3rd Party Apps Disabled in iPhone 1.1.1

[daveporter]

Dave-
We understand your point, you want security. We all like security. But is the decision by Apple to "lock down" the iphone, if it really is locked down, a security standpoint? It is the responsibility of apple to clearly state the risk of installing unsupported applications. They shouldn't lock it down to protect us. Is Apple locking us out for good? Are they working on a more secure way for us to gain phone functionality? Sure alot of the apps out there are games and of entertainment value but what about the legitimate apps? I would love you see a native Medical application, it would make the iphone 3x as functional for me. We all know the iphone is capable of supporting applications, we understand the risk it involves. I willingly installed applications to my phone, functional applications, and now that is gone. If apple make a more secure/approved/certification installation process then fine. Otherwise i will be happy to reinstall older firmware and continue the way i was. i do not want apple to "grant" me access such amazing updates such as the wifi store. I bought the phone because of its capabilities, hacking or not.

I do understand that you would like Apple to "open" the phone to 3rd party developers so that additional applications could be developed. However, when Apple announced the iPhone they made it clear that it would not do so. Therefore, we all knew what we were buying and what its capabilities were. We also knew that there was a very likely chance that any future added capabilities would have to come from Apple. If one did not agree to that scenario, then one should not have purchased an iPhone.

Now, if sufficient iPhone users want a new feature or application, the only way to have Apple CONSIDER providing it is to ask them. They are under no obligation to provide it, however, market conditions hopefully will assist them in making the right choice if enough customers demand the same features and/or new applications.

However, hacking the phone or trying to unlock it are just plain wrong, no matter why one "needs" or "wants" something that the iPhone does not offer. And Apple should not be taken to task just because it is taking steps to force a small percentage of iPhone users that have broken the rules to comply. The majority of iPhone users have not attempted to hack or unlock their phones because the either don't see the need or understand the rules they agreed to when the purchased the phone or, hopefully, both.

Dave

 

[willxm]

What "rules" were stated when i purchased the phone? I was aware apple did not actively support 3rd party applications but when i purchased the iphone they weren't actively locking down the phone. I didn't break any rules. As far as "unlocking" an iphone to work on another network, i can almost see apple doing this. Apple agreed to an exclusive deal with AT&T, they may be obligated to block this action. As far as installing a free game... apple has no definite obligation to stop this. If my iphone slows down (which it hasnt really) then that is my problem.

 

[CCStandUpFan]

Possible?, oh good, we're done then

What don't you understand about this?

If NO ONE can install 3rd party code to an iPhone, period, then no one can install malware (via a web browser, or email client, etc) either.

I don't see that there's been any proof of that. No indication anyone has been able to install malware, but that doesn't equal impossible.

Apple has obviously agreed with me on this since they have seemed to effectively totally secured the iPhone this time.

It's totally secured? Ok (makes hand wiping motion). I guess we're done then. Attention iPhone developers who want to go outside Web 2.0: Please just stop now. It's a totally secured system.

Apple is under no obligation to support 3rd party, but if people want to try it, that's really their business. It's a little bit like hunting down and shutting down people who want to overclock a processor.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Dave

"I don't agree to that."

 

[Marcjcd]

I do understand that you would like Apple to "open" the phone to 3rd party developers so that additional applications could be developed. However, when Apple announced the iPhone they made it clear that it would not do so. Therefore, we all knew what we were buying and what its capabilities were. We also knew that there was a very likely chance that any future added capabilities would have to come from Apple. If one did not agree to that scenario, then one should not have purchased an iPhone.

Now, if sufficient iPhone users want a new feature or application, the only way to have Apple CONSIDER providing it is to ask them. They are under no obligation to provide it, however, market conditions hopefully will assist them in making the right choice if enough customers demand the same features and/or new applications.

However, hacking the phone or trying to unlock it are just plain wrong, no matter why one "needs" or "wants" something that the iPhone does not offer. And Apple should not be taken to task just because it is taking steps to force a small percentage of iPhone users that have broken the rules to comply. The majority of iPhone users have not attempted to hack or unlock their phones because the either don't see the need or understand the rules they agreed to when the purchased the phone or, hopefully, both.

Dave

I was given no set of "rules" when I purchased iPhone. I think your really throwing two different issues into one basket.

I TOTALLY AGREE that you should not be able to unlock the phone to use with any other cellular service. Apple has every right to block or disable any program that allows you to use a different cellular service. They are in business with AT&T, made it clear that AT&T was the sole US provider for iPhone for the first two years, and are contractually obligated with AT&T to do anything to insure the security of iPhone's being used with AT&T service only.

That said, I TOTALLY DISAGREE that 3rd party applications should be an issue here. Let me ask you this, if Apple's next update had a "APP PACK" that cost $19.99 which included task lists, audio notes, etc. would that be ok? Well if you think so, then as a consumer dont you search for less expensive or (GOD FORBID) free options to things you want? Why would Apple care what we install on our phones if it doesnt cost them financially in any way? For that matter, why should anyone care what I put on MY PHONE? I'm not forcing anyone else to download anything.

So I ask you... have you ever downloaded "freeware" to your mac/pc? That's a 3rd party app right?

 

[iJed]

What don't you understand about this?

If NO ONE can install 3rd party code to an iPhone, period, then no one can install malware (via a web browser, or email client, etc) either.

There is simply no way that the iPhone will ever be 100% secure against malicious attacks. If Apple software can write to the device then so can someone else's. Its just a matter of time. So if the user can allow Apple to install software on their iPhone is there any real difference in allowing third party software chosen (by the user) from reputable sources?

There is also no good reason for Apple to stop users from installing third party software (other than possible financial gain through selling software in the future.) After all, basically every other phone made today can run third part native binaries as well as client side J2ME applications.

Apple has obviously agreed with me on this since they have seemed to effectively totally secured the iPhone this time.

No it looks like Apple is again trying to control everything. The frequency and extent with which they seem to be doing this is getting more and more worrying as time goes on. Apple should be opening up and standardising its technologies to as great an extent as is possible. I do not want to see OS X embedded marginalised in the same way as the Mac has been.

Now, if sufficient iPhone users want a new feature or application, the only way to have Apple CONSIDER providing it is to ask them. They are under no obligation to provide it, however, market conditions hopefully will assist them in making the right choice if enough customers demand the same features and/or new applications.

Or they could just allow third party development.

However, hacking the phone or trying to unlock it are just plain wrong, no matter why one "needs" or "wants" something that the iPhone does not offer. And Apple should not be taken to task just because it is taking steps to force a small percentage of iPhone users that have broken the rules to comply. The majority of iPhone users have not attempted to hack or unlock their phones because the either don't see the need or understand the rules they agreed to when the purchased the phone or, hopefully, both.

It is seriously worrying that there are people around who actually believe this! It is fair enough that you have to complete the AT&T contract. Since this is part of paying for the iPhone. But for hacking the device in any other way: you paid for it. It is yours. Apple does not own your iPhone. You have the right to do whatever you want with your iPhone, which you bought, with your own money!

 

[daveporter]

So I ask you... have you ever downloaded "freeware" to your mac/pc? That's a 3rd party app right?

To be totally honest, no. There isn't a piece of software, a song, a movie, a photo, or any other media on any of my computers at home, or any software on any of the machines at my office (I own the company) that has any free or stolen software on them.

I prefer to deal with those that have a responsibility to provide quality and service with their products, so, I pay for them. That is not to say that there are not some quality software applications that someone has produced as a labor of love, however, in business, I would not use them for a number of reasons.

Dave

 

[crisc]

Maybe there is a another point everyone is missing.

With this cat and mouse game, Apple is having to spend more time and resources to lock down the phone, leaving less time for them to do real work like new features and bug fixes.

So everyone who cries why can't I copy and paste or do this or that, needs to be aware that Apple isn't giving 100% attention to the things we want and need with the iphone.

So go ahead and be selfish and hack your phone, it is only going to delay more updates we need

 

[Quiara]

To be totally honest, no. There isn't a piece of software, a song, a movie, a photo, or any other media on any of my computers at home, or any software on any of the machines at my office (I own the company) that has any free or stolen software on them.

I prefer to deal with those that have a responsibility to provide quality and service with their products, so, I pay for them. That is not to say that there are not some quality software applications that someone has produced as a labor of love, however, in business, I would not use them for a number of reasons.

Dave

Is there a single app that is not proprietary by the same company that manufactured your OS? Are you running a single 3rd party app?

 

[iJed]

To be totally honest, no. There isn't a piece of software, a song, a movie, a photo, or any other media on any of my computers at home, or any software on any of the machines at my office (I own the company) that has any free or stolen software on them.

I prefer to deal with those that have a responsibility to provide quality and service with their products, so, I pay for them. That is not to say that there are not some quality software applications that someone has produced as a labor of love, however, in business, I would not use them for a number of reasons.

Dave

Your sig says otherwise. Mac OS X is filled with free open source software. From your networking to many of the APIs and even the security software.

As a software engineer I am the exact opposite of you. I would be very wary of using commercial proprietary software in any of my projects. Companies are seldom truly accountable for their actions, especially in software. I have seen very expensive projects killed overnight when the one proprietary maker of a component stops updating it.

 

[Marcjcd]

Maybe there is a another point everyone is missing.

With this cat and mouse game, Apple is having to spend more time and resources to lock down the phone, leaving less time for them to do real work like new features and bug fixes.

So everyone who cries why can't I copy and paste or do this or that, needs to be aware that Apple isn't giving 100% attention to the things we want and need with the iphone.

So go ahead and be selfish and hack your phone, it is only going to delay more updates we need

Oh you mean they didnt have enough time to put together a copy/paste application but they had more then enough time to roll our their mobile music store while partnering with Starbucks huh?

Are you that naive that you dont understand that this ALL has to do with REVENUE? They spent the time on the Wi-Fi music store because the Wi-Fi music store makes them MONEY! They spent the time on blocking unlockers because unlocking for a different cellular service COSTS THEM MONEY. You do understand that they get a % of every AT&T bill! THATS WHERE THEIR FOCUS IS!

Again... many of you are confusing unlocking with using 3rd party applications.

 

[daveporter]

It is seriously worrying that there are people around who actually believe this! It is fair enough that you have to complete the AT&T contract. Since this is part of paying for the iPhone. But for hacking the device in any other way: you paid for it. It is yours. Apple does not own your iPhone. You have the right to do whatever you want with your iPhone, which you bought, with your own money!

What you don't seem to understand is that when Apple developed the iPhone it was not for fun or altruistic reasons; it was a business decision. A business decision ultimately is based a number of factors, however, the ability of the product to produce a profit is on the top of the list.

When Apple decided the price point for the iPhone, it chose to collect revenue from each user in a number of ways to pay for the development costs for the phone, the overhead costs and to provide a profit. First, there was the cost of the phone. Then they planned to reap a piece of the monthly charge that ATT collects from each user. Finally, they planned to sell users ring tones, accessories, iTunes content and most likely, applications.

By hacking the phones to be able to add your own ring tones and programs and by unlocking it so that you can go to a cell phone service provider other than ATT, your preventing Apple from collecting all the revenue it contemplated in its iPhone business plan. If this continues, Apple may consider that iPhone a failure and kill the product. That is what happens in a capitalist society when a company can not make the profit margin needed to justify continuing to offer a product.

To all of you that complain that "Apple is just trying to control things," your darned right. And why is that wrong? This if their product which they offered to you. They told you how they planned to work with you on the sale and use of the phone and in essence entered into a contract with you based on those conditions. You were not forced to buy the phone, your chose to.

Apple is doing exactly the right thing here. i, and many other Apple stock owners expect Apple to require its customers to comply with their agreements and for Apple to obtain a good return on investment on the iPhone.

Dave

 

[shadowfax]

Maybe there is a another point everyone is missing.

With this cat and mouse game, Apple is having to spend more time and resources to lock down the phone, leaving less time for them to do real work like new features and bug fixes.

So everyone who cries why can't I copy and paste or do this or that, needs to be aware that Apple isn't giving 100% attention to the things we want and need with the iphone.

So go ahead and be selfish and hack your phone, it is only going to delay more updates we need

Oh yeah, smart one, there. Apple is getting delayed on updates you "need" because they are wilfully playing cat and mouse with us "hackers." Never mind that the company used to fly a pirate flag over its HQ. Never mind the obvious fact that the iPod Touch (which is binary compatible with the iPhone) has been running the same kind of lockdown software on it for weeks now, so obviously it's not like Apple was rushing their little solution out the door for the iPhone--they've been sitting on it for some other reason.

Apple NEVER gives "100%" attention to the things we want. Where's my non-crappy email application? Hell, 4 months ago half this board were whining about how evil the iPhone is because it's "delayin Leopard," and that was actually confirmed by the horse's mouth. STOP BLAMING HACKERS FOR EVERYTHING. Jeez! It's Apple's choice to lock their system down and work their butts off on a futile effort that will soon be rebutted. And moreover, there is no evidence--not one shred--that Apple delayed the release of this update due to hackers.

The only group of people you could possibly blame for the delays to getting these updates that you "need" is Apple itself. Write a nasty letter to them.

 

[briand05]

The best solution is to REFUSE the update, it's your phone.

 

[JD914]

The best solution is to REFUSE the update, it's your phone.

Exactly! I'm glad I waited for the post update results. My phone is working better than any Apple updated phone and on T Mobile! WGAS about Itunes Wi Fi store anyway?

 

[kingtj]

Agreed!

I'm with you here! If Apple wants to keep making changes that screw up the carrier unlocking hacks, that's one thing. (I'm not fond of that, yet I understand why Apple would feel pressured to do it. When you have to partner with another big corp. to launch a product, you have to make certain concessions you might not be happy about. It's no different than iTunes having DRM on many songs they sell.)

BUT, purposely breaking 3rd. party software that was loaded on the phone is NOT cool, in my opinion. Steve Jobs himself was originally quoted as saying Apple was going to take a neutral stance on that whole thing .... not "endorsing" any of the development, but not actively "fighting" it either.

It looks to me like he now thinks he spoke too soon (perhaps after getting pressure from AT&T after they realized 3rd. parties might develop voice over IP telephony apps for iPhone which bypass the need to use up minutes on the cellular network?), so he's purposely wiping the 3rd. party stuff out with the upgrades.

I won't be doing this update either (despite realizing headset and speaker volume IS too low and it needs to be patched!), unless/until AppTap installer can be upgraded to work with it properly.

The iPhone is simply too useful with all these 3rd. party freeware add-ons to give that all up. It was the promise of these exciting, unofficial apps that made me buy my iPhone in the first place!

Just because Apple doesn't support them doesn't mean Apple is making the right decision.

I stand behind the third party developers. No update for me yet.

 

[CWallace]

I suppose it will eventually be possible for those with malicious intent to develop malware for the iPhone that could then be sent to others via SMS/e-mail/whathaveyou as has happened with "desktop" OS' and systems, but I tend to think the likelihood of it happening is about the same on a phone never touched by non-Apple approved software/content as it would be on one that has been heavily-modified with non-Apple approved software/content.

On the subject of ringtones, most of mine are not available in the iTunes store. However, I'd be more then happy to send Apple $2 a ringtone if they'd send me a license for iTunes that will let me keep the things more then one version.

 

[shadowfax]

Steve Jobs himself was originally quoted as saying Apple was going to take a neutral stance on that whole thing .... not "endorsing" any of the development, but not actively "fighting" it either.

Technically, it was phil schiller that said that. I guess he jumped the gun, because Steve certainly seemed to contradict him at the interview in London.

 

[Quiara]

They're still THIRD PARTY APPS, Dave. Non-proprietary, non-commissioned by the source of the OS. Would you feel better if all the people who developed little games and such for the iPhone up to this point had charged $5/pop for them? Would that make your capitalist heart happy? THEY'RE STILL THIRD PARTY APPS. The point is whether or not Apple allows 3rd party apps - NOT whether Apple allows FREE 3rd party apps.

Yes, Apple should be able to undo unlocking - they have a contract with AT&T. Lovely. I'm not contending that. But are you really so naive as to think that the thing that makes your particular 3rd party apps safe is because you PAID for them?

People pay for crap all the time. Some of life's best things are free. Apple knows this - half the widgets they incorporate were freeware before Apple ate them up. And that's only one example. Apple is a HUGE FAN of freeware - it gives them a ton of stuff to build into the next release of their OS - just like everybody else.

 

[IDANNY]

I think this is a bad move by apple and very unapple. It will be hacked again soon enough anyway

 

[CWallace]

They're still THIRD PARTY APPS, Dave. Non-proprietary, non-commissioned by the source of the OS.

I'm not really interested in all the "moral and legal" arguments being tossed around, but this statement I felt did deserve a comment.

These third-party OS X apps may not originate from Apple, but they have been developed with Apple's blessing (more or less) through Apple releasing SDKs and other information about how the operating system is designed and structured, using services and functions provided by Apple for the purpose of developing such applications.

Apple has specifically denied this information to developers for the iPhone. As such, developers are attempting to "reverse-engineer" the codebase, as well as operate under the assumption that "since it's based on Leopard, let's use the Leopard SDK and see what happens". They're obviously smart people, but they don't have the full story. If they did, Apple's firmware and supporting software (iTunes) updates wouldn't keep breaking all their stuff. But instead, Apple is changing code and then they have to scramble to reverse-engineer the changes and modify their code to work with the new system code.

 

[Quiara]

I'm not really interested in all the "moral and legal" arguments being tossed around, but this statement I felt did deserve a comment.

These third-party OS X apps may not originate from Apple, but they have been developed with Apple's blessing (more or less) through Apple releasing SDKs and other information about how the operating system is designed and structured, using services and functions provided by Apple for the purpose of developing such applications.

Apple has specifically denied this information to developers for the iPhone. As such, developers are attempting to "reverse-engineer" the codebase, as well as operate under the assumption that "since it's based on Leopard, let's use the Leopard SDK and see what happens". They're obviously smart people, but they don't have the full story. If they did, Apple's firmware and supporting software (iTunes) updates wouldn't keep breaking all their stuff. But instead, Apple is changing code and then they have to scramble to reverse-engineer the changes and modify their code to work with the new system code.

That much I will acknowledge as a point. I know Apple has not (as yet) released any SDK for the iPhone. My discussion is more based on the more abstract elements of the situation, though. Not "has Apple allowed this." The answer to that is emphatically "no!" Obviously Apple has not.

Does that mean all attempts to implement 3rd party solutions for things Apple is not yet willing and/or able to provide for us as consumers? I don't think so.

 

[Mainyehc]

Perhaps you feel this way, many other do not. However, the proper way to express your dismay with Apple's decision is to lobby them to change their position. Assuming enough customers want the same changes then Apple will need to consider first if they can technically accomodate the requrest, then if it is in the financial interests of Apple to do so, and lastly, is it safe to do so (from a malware point of view).

The wrong way to try to get what you want is to try to hack or unlock the phone yourself or install unauthorized 3rd party software not approved by Apple/

Those that tried the unlocking are now realizing that it was a big mistake.

Dave

Remember when Apple introduced the first Intel-based Macs, not long ago?

Yeah, it was only after a bounty was created for the first person to hack the hell out of EFI and successfully boot Windows XP on a Mac, and said person managed to accomplish that feat, that Apple released their official, sanctioned, non-warranty-voiding method, BootCamp.

So, in short, no, hacking the iPhone, while illegal as far as license agreements are concerned, is not a big mistake, far from it. It is actually a great idea, and also much more effective than the "lobbying" you mentioned.

 

[slinky0390]

yeah, but i'm going to go out on a limb (dont flame me for being wrong if i am) but, wouldnt it be hard for someone to hack into a phone that they do not have infront of them, the only way they could put anything along the lines of malware is if you allow somone to. simply put, if you dont want to risk it, do not hack your phone.. i personally think the lock down is lame. if people want to possibly dammage their phones by unlocking or hacking, let them. they bought the phone, let them do what they want with it.

 

[daveporter]

yeah, but i'm going to go out on a limb (dont flame me for being wrong if i am) but, wouldnt it be hard for someone to hack into a phone that they do not have infront of them, the only way they could put anything along the lines of malware is if you allow somone to. simply put, if you dont want to risk it, do not hack your phone.. i personally think the lock down is lame. if people want to possibly dammage their phones by unlocking or hacking, let them. they bought the phone, let them do what they want with it.

If Apple provides encryption level protection for the iPhone that prevents anyone from installing unauthorized applications (as it does now to a certain extent for the system folder components in OS X) then that will also make it very difficult for hackers to comprimise my iPhone when they try to deliver a payload via a web brouser, email client, sim messaging, or any other means.

Dave

Remember when Apple introduced the first Intel-based Macs, not long ago?

Yeah, it was only after a bounty was created for the first person to hack the hell out of EFI and successfully boot Windows XP on a Mac, and said person managed to accomplish that feat, that Apple released their official, sanctioned, non-warranty-voiding method, BootCamp.

So, in short, no, hacking the iPhone, while illegal as far as license agreements are concerned, is not a big mistake, far from it. It is actually a great idea, and also much more effective than the "lobbying" you mentioned.

Who is to say that Apple was not planning to offer such a feature when the time was right? I doubt that anyone can force Apple to do anything it does not want to do.

Dave

 

[FunkyMonkey]

What did he just say???

Wow! Has anyone seen this???

I found this article and my jaw dropped.

Apple marketing boss, Greg Joswiak, says Apple won't support the hacking of its products, but it won't purposely try to stop hackers either.

He considers Apple's stance neutral, neither in support or against third party development for the iPhone and iPod Touch, although, he mentions that Apple is always analyzing its position on such matters. If a software update does break any third party software, Apple did not do it intentionally.

http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/09/11/apple-wont-try-to-stop-iphone-and-ipod-touch-hackers/