Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone 1.1.1 Aftermath
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, because you knew that it was not allowed by Apple to mod the phone. Why would Apple need to create a restore point for their phone when they know exactly what is on it and all the system preferences. Your point that they are screwing the customer is still reliant on the fact that the customer already screwed themselves.
I remember that old HP systems (maybe these days too, haven't bought one lately) had a peice of tape over the case enclosure as tamper evident. You altered your phone with non-Apple programs, you took a risk, and you faced the consequences if your phone was bricked. And Apple should not cave and help those that did brick their phones.
Too bad Microsoft can't convert market share to market value. While they have nearly 15 times the market share of poor Apple, they have only twice the value as a company.
macenforcer
macrumors 65816
So what is with Steve Jobs and co bragging that it runs a version of OS X if nobody can use the features of OS X? What is the point? My iphone can do so much more but I can't do that because apple wants to be rude.
I guess my real question is why do people on this forum stick up for apple on this topic? Don't you want to run cool apps on your iphone? I don't get it.
I guess my real question is why do people on this forum stick up for apple on this topic? Don't you want to run cool apps on your iphone? I don't get it.
Interesting, I always thought that you 'owned' the 'rights' to the software that you used...instead of an open ended rental agreement. Rights implying a certain type of ownership...but again I am not a lawyer so it might just be semantics
Anyway the real point is that the Hacks and the 3rd party software did not modify the original software and hence the rental agreement that you speak of. These programs made use of the functions that the OS already provided albeit these functions were not obvious. Apple then came in took away these functions leaving you with a lesser product then what you had originally agreed to. This action was intentional and MALICIOUS and makes Apple a very dirty boy
Cool aid tastes great in the summer time
macenforcer
macrumors 65816
You are so off its not even funny. Let me enlighten you. What about the people who used their old att phone sim to activate because the activation process got messed up? Hmmm. Or what about the hundreds of people who never did anything wrong on their phone and now its bricked? HHHMmmmm. Check out the engadget poll for some knowledge please.
If I correctly understand how the unlocking software works, I would disagree based on what I've seen in the US. As I understand it, in order to unlock the phone, you actually have to change the SIM or download different firmware into the radio. I can't think of a single instance in the US where these types of changes garnered any legal support (pointless car analogies aside).
KittyToy
macrumors 6502
you got the analogy all wrong.... now what if you took that said car in and they told you that if they fixed it, this may damage your engine, then you decided to get it fixed anyway, disregarding everything they told you would happen if they fixed it....so who is really at fault here, they didn't force you to get it fixed and apple didn't force you to get 1.1.1
Digital Skunk
macrumors G3
I agree with the fact that Apple shouldn't have bricked it but you have to remember that Apple isn't a company that is going to cater to people trying to fix the companies mistakes. They locked the phone so game over if you don't want to switch to AT&T. There were other options. The users that hacked the phones to use on T-Mobile's network, I assume, were smart enough to know that updating the software would have destroyed the original programing.
We feel the user's pain, but after hacking into the software and breaking the license agreement and voiding the warranty on the phone, the franken-iPhone user should have been more careful with software updates.
McDonalds lost that lawsuit because they didn't put a warning on the cup that the coffee was extremely hot, now they have it all over the dag-on cup along with caution tape and flashing red lights.
Agreed, as well. Some of the defenses of Apple on this are really kind of nuts. But then, it's a faith for some, and there is no reasoning with the faithful.
You guys so desperately need to read a modern EULA... I recommend the Microsoft one... 🙂
macenforcer
macrumors 65816
I hear you. But would it KILL apple to come out with an updater that flashes the phone, installs update 1.1.1 on there and now the phone works and is still hack proof? That, at the very LEAST they could do. Not doing that makes them a rotten apple.
Yes, that have a responsibility to do the extra programming to fix the illegally hacked phones that people were warned about. The hackers PAYED money for the phones. If they don't do this those paying customers are LOST forever. Plus its the right thing to do.
Macenforcer,
So I guess your actually admiting your were wrong about your comments in another thread about how the iPhone doesn't really run OS X? I remember you writing in another thread that to say the iPhone runs OS X is like saying a Windows Mobile phone runs Vista. Except you were wrong as the iPhone really does run OS X with the only difference being it launches the Springboard.app instead of Finder.app and Windows Mobile couldn't be running a Vista kernel because when Windows CE was developed it was built with an entirely different kernel. So are you now admitting you were wrong?
My honest opinion is this is more AT&T than Apple. I'm sure the exclusivity contract Apple signed with AT&T states that Apple must do anything possible to ensure the iPhones don't make their way to other carriers. As I stated earlier... To get the iPhone on another carrier you must change out the SIM. The modem in the iPhone had firmware to only allow AT&T SIMS. So you have to change the firmware in the modem itself (note this is not the iPhone firmware/OS). In order to change the firmware in the modem you'll likely need file system access on the iPhone itself. Easiest fix is to lock down the iPhone firmware/OS. Doing this also blocks 3rd party apps. If you open the iPhone to third party apps you also open up the ability to reflash the modem. Now Apple could simply create a chroot'd environment on the iphone for 3rd party apps (and maybe they will). But this likely will take a lot of testing on their part.
Why do I think this is more AT&T than Apple??
1.) Why hasn't Apple stopped iTV hacks?
2.) AT&T has more to lose in freely available apps. Apple is a hardware company first, they already made their money on the iphone when you bought it. AT&T hopes to make more money by perhaps offering/selling apps (think Verizon GetIt Now (TM).
3.) Why did Apple initially say they would do nothing to block 3rd party apps then recant that?
Digital Skunk
macrumors G3
I don't like cool aid and i am sure that the comment wasn't directed towards me.
Anyway, the license agreement you agree to says a bunch of words, a few stating that you have to use the software for what it's intended for, not your own greedy purposes. No one is trying to be an Apple fanboy or support what Apple did, we are just the ones that aren't taking it so far as to think that Apple was wrong for doing what it did.
The hacks DID modify the original software which was only supposed to run the phone on the AT&T network and nothing else... besides, no one here besides a devo can say what the software did or didn't do.
Those angry at Apple need to just take a step back for a minute and really think about what Apple did. I don't like anything about the iPhone or Steve's decisions on it, where the hell is my Gamer Mac and so forth! Apple makes mistakes and does things that some people may no like, but what company doesn't?
macenforcer
macrumors 65816
sure, because it's up to apple to facilitate the customers' hacking.
if you unlocked, you knew the risks. tough luck.
skunk
macrumors G4
It's really very simple. Those who bought an iPhone and unlocked it were acting in bad faith. The update was optional. Apple gave a very clear warning of the possible consequences to hacked phones. Some people ignored the warnings. There's no telling some people. You say: "Look out, the bridge is out ahead! Stop now. If you don't, you will crash." But they still drive straight over the edge. What more can you do?
macenforcer
macrumors 65816
Umm, put up a roadblock so people don't go flying over the bridge, fix the bridge before people crash, help them if they crash because it was your damn fault you had not built a sturdier bridge. Maybe?
skunk
macrumors G4
I guess you'd be with the cat burglar who sued the school he was robbing when he fell through the glass roof.
the real problem
I think that the real problem with this whole 'Did Apple do the right thing or not debate' is that some of us expect more from Apple then we do other vendors. If any other vendor did this 'function removing update' no one would even care...it would be expected and accepted as being wrong but as part of the way things are. Apple however is not allowed to be wrong or bad...we want them to represent what is right and good and the way that the world should be. However the truth is, is that Apple is just a large company that is trying to make us much money as humanly possible. The hope that they can provide an escape in an otherwise ruthless world is probably unfair and that we shouldn't expect more from them then an iPod or an iPhone...shrug...pass the Cool Aid I am out of hope
I think that the real problem with this whole 'Did Apple do the right thing or not debate' is that some of us expect more from Apple then we do other vendors. If any other vendor did this 'function removing update' no one would even care...it would be expected and accepted as being wrong but as part of the way things are. Apple however is not allowed to be wrong or bad...we want them to represent what is right and good and the way that the world should be. However the truth is, is that Apple is just a large company that is trying to make us much money as humanly possible. The hope that they can provide an escape in an otherwise ruthless world is probably unfair and that we shouldn't expect more from them then an iPod or an iPhone...shrug...pass the Cool Aid I am out of hope
iPhone adjusting route - best advice
I wonder why iPapy does not get rid of all his Mob / Cell / WL gurus and advicers.
Long time not seen such a bad start from the Apple. The real good iDea is to jump both feet into the telecom.
Open the .Mac to telephone communication.
VOiP is already behind us. Wake up! Forget all old telecoms in their boneyard.
iPhone is so much steps ahead of anything else and many of us so willing to go with it, that the only think really refraining us from doing so is the bad bad logic of Mobile world which assumes we are all followers.
ciao
I wonder why iPapy does not get rid of all his Mob / Cell / WL gurus and advicers.
Long time not seen such a bad start from the Apple. The real good iDea is to jump both feet into the telecom.
Open the .Mac to telephone communication.
VOiP is already behind us. Wake up! Forget all old telecoms in their boneyard.
iPhone is so much steps ahead of anything else and many of us so willing to go with it, that the only think really refraining us from doing so is the bad bad logic of Mobile world which assumes we are all followers.
ciao
macenforcer
macrumors 65816
ngdesign
macrumors member
Man.. how can you compare this to an iPhone?
adding 3rd party software won't kill a person's life. If they just stop the warranty.. thats understandable.. but intentionally brick it by changing the codex?? thats just messed up
And you have to get out more, and check what's enforceable and what's not. Apple could have included a clause that if you hack the iPhone, they can take your house - it doesn't mean they really can. Well, not unless you are a sucker and believe everything Apple does is right. There are states where EULAs are not taken as gospel by the courts and Apple can in fact be sued.
When you walk into the Apple Store, you are not pulled aside by the sales clerk and walked through the EULA. No, they sell you the phone, take your money, then send you home to "easily" activate your phone. For most, this easy activation does not include meeting for a couple of hours with their attorney, to discuss Apple's EULA, or the opportunity to negotiate amendments.