iPhone 1.1.1 Aftermath

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
49,579
10,893
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png

With the consequences of the iPhone 1.1.1 update, there's been no shortage of opinions on Apple's latest move to lock down the iPhone from unlockers and 3rd party developers. Before the update, 3rd party application installation on the iPhone had become so easy that David Pogue demonstrated its ease of use and utility in a video segment for the NYTimes.

Apple's latest software update, however, has made it significantly more difficult for developers to install 3rd party applications, install custom ringtones, and, of course, unlock the iPhone from AT&T. While it had been expected that Apple would specifically fight SIM unlocking software on the iPhone, there had been some early hope that they would choose to simply ignore unofficial 3rd party application development efforts.

Long standing Apple users may recall that this sort of lock-down attitude is not necessarily new to Apple, and certainly not to Steve Jobs, who has historically been against user expansion of Apple hardware. Even as early as 1984, Steve Jobs's opinion on user expandability was clear:
Apple's other co-founder, Steve Jobs, didn't agree with Jef about many things, but they both felt the same way about hardware expandability: it was a bug instead of a feature. Steve was reportedly against having slots in the Apple II back in the days of yore, and felt even stronger about slots for the Mac. He decreed that the Macintosh would remain perpetually bereft of slots, enclosed in a tightly sealed case, with only the limited expandability of the two serial ports.
Meanwhile, Nokia is taking advantage of this moment to start running "Open to anything" ads which promise phones "Open to applications. Open to widgets. Open to anything" (at nseries.com/open).

Early efforts to unlock the iPhone 1.1.1, or at least provide a downgrade option to 1.0.2 are undeway, but Apple's position on this is clear.

Ongoing iPhone coverage at MacRumors.com/iPhone.

Article Link
 

DeaconGraves

macrumors 65816
Apr 25, 2007
1,289
2
Dallas, TX
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png



Long standing Apple users may recall that this sort of lock-down attitude is not necessarily new to Apple, and certainly not to Steve Jobs, who has historically been against user expansion of Apple hardware. Even as early as 1984, Steve Jobs's opinion on user expandability was clear:

Article Link
I'm just bracing myself for the wave of "But Jobs got started by hacking phones!" comments to come roaring in.... :p
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,397
12,512
As I recall, Jobs never hacked anything, Woz did. Jobs just took credit.
 

Mitthrawnuruodo

Moderator emeritus
Mar 10, 2004
13,845
232
Bergen, Norway
I'm more or less behind SJ's assessment on hardware expandability, and I like the idea that all software being installed on a small portable device needs to be pre-approved by the device manufacturer (see below), but why cannot I use whatever sounds I want...?!? That wouldn't

"Open to anything"...?

diagram_virus_thumb.jpg

:D
 

brewcitywi

macrumors 6502
Sep 29, 2007
285
42
1.1.1 comment

I still believe that users are overreacting to the closed status of the iPhone. You aren't buying an external hard drive! Plus, Apple is most likely legally protecting their relationship with AT&T by proving that the SIM card can't be replaced in a simple way.

In the long run, the iPhone will probably have many of the boundaries soften, maybe even with multiple carrier options. Heck, maybe with the release of Leopard, Apple may even have some tricks up their sleeve in order to begin to open up more ability for the installation of 3rd party apps and widgets...could it be that they just want to let Leopard get out there for a bit?

But does every developer and tech user have to call Apple out on each move? I mean, the iPhone has only been out for about 4 months.
 

RedDragon870503

macrumors 6502
Sep 6, 2006
299
0
Call me shortsighted, but I do not understand the economical reason behind locking a device.

What difference does it make to Apple?

It's not like they are trying to push their OWN software (not yet at least)

Someone explain; there has GOT to be a reason.
 

macenforcer

macrumors 65816
Jun 9, 2004
1,248
0
Colorado
I smell a lawsuit coming and fast. I was just in the apple store and a guy was in there with his locked iphone because of this update. They told him he hacked it and there was nothing he could do. He was yelling like mad. I felt bad for him. Its freakin wrong of apple and they deserve to get sued.
 

guzhogi

macrumors 68040
Aug 31, 2003
3,069
956
Wherever my feet take me…
I can understand this. Steve probably wants Macs as simple as possible and when you add more things, the more complicated it becomes. Partially b/c of that, it's harder to make everything well together. Look at Windows.

On the other hand, people like to customize their things. Being locked into one way of doing thing is hard. There's so many different ways I'd like to do things, but Apple's like "Do it our way or leave." I'd love to build my own computer, but it's locked down to Apple hardware. :mad: If I were good at programming, I'd make my own OS, but since I'm not, I'll stick w/ Mac OS X (and go w/ Windows only for the games).
 

Jetson

macrumors 6502a
Oct 5, 2003
578
38
This closed iPhone policy is a high profile disaster in the making.

It certainly is customer-unfriendly.

I understand that O/S or firmware updates can break user added apps. But what we are talking about here is a hostility to iPhone owners who have a legitimate desire to expand the capability of THEIR phones. To intentionally disable a customer's phone is definitely NOT the way to keep customers. Maybe Jobs doesn't care about keeping customers anymore?

By extension, I would expect that owners of the new iPod Touch would also experience the same kind of treatment should they dare to install non-Apple approved apps on THEIR iPods.
 

LaMerVipere

macrumors 6502a
Jan 19, 2004
971
0
Chicago
I just bought an iPhone yesterday and love it, but I am debating whether or not I want to update the firmware.

I haven't loaded any 3rd party apps onto it yet because I am going to see how I enjoy using it with just what shipped on it.

For AIM I am using FlickIM, which is working great.

I would like some of the features that shipped with 1.1.1 though.

Decisions, decisions.
 

island

macrumors 6502
Feb 19, 2007
478
0
CT
To be honest, I have no problem with what they are doing. If you want a phone to hack or mess with, go with a different company. If Apple doesn't want you to mess with there stuff, why would you buy it to hack in the first place?
 

DeaconGraves

macrumors 65816
Apr 25, 2007
1,289
2
Dallas, TX
Call me shortsighted, but I do not understand the economical reason behind locking a device.

What difference does it make to Apple?

It's not like they are trying to push their OWN software (not yet at least)

Someone explain; there has GOT to be a reason.
Its much more complex then this, but two basic reasons:

For locking it from third-party apps: As of right now, Apple hasn't released an SDK to developers. That means any apps developed are done for the most part on a trial and error basis with no guarantee what any particular one will do to the phone. Apple locks the phone up from these things so they don't have to incur the costs of servicing any phones that a user might break by installing one of these apps (I know that there aren't any major examples of this but it is a possible explanation).

For locking it to AT&T/O2: Apple wants a chunk of the fees you pay each month. Through negotiation, AT&T (and O2 in the UK) agreed to this, but wanted to be the exclusive network of the phone for the next (five?) years. Apple has to at least show good faith that they are keeping all iPhones on the AT&T network to uphold their end of the bargain. I'm guessing Apple could have released the phone unlocked for all networks, but then they'd be missing out on the subscription revenues (as well as having to deal with a handful of Verizon/Sprint subscribers wondering why the GSM phone wouldn't work on their network).
 

plumbingandtech

macrumors 68000
Jun 20, 2007
1,993
1
To intentionally disable a customer's phone is definitely NOT the way to keep customers.
intentionally? Or just upgrading software and reseting basic parts of the OS THAT HAVE BEEN HACKED... ?


This closed iPhone policy is a high profile disaster in the making.

Would be the same policy that apple has had since day one (sans web apps)?

That same policy that has sold a million + iphones in three months making it one of the most successful electronic launches ever?

That policy?

A bunch of complainers by a subset of users does not a high profile disaster make.
 

emotion

macrumors 68040
Mar 29, 2004
3,186
3
Manchester, UK
I smell a lawsuit coming and fast.....Its freakin wrong of apple and they deserve to get sued.
:D

I love this forum. That was a joke yes?


I think Apple may want to establish selling software through iTMS for these devices before eventually opening up wth an SDK.

Remember the iPhone was essentially a rush job and they drafted people in from the Leopard work (hence slip). Now that project is coming to fruition the resources can go back into the iPhone project. A (documented) SDK might come from this yet.

I also think that something Jobs said about DRM and how to make it work properly you need control over the platform (well, control over the 'secrets'). This much control perhaps?
 

siurpeeman

macrumors 603
Dec 2, 2006
6,311
18
the OC
I just bought an iPhone yesterday and love it, but I am debating whether or not I want to update the firmware.

I haven't loaded any 3rd party apps onto it yet because I am going to see how I enjoy using it with just what shipped on it.

For AIM I am using FlickIM, which is working great.

I would like some of the features that shipped with 1.1.1 though.

Decisions, decisions.
if i were you and were curious, i'd install 3rd party apps just to see what you'd be missing out on. if it seems like you can do without, upgrade the firmware.
 

synth3tik

macrumors 68040
Oct 11, 2006
3,951
2
Minneapolis, MN
The thing that really gets me about the 1.1.1 update,

I gained a crappy wifi store that is no fun to use

I lost my ringtones.

I am not someone who likes songs as ringtones, but I also don't like horrible ringtones. I had a good amount of ringtones that were not annoying and can no longer use them. Shame on Apple.
 

gomatt

macrumors member
Feb 21, 2006
81
1
think people are forgetting about the deal between apple and att. an iphone without att is like selling it for $50. apple looses money. but is it enough to offset the money by selling more devices to people who are planning to unlock?.....no

matt
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,546
1,196
Apple's PUBLIC position is clearly pro-3rd-party apps: they have recognized the demand, they have said they will consider supporting it in future (which they can't very well do until the newborn iPhone platform/OS stabilizes and becomes less of a moving target), they have in the meantime actively promoted one limited form (Web apps), and they've said they will not take steps to break 3rd-party apps. Nor will they do the work of making sure 3rd-party apps keep working after each iPhone update--that task falls to the 3rd parties.

Is there evidence of another, secret position? Is Apple actively blocking 3rd party apps? Or are they merely allowing them to break by inaction, which is different? I wouldn't want Apple to waste their time testing to make sure unofficial hacks keep working. And I REALLY wouldn't want Apple to modify or complicate their software updates to benefit hackers. The iPhone OS is young and should be free to mature--THEN developer tools and official support will make sense.

There have been a lot of early claims thrown around, with too little evidence.

I HOPE that Apple's public position is truthful--I can't see any advantage to them in taking that position if they don't mean it.

If it IS truthful, then 3rd party apps will still break, casualties of changes to the iPhone, rather than victims of intentional attacks by Apple.

Let me be clear that I whole-heartedly support hacking 3rd-party apps on the iPhone--and, in future, official 3rd-party apps that won't need hacking. I hope to get an iPhone, and the more apps the better! But I don't see evidence that Apple is secretly spending time attacking 3rd-party iPhone native apps. I only see evidence that Apple isn't spending time fixing them.

(And I note the difference between 3rd-party apps, and SIM unlocks which Apple may well be combatting actively. I also note the difference between 3rd-party apps and ringtones.)
 

JoachimC

macrumors newbie
Jun 22, 2007
3
0
expandability

small notice : Steve's quote indiquates his reluctance towards hardware expandability, there's nothing about software expandability in it
 

guzhogi

macrumors 68040
Aug 31, 2003
3,069
956
Wherever my feet take me…
For locking it from third-party apps: As of right now, Apple hasn't released an SDK to developers. That means any apps developed are done for the most part on a trial and error basis with no guarantee what any particular one will do to the phone. Apple locks the phone up from these things so they don't have to incur the costs of servicing any phones that a user might break by installing one of these apps (I know that there aren't any major examples of this but it is a possible explanation).
Good point. I think that SDKs are a good thing. They help make sure the software runs well together. Hopefully, Apple would release an SDK for the iPhone/iPod Touch.

For some reason, this made me think of copyrights & intellectual property. Why copyrighting helps prevent people from taking credit for other people's work, it also helps people be more creative. Creativity is a good thing, but right now, Apple isn't letting people be creative. It would be great if Apple let people write software for for all it's products. In order to make sure it doesn't trash the system, Apple should test the software and do a digital signing thing, but let digitally unsigned apps still work. With unsigned apps, there should be an error message that says "This is not endorsed by Apple. Use at your own risk," or something along those lines. This way, people can be creative, but there is some protection from it trashing your computer.
 

WannaGoMac

macrumors 68020
Feb 11, 2007
2,485
3,570
just like the old OS as airlines joke

I think this joke sums up SJ's actions with the iPhone nicely. It's the OLD Apple mentality that made me never want to buy an Apple computer -- lately, I am beginning to wonder if this is back at Apple?

http://webaugur.com/bibliotheca/field_stock/os-airlines.html

Mac Airlines
All the stewards, stewardesses, captains, baggage handlers, and ticket agents look the same, act the same, and talk the same. Every time you ask questions about details, you are told you don't need to know, don't want to know, and would you please return to your seat and watch the movie.
 

Don.Key

macrumors regular
Jan 11, 2005
132
6
intentionally? Or just upgrading software and reseting basic parts of the OS THAT HAVE BEEN HACKED... ?
Reseting basic parts should at MAX return your device to pre-hacked state. There is ABSOLUTELY no reason for the update to brick devices.
Do not even try to tell me that bricking was not intended.

In the end effect the bricking failed because downgrade is possible now but the attempt was made, this alone stinks to heaven.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.