Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple, Friendly to consumers needs? Ha!

There are also many examples of where Apple has been friendly to the consumers needs and desires. They also favour open standards in OS X: Open GL is one I have already mentioned, but there is also H.264, AAC, CalDAV, Open LDAP, Kerberos, Bonjour....

Of the standards and protocols mentioned above, how many did Apple create and donate to the community?
HAHAHHAA! Since when did profiting off the open source community's efforts become a noble offering to the open source/open systems philosophy??

The only new Apple-created defacto 'standard' I've seen lately is DAAP, which is closed and proprietary. They even LOCKED OUT 3rd-party iTunes streaming music clients (open-source linux) in the last Itunes update after some devs reverse engineering DAAP. And yet they don't even PROVIDE ITUNES FOR LINUX.

As many others have said, Its more and more apparent to me how greedy Apple really is, and how they are becoming less and less interested in their customers needs and desires than ever before.

Must be related to their recent successes... Once you get big, rich and mainstream, who needs to please those 'demanding' loyal customers that used to keep them afloat?
 
just crazy

At $600 (and even at $400) the iPhone was/is a very expensive device for its class. Perhaps not the most expensive but it is definitely up there.

All that money for 12-13 apps with no approved way to add more? It just doesn't make sense. This phone could be so much more. It would be like buying a high end computer for $2000 and not being able to load any software. Or buying a Porsche and living in a place where the max speed limit is 35 MPH.

Hey, I own one of these things. I've also got Apple stuff all over the house. I have to say, this is the first major, major mis-step I've seen Apple take since the "re-invention" of the company. The AT&T exclusive deal was marginal... but I was willing to lend the benefit of the doubt. Not this time though.

Jobs really does not understand the phone/PDA market. I got so much use out of my old Palm OS PDAs because it was easy to add well-designed, safe applications to the device. I truly hope Apple gets a wake up call. I'm a bit concerned lately. I just tried the Amazon music store and it is great. I have to wonder why Jobs couldn't broker a deal like that. I wonder if excessive arrogance held them back. You would have to be a complete idiot to buy a song on the iTMS now if it is available for less on Amazon.

Anyway, think of how easy it would be to sell an iPhone if there were thousands of great apps out there (any many of them free!)
 
At $600 (and even at $400) the iPhone was/is a very expensive device for its class. Perhaps not the most expensive but it is definitely up there.

All that money for 12-13 apps with no approved way to add more? It just doesn't make sense. This phone could be so much more. It would be like buying a high end computer for $2000 and not being able to load any software. Or buying a Porsche and living in a place where the max speed limit is 35 MPH.

Hey, I own one of these things. I've also got Apple stuff all over the house. I have to say, this is the first major, major mis-step I've seen Apple take since the "re-invention" of the company. The AT&T exclusive deal was marginal... but I was willing to lend the benefit of the doubt. Not this time though.

Jobs really does not understand the phone/PDA market. I got so much use out of my old Palm OS PDAs because it was easy to add well-designed, safe applications to the device. I truly hope Apple gets a wake up call. I'm a bit concerned lately. I just tried the Amazon music store and it is great. I have to wonder why Jobs couldn't broker a deal like that. I wonder if excessive arrogance held them back. You would have to be a complete idiot to buy a song on the iTMS now if it is available for less on Amazon.

Anyway, think of how easy it would be to sell an iPhone if there were thousands of great apps out there (any many of them free!)

I hear you but I disagree. What the iphone does it does very well, which is what most people bought it for.
The iphone is pretty new, there's more to come for sure:D
The amazon music store suck imo, I went there not nearly as fun to shop for music. The prices are the same for what I was looking for and mp3 is inferior soundwise to aac. So I guess I'm a complete idiot:eek:
 
It seems this thread has wandered off track. Is the iPhone harder to hack now? Some other sites have mentioned it may be next to impossible to keep up with the new encryption schemes. Also does anyone know if the sim hacks change the IMEI? That would really alter the iPhone's owners rights.
 
It seems this thread has wandered off track. Is the iPhone harder to hack now? Some other sites have mentioned it may be next to impossible to keep up with the new encryption schemes. Also does anyone know if the sim hacks change the IMEI? That would really alter the iPhone's owners rights.

I was reading that the reason that why even legit AT&T SIM cards (the ones that came pre-installed) could not be used to activate a previously unlocked iPhone could maybe be because the IMEI number had been modified by the unlocking software. This could possibly have resulted in some kind of mismatch between the phone and it's original SIM.

I don't know for certain whether this is the case, but while we all know unlocking itself isn't illegal, I'm sure I heard a while back that modifying IMEI numbers is.
 
a little off topic but...

What happens at the end of a 2 year AT&T contract in the US with the iphone? Are they obliged to sim unlock it then or do you still have to take one of AT&T's options out to use the phone?
 
What happens at the end of a 2 year AT&T contract in the US with the iphone? Are they obliged to sim unlock it then or do you still have to take one of AT&T's options out to use the phone?

i would very much like to know the answer to that question.
 
What happens at the end of a 2 year AT&T contract in the US with the iphone? Are they obliged to sim unlock it then or do you still have to take one of AT&T's options out to use the phone?
This is a good question, one would hope that at that point an authorized unlock would be provided to the customer. It is at this point that some of the lawyers posting here have said Apple will tread into legal issues if they do not provide an unlock. I'm sure that Apple's very well paid legal team is all over these issues.
 
point taken

That is quite a bold statement you do here, Virgil, without knowing me or my background. ...
Your right. I might have got a bit carried away there, attributing that intention to you personally when, as you say, I don't really know you. I didn't mean it as a personal attack, I was just trying to describe the overall intentions and attitudes of a social group or sub-group to which you seemed to belong.

Seemed to me that you were saying that you were going to make a buck on the thing by selling it on eBay which is certainly in the same ballpark. I guess it depends on the selling price however as to whether you are "screwing someone over" or not.
 
conspiracy theories

Here's what we know. It looks like Apple is locking down the iPhone with encryption and signing, the same way they locked down the iPod Touch. We're working to see what we can find out, if there is a way around it, we will find it.

But this is not a good curve that Apple has thrown at us.
Has anyone but me wondered why Apple did not do this stuff with the original iPhone though?

I mean if Apple knew that by using encryption and signing they could essentially keep everyone out forever, why bother with leaving it open in the first place?

We now know that some of the people on the hacking lists and IRC were reporting directly back to Apple - or at least it seems that way - so was it all just a Trojan Horse operation?

Were they trying to identify the hackers?
Was Apple just looking to see what the most popular hacks were so they could add them themselves?
Was it a PR campaign so they could show that the iPhone could be "attacked" but then Apple can prevail and lock it down with an update?
 
Has anyone but me wondered why Apple did not do this stuff with the original iPhone though?

I mean if Apple knew that by using encryption and signing they could essentially keep everyone out forever, why bother with leaving it open in the first place?
Encryption and signing is not a good way to keep multiple syncs with multiple machines simple and error free. It would be much better if the system could remain open and nobody would take advantage of it. It would be nice to leave my front door unlocked as well...but. We will all pay the price for unauthorized hackers who, after all, are just trying to make a quick buck off of Apple's hard work and our investment in the iPhone.
 
No. Two similar, but separate things. The "web apps" are the official way to create apps for iPhone and Apple fully supports this. The other method, the hacks you hear of, install actual apps on iPhone and void your warranty.

One would think that AT&T would be all over Apple to allow true apps vs web apps to lighten the network load...
 
I hear you but I disagree. What the iphone does it does very well, which is what most people bought it for.

Well, for me, the phone is getting boring. Yeah I can make calls, use safari, and check the weather. And I can do it "in style." (Reminds me of Buzz Lightyear... "this isn't flying... this is FALLING, with STYLE!")

On my Palm devices, I had an app that gave me tide information, an astronomy/night sky star locator type thing, lots of games, etc. Sadly, my iPhone is the most powerful device I've ever held in my hand but it can't do any of those things. Not even a single game of any sort! Webapps just don't cut it. Can't use them on a plane or anywhere where your cell signal sucks, and even then you're doing it over Edge usually which is klunky.

Look, I'm still happy with my iPhone. But again, its like buying a Ferrari and it coming chipped with a speed regulator of 45 mph. It makes absolutely no sense- Apple has went off the deepest of deep ends when it comes to being control freaks.

P.S. By all means, buy your music where you see fit. But I think a lot of blind listening tests will show that Amazon's content is better quality, and a lot of the songs are in fact cheaper, and best of all, NO DRM. What does this mean? I can burn all the files I buy to a CD and my wife can FINALLY play this in her car's factory stereo! Try explaining to a non-computer person why they can't do that with music they legally paid for from some other source. Plus you don't have to worry about "bricking your music" in 20 years when iPods are a thing of the past. Probably more likely that you'll find open source stuff in 20 years for playing stuff like MP3's, even if it is an old format at that time. Although, I have a little hope in my mind that if DRM ever becomes obsolete, Apple would work a deal to help us automatically strip the DRM from the stuff we bought.
 
It has great email, and superb web surfing capabilities - the music and video player are wonderful - I just wish Apple would relinquish some control over the darn thing.
I feel that the email application is lacking some very critical features, like the ability to sort or search your email, and the ability to select which email address (not account) to use when you respond to email or send a new email. To me, these are critical features, and they have crippled the usefulness of the iphone. I can only use the iphone to respond to about 1/4 of the email that I can read on it. There are not any 3rd party applications to fix this, so I'm beginning to wonder if the iPhone was really worth the cost and the hassle.

I hear you but I disagree. What the iphone does it does very well, which is what most people bought it for.
The iphone is pretty new, there's more to come for sure:D
The amazon music store suck imo, I went there not nearly as fun to shop for music.
I hope there will be more to come for the iPhone, and I hope that it actually comes quick. I really like the user interface, but the stock applications are all not all they are cracked up to. The only stock ones that I use on a regular basis are mail and safari, and both are extremely limited in their usefulness, as described above, plus the lack of flash support in Safari.

We will all pay the price for unauthorized hackers who, after all, are just trying to make a quick buck off of Apple's hard work and our investment in the iPhone.
I'm not sure who people think are supposed to be "authorizing" people to develop applications for computers. If everything waited for this, then there wouldn't even be an Apple Corp to begin with. Steve Wozniak, himself, was basically an "unauthorized" hacker when he came up with the prototype of the Apple computer, and it wasn't to make a profit, but to impress the other members of the homebrew computer club that he belonged to. This Steve deserves my respect. The other one, the more famous face of Apple, Inc... Well, he's certainly a briliant marketing genius.

As far as the iPhone eliminating the devices I carry...I only wish it was true. Before the iPhone, I carried my Garmin iQue PDA/GPS, a 6mp Canon camera, my 5G 60 gig ipod and my RAZR. The iPhone doesn't have GPS, only has a 2mp camera without flash and can't store all my music. It DID save me from deciding to carry ANOTHER mobel device to check my email and browse the web, but I technically could have done that on the RAZR. On an average day, I might be able to do without the GPS and the 6mp camera, but they can't ever be very far from me, in case I need it.

I guess the iPhone really is marketed to those with less requirements than me, although it's really a shame. It could be SO much more. It's too bad if Apple is trying to limit it's function be making it harder to develop for.

-jt2
 
I think you're right about it being less phone than you need. I think people have to find the product that fits their needs. I can't mix a movie soundtrack on my iPhone, and that makes me unhappy.
 
when will 1.1.1 be hacked?:confused:

I was about to get an iPhone, but an iphone w/ out 3rd party apps isn't what i was looking for.
 
Has anyone but me wondered why Apple did not do this stuff with the original iPhone though?

I mean if Apple knew that by using encryption and signing they could essentially keep everyone out forever, why bother with leaving it open in the first place?

Maybe to have the best of both worlds.

1) By putting out encrypted software in 1.1.1, they stay in compliance with their carrier contracts. Thus, they keep getting the kickbacks from AT&T and (soon) 02, T-Mobile, et.al.

2) They've let a hackable OS out into the open, which will push sales of the iPhone much higher, as plenty of people across the globe buy themselves iPhones. Apple knows they won't be able to work out carrier agreements in every country, so they might as well sell them some hardware.
 
........We will all pay the price for unauthorized hackers who, after all, are just trying to make a quick buck off of Apple's hard work and our investment in the iPhone.

why is it you think anyone is trying to make a buck off apple or take from them we have payed 400$ 500$ and 600$ so the dollar ringtones are not what makes us upset they don't let 3rd party apps in fact if apple were to allow them and work with the developers they could sell the apps for download and make mega-money the fact that we have to hack our very expensive phones to get 3rd party apps sucks and apple needs to suck it up and let other people develop there product because they are not developing it fast enough what after 3+ months the greatest update is ringtones and double tap for .
 
Usually when you have the device in hand, brute forcing is not required. I am well aware that encryption with large keys is usually intractable to brute-force, but most attacks rely on something simple like the birthday attack. AES is vulnerable to the "related key" attack as well as the chosen plaintext attack. Now, granted, you can't really test this when you have no access to the system that encrypted the segments you want to crack, but, that's a moot point: if the iPhone uses some method of encryption to store segments of its software, then SOMEWHERE in the phone is software that decrypts those segments. Somewhere the key is stored or generated, and it's just a matter of finding where that is.

You could encrypt your data with 4096-bit Rijndael for all I care, as long as you put your secret on the device that's reading it (which you have to do for the device to read it). An encryption scheme is only as good as its weakest link, and if the enemy has its hands on the thing you use to decrypt your messages, then you pretty much might as well have never bothered.

I know a reasonable bit about encrypted executables. they are a royal pain in the butt, and that's why big software companies and virus writers employ them. However, if one can "watch" the execution of the software, one can break the encryption simply by rebuilding the binary from what they saw. Sometimes you can even figure out what method was used to encrypt it and you can mimic that. This is very, very, very different from communication-line security where Alice is trying to talk to Bob, and Eve is trying to listen in on them. This is Alice trying to talk to Bob, when Eve has Bob in her pocket. That's inherently insecure.

You're assuming the keys are held in software. This is what "Trusted Computing" and the TPM chip is all about: keys in hardware, almost impossible to extract.
 
why is it you think anyone is trying to make a buck off apple or take from them we have payed 400$ 500$ and 600$ so the dollar ringtones are not what makes us upset they don't let 3rd party apps in fact if apple were to allow them and work with the developers they could sell the apps for download and make mega-money the fact that we have to hack our very expensive phones to get 3rd party apps sucks and apple needs to suck it up and let other people develop there product because they are not developing it fast enough what after 3+ months the greatest update is ringtones and double tap for .
I'm sure if they didn't have to spend as much time dealing with the sim hacks (I think Apple is working on 3rd party apps by the way) and security issues, then we could have more useful features sooner. The hackers are costing you features and riding the backs of you and Apple for profit.
I think Apple has the right to decide if they want unauthorized hacked apps or their own on the phone. You can decide if it is the right phone for you.
 
I'm sure if they didn't have to spend as much time dealing with the sim hacks (I think Apple is working on 3rd party apps by the way) and security issues, then we could have more useful features sooner. The hackers are costing you features and riding the backs of you and Apple for profit.
I think Apple has the right to decide if they want unauthorized hacked apps or their own on the phone. You can decide if it is the right phone for you.

so when are these 3rd party apps that APPLE is working on going to come out? Why couldn't they wait to have their own apps ready before preventing their own customers from using use the already existing 3rd party apps? It just seems like they have pissed everyone off.
 
so when are these 3rd party apps that APPLE is working on going to come out? Why couldn't they wait to have their own apps ready before preventing their own customers from using use the already existing 3rd party apps? It just seems like they have pissed everyone off.

Everybody is a pretty inclusive word.
I'd say they pissed off a few people.
Most probably are happy about it or don't care. We all want apps. I don't want 3rd part junk though.
I would like numbers supported, vcs file support.
flash, 3g (actually not), copy and paste, iChat, etc. but I don't want unsupported malware. Apple will develop the products that they feel will make people buy their products and generate income. It's just that simple.
 
I've seen a lot of discussion on this forum and wanted to clarify regarding iToner. First, it did not reside on the iPhone, so never breaks Apple's rule about third party apps being on the iPhone. iToner resides on the Mac. It uses iTune's functions to update the iPhone. If it resided on the iPhone, it would be a native app, and could be used by Microsoft Windows users too.

Updating the ring tone list is not about storage space as some have suggested, because even with a video of my youngest granddaughter's foray into the water on a trip to the Gulf and all the photos I've uploaded (over a thousand at this point) of both my granddaughters, son, daughter-in-law, and the cat (mustn't forget the cat), there's still over 5gb available on my 8gb iPhone. So not storage space.

It's not that I can't personalize my iPhone--that's okay with Apple. Although they are much more expensive storage-wise than ringtones, I can attach a picture to each person on my contact list and this facility was one of the things that moved me off my old phone (a Samsung) to the iPhone. I'm already an AT&T customer (have been, since about 1998-99, through all their reincarnations), so didn't object to that. Music is just static content, like photos. Not like some .exe file on the PC that will infiltrate the system and break it, as some have suggested. Particularly when the app syncing those tunes does not even reside on the iPhone. Even the photos weren't enough to move me to the iPhone, however. It was the combination of photos and the ability to download my own ringtones. The latter didn't happen until iToner came out, since I'm opposed to jailbreaks and hacking my phone. So not about a 3rd party app on the iPhone.

I'm a little disappointed. Very disappointed really. I have tinnitus and with the chimes going 24 hours a day, I can't really appreciate the nuances of various tunes to clarify who's attempting to contact me--I can't even hear some of the tunes, because the chimes win every time. What I can do is distinguish human voices (unless they're very melodic, then sometimes, the chimes win). When my son calls, I want to hear his voice, say "Mom, it's me. On the phone. Pick it up." -- or whatever.

I was excited about the iPhone being able to sync to iTunes. I could make my own ringtones on the Mac--standard audio files, after all, and I have tools on my Mac that can catch and create tones--Apple publishes them, and other 3rd party developers recognized by Apple. All the back and forth doesn't change the fact that it could be done before the 1.1.1 upgrade. I can still do it, because I'm not upgrading. And I don't have to install any third party apps on my phone, or hack it, or use jailbreaks. Just a program that uses the calls from Apple's own published functions, but sends over more from my iTunes playlist, than iTunes alone does.

So if the tones don't break the phone, and iTunes holds them just fine, and these static (i.e., non-executable) files don't break my Mac, I'm left swayed by the agruments of those who feel that it's just the new Apple (we can now join the Lemmings in Apples 1984-85 commercials) who no longer desire to empower their customers but only to feed more money to the criminals at the RIAA--who, by the way, have historically only given lip service to the needs of their artists, who having signed away their rights to their music to get recognition when they were young, now frequently find that they have no rights at all and generally see very little income from their efforts.

And for those who believe that all third party developers are part of the evil dark side, remember that Apple holds a developer conference every year and that those developers are not only sanctioned by Apple, but also pay Apple for membership to that club. Ambrosia has been around a long time. Maybe, I'm making inaccurate assumptions, but I'm assuming that Ambrosia and many, if not all of their outside developers, with numerous applications for the Mac on the market, have paid those dues like so many other Mac developers. Apple makes money off third party developers or they wouldn't support them. Third party applications draw people to the Mac--they tend to be innovative and functional. So, technically, third-party developers sell systems for Apple in many cases. In the same way, iToner (a Mac application), was my reason for buying the iPhone.

In any case, my snippet of my son's voice, certainly doesn't belong to the RIAA and like the photos attached to my contacts, and the wallpaper image of my daughter-in-law and granddaughters, should be attachable to him on my contact list. I filled out a survey for AT&T 2 weeks ago, right after I bought the iPhone, and indicated that I thought Apple was very innovative--I've been using Macs at home since 1984, and in my business since well before it was incorporated in 2000. I'm just disappointed that all Steve's empowerment speeches over the years turn out to be nothing more than posturing--not much different, it seems in the end than Scully. Ah, well.
 
I was reading that the reason that why even legit AT&T SIM cards (the ones that came pre-installed) could not be used to activate a previously unlocked iPhone could maybe be because the IMEI number had been modified by the unlocking software.

I just wanted to clarify this from what I know (which may not necessarily be correct as I have just picked it up from reading many forum posts). The way the dev team unlock works is by setting an fake "unlock token" in the phone, then having the modem firmware ("baseband") patched slightly, so that when this token is checked, it passes inspection, even though it is the wrong number. It doesn't actually change the IMEI at all. However, when that modem firmware is updated to an unpatched version (say with the 1.1.1 update), the unlock token is detected as being incorrect, and the phone puts itself into a sort of "lockdown" mode where it shows a generic warning IMEI. This is why if you remove the SIM and restart, the normal IMEI will show, as the phone is not running the unlock check.

So if this is all correct, it should be simply a matter of Apple removing the unlock token during the update, then all would work fine (of course the phone would go back to being locked!). Why Apple chose to not do this is unclear to me, but they've decided to leave it there and cause the "bricks" instead.
 
I've used many of these web 2.0 applications, and many of them are nice - WHEN you have a connection to the web. I tried using a web 2.0 To Do list and needed to call it up when I was in a building and found out that because there was no WiFi and I had no good phone signal, I couldn't get to my To Do list - This happened too many times for me to appreciate these apps. The function great when you have a good connection to the web, but since they aren't native, you can't always use them. One HUGE drawback if you ask me.

I also tried the ToDoList online, it was slow and it took too long to connect via EDGE. My office is in a basement level with no EDGE and no Wifi. Now I have the ToDistList App, it is fast works well.

Web 2.0 will not cut it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.