Exactly what I thought. Thanks for the info.
YO KZIN! Here's your proof. But I told you so.
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
Exactly what I thought. Thanks for the info.
YO KZIN! Here's your proof. But I told you so.
It's an Apple
Let the people at Apple decide what's best for the iphone. If we let 3rd party apps in the iphone without approvel from Apple, then we're going to end up with the iWindows95 phone and i'm not paying 600 dollars for that. Also, if people decide to install 3rd party apps when they were warned not to, then stop the whinning once you realize your iPhone stopped working.
Hey, it's a great gadget just the way it is. Don't try to rush to make the iPhone do things is not ready for yet. It'll come. Remember, Noah didn't built his ark in one day, God didn't create the world in one day and it took over 15 years for Apple to complete the iPhone project. Don't ruin it in with cheap 3rd party apps.
Let the people at Apple decide what's best for the iphone. If we let 3rd party apps in the iphone without approvel from Apple, then we're going to end up with the iWindows95 phone and i'm not paying 600 dollars for that. Also, if people decide to install 3rd party apps when they were warned not to, then stop the whinning once you realize your iPhone stopped working.
Hey, it's a great gadget just the way it is. Don't try to rush to make the iPhone do things is not ready for yet. It'll come. Remember, Noah didn't built his ark in one day, God didn't create the world in one day and it took over 15 years for Apple to complete the iPhone project. Don't ruin it in with cheap 3rd party apps.
Whilst Apple are in their right to counter unlocked phones... there is absolutely no reason why apple should brick these phones. They could easily reset the lock, or force the user to reload.
I don't understand the mentality of Apple. sure if you unlock, you break the warranty - thats fine. However, bricking phones is a different story - that is a delibrate act.
Noah didn't exist, its all fairy stories
I don't understand the mentality of Apple. sure if you unlock, you break the warranty - thats fine. However, bricking phones is a different story - that is a delibrate act.
Noah didn't exist, its all fairy stories
Let the people at Apple decide what's best for the iphone. If we let 3rd party apps in the iphone without approvel from Apple, then we're going to end up with the iWindows95 phone and i'm not paying 600 dollars for that. Also, if people decide to install 3rd party apps when they were warned not to, then stop the whinning once you realize your iPhone stopped working.
Hey, it's a great gadget just the way it is. Don't try to rush to make the iPhone do things is not ready for yet. It'll come. Remember, Noah didn't built his ark in one day, God didn't create the world in one day and it took over 15 years for Apple to complete the iPhone project. Don't ruin it in with cheap 3rd party apps.
Let the people at Apple decide what's best for the iphone. If we let 3rd party apps in the iphone without approvel from Apple, then we're going to end up with the iWindows95 phone and i'm not paying 600 dollars for that. Also, if people decide to install 3rd party apps when they were warned not to, then stop the whinning once you realize your iPhone stopped working.
Hey, it's a great gadget just the way it is. Don't try to rush to make the iPhone do things is not ready for yet. It'll come. Remember, Noah didn't built his ark in one day, God didn't create the world in one day and it took over 15 years for Apple to complete the iPhone project. Don't ruin it in with cheap 3rd party apps.
God let Noah load 3rd party animals on the ark.
Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. Ultimately, it is up to the customers to decided what is best for themselves. If Apple refuses to meet their expectations, they will refuse to buy Apple's products. Apple will have to go sit in the corner by themselves and think about how 'right' they are while all their customers disappear. Just like has happened many times before in their history.
I'm as big of fan of Apple and their products as anybody on this forum, but will at least one of you apologists please explain to me your complete and utter failure to grasp basic marketing?
You guys have gotten so absurd in your pathetic attempts to make excuses for one of Apple's greatest follies, that I am half convinced you apologists are really trolls working for Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, et. al. who are desperately trying to keep Apple from realizing and correcting their obvious mistake in customer relations.
Hmm. The iPhone runs OS/X. The Mac runs OS/X. Third party developers provide countless applications for Mac OS/X without Apple's approval. Apple even encourages it.
So, you are saying that Mac OS/X has become Windows95...?
Seriously dude, I think you might want to go rethink just how absurd your comment was and then come back here to revise your remark.
Here's to the crazy one's...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a40BQ8ThsTc&eurl=http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/
"Okay, we get it. You took the soundtrack from our old ad about "Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels ..." and you put it over a list of third-party iPhone apps that we're crushing under the heavy treads of our Apple Panzerkampfwagens. And sure, people are wondering, has Apple changed? Now that the company is riding high, are they different? Less free? Less open? The answer is that of course we have not changed one single bit except in the ways where we've had to change to deal with business realities and even in those ways we haven't really changed except in the sense where occasionally we've had to readjust our priorities or releverage our emphasis and focus in order to achieve greater synergies across a more diverse set of constituents and a wider range of opportunities. Or something. Yeah. Like that. And yes, we believe that this video does represent an inappropriate appropriation of our copyrighted material; and though you might argue that this use is permitted under the concept of "fair use" and in fact you would likely prevail in court, we're still probably going to sue your frigtarded a$$ and lock you up in a long and costly court battle which will drain your bank account dry and ruin your life. Much love, ******. Peace out."
-Fake Steve Jobs, http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/
Saw this posted on the "Fake Steve Jobs" blog (really funny blog I highly recommend). I thought it was extremely well done, and summed up my feelings regarding Apple's stance on the iPhone. A lot of people are new to Apple, and have forgotten or never knew what Apple's stance is/was: being different. This belief is as true now as it was ten years ago, yet it seems Apple has forgotten their own reason d'être. Remember that in all this iPhone debating.
"Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The trouble-makers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They're not fond of rules, and they have no respect for the status-quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify, or vilify them. But the only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do." —Apple, 1997
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a40BQ8ThsTc&eurl=http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/
"Okay, we get it. You took the soundtrack from our old ad about "Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels ..." and you put it over a list of third-party iPhone apps that we're crushing under the heavy treads of our Apple Panzerkampfwagens. And sure, people are wondering, has Apple changed? Now that the company is riding high, are they different? Less free? Less open? The answer is that of course we have not changed one single bit except in the ways where we've had to change to deal with business realities and even in those ways we haven't really changed except in the sense where occasionally we've had to readjust our priorities or releverage our emphasis and focus in order to achieve greater synergies across a more diverse set of constituents and a wider range of opportunities. Or something. Yeah. Like that. And yes, we believe that this video does represent an inappropriate appropriation of our copyrighted material; and though you might argue that this use is permitted under the concept of "fair use" and in fact you would likely prevail in court, we're still probably going to sue your frigtarded a$$ and lock you up in a long and costly court battle which will drain your bank account dry and ruin your life. Much love, ******. Peace out."
-Fake Steve Jobs, http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/
Saw this posted on the "Fake Steve Jobs" blog (really funny blog I highly recommend). I thought it was extremely well done, and summed up my feelings regarding Apple's stance on the iPhone. A lot of people are new to Apple, and have forgotten or never knew what Apple's stance is/was: being different. This belief is as true now as it was ten years ago, yet it seems Apple has forgotten their own reason d'être. Remember that in all this iPhone debating.
"Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The trouble-makers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They're not fond of rules, and they have no respect for the status-quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify, or vilify them. But the only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do." —Apple, 1997
Not really. This whole Mac vs. iPhone argument is flawed. Third parties can develop apps for both platforms, however there are fewer restrictions on the Mac. On the iPhone the only sanctioned development avenue is Web 2.
Third parties develop countless apps for the Mac because it is intentionally open to them and no certification process is needed.
This does not mean the same has to be true for the iPhone, if for no other reason than to prevent people from trying to unlock the phone. Opening up the iPhone will make hacking much easier.
When I purchased the iPhone I knew exactly what was and was not allowed. I did not expect an open Smartphone and I didn't want an open Smartphone.
If someone wants an open Smartphone there are plenty of choices on the market so why bash Apple for something they clearly stated ahead of time?
If you want to bash Apple, ask them to create a new model that actually is an open Smartphone and wait until it comes out, 'cause the current model ain't an open Smartphone. There are plenty of other choices on the market so give your money to someone else. Buyer beware.
More like a Königstiger. I too am wondering what is happening on this "bricking" front, and I do not like what I see. It is software, afterall, so a clean wipe of the iPhone with the firmware would have been acceptable.
No, it's proof that the update affects them specifically, not that the update was malicious. The fact that they DO have a mechanism for fixing it, and will perform it says that they're not merely being malicious. Obtuse (for requiring such hoops to get it reversed), sure. But it's not proof of malicious intent.
For example, it may have just been a bugfix to anti-unlocking code that was in the iPhone from day one, but just wasn't doing its job properly. That's not maliciously bricking phones that have been unlocked for X days. That's fixing a bug that was supposed to have disabled the phone the day it was unlocked, enforcing the EULA immediately.
That's not malicious. It's heavy handed, and deliberate, but it's not malicious.
After having tested, re-tested, unlocked, pseudo-relocked, re-unlocked and finally having upgraded my iPhone to 1.1.1 - my opinion is that the "bricking" of unlocked iPhones was not intentionally done by Apple.
Interesting note - the iphonesimfree unlock survives the 1.1.1 upgrade just fine, where the iunlock/anysim unlock does not (as we've seen.) I tried the IPSF myself, as a way to back out of the iUnlock solution, which I'd previously applied. Since I have a valid AT&T SIM card, I was able to activate my phone without a hitch after going to 1.1.1. One interesting point this brings up is that Apple was being dishonest when they stated that iUnlock/AnySim "permanently damages" the firmware.
This won't be helpful to most people, since not many who unlocked their iPhones have valid AT&T SIM cards. Also, the IPSF unlock is fee based. And as always, there are no guarantees that down the road another update by Apple won't break the IPSF unlock, too. But having seen and read pretty much every discussion about 1.1.1 over the past week, it really does not appear that Apple intentionally set out to break phones. They absolutely set out to stop jailbreaking, which IMO is a big mistake on their part. But that's a whole other debate apart from unlocking.
Interesting note - the iphonesimfree unlock survives the 1.1.1 upgrade just fine, where the iunlock/anysim unlock does not (as we've seen.) I tried the IPSF myself, as a way to back out of the iUnlock solution, which I'd previously applied. Since I have a valid AT&T SIM card, I was able to activate my phone without a hitch after going to 1.1.1. One interesting point this brings up is that Apple was being dishonest when they stated that iUnlock/AnySim "permanently damages" the firmware.
This won't be helpful to most people, since not many who unlocked their iPhones have valid AT&T SIM cards. Also, the IPSF unlock is fee based. And as always, there are no guarantees that down the road another update by Apple won't break the IPSF unlock, too. But having seen and read pretty much every discussion about 1.1.1 over the past week, it really does not appear that Apple intentionally set out to break phones. They absolutely set out to stop jailbreaking, which IMO is a big mistake on their part. But that's a whole other debate apart from unlocking.
Wait a minute
What is the difference between "malicious" and "heavy-handed and deliberate".
By the way, you are all hilarious. People are getting blown to bits around the world, believing they are right, remember, none of this really matters. Next year, it will be another gadget, another company, whatever.
But if you can't relax that is also ok, because I'm still with all of you nuts, all 20 pages on this site, and the other sites too... can't wait to see the next turn of the page.
What is the difference between "malicious" and "heavy-handed and deliberate".
By the way, you are all hilarious. People are getting blown to bits around the world, believing they are right, remember, none of this really matters. Next year, it will be another gadget, another company, whatever.
But if you can't relax that is also ok, because I'm still with all of you nuts, all 20 pages on this site, and the other sites too... can't wait to see the next turn of the page.
The iPhone is 4 months old.
All this whining sounds like it is coming from babies even younger than that.
All this whining sounds like it is coming from babies even younger than that.
Or how 'bout this? After years of seeing the fruits of wild west development in Windows (and the accompanying security/usability nightmares), perhaps Joe and Jane Public are responding enthusiastically to a well-designed, but safely locked down phone that actually allows them to use its advertised features without worrying that it will suddenly grow horns.
How 'bout that in their eyes of people terrorized by every virus they read about when they watch the news, YOU'RE the problem, not Apple.
I think this approach may actually be a stroke of brilliance.
Oh yeah... up another $3 today. Boy those investors must be really stupid, huh?
There were still more crying from americans who didn't understand that technology devalues in price, especially phones!
Lets cut through all the arguing and get to the truth!
The unlocking issue and whether Apple is intentionally bricking phones is complicated. Apple has some wiggle room (legally, "socially") here in regards to the contract with AT&T. But you do have cases where someone is a prior AT&T customer who activated on a different AT&T SIM because of the initial problems with activation and still got 'bricked' in the update. For these reasons, I am going to leave it be and focus on a more pressing issue:
Everyone keeps fighting back and forth about Apple going out of their way to remove 3rd party applications and/or disabling phones with 3rd party applications.
I want to know the outstanding evidence (or truth) of the matter with technical details. I have not had any direct experience with the iPhone other than what I have read over on IRC and the "Hackintosh" website.
My limited knowledge, however, would lead me to believe the following:
1) Though many people argue that Apple is not required to test their updates with third party hacks, It appears to me that the system software/firmware Apple would be modifying in an update SHOULD NOT HAVE TO interfere with/overwrite any third party applications someone has installed. I'm assuming the application space stays separate from the system software.
2) It also appears to me that if Apple truly wanted to remain neutral with respect to 3rd party applications, they could have easily decided to encrypt and "digitally sign" JUST the baseband/modem firmware which would allow them to prevent unlocking, and at the same time not completely obstruct/lock down the ongoing 3rd party application development.
No matter what the truth is and who's to blame for what, it should be obvious to everyone that Apple has really gotten themselves stuck between a rock and a hard place. I haven't seen such a PR blunder like this from Cupertino in a long time. The real killer was the Apple marketing VP comment about being neutral to 3rd party applications and then having the iPhone update completely remove all the applications and then lockdown the whole system with encryption. ouch.
Alas, If you have the technical experience with the iPhone architecture necessary to comment on my questions/presumptions PLEASE DO. I would like for the community to have this information so they quit arguing about it once and for all.
The unlocking issue and whether Apple is intentionally bricking phones is complicated. Apple has some wiggle room (legally, "socially") here in regards to the contract with AT&T. But you do have cases where someone is a prior AT&T customer who activated on a different AT&T SIM because of the initial problems with activation and still got 'bricked' in the update. For these reasons, I am going to leave it be and focus on a more pressing issue:
Everyone keeps fighting back and forth about Apple going out of their way to remove 3rd party applications and/or disabling phones with 3rd party applications.
I want to know the outstanding evidence (or truth) of the matter with technical details. I have not had any direct experience with the iPhone other than what I have read over on IRC and the "Hackintosh" website.
My limited knowledge, however, would lead me to believe the following:
1) Though many people argue that Apple is not required to test their updates with third party hacks, It appears to me that the system software/firmware Apple would be modifying in an update SHOULD NOT HAVE TO interfere with/overwrite any third party applications someone has installed. I'm assuming the application space stays separate from the system software.
2) It also appears to me that if Apple truly wanted to remain neutral with respect to 3rd party applications, they could have easily decided to encrypt and "digitally sign" JUST the baseband/modem firmware which would allow them to prevent unlocking, and at the same time not completely obstruct/lock down the ongoing 3rd party application development.
No matter what the truth is and who's to blame for what, it should be obvious to everyone that Apple has really gotten themselves stuck between a rock and a hard place. I haven't seen such a PR blunder like this from Cupertino in a long time. The real killer was the Apple marketing VP comment about being neutral to 3rd party applications and then having the iPhone update completely remove all the applications and then lockdown the whole system with encryption. ouch.
Alas, If you have the technical experience with the iPhone architecture necessary to comment on my questions/presumptions PLEASE DO. I would like for the community to have this information so they quit arguing about it once and for all.
Theory
Theory:
Apple needed to protect AT&T's exclusive relationship with them
and needed a way and an excuse to re-establish the exclusivity between
them. If they did not either brick or re-lock hacked iPhones, AT&T
could sue Apple for a breach of contract. It would be a bigger loss,
financially, to lose AT&T than to lose a few thousand consumers.
Theory:
Apple needed to protect AT&T's exclusive relationship with them
and needed a way and an excuse to re-establish the exclusivity between
them. If they did not either brick or re-lock hacked iPhones, AT&T
could sue Apple for a breach of contract. It would be a bigger loss,
financially, to lose AT&T than to lose a few thousand consumers.
Nice measured post.
Yes. The PR involved in all this is terrible. Even Nokia have piled on, along with most of the world's press. It's safe t say the way this has been handled has involved far more people than just the unlockers/3rd party app installer people (not hackers, they are the the folk that initially opened it up).
This might work in the favour of 3rd party apps being allowed back again (when the official SDK is available, after Leopard is out of the way. See my previous posts) - as Apple try to salvage some good feeling from this.
Either that or we'll see some more aps from Apple possibly before xmas.
It's very interesting to watch how this will unfold.
It's interesting that you bring this up. I keep saying this, because I read Gizmodo report this fact, but in the heat of it all, they still disagree, even though this fact alone flies in the face of that.
Agreed. --And, I don't think they set out to stop jailbreaking per se, either. I think they set out to stop arbitrary code execution and buffer overrun issues (along with a host of other security related issues). There is also a problem with all of their apps running as root, without the same security confirmations their desktop system has. As a closed system, adding a layer of security isn't really about stopping jailbreaks, as generally no one should be in the system in the first place.
I think in their view, if people get jailbreak apps running again, that's their business, but they're not setting out to defeat them specifically (which is what they said). In later responses, they did amend that "3rd party apps" would probably NOT work after the update. It's clear they never really wanted to officially comment on it.
If the way applications were running were the way Apple intended them to operate in perpetuity, then you're correct, however, if Apple acknowledged serious security issues with the OS and decided to manage applications more securely, then you're NOT correct. Let's not forget... currently OSX and Microsoft Vista both require user approval before executing most lower-level procedures. The iPhone has NO SUCH security in place, and all its apps run as ROOT. Apple never intended anyone to get in their yet, so its a time-bomb waiting for someone to find another buffer-overrun in Safari, and begin arbitrary code execution on the handset from a webpage or maybe a WiFi security hole. It seems very clear Apple is planning some form of 3rd party support, but the OS is simply not ready for primetime... to be open like a gaping maw, and suddenly, Apple's going to be holding the bad when the security problems roll in.
Remember, when the device launched, there was some very strongly worded comments that it did not have enough security in place for the enterprise. I think it seems clear to me (and anyone else who gives it some thought) that however Apple is setting things up now, it will require much more intention to put an executable on the handset and have it execute code. This is a GOOD THING, however inconvenient it was to previous hacks.
~ CB
All those people who are now left with rather expensive paperweights bought the iPhone knowing what was what. How is this a PR blunder? The jailbreak community is possibly suffering delusions of grandeur in thinking the world stage gives a toss that they did something silly.
My Thoughts
It seems like there are unhappy campers on both sides of the fence. So hopefully my experience will provide some balance. I have lived and worked in Hong Kong for the last 15 years and have been an Apple user since 1984 ( Please note that although I prefer apple products ,I'm not an Apple Fan-boy and have had my fair share of frustrations with Apple over those years).
So when the iphone was released I was very interested in getting one. However, as there was no known release date for Hong Kong my only options were to buy an unlocked version, or wait indefinitely . Like most things here the phone (unlocked) was available almost immediately so I went to the store and purchased one. The guy in the store specifically told me not to update the phone as this may end up bricking it. He gave me a guarantee (obviously not an Apple one) on the hardware for one year as long as i didn't update the firmware. It was very clear to me that I was walking out of the store with a phone that may never be able to be updated. It was a gamble I was prepared to take.
End result. I have a working iphone(1.0.2) with some great third party apps that I can use world wide on whatever network I desire. I don't even think about 1.1.1 because as I said when I left the store I knew it was highly unlikely that I would be able to carry out future updates.
Today I passed by the store to pickup a iphone for the wife. The store owner gave me the same deal and said when/if they found a workaround for 1.1.1 he would let me know. He did however say they had a workaround for the speaker volume. So an hour later I picked up my phone and true to his word my volume control had more high end range ( probably a little too high IMO).
I'm very happy with my phone but. if it stops working (update or no update) I only have myself to blame.
Do I think Apple is deliberately bricking phones on purpose? Probably not (maybe the unlocked ones due legal obligations with AT&T).
Do I think Apple can unbrick all phones ? Absolutely
I don't think it will be too long before there is a workaround for 1.1.1( for those who want it) I'm sure there are many busy people working on giving people options that Apple don't provide. In the mean time I'll enjoy my phone just the way it is!
It seems like there are unhappy campers on both sides of the fence. So hopefully my experience will provide some balance. I have lived and worked in Hong Kong for the last 15 years and have been an Apple user since 1984 ( Please note that although I prefer apple products ,I'm not an Apple Fan-boy and have had my fair share of frustrations with Apple over those years).
So when the iphone was released I was very interested in getting one. However, as there was no known release date for Hong Kong my only options were to buy an unlocked version, or wait indefinitely . Like most things here the phone (unlocked) was available almost immediately so I went to the store and purchased one. The guy in the store specifically told me not to update the phone as this may end up bricking it. He gave me a guarantee (obviously not an Apple one) on the hardware for one year as long as i didn't update the firmware. It was very clear to me that I was walking out of the store with a phone that may never be able to be updated. It was a gamble I was prepared to take.
End result. I have a working iphone(1.0.2) with some great third party apps that I can use world wide on whatever network I desire. I don't even think about 1.1.1 because as I said when I left the store I knew it was highly unlikely that I would be able to carry out future updates.
Today I passed by the store to pickup a iphone for the wife. The store owner gave me the same deal and said when/if they found a workaround for 1.1.1 he would let me know. He did however say they had a workaround for the speaker volume. So an hour later I picked up my phone and true to his word my volume control had more high end range ( probably a little too high IMO).
I'm very happy with my phone but. if it stops working (update or no update) I only have myself to blame.
Do I think Apple is deliberately bricking phones on purpose? Probably not (maybe the unlocked ones due legal obligations with AT&T).
Do I think Apple can unbrick all phones ? Absolutely
I don't think it will be too long before there is a workaround for 1.1.1( for those who want it) I'm sure there are many busy people working on giving people options that Apple don't provide. In the mean time I'll enjoy my phone just the way it is!
Hmm, it seems a bit late now but why didn't, doesn't Apple just say, if you're phone is locked after the update it's $100 to fix it. No waranttee for those who try and hack stuff in. Simple, cost effective and sensible.
Why should Apple have to repair someones hacking?
Mind you, it should have said somewhere during the purchase of the phone.
No hacking, No 3rd party apps etc. If you do, it could or will cost $100 for resetting the phone and all you're info is lost.
Done
Later
Why should Apple have to repair someones hacking?
Mind you, it should have said somewhere during the purchase of the phone.
No hacking, No 3rd party apps etc. If you do, it could or will cost $100 for resetting the phone and all you're info is lost.
Done
Later
Apple Isn't.
Hey guys. My intention is not to further upset, but to ease some of the opinions being thrown back-and-forth about Apple Inc. in regards to the iPhone 1.1.1 update with a few facts.
To the Unlockers: the biggest piece of information to consider before getting upset with Apple is the fact that Apple is not out on a hunt to get you and punish you for unlocking the phone. No. The reason why Apple is taking these measures is because they must protect their partnership with AT&T. Apple must protect this relationship for not only legal reasons but also in an attempt to follow good business practices.
Honestly guys, lets stop for a minute and think how it would appear if Apple--after publicizing this so-called multi-year contract with AT&T--turned a blind eye to unlockers.
It would be ridiculous!
It's also wise to keep in mind that while the iPhone may have been in development for several years, it is still early in it's release. In addition to that fact, the mobile phone and mobile service world is a very new venture for Apple and this requires the patience of savvy consumers in-the-know.
Apple is expanding iPhone as quickly as possible with the iPhone arriving in Germany on 09-Nov via T-Mobile and arriving in the U.K. on 09-Nov via O2.
Yes for some people it's of a real urgency that they have an unlocked phone to swap 4 or 5 sim cards out or more; however, Apple never said that the iPhone would be crafted for everyone and each of their specific needs. The good news, is that Apple listens to their consumers and will likely deliver the "missing" capabilities.
The iPhone is showcased as a Revolutionary Mobile Phone, a Widescreen iPod, and a Breakthrough Internet Device. All issues aside, it would be quite hard to argue that the iPhone is not delivering in each of these capacities.
This is a first for Apple and it's NEVER perfect the first time: however, I say kudos for what Apple has done to the mobile industry in an unbelievably short time frame...the first time!
Rome was not built in a day and even if it was; what did you do before the iPhone - or can't you remember?
Vm
Hey guys. My intention is not to further upset, but to ease some of the opinions being thrown back-and-forth about Apple Inc. in regards to the iPhone 1.1.1 update with a few facts.
To the Unlockers: the biggest piece of information to consider before getting upset with Apple is the fact that Apple is not out on a hunt to get you and punish you for unlocking the phone. No. The reason why Apple is taking these measures is because they must protect their partnership with AT&T. Apple must protect this relationship for not only legal reasons but also in an attempt to follow good business practices.
Honestly guys, lets stop for a minute and think how it would appear if Apple--after publicizing this so-called multi-year contract with AT&T--turned a blind eye to unlockers.
It would be ridiculous!
It's also wise to keep in mind that while the iPhone may have been in development for several years, it is still early in it's release. In addition to that fact, the mobile phone and mobile service world is a very new venture for Apple and this requires the patience of savvy consumers in-the-know.
Apple is expanding iPhone as quickly as possible with the iPhone arriving in Germany on 09-Nov via T-Mobile and arriving in the U.K. on 09-Nov via O2.
Yes for some people it's of a real urgency that they have an unlocked phone to swap 4 or 5 sim cards out or more; however, Apple never said that the iPhone would be crafted for everyone and each of their specific needs. The good news, is that Apple listens to their consumers and will likely deliver the "missing" capabilities.
The iPhone is showcased as a Revolutionary Mobile Phone, a Widescreen iPod, and a Breakthrough Internet Device. All issues aside, it would be quite hard to argue that the iPhone is not delivering in each of these capacities.
This is a first for Apple and it's NEVER perfect the first time: however, I say kudos for what Apple has done to the mobile industry in an unbelievably short time frame...the first time!
Rome was not built in a day and even if it was; what did you do before the iPhone - or can't you remember?
Vm
Yeah, it certainly was all about the user's security (as in viruses, buffer overflows etc.) from the very beginning, that's why all applications are running as root and a Safari or Mail exploit can take over the entire phone. Very "safely locked down phone" indeed.
As has been posted before, unlocking a phone is legal and the EULA cannot (and in fact does not) violate applicable law.
Everyone who hacked an 1.0.2 phone and instantly updated to 1.1.1 is an idiot. There were warnings allover the place (not by Apple actually), that you should never update to a new firmware without checking compatibility first.
However, because Apple has chosen the greedy route, everyone who actually wants to use the phone for what it is and not just show off (aaaaaaah, CoverFlow) needs to stay at 1.0.2 or downgrade to 1.0.2, obviously without security patches. I wonder what Apple is going to do about this, issue special patches like Microsoft is doing for those who have pirated their copy of Windows?
How is this a PR blunder? Are you asking how this is a PR blunder?
Are you for real???
As we speak, Apple are about to flush down the toilet more goodwill than most companies in existence can ever dream of attaining. That's how big this is.
This is a world-class tier-one PR-nightmare, and by now there is very little Apple can do about it. The worst part is that, unless Apple somehow manage to contain it, this will not end with the iPhone. The goodwill-drain might also spread to other products. If that happens - the mighty brand it self will start taking direct hits.
At this point I'll say it's hardly more than an academic question if Apple is to blame or not. All people will hear/read/think is that Apple purposely destroyed it's own products thru a software-update. The details will disappear in the fog of war and with them future costumers. And that is very bad indeed.
There is blood in the water and both the media and competition is smelling it. And they will not let this blunder, handed to them on a silver-platter, get away.
This will cost Apple dearly:
- There will likely be far fewer sales going into the holiday season
- They can more or less forget about selling them in Europe. It's not like the iPhone was/is perfect, but up to now the coolness easily outweighed any drawback, but this is a game-changer
- Apple will not be able to sell anywhere near ten million units thru 2008
- Serious questions will be raised about the business-model for the iPhone (ground zero)
- AAPL is heading for a downgrade
- RDF is dying
Software-update 1.1.1. will go down in history as Apple worst blunder, ever. It will be truly infamous.
Heck of a job, Jobsey