1.1.1 Unlock Solution in the works

Discussion in 'Jailbreaks and iOS Hacks' started by Bernie-Mac, Sep 30, 2007.

  1. Bernie-Mac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Location:
    Sin City, NV
  2. aerospace macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    #2
    soon could be weeks, I'm not getting my hopes up.

    wasn't impressed by :apple: 1.1.1 anyway
     
  3. megfilmworks macrumors 68020

    megfilmworks

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Location:
    Sherman Oaks
    #3
    I think this battle is over. Updates will come faster than the hackers can hack.
    These encryptions may be beyond the realm of the hacker in a limited time frame.
     
  4. b257177 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    #4
    True.. but, being on an unlocked 1.0.2 isn't bad right now.. and when/if 1.1.1 reaches that point, unlocked users can upgrade. When Apple releases the next update (let's call it 2.2.2 for conversation sake), we'll sit happily unlocked on 1.1.1 until 2.2.2 is available for unlocked users. Rinse, repeat.

    And, so we dance, at least until AT&T isn't the only game Apple plays in the United States.
     
  5. mpuck972 macrumors 6502

    mpuck972

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    #5
    This is the exact same tactic Direct Tv took to try to rid itself of the hacking of the DTV cards some years back. Eventually it got to the point where they started releasing updates hourly. A big company like them could afford it. As expected, the hackers gave up for the most part, and moved onto Dish Network.
     
  6. sblasl macrumors 6502a

    sblasl

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Location:
    Heber Springs, AR
    #6
    IMHO, I think this is probably more or less wishful thinking, they might have a better understanding of what Apple has done but my gut tells me they are no closer today than when the 1.1.1 update was released.
     
  7. bbplayer5 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    #7
    All Apple has to do is include ichat, and i wouldnt hack my phone. Case closed!!! If a 3rd party team can get chat on the phone in less than a month, apple could have had it at release.
     
  8. FSUSem1noles macrumors 68000

    FSUSem1noles

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale
    #8
    I don't see it happening...

    I believe Apple is using this update as a buffer, they're working on the next update as of pre-release of 1.1.1, by the time this 1.1.1 update is hacked, if it's ever hacked, Apple will be rolling out the next update..

    So

    I truely believe they did this to buy themselves time.. so best case scenario is, individuals who want 3rd party apps will always be a version behind, at best..
     
  9. GTiPhone macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Location:
    Island Heights, NJ
    #9
    Why on earth would anyone consider unlocking after what Apple JUST DID??

    If you do, then my dog could probably beat you in a spelling contest. Hope that sentence isn't too offensive.
     
  10. bdj21ya macrumors 6502a

    bdj21ya

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    #10
    Ah, but being one version behind isn't so bad, eh? Especially if this forces Apple to keep coming out with new features to entice users into applying their risky updates.
     
  11. FSUSem1noles macrumors 68000

    FSUSem1noles

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale
    #11
    I completely agree..

    Unfortunately, it doesn't have to necessarily be updates that include features, they could just be security updates, firmware updates, or updates to update the update.. ;)
     
  12. shoelessone macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    #12
    Also, they could require the iPhone be updated to work with iTunes, in which case you'd also have to be a version (or more) behind with iTunes. Or hackers would have to start hacking iTunes as well.

    I've decided to wait. I don't care about 3rd party apps, or unlocking the phone, I want the phone sans the phone to use as an mp3 player with camera. Oh well!
     
  13. akophone macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    #13
    Sounds like Sony's PSP vs hackers all over again!
     
  14. bragerz macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #14
    There is a big difference between hacking to **STEAL** service, and hacking to make better use of a piece of equipment you own. The correct parallel to this current battle is Sony PSP vs. the Hackers... A battle the hackers are currently winning!
     
  15. Marcjcd macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #15
    Totally agreed! I think MANY on here are confusing two things... hacking the phone to use with a different cellular service (which Apple should block since their contractually obligated to and it costs them money) and hacking the phone for the PHONE OWNER to add programs for their own PERSONAL USE OR ENJOYMENT.
     
  16. cgray24 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2007
    Location:
    Texas
    #16
    I dont use hacks, but im hoping some development continues so sooner or later Apple has to release new features that people want to upgrade to rather than stick with older software.
     
  17. Bernie-Mac thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Location:
    Sin City, NV
    #17
    Idk...the only thing that made me update was the double-clicking home button for music control, there were so many times i was listening to my iphone on speaker while closing at work and it is now so easy to switch songs (not to mention pause the song when my boss walks by) and its a lot easier to change songs while driving...if they can come up with a apptapp for 1.1.1 i dont see any reason to update ever again
     
  18. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #18
    Could Apple have easily blocked one without blocking the other?
     
  19. b257177 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    #19
    Don't forget, there are specific legal exemptions allowing the hacking of a telephone for the purpose of removing single-netowrk use restrictions, i.e. it is legal to do so.

    In fact, carriers will issue you an unlock code for your phone, after being under contract for 90 days they have to, but not even AT&T has an unlock code for the iPhone yet. Recent post by Erica Sudan on the topic.

    So, really, they are one in the same issue... the hacking of the iPhone for my personal enjoyment varying slight from your definition *but* both entirely within the law.
     
  20. Cinemagic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    #20
    The difference is that DirecTV re-programs the HU card without user action. If you had a script that blocked the update, the receiver would stop working. With the iPhone, we have the option to upgrade to new firmware or not to upgrade than the phone will still work. For there to be a change like DiecTV and the HU to be effective, AT&T would have to redo their software to check firmware and reject all except current. This would not be in AT&T's best financial interest. Not to mention customer complaints.
     
  21. /dev/toaster macrumors 68020

    /dev/toaster

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #21
    I totally agree. I have no problems at all with Apple trying to protect users from moving the phone to other carriers. I do however feel the cellular network in the US needs to be more opened up like Europe. Regardless, I still support Apple in this area.

    However, my problem and anger is in them locking out 3rd party developers. I suppose I could see it from Apples point of view for the iPhone, but why the hell did they do it on the iPod touch ? Something doesn't add up there.

    Honestly, the pressure is going to come down hard on Apple. Apple has gotten them selves into a very unforgiving cut throat market. By the time the holidays hit, they will not like the numbers they see. The iPhone does what it does very well, but its not enough for most. I know a number of people at work who took the plunge knowing someone would create 3rd party apps for the features they missed. They took the risk and now after Apples response they are regretting it. If Apple is doing this a year from now, do you think people will go after iPhone 2.0 ?

    Not a chance.
     
  22. tsvb macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Location:
    Syracuse, NY
    #22
    This is all I want from the iPhone. I'm hoping for an update when leopard comes out.
     
  23. twoodcc macrumors P6

    twoodcc

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Location:
    Right side of wrong
    #23
    i'm using 1.1.1 right now, and it's not so bad. but i'm hoping that someone hacks it though, cuz i do miss apptapp
     
  24. bbplayer5 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    #24
    Ill use 1.1.1 when its hacked... Period, end of story. I use my iphone all day now that i have stuff to do on it. Its ashame apple didnt allow this from day one.. the phone is just amazing...

    Why not allow it, and just put a disclaimer saying that if a 3rd party program ruins your phone, they dont cover it? That way they allow it, but dont warranty it!! Duhhhh apple...
     
  25. bdj21ya macrumors 6502a

    bdj21ya

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    #25
    Because Apple has to prevent unlock programs, 3rd party apps just got caught in the crossfire. Mark my words, if there are going to be 3rd party apps sanctioned at all, they will be by big developers, tightly controlled through Apple. It is LAME, but that's where Steve is taking the company. Apparently did not learn his lesson from Mac vs. IBM.
     

Share This Page