itís got awesome security. And the right apps. Itís got everything from Cocoa and the graphics and itís got core animation built in and itís got the audio and video that OSX is famous for. Itís got all the stuff we want. And itís built right in to iPhone. And that has let us create desktop class applications and networking. Not the crippled stuff that you find on most phones. This is real, desktop-class applications."

It's shameful that native Instant Messaging is absent, with no indication that Apple plans to remedy this. iChat is part of OSX. Yet it took independent developers to deliver native IM apps, and they did it in weeks, with no SDK!

For those of you who will suggest Web based IM is sufficient, keep in mind that they rely on logging in to a page (which can be overwritten by another app), with a browser that doesn't cache logins/passwords, and can't alert you when in other apps, etc.

BTW, my Nokia e62 was "crippled" with these abilities: MP3 ringtones, text-to-speech Caller ID name announcing, customizable screens, in addition to native IM, Bluetooth music (Not A2DP, but bluetooth nonetheless), and my personal favorite, Bluetooth syncing...just walk into my office and it would sync. No docking, no cables.

For those of you who will point the finger at me, keep in mind that when I bought my iPhone, native IM was indeed available, from third parties. So I'm staying at 1.0.2 for this reason. Indeed, an argument could be made that those of you who HAVE upgraded firmware are the ones who weren't satisfied with what you bought! The interface of the iPhone is far superior and the hardware is far more responsive than anything else. But the functionality has a way to go. Apple has their priorities (WiFi music, etc.). I prefer my iPhone, but specifically, I prefer it at 1.0.2 where I can leverage the development of tools that Apple hasn't prioritized, in particular native IM.

aristobrat
Oct 7, 2007, 12:07 AM
To answer your question plainly the subtext is in the fact that they compared its size to the size of four other smart phones.
Can you please explain to me how there was anything that could be construed as "subtext" after Apple started putting videos demonstrating the features of the iPhone?

Out of curiosity, have you even seen the videos?

dustywaffles
Oct 7, 2007, 01:34 AM
Can you please explain to me how there was anything that could be construed as "subtext" after Apple started putting videos demonstrating the features of the iPhone?

Out of curiosity, have you even seen the videos?

You posted an add comparing the size of the iphone with other smartphones. I said THAT add had subtext. It was clear that size comparison was what I claimed had subtext, as that was what I was responding to and I never mentioned videos in the post.

Your asking me to back up a claim I never made.

If that was not your intention then your point is that apple's instructional videos should have overridden any other subtext or implications in all the information, and statements apple made.

It doesn't work like that. those videos did not exist in a vacuum. People didn't take those videos to mean these are the only features the iphone will ever have, nor did apple intend for that to be the point of the videos. If they did they were lying because ITMS wasn't in the original videos. I know because I watched them. They added that.

Even if apple DID want people to think iPhone would never have a feature not demonstrated in those videos apple should have made that clear. If people thought the iphone would never do anything not in those videos a huge chunk would have never have bought it.

As to your question as to if I ever watched those videos. Well that question has a subtext as well which I interpret as an attack on me instead of my argument. If that is where this is going then I will have to withdraw myself from what was a stimulating debate.

CJD2112
Oct 7, 2007, 01:56 AM
Can you please explain to me how there was anything that could be construed as "subtext" after Apple started putting videos demonstrating the features of the iPhone?

Out of curiosity, have you even seen the videos?

I find it interesting that others have made very interesting points regarding the iPhone, and specifically one user quoting Steve Jobs word for word on how the iPhone is basically a small computer device running a version of OS X and thus is capable of running applications most other phones can not, and yet you glaze over those valid points by going back to this "smartphone" non-sense. Your comment that the chart has very little information and thus defends your stance that making assumptions that the iPhone can do more works both ways, as the chart has little information who is to say that it CAN NOT do all those things and more. Further, Steve Jobs himself stated that the iPhone has:

- "Runs OS X"
- "Multi-tasking"
- "Desk-top class applications"

and on and on. Those were his exact words. Based on that early press release, how is it erroneous to assume that the iPhone was not marketed to "do more"? As someone else stated, the whole principle of the device is its software driven OS, which allows for changing and adapting to allow new features and applications, precisely the reason the iPhone is revolutionary (one of the reasons). Even more, developers were able to get great app's on the device without SDK's, and yet Apple said "No, even though we stated the iPhone could do those things and you did get it do run those app's, we're not going to let you. In fact, we're going to offer updates with new features you will want but tethered to those updates will be firmware to cripple the iPhone and lock it down". Um, what? That's tantamount to Apple updating the software on my Mac Pro to cripple it so only certain applications work. Again, didn't Jobs say the iPhone was great cause "Itís got all the stuff we want. And itís built right in to iPhone. And that has let us create desktop class applications and networking. Not the crippled stuff that you find on most phones. This is real, desktop-class applications." ... So, um, why take away the ability for developers to make programs for the iPhone as they can for Mac OS X? No one has explained that to me yet, and made sense.

CJD2112
Oct 7, 2007, 02:15 AM
While several smart-phone features are yet to be delivered, the ones which do exist on the iPhone are dramatically smarter than others out there; It's a highly responsive phone with multi-tasking functionality in most categories sporting a brilliant interface, an iPod which functions extremely well while running other tasks, an internet device which blows away anything I've worked with, stunning screen resolution, video playback, incredible zoom capabilities, and best of all, a platform with unlimited potential which utilizes a quantum leap in technology called 'multi-touch,' all running on OS X. (I haven't touched my Blackberry 8830 since June 29th) Sure it needs more stuff, improved mail client functionality, copy, cut, paste, more 3rd party apps, etc., but three months is a relatively short time frame to be voicing concerns about missing features. We can expect more functionality and features once Leopard is released. (and once 1.1.1 is opened up)

Totally agree. The device has a lot of great functions and a fantastic UI that is leaps and bounds ahead of the competition. I sincerely hope Apple does open the device up, while releasing new features with Leopard would be a fantastic follow through (and would explain why Jobs wanted Leopard people on the iPhone team as they may/will tie together). I just don't understand the logic behind Apple aggressively locking and encrypting a device that was marketed to do more and was successfully doing so through developers without even an SDK. It's control. It's greed, and if I see Apple release third party applications for sale on iTunes I will be very disgusted.

Ooooo, and you have an 8-core Mac Pro. I was tempted in buying two quad-core chips and just popping them into my Mac Pro (got it last December, should have waited), but then I would break my warranty and that wouldn't be cute. I'm jealous lol.

djgamble
Oct 7, 2007, 06:27 AM
Don't be so naive. Anything can be cracked, if there is the will.

In terms of your claim that I am naive... I think my comments show that I have experience with things that haven't been cracked.

The 2nd gen nano cannot have iPod Linux and the 6th gen iPods can't have linux either. People have been trying really hard with the 2nd gen nano. Maybe one day it will be cracked... but I'm ruling out a cat and mouse game where Apple is so shocked by the talent of the hackers that it is scrambling to produce patches every month.

Apple's ahead of the hackers, and I think it will be a while until newer iPhones (that came with 1.1.1 installed) and iPod touches will see 3rd party apps.

I'm not against the cause, I really want 3rd party apps on my iPod Touch! But look at the 2nd gen nano... why hasn't anyone been able to hack the encrypted firmware? We all know it's possible, but it's not a game of cat and mouse between Apple and the hackers, it's a game of Apple being a big fat cat sitting on top of the mouse while it sits there unsuccessfully trying to get out from under it. One day it might bring up the strength to get out, but it won't be all that quick.

Getting access to the flash RAM using a loophole with previous versions of the firmware is hardly "as good as done"... there are many other cravats and even if it did work instantly it still isn't a solution for iPod Touch owners.

I think the quick hacking of the iPhone exposed a lot of naive people (like yourself) to the hacking world who are quick to make the assumption that hacking the iPhone is easy and when there's a will there's always a quick and easy way. People are starting to think that Apple is clumsy and will be releasing useless updates every few weeks because the hackers are far ahead of them due to the quick initial hacking. This is simply not the case, at first Apple left the iPhone exposed, now its put in a measure that people are yet to crack and it will probably be quite some time until someone finds a simple way around it.

If the encryption of the 2nd gen iPod nano is any indicator then it could be a long time, by which stage people will have moved onto other devices or given up.

Anyway just an opinion... please prove me wrong hackers and keep up the good work ;) this message is more to general consumers as a reminder that hacks don't just happen and limited success should not be treated as full success. Be patient guys ;)

Stella
Oct 7, 2007, 07:24 AM
iPhone v1.1.1 exploits starting to surface:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/07/iphone-v1-1-1-exploits-starting-to-surface/

--

Maybe the 2 second gen nano isn't interesting enough compared to the iPhohne and Touch! :p

In terms of your claim that I am naive... I think my comments show that I have experience with things that haven't been cracked.

The 2nd gen nano cannot have iPod Linux and the 6th gen iPods can't have linux either. People have been trying really hard with the 2nd gen nano. Maybe one day it will be cracked... but I'm ruling out a cat and mouse game where Apple is so shocked by the talent of the hackers that it is scrambling to produce patches every month.

Apple's ahead of the hackers, and I think it will be a while until newer iPhones (that came with 1.1.1 installed) and iPod touches will see 3rd party apps.

I'm not against the cause, I really want 3rd party apps on my iPod Touch! But look at the 2nd gen nano... why hasn't anyone been able to hack the encrypted firmware? We all know it's possible, but it's not a game of cat and mouse between Apple and the hackers, it's a game of Apple being a big fat cat sitting on top of the mouse while it sits there unsuccessfully trying to get out from under it. One day it might bring up the strength to get out, but it won't be all that quick.

Getting access to the flash RAM using a loophole with previous versions of the firmware is hardly "as good as done"... there are many other cravats and even if it did work instantly it still isn't a solution for iPod Touch owners.

I think the quick hacking of the iPhone exposed a lot of naive people (like yourself) to the hacking world who are quick to make the assumption that hacking the iPhone is easy and when there's a will there's always a quick and easy way. People are starting to think that Apple is clumsy and will be releasing useless updates every few weeks because the hackers are far ahead of them due to the quick initial hacking. This is simply not the case, at first Apple left the iPhone exposed, now its put in a measure that people are yet to crack and it will probably be quite some time until someone finds a simple way around it.

If the encryption of the 2nd gen iPod nano is any indicator then it could be a long time, by which stage people will have moved onto other devices or given up.

Anyway just an opinion... please prove me wrong hackers and keep up the good work ;) this message is more to general consumers as a reminder that hacks don't just happen and limited success should not be treated as full success. Be patient guys ;)

123
Oct 7, 2007, 08:48 AM
The 2nd gen nano cannot have iPod Linux and the 6th gen iPods can't have linux either.

1) These are toy devices compared to an iPhone. All it takes is a single Safari exploit, Mail exploit, Quicktime exploit, syncing exploit... relatively easy to find.

2) As long as Apple has to provide an upgrade path from a cracked version to a non-cracked version of their software, the final software image will always more or less be known. This helps to crack phones with the newest software already on them. The assembly is available, the file structure is known, and cracked phones are available for testing stuff. Combine this knowledge with 1) and you have a crack for the newest version.

JPyre
Oct 7, 2007, 11:53 AM
I personally feel mislead by the above picture's and the below picture's subtext. artistrobrat you have no argument. Yes we all saw the videos and the majority of us didn't think "is that it?...." We, the majority, felt the videos didn't even touch the tip of the iceberg. We were wrong. iPhone has been compared to smartphones by Apple itself in multiple situaltions, I, and many others, assumed since they were comparing them to smartphones, that they'd meet or exceed smartphones. Many of us are dissaponited to find out that only the GUI and the Safari and the iPod functions are the only things that exceed other smartphones, nothing else. With the phone, camera, and 3rd party support not exceeding or meeting other smartphones by any streatch of the imagination. Not to mention no moble flash, no im, and no voice recorder, which smartphones have had for years.

http://home.comcast.net/~jpyre/keynote.jpg

cal6n
Oct 7, 2007, 12:00 PM
@JPyre

Sorry, but could you post a bigger version of that image at a lower resolution as I can almost make sense of it...

JPyre
Oct 7, 2007, 12:27 PM
@JPyre

Sorry, but could you post a bigger version of that image at a lower resolution as I can almost make sense of it...

I appreciate the sarchasim but um, it was a high res image of a low res video ;)

Fixed. Still cant make it out though, the chart is a "not easy"-"easy to use" / "smart"-"dumb" chart.

My beef is with the smart dumb part, nobody is arguing that iphone isnt easy to use.... its just dumb comapred to other smart phones...

donlphi
Oct 7, 2007, 04:33 PM
I personally feel mislead by the above picture's and the below picture's subtext. artistrobrat you have no argument. Yes we all saw the videos and the majority of us didn't think "is that it?...." We, the majority, felt the videos didn't even touch the tip of the iceberg. We were wrong. iPhone has been compared to smartphones by Apple itself in multiple situaltions, I, and many others, assumed since they were comparing them to smartphones, that they'd meet or exceed smartphones. Many of us are dissaponited to find out that only the GUI and the Safari and the iPod functions are the only things that exceed other smartphones, nothing else. With the phone, camera, and 3rd party support not exceeding or meeting other smartphones by any streatch of the imagination. Not to mention no moble flash, no im, and no voice recorder, which smartphones have had for years.

http://home.comcast.net/~jpyre/keynote.jpg

iPhone has been compared to a smart phone, but has never been classified as or called an iSmartphone... it's better than a smart phone.

The phone is still young. Be patient or figure out how to hack the phone.

matticus008
Oct 7, 2007, 04:42 PM
So once again, why did Apple compare iPhone against smartphones?
[...]
PS. The only thing the iPhone is ahead of is the UI, and nothing else. It does not show other functionality beyond any other phone on the market.
You've answered your own question.

However if you're trying to make the argument that people should have assumed that apple would never add any feature besides the ones it launched with.... your wrong.
No, he's not. It's called being a sensible and practical consumer. If you have no evidence whatsoever as to future features, you can't reasonably apply your personal expectations to a device. You must purchase it with the assumption that it will never do anything worthwhile that it doesn't right out of the box.

You have no way of knowing what or how much will be added in the future or whether it will be the least bit interesting, useful, or innovative. They very well could have been referring solely to the WiFi Music Store. Maybe there's no more to come after that at all--there's nothing dispositive to the contrary. Obviously, that's unlikely, but if you bought it assuming they would add things you think are essential, you're rather foolish.
Thats what you are getting from people, disillusionment.
Only because you created runaway expectations from a device, got in a large group of other over-excited Internet people, and created an iPhone in your collective heads that doesn't reflect reality. You blame all the hype, but you're forgetting that it's people like you who drove the hype in the first place.

Further, Steve Jobs himself stated that the iPhone has:

- "Runs OS X"
- "Multi-tasking"
- "Desk-top class applications"

and on and on. Those were his exact words. Based on that early press release, how is it erroneous to assume that the iPhone was not marketed to "do more"?
Because you can't get from the specified features to "open platform" without a number of serious leaps of logic and major assumptions.

AppleTV runs OS X; it is not an open platform. The new iPods run OS X. They're not an open platform. Multitasking doesn't get you anywhere--it just specifies that you can switch seamless between applications on the phone. You can play music while checking the weather or texting. "Desktop class applications" simply refers to the quality of what's installed--YouTube and Safari are quite comprehensive, and Google Maps is full-featured. I won't lump Mail in this category because it sucks. It doesn't say "desktop application support" or anything at all about development.
So, um, why take away the ability for developers to make programs for the iPhone as they can for Mac OS X? No one has explained that to me yet, and made sense.
No, you just refuse to listen because you hear what you want to hear. You can't take away a feature that never existed. There are any number of practical considerations to consider for why the platform is closed. The software is clearly unfinished, and you don't write APIs for a moving target. The software is also heavily based on some Leopard technologies, and Leopard was far from finished throughout the entire development process. You can go from there to stability issues and memory management (the device can't handle large numbers of open applications, and many of the ones written caused a general slowdown and unresponsiveness). Then there are business concerns--an unlimited data plan coupled with VOIP would degrade service quality of the data network, and would simultaneously lower demand for voice services.

It's obvious that third-party software will be coming officially to the iPhone at some point, but it was always foolhardy to believe that would be before the release of Leopard. Did you ever stop to consider the "future updates" might not be immediate?

I personally feel mislead by the above picture's and the below picture's subtext.
I don't see how. The iPhone is easy to use. It also has a great deal more sophistication in "smart" applications. If it said something about "number of applications" or development in any way, shape, or form, you might have a position that makes more sense.

You're linking "smart" with "open"--a clear fallacy. The "smartness" of the phone refers to the level of its functions; Google Maps is a clear example of this. It automatically locates points of interest and provides immediate access to directions and to call from the screen. Smart applications and ease of use are highly correlated, since often similar functions on Windows Mobile are quite complex.

megfilmworks
Oct 7, 2007, 04:59 PM
Another sensible post by Matticus!

CJD2112
Oct 7, 2007, 05:18 PM
Another sensible post by Matticus!

Never mind. On second thought, no matter what I write it will be twisted, misinterpreted and slammed. This debate will be between the individuals who love Apple and expect more from them and those who drank too much kool-aid and will defend Apple at every turn, even if it means expecting less and getting just that, less. Besides, it just seems to fan the flames.

sblasl
Oct 7, 2007, 06:32 PM
Hey Mods,

Can this be made a "Sticky"? It should be mandatory reading before any post is made.

You've answered your own question.

No, he's not. It's called being a sensible and practical consumer. If you have no evidence whatsoever as to future features, you can't reasonably apply your personal expectations to a device. You must purchase it with the assumption that it will never do anything worthwhile that it doesn't right out of the box.

You have no way of knowing what or how much will be added in the future or whether it will be the least bit interesting, useful, or innovative. They very well could have been referring solely to the WiFi Music Store. Maybe there's no more to come after that at all--there's nothing dispositive to the contrary. Obviously, that's unlikely, but if you bought it assuming they would add things you think are essential, you're rather foolish.

Only because you created runaway expectations from a device, got in a large group of other over-excited Internet people, and created an iPhone in your collective heads that doesn't reflect reality. You blame all the hype, but you're forgetting that it's people like you who drove the hype in the first place.


Because you can't get from the specified features to "open platform" without a number of serious leaps of logic and major assumptions.

AppleTV runs OS X; it is not an open platform. The new iPods run OS X. They're not an open platform. Multitasking doesn't get you anywhere--it just specifies that you can switch seamless between applications on the phone. You can play music while checking the weather or texting. "Desktop class applications" simply refers to the quality of what's installed--YouTube and Safari are quite comprehensive, and Google Maps is full-featured. I won't lump Mail in this category because it sucks. It doesn't say "desktop application support" or anything at all about development.

No, you just refuse to listen because you hear what you want to hear. You can't take away a feature that never existed. There are any number of practical considerations to consider for why the platform is closed. The software is clearly unfinished, and you don't write APIs for a moving target. The software is also heavily based on some Leopard technologies, and Leopard was far from finished throughout the entire development process. You can go from there to stability issues and memory management (the device can't handle large numbers of open applications, and many of the ones written caused a general slowdown and unresponsiveness). Then there are business concerns--an unlimited data plan coupled with VOIP would degrade service quality of the data network, and would simultaneously lower demand for voice services.

It's obvious that third-party software will be coming officially to the iPhone at some point, but it was always foolhardy to believe that would be before the release of Leopard. Did you ever stop to consider the "future updates" might not be immediate?


I don't see how. The iPhone is easy to use. It also has a great deal more sophistication in "smart" applications. If it said something about "number of applications" or development in any way, shape, or form, you might have a position that makes more sense.

You're linking "smart" with "open"--a clear fallacy. The "smartness" of the phone refers to the level of its functions; Google Maps is a clear example of this. It automatically locates points of interest and provides immediate access to directions and to call from the screen. Smart applications and ease of use are highly correlated, since often similar functions on Windows Mobile are quite complex.

DeathChill
Oct 7, 2007, 08:23 PM
Never mind. On second thought, no matter what I write it will be twisted, misinterpreted and slammed. This debate will be between the individuals who love Apple and expect more from them and those who drank too much kool-aid and will defend Apple at every turn, even if it means expecting less and getting just that, less. Besides, it just seems to fan the flames.

I cannot agree more. I am still in shock about how many people find the lack of video recording and MMS acceptable in this day and age. Even worse is that they defend it and then post ridiculous work around's and think that it is acceptable.

Lord knows we'd mock Microsoft endlessly if they pulled the same stunt.

123
Oct 7, 2007, 08:28 PM
You have no way of knowing what or how much will be added in the future or whether it will be the least bit interesting, useful, or innovative.
You are right, but only because Jobs is a notorious liar. It was foolish to expect the iPhone to be "smart" just because he said so.

AppleTV runs OS X; it is not an open platform. The new iPods run OS X. They're not an open platform.
If it's not an open platform, then OS X is not a feature either. Why would anyone care? For all I know it could run Commodore64 Basic, as long as the phone works as shown in the videos... The problem is they advertised the completeness of the phone's OS X underpinnings, and especially that it comes with OS X's frameworks built right in. People can expect some kind of benefit from that, i.e. easy+powerful 3rd party app development. Otherwise those wouldn't be features.

YouTube and Safari are quite comprehensive,
No they're not. YouTube is minimalistic. OK, who cares... if at least all the movies were there. But they're not. And as far as Safari is concerned: YouTube.app wouldn't even be necessary if Safari were a "Desktop class application". But it isn't.

The software is also heavily based on some Leopard technologies, and Leopard was far from finished throughout the entire development process.
Yeah right, because it is so heavily based on "Leopard technologies", all these iPhone developers can easily compile their apps on Linux and Tiger using the 10.4 sdk... Besides, "Leopard technologies" are well known. Or how do you think are we preparing our software for 10.5?


You can go from there to stability issues and memory management (the device can't handle large numbers of open applications, and many of the ones written caused a general slowdown and unresponsiveness)
Many? Which ones? Besides, you can always only allow single task apps (like the vast majority of current 3rd party apps).


You're linking "smart" with "open"--a clear fallacy. The "smartness" of the phone refers to the level of its functions; Google Maps [...] automatically locates [...]
No it doesn't. The term "smart" in relation to phones is a well established one. It's not up to Mr. Jobs to reinvent it, or to you, for that matter.

Smart applications and ease of use are highly correlated
Blasphemy! Go have a look at that chart Jobs presented. His point is clearly that this is not the case and that the iPhone is in fact the first phone that (supposedly) manages to do both!

sparkpoint11
Oct 7, 2007, 08:44 PM
Originally Posted by sblasl
Apple nor Steve Jobs ever marketed, called, or alluded to the iPhone as a SmartPhone. When Jobs made the announcement introducing the iPhone he questioned why SmartPhones were called "Smart" Phones.
Anyone who thinks that the iPhone is a SmartPhone or a PDA is wishful thinking on their part.



Originally Posted by aristobrat
With the iPhone pretty much "fully demonstrated" for you before it went out sale, how exactly did you "expect more"?




No, he's not. It's called being a sensible and practical consumer. If you have no evidence whatsoever as to future features, you can't reasonably apply your personal expectations to a device. You must purchase it with the assumption that it will never do anything worthwhile that it doesn't right out of the box. You have no way of knowing what or how much will be added in the future or whether it will be the least bit interesting, useful, or innovative. They very well could have been referring solely to the WiFi Music Store. Maybe there's no more to come after that at all--there's nothing dispositive to the contrary. Obviously, that's unlikely, but if you bought it assuming they would add things you think are essential, you're rather foolish.

Only because you created runaway expectations from a device, got in a large group of other over-excited Internet people, and created an iPhone in your collective heads that doesn't reflect reality. You blame all the hype, but you're forgetting that it's people like you who drove the hype in the first place.




Originally Posted by megfilmworks
Another sensible post by Matticus!



Originally Posted by sblasl
Can this [above post by Mattisuc008] be made a "Sticky"? It should be mandatory reading before any post is made.



Woah.. watch out there fellow Mac friends, the Kool-Aid Clan© is circling the wagons around their leader 'Matticus'!
Asking an admin to make an opinion post a Sticky?

I would like to point out some moments/quotes from the initial iPhone keynote presentation. this "timeline" of events
ar the presentation is NOT my response, so please do not respond to it directly without reading my comments below...

[Keynote starts]
[shows original mac, ipod as game-changing product innovations...]

SJ "we have a new one today"
SJ "revolutionary mobile phone"
SJ "breakthrough internet communications device"
SJ "reinventing the phone"

[shows pictures of 4 smartphones: Q, Blackberry, Treo 650, E62]
SJ "this thing is Super Smart... ...way smarter than ANY mobile device has ever been"

[shows picture of 4 smartphone's "fixed" keyboards and buttons]
SJ describes problems with fixed keyboards..

[shows picture of smartphone's stylus]
SJ "no one wants a stylus"

[The Motorola Q on the screen actually morphs into the iphone, contrasting the lack of keyboard and fixed button]
[shows soft keyboard on iphone...]
SJ "faster to type on than the little plastic keyboards on the other phones"

[shows iPhone side angle]
"thinner than ANY smartphone out there.. thinner than the Q .. thinner than the blackjack"

[shows more iphone pics]
SJ "iPhone is 5 years ahead ...of any phone on the market"

SJ "Runs OS X"
SJ "Multi-tasking"
SJ "OSX means not crippled phone applications... Desktop class applications"

[SJ Shows off iPhone apps like mail, calendar, youtube, Google maps, Safari web browser, stock and weather widgets...]
SJ touts benefits of touch interface and not fixed button as a means to allow new features/applications to be added to the Iphone in the future.
SJ touts ability to add features and applications through Itunes interface....

Nearly everything Steve Jobs said and displayed during the iPhone keynote IMPLIED that the iPhone was supposed to be "Way Smarter" and more advanced than ANY existing smartphone on the market. Actually, "Five years ahead of everything else on the market", specifically showing competitors SMARTPHONES over and over again throughout the presentation. He continually alluded to the fact the iPhone was running OSX "the best software platform ever" and that the dynamic software interface and easy iTunes update would allow more applications to be produced in the future for the device. In fact, SJ and Apple made it clear that they viewed this very capability as a major part of the "revolutionary" aspect of the device --- allowing the phone's interface to continually adapt to new software ideas.

I am not going to argue the merits of whether SJ had to actually say in precise words "The iPhone is a smartphone". On that same note, I'm not going to argue about whether SJ saying "Iphone runs the best software platform ever" or "is smarter than anything on the market"

The fact is he created that perception in a large percentage of people who first saw the iphone at the keynote. That feeling of being mislead about the "smartphone capabilities" (AKA third-party apps) coupled with the glaring lack of a few fundamental features in the iPhone is what is leading to all of the backlash going on.

People were marketed to and sold on a "revolutionary mobile phone and breakthrough internet communications device that is 5 years ahead of anything on the market". When you make claims like that, and yet the device doesn't have a to-do list, MMS, Instant Messenging, customizable interface, RSS reader, voice dialing, voice memos, simple games, video recording, outlook synching, enterprise wifi support, exchange/enterprise email support, bluetooth A2DP, etc, can you really blame people for being disappointed that apple blocks 3rd party applications when they left so much out?

On the other point, Apple demonstrating most or all of the launch features of the iPhone on their website did not lead anyone to believe that those videos represented the only features they would ever see on the iPhone.
Apple itself, obviously, never even had this intention in mind, as they have continually indicated that new features (without an instruction video at launch) were going to be added to the iPhone in regular intervals through the iTunes update service. Itunes Wi-fi store is one of them.

matticus008
Oct 7, 2007, 09:44 PM
On second thought, no matter what I write it will be twisted, misinterpreted and slammed.
An excellent propaganda piece, but there has been no twisting or misinterpretation. The iPhone didn't unfold as you hoped. We get it. Your hopes are not Apple's responsibility. The need to assign blame for your own self-caused disappointment is irrational.
This debate will be between the individuals who love Apple and expect more from them and those who drank too much kool-aid and will defend Apple at every turn, even if it means expecting less and getting just that, less.
False dichotomy. It's interesting that you put "drinking too much kool-aid" (a fairly tired and ridiculous metaphor) automatically on the opposite side of your own opinions, when the objective person would conclude that people "who love Apple and expect more" are the ones with perception issues.

It's also amusing to me that someone opposed to your own irrational expectations of a product automatically gets lumped into "defending Apple at every turn." Isn't it obvious that this whole disagreement has nothing to do with Apple at all? It has to do with baseless expectations and a fantasized notion of what "should be" or how a company is "breaking the law" by pulling the strings to your heart. It's a search for blame and an attempted defense for a sense of entitlement and outrage that people simply can't resist buying an Apple product that clearly did not meet their needs or desires.

The simple fact is that there are other products and other companies out there. I for one am tired of being called an apologist for pointing out that consumers should buy the product that meets their needs, and sometimes that means not buying from Apple.

If it's not an open platform, then OS X is not a feature either. Why would anyone care?
Welcome to the world of marketing. People care because it's an extension of a brand and an indication that tighter interoperability with desktop systems is a fundamental. It has more to do with an Apple "ecosystem" than anything else. You know this is the case because of the other closed systems introduced. Every peripheral product to the Mac ever released has been a closed component. Even when further third party development comes to the iPhone, it won't be a free-for-all.
People can expect some kind of benefit from that, i.e. easy+powerful 3rd party app development.
Where's the missing step? How do you get to "open platform" from stripped down OS X functions?
That feeling of being mislead about the "smartphone capabilities" (AKA third-party apps)
Third party applications are not central to what constitutes a "smart" phone. You've either misled yourself or been misled by someone else about the definition of "smart phone." The industry analysis cited in a recent case was this: "A large-screen, data-centric, handheld device designed to offer complete phone functions whilst simultaneously functioning as a personal digital assistant (PDA)." This definition is credited to one of the large firms. Wikipedia doesn't even mention an "open platform" anywhere in the defining characteristics. Even a simple look at the name reveals that it's advanced function, not openness. Regular phones often allow third-party applications as well--development openness is at best a tangential issue.
Yeah right, because it is so heavily based on "Leopard technologies", all these iPhone developers can easily compile their apps on Linux and Tiger using the 10.4 sdk
Again, you're just missing the boat. You don't release an API with unfinished controls and unknown future performance. You can write an application on anything you like and get it working, but that's not the level of functionality expected for professional development. Turn it around and you'd just be complaining about how the iPhone screwed over developers by completing changing all system calls and releasing an incompatible set of frameworks, making everyone start from scratch.
... Besides, "Leopard technologies" are well known. Or how do you think are we preparing our software for 10.5?
They're well known now, more than a year after the groundwork for the iPhone would have been laid. Would you write production software based on the WWDC 2006 preview of Leopard?
No it doesn't. The term "smart" in relation to phones is a well established one. It's not up to Mr. Jobs to reinvent it, or to you, for that matter.
The only people reinventing anything are the ones that think "smart" has anything to do with "open." Smartphones are available with a WinCE SDK which allows for easy development. Take the SDK away, and they're still "smart" phones. It has never referred to openness to third party development. Correlation does not imply causation. It's a shame people aren't better versed in logic.

Stella
Oct 7, 2007, 10:29 PM
Apart from the UI being a few years ahead ( I wouldn't say 5 years ).. in what way is the iPhone 5 years ahead of the competition?

SJ claimed ( I'm taking the quote from above)
"SJ "Runs OS X"
SJ "Multi-tasking"
SJ "OSX means not crippled phone applications... Desktop class applications""

Reality:
* iPhone is not the first multi-tasking phone OS.
* So what if it runs OSX - running OSX does not automatically mean its 'better'.
* Not Crippled Apps - so why can't you "Delete All" in email app? For example.
* Why doesn't Safari support flash?
* Why doesn't it support video recording?
* Why no VOIP?
* The list goes on and on....


Hardly '5 years ahead of the competition'.

Anyone who believes this requires their head examined and a reality check.

CJD2112
Oct 7, 2007, 10:42 PM
Apart from the UI being a few years ahead ( I wouldn't say 5 years ).. in what way is the iPhone 5 years ahead of the competition?

SJ claimed ( I'm taking the quote from above)
"SJ "Runs OS X"
SJ "Multi-tasking"
SJ "OSX means not crippled phone applications... Desktop class applications""

Reality:
* iPhone is not the first multi-tasking phone OS.
* So what if it runs OSX - running OSX does not automatically mean its 'better'.
* Not Crippled Apps - so why can't you "Delete All" in email app? For example.
* Why doesn't Safari support flash?
* Why doesn't it support video recording?
* Why no VOIP?
* The list goes on and on....


Hardly '5 years ahead of the competition'.

Anyone who believes this requires their head examined and a reality check.

- No GPS (something the Motorola RAZR has, but not the ex-$599 iPhone)
- No MMS
- No Voice Dialing
- OS X that has been actively crippled to disallow third party apps (something Jobs touted before the iPhone release as "revolutionary" theennnn, changed his mind)
- No IM
- No manual iTunes syncing
and on and on

but wait, because Jobs has been vague about the device, we shouldn't be so quick to judge. Oh, and it has the cool multi-touch thing, that makes it all better.

The fact is he created that perception in a large percentage of people who first saw the iphone at the keynote. That feeling of being mislead about the "smartphone capabilities" (AKA third-party apps) coupled with the glaring lack of a few fundamental features in the iPhone is what is leading to all of the backlash going on.

Careful, they'll stone you for that heresy. From their point of view, if it wasn't CLEARLY stated in blood and your first born wasn't sacrificed then our expectations are "ridiculous" as we shouldn't expect a device like the iPhone to run third party applications like Palm devices or other "similar" devices (I'll be exiled for using "smartphone").

I have an iPhone, I like it, I want to love it, but Apple's approach in actively holding back its potential is perplexing. It has been stated time and time again by Jobs in early press releases that "OSX [on the iPhone] means not crippled phone applications... Desktop class applications". So we're "disillusioned" to believe that the iPhone can run third party applications or that we were wrong to expect it? Pure crap. Further, calling those who expect more from a company they believe it "children" and names isn't helping, but weakening certain arguments. Having a tone of superiority simply results in emotional discourse instead of logical debate, and the facts clearly state that Apple has created a device they are holding back from acting in its full capacity. Whether we had imaginary expectations is irrelevant, developers have already proven what Steve Jobs has stated, the iPhone can "do more". So why cripple it and/or brick it? Forget our expectations, those people are still stuck on the "b" aspect of our equation. We're already on "c", why are they doing it?

...but pssst, don't tell Matticus this. ;)

dustywaffles
Oct 8, 2007, 05:03 AM
You've answered your own question.

No, he's not. It's called being a sensible and practical consumer. If you have no evidence whatsoever as to future features, you can't reasonably apply your personal expectations to a device. You must purchase it with the assumption that it will never do anything worthwhile that it doesn't right out of the box.

You have no way of knowing what or how much will be added in the future or whether it will be the least bit interesting, useful, or innovative. They very well could have been referring solely to the WiFi Music Store. Maybe there's no more to come after that at all--there's nothing dispositive to the contrary. Obviously, that's unlikely, but if you bought it assuming they would add things you think are essential, you're rather foolish.

Only because you created runaway expectations from a device, got in a large group of other over-excited Internet people, and created an iPhone in your collective heads that doesn't reflect reality. You blame all the hype, but you're forgetting that it's people like you who drove the hype in the first place.


Because you can't get from the specified features to "open platform" without a number of serious leaps of logic and major assumptions.

AppleTV runs OS X; it is not an open platform. The new iPods run OS X. They're not an open platform. Multitasking doesn't get you anywhere--it just specifies that you can switch seamless between applications on the phone. You can play music while checking the weather or texting. "Desktop class applications" simply refers to the quality of what's installed--YouTube and Safari are quite comprehensive, and Google Maps is full-featured. I won't lump Mail in this category because it sucks. It doesn't say "desktop application support" or anything at all about development.

No, you just refuse to listen because you hear what you want to hear. You can't take away a feature that never existed. There are any number of practical considerations to consider for why the platform is closed. The software is clearly unfinished, and you don't write APIs for a moving target. The software is also heavily based on some Leopard technologies, and Leopard was far from finished throughout the entire development process. You can go from there to stability issues and memory management (the device can't handle large numbers of open applications, and many of the ones written caused a general slowdown and unresponsiveness). Then there are business concerns--an unlimited data plan coupled with VOIP would degrade service quality of the data network, and would simultaneously lower demand for voice services.

It's obvious that third-party software will be coming officially to the iPhone at some point, but it was always foolhardy to believe that would be before the release of Leopard. Did you ever stop to consider the "future updates" might not be immediate?


I don't see how. The iPhone is easy to use. It also has a great deal more sophistication in "smart" applications. If it said something about "number of applications" or development in any way, shape, or form, you might have a position that makes more sense.

You're linking "smart" with "open"--a clear fallacy. The "smartness" of the phone refers to the level of its functions; Google Maps is a clear example of this. It automatically locates points of interest and provides immediate access to directions and to call from the screen. Smart applications and ease of use are highly correlated, since often similar functions on Windows Mobile are quite complex.



From all the things that apple said, that people keep quoting I really don't think being able to have something besides a black home screen qualifies as run away expectations.

I said before that just because some people had unrealistic expectations you shouldn't lump everyone who's dissatisfied into that category.

not everyone who is disappointed had runaway expectations. Its not unreasonable to think that some of the things that I couldn't do on my iphone that I could do on every crap phone I owned in the last 5 years might be added in one of the early patches since they said it was going the be the most advanced phone in the world.

If I was in here four months ago complaining about how the advertised features don't impress me, a lot of you who are defending Apple now would tell me that the platform was new and about all the potential it has.

No apple didn't say anything we could hold them to in court, and this is what your argument seems to hinge on. But the question here is wether apple made it clear that if you expect to ever have any feature, functionality, or enhancement that iPhone doesn't have out of the box on launch day you have " ran away expectations."

No Apple didn't want anyone to think that.
They hinted that they would add things because they had every intention of doing it and now they actually have done it.

If you assumed they wouldn't you would have been dead wrong after ITMS.

If you assumed they would add features than you would have been absolutely correct so I hardly think think it was a run away expectation. It was a very reasonable/correct expectation.

Ignoring any suggestion a company makes thats not legally binding isn't being a reasonable consumer, it's being a jaded one.

Not to mention a lot of people just had faith in apple. Maybe that was foolish.

I expected their to be more features and I was right. I'm just upset that the missing features that are standard in almost every phone weren't added first.

If you want to continue this debate please understand how my stance differs from others. There some holes in the iphones functionality that I am irked haven't been patched in. Simple things that all almost all phones have. Based on the fact that Apple has added features it was not unreasonable to think that they would add features when I bought the phone. Apple adding ITMS or double tapping the home button didn't really shock anybody. Also do to the basic nature and commonality of the functions iPhone lacked it was not unreasonable to think they would be added soon, maybe even first.

ajl917
Oct 8, 2007, 08:52 AM
Wooh I cant wait until they finally crack 1.1.1!! There are things that would be nice with 1.1.1 that I am holding out on for my 3rd party apps.

aristobrat
Oct 8, 2007, 09:44 AM
There some holes in the iphones functionality that I am irked haven't been patched in.
Again, I have no qualms with anyone that is [irked, disappointed, disillusioned, expecting more] with the iPhone.

I simply don't agree with trying to use "but [Steve Jobs, Apple] said xxxx about the iPhone back in yyyy" as a point of justification.

I specifically don't agree with that because I feel that the detailed iPhone functionality videos that Apple released before launch addressed virtually everything about the iPhone that prior statements may have left ambiguous in some folks mind.

That's all I'm saying. :confused:

Please note that I'm not saying:

how anyone feels (or what they expect about) about the iPhone is wrong
people should not expect more from Apple
everything that Apple does is always correct

MarceePauff
Oct 8, 2007, 11:02 AM
How bout some news on the hacking of 1.1.1? How bout that?

Jayare
Oct 8, 2007, 11:24 AM
Just to let people know, the folks at TUAW have managed to jailbreak the iPhone.
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/10/08/announcing-a-preliminary-iphone-1-1-1-jailbreak/
See link above to view report.

DavoMrMac
Oct 8, 2007, 11:35 AM
The TUAW news is great. I have an unlocked iPhone and really want to test the Wifi Music Store, but I am having to patiently wait.

CJD2112
Oct 8, 2007, 11:45 AM
Just to let people know, the folks at TUAW have managed to jailbreak the iPhone.
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/10/08/announcing-a-preliminary-iphone-1-1-1-jailbreak/
See link above to view report.

Saw-weeeet! Nice one. Reading now (and thanks for the link). :D

UPDATE: (from link)

So what does this jailbreak mean?

- Third Party apps run. Kind of. We probably have to recompile many of them for the new frameworks because many of them crash.

- Springboard no longer recognizes DisplayOrder.plist. And the list of "whitelisted" apps (that is, the official Applications including Safari, Photos, Calendar, etc) seems to be hard-coded into Springboard.app

- The iPhone has been activated via third-party workarounds.

- The 1.1.1 binaries barely work with 1.0.2 -- at least not well enough to run the music store without major hacking.

- The Mobile Terminal App works on 1.1.1.

- The entire bsd suite still works -- as do standard command-line utilities compiled for ARM.

- 1.1.1 references both com.apple.mobile.radio and com.apple.mobile.nike.

The jailbreak method is nowhere near ready for prime time. So please be patient.

Wow, it seems Apple has gone through an awful lot of trouble in locking this sucker down. :(

Jayare
Oct 8, 2007, 11:47 AM
No problem, thought people might like the update.

EDIT* Gizmodo seems to have discovered the news as well.

matticus008
Oct 8, 2007, 05:15 PM
From all the things that apple said, that people keep quoting I really don't think being able to have something besides a black home screen qualifies as run away expectations.
That's not the issue. It's not the specific expectation that is important, it's the existence of specific expectations without evidence.

It is simply illogical and unreasonable to expect specific changes without evidence, no matter how simple or obvious they might seem to you or how common they might be on other products. What you're making is a reasonable guess, not a reasonable expectation.
I said before that just because some people had unrealistic expectations you shouldn't lump everyone who's dissatisfied into that category.
Any specific expectation is unreasonable. The only reasonable one is that something would be added some time in the future. You can't infer from that that it would be anything in particular, and you can't buy products based on your hopes and dreams. It only sets you up for disappointment when reality takes a different path. What if there's never MMS capability? If that's something you need, you intentionally and knowingly bought something inadequate.
If I was in here four months ago complaining about how the advertised features don't impress me, a lot of you who are defending Apple now would tell me that the platform was new and about all the potential it has.
Potential is the key. No one promised anything, and it is unreasonable to expect anything in particular. Sure it's likely that many things might be added, but you can't bank on it, and therefore you can't reasonably base your purchase decision around it.
Ignoring any suggestion a company makes thats not legally binding isn't being a reasonable consumer, it's being a jaded one.
That unfortunately just doesn't make sense. If a product at time of purchase is not worth the asking price at that time, you should not buy it. It's a fundamental element of a market economy. You're saying it wasn't good enough as is. Logically, you should not have purchased it. If you required something in particular, you should wait to purchase it until it meets that requirement.
If you want to continue this debate please understand how my stance differs from others.
I see how you are trying to distinguish yourself from people with "unreasonable expectations" because yours are "reasonable" in your opinion. You're still missing the basic point: any specific expectation as to a particular unannounced feature is inherently unreasonable.

alljunks
Oct 8, 2007, 06:00 PM
they should just keep the iphone unlock!!

guet
Oct 9, 2007, 04:21 AM
That's not the issue. It's not the specific expectation that is important, it's the existence of specific expectations without evidence. You're still missing the basic point: any specific expectation as to a particular unannounced feature is inherently unreasonable.

Sophistry. You're missing the point being made (implicitly) by many of the posters here. Their specific expectations all boil down to :

Apple will treat their customers with respect and try to cater to their wishes
Apple will not unreasonably block apps like iChat or VOIP to make more money
Apple will not deliberately attempt to lock out 3rd party apps

Based on evidence from the past :

On desktop OS X, Apple lets third party applications flourish, has a roadmap, and has an SDK. It's a level playing field between Apple and developers, and that benefits everyone - customers, Apple and developers.
Any apps can be run on desktop OS X (note Steve deliberately mentioned the underlying OS as a feature of the iPhone)
The Apple TV has been hacked, and Apple have left the hackers to do their thing

Apple has traditionally not tried to wring every last bit of money out of their customers, just most of it : ) I don't want to see them turn into Microsoft, and the best way to avoid that is to complain vociferously when they attempt a money grab. The iphone is a money grab in its present state, and yet could be a wonderful device if opened up, and that's why people are complaining. You may think the initial complaints are overblown, and based on unrealistic expectations, but this is not just about the iPhone; the iPhone is the future of OS X, and some of us don't like what we see.

If Apple continues down this road (full lock-down), I'll be looking at alternatives.

kyrow123
Oct 9, 2007, 09:37 AM
That's not the issue. It's not the specific expectation that is important, it's the existence of specific expectations without evidence.

It is simply illogical and unreasonable to expect specific changes without evidence, no matter how simple or obvious they might seem to you or how common they might be on other products. What you're making is a reasonable guess, not a reasonable expectation.

Lets just play a little game, shall we.

Lets say that we viewed the iPhone videos and the features portrayed were not in the actual production iPhone on launch day, would that be unreasonable specific expectations in your opinion, even though there is evidence to prove it? Then you would respond by saying that because the phone had not been released at the time of those videos, that it was unreasonable for us to expect something from a device that has yet to be released. Sure, the evidence shows that a specific feature should be in the phone, but you would reply that the actual released product can vary, as we should all understand, due in part to other similar products that get released and have missing features that were to be in said item.

There is no need for actual evidence of every specific feature that these people would like to see in their phone. What they are claiming is that, for example, something as simple as being able to change the background of the home screen, is a minuscule feature that could be a welcomed addition at some point in time. I don't see that as an illogical and unreasonable expectation (since many phones have the ability to do just that). We base our assumptions, YES ASSUMPTIONS, on actual evidence we have gathered over the years from using other similar devices. Whether Apple decides to roll-out one of these grand new features to its user base, remains to be seen. You have no warrant to call people's expectations illogical, since there is a base for those expectations. Although I do have to agree that to expect all these things today is a bit unwarranted, since we know that it can all be updated in due time.

CJD2112
Oct 9, 2007, 10:54 AM
Sophistry. You're missing the point being made (implicitly) by many of the posters here. Their specific expectations all boil down to :

Apple will treat their customers with respect and try to cater to their wishes
Apple will not unreasonably block apps like iChat or VOIP to make more money
Apple will not deliberately attempt to lock out 3rd party apps

Based on evidence from the past :

On desktop OS X, Apple lets third party applications flourish, has a roadmap, and has an SDK. It's a level playing field between Apple and developers, and that benefits everyone - customers, Apple and developers.
Any apps can be run on desktop OS X (note Steve deliberately mentioned the underlying OS as a feature of the iPhone)
The Apple TV has been hacked, and Apple have left the hackers to do their thing

Apple has traditionally not tried to wring every last bit of money out of their customers, just most of it : ) I don't want to see them turn into Microsoft, and the best way to avoid that is to complain vociferously when they attempt a money grab. The iphone is a money grab in its present state, and yet could be a wonderful device if opened up, and that's why people are complaining. You may think the initial complaints are overblown, and based on unrealistic expectations, but this is not just about the iPhone; the iPhone is the future of OS X, and some of us don't like what we see.

If Apple continues down this road (full lock-down), I'll be looking at alternatives.

Exactly. Very well said :).

dustywaffles
Oct 9, 2007, 12:50 PM
That's not the issue. It's not the specific expectation that is important, it's the existence of specific expectations without evidence.

It is simply illogical and unreasonable to expect specific changes without evidence, no matter how simple or obvious they might seem to you or how common they might be on other products. What you're making is a reasonable guess, not a reasonable expectation.

Any specific expectation is unreasonable. The only reasonable one is that something would be added some time in the future. You can't infer from that that it would be anything in particular, and you can't buy products based on your hopes and dreams. It only sets you up for disappointment when reality takes a different path. What if there's never MMS capability? If that's something you need, you intentionally and knowingly bought something inadequate.

Potential is the key. No one promised anything, and it is unreasonable to expect anything in particular. Sure it's likely that many things might be added, but you can't bank on it, and therefore you can't reasonably base your purchase decision around it.

That unfortunately just doesn't make sense. If a product at time of purchase is not worth the asking price at that time, you should not buy it. It's a fundamental element of a market economy. You're saying it wasn't good enough as is. Logically, you should not have purchased it. If you required something in particular, you should wait to purchase it until it meets that requirement.

I see how you are trying to distinguish yourself from people with "unreasonable expectations" because yours are "reasonable" in your opinion. You're still missing the basic point: any specific expectation as to a particular unannounced feature is inherently unreasonable.

It's not just that I think I have reasonable expectations. I also don't think apple technically did anything wrong. I know nothing was promised. It's a free country and I got what they said I would I get they don't owe me anything.

However you don’t have to be technically wrong to treat your customers like crap.

What if a dinner made me a burger but before hand they told me exactly what was in it, and even showed videos of it, but when they brought it to the table they wouldn’t give me catsup for it. Then the table next to me gave some catsup when waiter left, but then the waiter wouldn’t refill my drink unless I gave up the catsup so he could lock it up. What if this happened in America where you can always get catsup with your burger and this was a reputable restaurant?

Well if catsup wasn’t on the ingredient list than technically they didn’t do anything wrong, and they certainly don't owe me the catsup. but I still got treated like crap. Catsup isn’t always on the ingredient list but I expect it to be an option. It is a specific expectation based on no evidence from the menu that is totally reasonable because its a burger and you can always get catsup for your burger.

For me to expect a feature that every phone has on the most advanced phone in the world is not unreasonable because it was unreasonable not to add it.

I will even show you the reasoning.

The iPhone is a phone.
All phones let you choose a background.
Apple said the iPhone is better than all phones.
All phones let you choose a background.

matticus008
Oct 9, 2007, 01:51 PM
You're missing the point being made (implicitly) by many of the posters here. Their specific expectations all boil down to :
I'd agree with CJD2112 that it's very well said, but both of you flew right past the point: you're talking about 3rd party development, whereas you're replying to a discussion about what features Apple will add in the future and whether it is reasonable to expect and demand specific features to be added in software updates. So you're not really answering the question, amusingly enough an actual sophism.

The Apple TV has been hacked, and Apple have left the hackers to do their thing
The AppleTV hack isn't based on a security vulnerability. If the iPhone hackers could do their job without buffer overflows, you'd have a point.

Lets say that we viewed the iPhone videos and the features portrayed were not in the actual production iPhone on launch day, would that be unreasonable specific expectations in your opinion, even though there is evidence to prove it?
Did Apple indicate that these are features they would be adding? If that is the case, you'd have a different scenario where Apple listed specific future functionality.

It's really not that difficult.
Then you would respond by saying that because the phone had not been released at the time of those videos, that it was unreasonable for us to expect something from a device that has yet to be released.
No, that is not the case. If you are told by Apple that a specific feature is coming, it is reasonable to assume it will be added. If you are told nothing of the sort, it is unreasonable to make your own conclusions and then expect them to magically appear.

There is no need for actual evidence of every specific feature that these people would like to see in their phone.
Would like to see != expect and require
We base our assumptions, YES ASSUMPTIONS, on actual evidence we have gathered over the years from using other similar devices.
That's fine. Make as many guesses and assumptions as you'd like. Just remember that they're your guesses and assumptions, and they're not valid things to expect as inevitable.
You have no warrant to call people's expectations illogical, since there is a base for those expectations.
Please reread.
It's not just that I think I have reasonable expectations. I also don't think apple technically did anything wrong. I know nothing was promised. It's a free country and I got what they said I would I get they don't owe me anything.
[quote]However you don’t have to be technically wrong to treat your customers like crap.
What?
What if a dinner made me a burger
I'm going to stop you right there. Burgers and condiments and refusals have exactly zero to do with anything.

You're still, like the poster above, conflating a reasonable expectation with a reasonable assumption. They're not interchangeable.

but I still got treated like crap. Catsup isn’t always on the ingredient list but I expect it to be an option.
Why? Not all burgers come with ketchup, and many gourmet burgers would be downright disgusting if you tried to order it as such. Your asking for a condiment, furthermore, has nothing to do with a mass-produced electronic device which you cannot custom-order.
All phones let you choose a background.
No.
Apple said the iPhone is better than all phones.
All phones let you choose a background.
Where's the missing link? Don't they require everyone to take a logic and reasoning class in college anymore? "Better" != "has everything every other phone might have."

Sometimes less is more. They sell the iPod as better than the competition, and it does a hell of a lot less than many mp3 players.

dustywaffles
Oct 9, 2007, 03:28 PM
I'm going to stop you right there. Burgers and condiments and refusals have exactly zero to do with anything.


It's an analogy. The point of it is that Apple and iPhone don't exist in a vacuum. Some things are so basic it is reasonable to view their absence as an oversight, or the result of having to rush something. Some things you exept no matter who you're buying the device from.

The analogy is relevant because as it is accepted and expected you can have condiments with your food whether its advertised or not its pretty much expected with a phone you can have a background, some background, any background but black.

look, it's not important that people I never meet agree with me. I debate because it's stimulating and I try to do it in good spirits. So comments like "don't they require logic classes in college" that attack me instead of my arguments are not necessary. As I majored in math the last few years on school were nothing but proofs and symbolic logic. I can be illogical at times like everyone in the world but I am certainly capable of logic and reasoning. Two people can disagree and both be totally logical. Some thing's are a matter of perspective.

If either one of us thinks they are going to actually get the other to concede they are delusional. The most anyone will get is the last word. So if we know we're discussing this because it's interesting and fun then you don't need to make comments like that.

matticus008
Oct 9, 2007, 06:13 PM
It's an analogy.
It's a bad analogy that still confuses assumption and expectation. Please let that sink in, because each successive post fails to address that fundamental problem.
The analogy is relevant because as it is accepted and expected you can have condiments with your food whether its advertised or not its pretty much expected with a phone you can have a background, some background, any background but black.
I have yet to see a phone that allows you to customize backgrounds in menu screens. You can change the iPhone's background image, but just like Dashboard or Front Row or the Programs menu of just about any phone I've ever come across, the background is not always customizable and the wallpaper doesn't show in all screens.
So comments like "don't they require logic classes in college" that attack me instead of my arguments are not necessary. As I majored in math the last few years on school were nothing but proofs and symbolic logic.
It's not an attack. You volunteered your "logic" with a series of unconnected statements that form no conclusion at all. I'm trying to get you to elucidate the steps between your statements so you'll see that it's no rule of logic that moves you along--it's guesses and conjecture. You're trying at mmp, but not establishing a truth value or a relative link.

There is no foregone conclusion from your statement, and therefore no expectation. This is roughly the fourth time I've attempted to get you to see your leaps. Like many others, though, you keep skipping the fundamentals and racing ahead to your point.

If you don't build your house on a strong foundation, it's not going to stand.

123
Oct 9, 2007, 07:24 PM
How do you get to "open platform" from stripped down OS X functions?
"Stripped down"? When did Apple marketing call it "stripped down"? They created the opposite impression.


You're still missing the basic point: any specific expectation as to a particular unannounced feature is inherently unreasonable.
No, you are missing the point. It's not about a particular feature, it's about tons of missing basic features, none of which have been added. I'm sure people whouldn't constantly bring up the black home screen if Apple had at least given us WPA enterprise, copy-paste, audio notes, multi recipient SMS, and manual syncing in 1.1.1. Or other features that are common on comparable phones and that were universally brought up by reviewers, like MMS, IM, ringtone sync, and Exchange push... People didn't expect feature X to be added in particular, however, they did expect Apple to work towards closing the feature gap in general (likely adding feature X eventually).
Apparently, that was "unreasonable": Apple sold us a car with three wheels and no car audio; after three months they generously sent us a funky hood ornament instead of the missing wheel OR stereo.


Third party applications are not central to what constitutes a "smart" phone.
They sure are if you release a smarter-than-current-smart-phones iPhone that is essentially stupid and lacks the most basic features and if you are apparently (1.1.1) unable or unwilling to improve the situation yourself.


[speaking about so called "Leopard technologies"...] They're well known now, more than a year after the groundwork for the iPhone would have been laid.
So what? Let me get this straight: Your point is that Apple can't release an API now because it is based on Leopard stuff that is known now and has been for months, but wasn't set in stone one year ago? Wonderful logic!


Would you write production software based on the WWDC 2006 preview of Leopard?
Umm. Of course?! What would you do? Ignore the early start kit, all the developer builds and resources and start your work when you get your hands on a release copy? Wait, not so fast, some libraries might still be buggy. Maybe wait until 10.5.4 or so... or 10.6, I've heard great things about 10.6... Good luck!

matticus008
Oct 9, 2007, 07:45 PM
"Stripped down"? When did Apple marketing call it "stripped down"?
Right about when Steve Jobs talked about how they'd "slimmed it down" and gotten rid of "unnecessary" things to make it fit in a smaller space. A little common sense is in order--obviously you're not dealing with a full-blown system here.
No, you are missing the point. It's not about a particular feature, it's about tons of missing basic features, none of which have been added.
And may never be. Some of them I think are pretty important, others you think are pretty important, but maybe none of them that Apple things are important.
Apparently, that was "unreasonable": Apple sold us a car with three wheels and no car audio; after three months they generously sent us a funky hood ornament instead of the missing wheel OR stereo.
If that's what you think of the iPhone, you obviously should not have bought one. If it was that deficient, you should have waited until it had all four wheels and the stereo. Full stop.

So what? Let me get this straight: Your point is that Apple can't release an API now because it is based on Leopard stuff that is known now and has been for months, but wasn't set in stone one year ago? Wonderful logic!
No, the point is that getting the Leopard tools out the door is a prerequisite to a finalized iPhone SDK. The iPhone's software, as shipped, is based on software that is over a year out of date. In order to release a finalized SDK now, you would have to release a software update that replaced the iPhone's OS with a more finalized form (which they appear to have done, at least in part, with 1.1.1) and then release an SDK based upon that new software (and on other finalized Leopard components, since a number of functions are clearly tied to Leopard--Mail, Core Animation, and Safari, for starters).
Umm. Of course?! What would you do? Ignore the early start kit, all the developer builds and resources and start your work when you get your hands on a release copy?
Yeah, when you're dealing with a software platform that is unstable and undefined and hasn't even progressed to the stage of public developer builds. Why write software that you're going to have to rewrite in a month? You seem to be glossing over the fact that the iPhone software as recent as 1.0.2 is very different from what was introduced in 1.1.1. Many applications just don't work even on the post-jailbreak units. Further, it's just not your call at what point Apple deems a platform mature enough to release development tools for it. They'll do so when they choose to.

Leopard development tools certainly weren't released with the earliest builds of Leopard--things had changed quite a bit by the time of the first developer preview, and professional developers know better than to release production software based on beta tools and a beta OS.

dustywaffles
Oct 9, 2007, 08:24 PM
It's a bad analogy that still confuses assumption and expectation. Please let that sink in, because each successive post fails to address that fundamental problem.

I have yet to see a phone that allows you to customize backgrounds in menu screens. You can change the iPhone's background image, but just like Dashboard or Front Row or the Programs menu of just about any phone I've ever come across, the background is not always customizable and the wallpaper doesn't show in all screens.

It's not an attack. You volunteered your "logic" with a series of unconnected statements that form no conclusion at all. I'm trying to get you to elucidate the steps between your statements so you'll see that it's no rule of logic that moves you along--it's guesses and conjecture. You're trying at mmp, but not establishing a truth value or a relative link.

There is no foregone conclusion from your statement, and therefore no expectation. This is roughly the fourth time I've attempted to get you to see your leaps. Like many others, though, you keep skipping the fundamentals and racing ahead to your point.

If you don't build your house on a strong foundation, it's not going to stand.

Youíre seeing these jumps because youíre looking at an inductive argument as if it were a deductive argument.

Iím not constructing a deductive line of logic because Iím not trying to prove anything that requires it. Iím not trying to say I was mislead.

I think what we are debating here is the word expect, by which I simply mean belief that something will happen.

What happened is people bought a device for the features it had right out of the box and also it potential. We all knew there would be updates and added features.

Now a lot of people are ticked about what apple has and hasnít done. Your point is that this is unreasonable because apple promised nothing specific. Which is a totally valid point.

I think the people that angry about the lack of a specific feature that they wanted added should think long and hard about that point.

What I am angry about is the way apple has handled the updates in general and I donít think you point applies to that. When there are a few things that a device doesnít have, Things tons of people who own the device want, things that are basic, and the company keeps adding features to the device but keeps passing over these basic things it is irritating. Just because I am irritated does not mean Iím part of a group that worked themselves into a frenzy of wild expectations.

Early adopters a device that will evolve are aware they donít know what it will look like in a few months. They are taking a risk. They know this and they take this risk partly because they have faith in the company putting the product out. It is totally possible for that company to mismanage the evolution of a device and piss a bunch of people off without breaking any specific promises.

I kept reusing the example of backgrounds because I was missing the fact that you were interpreting Ďexpectí different then me and I was making an inductive argument that it reasonable to expect some specific things. Iím not made about the absence of any particular feature.

Iím mad because I think the way apple is evolving the iPhone is out of touch. The closest I come to being ticked about the absence of a particular feature is the backgrounds. Not because I think I was lead to believe they would add that, but because when I learned about it I found itís not even something they have to add, just enable. Apple just doesnít want me to have anything but black on my home screen and that pisses me off. Phones are a very personal thing.

vic32amg
Oct 9, 2007, 08:27 PM
Youíre seeing these jumps because youíre looking at an inductive argument as if it were a deductive argument.

Iím not constructing a deductive line of logic because Iím not trying to prove anything that requires it. Iím not trying to say I was mislead.

I think what we are debating here is the word expect, by which I simply mean belief that something will happen.

What happened is people bought a device for the features it had right out of the box and also it potential. We all knew there would be updates and added features.

Now a lot of people are ticked about what apple has and hasnít done. Your point is that this is unreasonable because apple promised nothing specific. Which is a totally valid point.

I think the people that angry about the lack of a specific feature that they wanted added should think long and hard about that point.

What I am angry about is the way apple has handled the updates in general and I donít think you point applies to that. When there are a few things that a device doesnít have, Things tons of people who own the device want, things that are basic, and the company keeps adding features to the device but keeps passing over these basic things it is irritating. Just because I am irritated does not mean Iím part of a group that worked themselves into a frenzy of wild expectations.

Early adopters a device that will evolve are aware they donít know what it will look like in a few months. They are taking a risk. They know this and they take this risk partly because they have faith in the company putting the product out. It is totally possible for that company to mismanage the evolution of a device and piss a bunch of people off without breaking any specific promises.

I kept reusing the example of backgrounds because I was missing the fact that you were interpreting Ďexpectí different then me and I was making an inductive argument that it reasonable to expect some specific things. Iím not made about the absence of any particular feature.

Iím mad because I think the way apple is evolving the iPhone is out of touch. The closest I come to being ticked about the absence of a particular feature is the backgrounds. Not because I think I was lead to believe they would add that, but because when I learned about it I found itís not even something they have to add, just enable. Apple just doesnít want me to have anything but black on my home screen and that pisses me off. Phones are a very personal thing.
:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

why not start a thread where you can argue about this stuff. instead of wasting this for crazy talk.

#1 lurker.

later

matticus008
Oct 9, 2007, 08:52 PM
Youíre seeing these jumps because youíre looking at an inductive argument as if it were a deductive argument.
I'm required to, since an expectation cannot derive from induction; inductive "logic" produces at best merely an assumption.
I think what we are debating here is the word expect, by which I simply mean belief that something will happen.
That's an assumption. An expectation is a consequential assumption. Certainly, this is the biggest issue that clouds our discussion.

In a simplified continuum, you have:
Hope -> Assumption -> Expectation

An expectation is a solid conclusion based on requirements or on deterministic logic. Inductive arguments are outside the bounds of reason.

I am not saying that it is inappropriate to hope or to assume features will be included at some point. They are reasonable and appropriate guesses; they are not conclusions, nor are they based on solid logic and therefore cannot be rational expectations. But in order to be blameworthy, one must fail an expectation--not an assumption.
Just because I am irritated does not mean Iím part of a group that worked themselves into a frenzy of wild expectations.
I don't understand how Apple is the cause of the irritation.
It is totally possible for that company to mismanage the evolution of a device and piss a bunch of people off without breaking any specific promises.
The people have pissed themselves off. If you had no rational reason to expect something, it's understandable to be disappointed, but it is no one's fault but the individual's. It is not Apple's fault that they released a product that isn't fit for everyone.

At any rate, my point was merely to get you to clarify and strengthen your argument, which you've now done. Thoughtful and solid arguments benefit everyone.

kyrow123
Oct 10, 2007, 11:32 AM
I'm required to, since an expectation cannot derive from induction; inductive "logic" produces at best merely an assumption.

That's an assumption. An expectation is a consequential assumption. Certainly, this is the biggest issue that clouds our discussion.

In a simplified continuum, you have:
Hope -> Assumption -> Expectation

An expectation is a solid conclusion based on requirements or on deterministic logic. Inductive arguments are outside the bounds of reason.

I am not saying that it is inappropriate to hope or to assume features will be included at some point. They are reasonable and appropriate guesses; they are not conclusions, nor are they based on solid logic and therefore cannot be rational expectations. But in order to be blameworthy, one must fail an expectation--not an assumption.

I don't understand how Apple is the cause of the irritation.

The people have pissed themselves off. If you had no rational reason to expect something, it's understandable to be disappointed, but it is no one's fault but the individual's. It is not Apple's fault that they released a product that isn't fit for everyone.

At any rate, my point was merely to get you to clarify and strengthen your argument, which you've now done. Thoughtful and solid arguments benefit everyone.

We all have assumed that certain features should have been in the phone and we based this rationale on prior evidence (i.e. mainly other phones we have used over the years). To expect Apple to meet all of those assumptions is a bit unrealistic, since they are a business who will never be able to me what I want and what you want as consumers.

What we are left with is many features we wish will be updated at some point in the future. There is no telling that all of our wishes will be met, but hopefully the future updates will satisfy a majority of Apple's user base, which is what such a large company as Apple can do.

The only thing we can expect, is not rely on Apple to meet all of our wishes.