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 2.0 Firmware Jailbroken and Unlocked
- Thread starter andybno1
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mostly true. You can Jailbreak without Unlocking, but you can't Unlock without Jailbreaking.
What about people who are existing ATT customers but not iphone plan owners -- can you bypass activation without Jailbreaking or unlocking and just use your ATT SIM?
Question about updating to 2.0 on a soft-updated 1.1.3 iphone
Hi everyone
I have a 1.1.2 OTB iphone, which I had jailbroken and soft-updated to 1.1.3 (seems like ages back, right)? I wanted to update to 2.0. I'm with ATT. Do you think I can update right away (I had "hactivated") my phone back then. I'm worried it might get deactivated if I update to 2.0.
Advice?
Thanks,
Nash
Hi everyone
I have a 1.1.2 OTB iphone, which I had jailbroken and soft-updated to 1.1.3 (seems like ages back, right)? I wanted to update to 2.0. I'm with ATT. Do you think I can update right away (I had "hactivated") my phone back then. I'm worried it might get deactivated if I update to 2.0.
Advice?
Thanks,
Nash
ZiPhone lets you just jailbreak. At least it did. Pwnage hasn't been released for 2.0 because Apple hasn't put 2.0 back out there for download yet.
Or maybe they have.... Hey guys, I'm on 1.1.3 and in Indiana. Is 2.0 out there yet? It still says that I should upgrade to 1.1.4. I was under the impression that I didn't need to to be able to get to 2.0. Is that the case, or is 2.0 really not back yet?
If you want to break out your soldering iron and silver pen, you can go for it. But you didn't buy the rights to the software to do as you please, so no, technically you can't jailbreak it, and Apple certainly can tell you what to do with it.
If you want to replace the software with one entirely of your own work, you can do that too. But you don't have any right, legal or otherwise, to do whatever you please with Apple's software (or Adobe's, or Microsoft's, et al.).
The question of jailbreaking as the Dev Team has done is much too complex for a comprehensive lay discussion, but suffice it to say that regardless of the actual legal limits, Apple has chosen not to pursue the matter and instead patches the software to correct the flaws that allow jailbreaking.
Technically speaking, parts of the jailbreaking process are illegal, but the net effect is a positive one for Apple, so they're going to tolerate as long as malicious intent stays out of the equation.
Oh please. There's not a substantive claim in that mess of an article, and there is no serious debate on the existence or relevance of IP except by irksome Internet people. Certainly not in legal or political arenas, and not even in a significant number of private organizations.
There is exactly zero chance of IP disappearing in the foreseeable future. The US economy, such as it is, is totally dependent on it for survival, as are the jobs of most people on this forum.
I'm not going to be giving up Customize app anytime soon, for one...
(charging screen with beer mug that fills up, home screen with Leopard dock, power-off screen)
You sir have MySpace'd up your iPhone.
Wrong. Once I've paid for something, it becomes mine to do with as I please, within the limits of the law - which isn't very clear as it is. I can change the software and reverse-engineer it, I can back it up to external media, and I can (if I choose to remove all traces of it from my computer) re-sell it, all without breaking any law. A EULA isn't a binding contract, and I've agreed to no terms by purchasing a product or installing software.
You can hand-wave all you want, I sure don't see any milkmen, blacksmiths, or ice delivery trucks any more. Did they try to sue their customers for buying a refrigerator or car? I'm sure they were upset about being put out of a job by newer tech too, but they had to adapt, or go bankrupt.
Patenting ideas only hurts the world, to the benefit of corporations who want to make money without producing any tangible products. The media would like you to believe otherwise, since they are owned by those same companies (and have obviously convinced you personally of the 'evils' of breaking digital restrictions). You make it sound like you want companies to have the right to put artificial restrictions on things you buy.
I'm sure that each of us on this forum is resourceful enough to see changes coming (like now with digital rights) and be somewhat prepared, or enough at least that we're not taken by complete surprise - how does that happen, that a Detroit auto worker had no idea that the American car industry is dying and all of a sudden is out of a job without any plan?
If the USA's economy is 'totally dependent' on IP for survival, as you say, then it will likely have some rough patches up ahead, because (most of) the rest of the civilized world is beginning to treat file sharing as it should be treated - casual copying that doesn't measurably hurt sales, and in most cases actually helps music/TV/movies/software gain exposure, especially indie stuff.
Reverse engineering and fixing products that are "defective by design", as the saying goes, is an honorable act, to the benefit of each user of that device, and the company that released said device shouldn't have any say over that. We are not here to obey the will of corporations.
On topic: my iPod Touch is running 2.0 happily (the *345 one), but as I reluctantly expected, the apps on offer are mostly crap compared to what's available for the jailbreak community.
s/w 2.0 update on unlocked iphones
has anyone with an unlocked iphone 1.0 been able to load the 2.0 s/w update?
i just connected mine to my mbp and i was prompted to update the new s/w 2.0 but i didn't because of fear that it may be locked permanently by steve and company...
ANYBODY KNOW SOMETHING?
has anyone with an unlocked iphone 1.0 been able to load the 2.0 s/w update?
i just connected mine to my mbp and i was prompted to update the new s/w 2.0 but i didn't because of fear that it may be locked permanently by steve and company...
ANYBODY KNOW SOMETHING?
i hope someone can advise! i have an at&t iphone activated sim card and plan that i've been using in the US for the past year. i am currently traveling internationally in countries without iphone plans so i unlocked the iphone using iliberty about a month ago to use local sim cards rather than my at&t sim.
as i'm rather anxious to checkout the new 2.0 software and can be fine going a week or more (until the unlock tool is released) without making or receiving calls on the local sim, i am wanting to update to the 2.0 software and use my at&t sim card with wifi/data roaming off so that i can play with the apps, etc.
i cannot seem to find the iliberty site or any information as to whether or not i can simply upgrade my iphone software to 2.0 through itunes from the unlocked/jailbroken state and it will re-lock and ask to re-activate with my at&t sim card, or if i'm going to end up making the iphone totally unusable with my at&t sim card as well because of the previous unlocking.
any advice or insight would be greatly appreciated.
as i'm rather anxious to checkout the new 2.0 software and can be fine going a week or more (until the unlock tool is released) without making or receiving calls on the local sim, i am wanting to update to the 2.0 software and use my at&t sim card with wifi/data roaming off so that i can play with the apps, etc.
i cannot seem to find the iliberty site or any information as to whether or not i can simply upgrade my iphone software to 2.0 through itunes from the unlocked/jailbroken state and it will re-lock and ask to re-activate with my at&t sim card, or if i'm going to end up making the iphone totally unusable with my at&t sim card as well because of the previous unlocking.
any advice or insight would be greatly appreciated.
It is not illegal to break a contract. If it were, our overcrowded jails would be even more crowded. If I break a promise to you am I breaking the law? Of course not! Breaking a contract is a civil matter not a criminal matter. As for violating contract, it is no way clear how jail breaking violates the non disclosure agreement (which is all about releasing information you have privileged knowledge about). The dev team did not release their jail break for the NDA software.
You may not like what they do, but at least make intelligent criticisms to back up your venom. Jumping up and down and shouting "illegal" when it clearly isn't, just makes your arguments sound silly.
If you unlocked your phone using pwnage you can easily upgrade to 2.0 by ctrl-loading the firmware in iTunes. Works like a charm with no problems. Of course you will no longer be unlocked but you can always revert with pwnage. But please bear this in mind: I did this with a pwnage unlocked phone using 1.1.4. I have no idea about other unlocking methods and I strongly suspect they will not work as well.
BTW I am running yesterdays 2.0 firmware and it works like a charm. And I already encountered activations errors and timeouts yesterday before today's deluge so I suspect their were buggy software issues and not just load issues.
Jailbreaking has many pluses. First off, you can get every app for free, not 1.99,9.99 etc..,You can customize your phone(themes, summerboard, icons, sounds, etc..) You can ad so many things to a jailbroken iphone its crazy. I for one am waiting for 2.0 to be jailbroken. Just for example, the monkeyball app, its 9.99 and ive been playing that game on my 1st gen iphone under a different name for months for free.
The penalty for breaking the law is not always jail.
If it were not illegal to break a contract, no one could sue you for it.
If you go to court and there is a judgment passed against you, you broke the law. Otherwise, the court has no authority to do anything. You grossly misunderstand the definition of "illegal".
No, you cannot reverse engineer it. The limits of the law extend your rights only as far as that which you've purchased--the hardware and the right to use the software. Not the right to prepare derivative works, to redistribute, or to reproduce the software (except under the narrow grounds of backup and performance).
Yes, it is. No court has ever categorically rejected EULAs. You clearly are not experienced in this field.
Patents brought you the computer you're typing this ludicrous assertion on.
Changes happen every day. None of them is a step toward abolishing Intellectual Property law. Each clarification and adjustment strengthens and deepens the field, more closely intertwining it and coming to a common basis.
This is a total non sequitur. The US economy is not dependent on film and music industry copyrights. IP is more than movies and music. The rest of the "civilized world" is just as dependent on IP as the US.
We don't live in an industrial or agrarian society anymore.
What a load. If you don't like it or the terms it comes with, don't buy it. It's not a moral crusade. You're not feeding children or curing disease. There's nothing wrong with modding and jailbreaking, as long as it respects the law.
I had to create an account specifically to respond to these common misconceptions of the law (and lack of common sense). IT IS NOT ILLEGAL TO BREAK A CONTRACT. It is not illegal to break a NDA. It is not illegal to break any agreement signed with Apple, Microsoft, or anyone else. Again, it is NOT against the law to break a contract. If it was against the law, no one would get sued. Think about it. They would be ARRESTED or fined under the criminal justice system. Have you ever, even in passing or fictional works, heard of someone being incarcerated or tried for the crime of breaking a contract? NO. Because such a crime does not exist under ANY modern justice system.
If the Iphone Dev Team broke their NDAs with Apple - that's between them and Apple. It is up to Apple to sue them. That is the remedy. Suing for breach of contract is the remedy BECAUSE it is not a crime and they can't be prosecuted for it. They have assumed a risk, and a risk that is not inherently dangerous. There is no way they can correctly be called criminals and there is no way that what they did can be called illegal.
Just stop for a second and use some common sense. What if you were to break your apartment lease tomorrow? Would that be illegal? NO. You may be LIABLE, but nothing you did is illegal or even immoral in the eyes of the law and society. And yes, centuries of jurisprudence and property rights are more qualified to determine whether something SHOULD be illegal or immoral than you. Would it be illegal for you to not pay your monthly cell phone bill? Your phone contract, after all, is also an agreement. NO. You would be held liable for damages arising from breach of contract.
So, all you haters out there. Understand that legal doctrines, jurisprudence, and centuries of both common law and statutes are smarter than you. Just because you think something should be illegal doesn't mean that it is. You obviously have a severe misunderstanding and/or lack of knowledge regarding agreements, contracts, NDAs, and property rights.
Wrong. Absolutely dead wrong. YOU grossly misapplied the principle of legality to any context in which a court has the authority to state something. A court has the authority to pass a child custody judgment for you or against you. Does that mean you broke the law? The court has the power to grant or deny a divorce or annulment? Does that mean you broke the law?
NO. In a civil matter, the court is not (nescessarily) passing a judgment against you because you broke the law. It is - in instances of contract law - simply ruling that you are liable to another party. ANOTHER PARTY. In order for you to "break the law," you would have to violate a specific law. In such instances, we would not have agreements. In contract cases, you violate agreements, not laws. If you violate a law, you pay a fine to the state or an agency or go to jail. Such is not the case in contract law.
No, not when the judgment is against you. A contract is an agreement bound by law. It is law--any first year contracts course covers this concept.
A court of law has no power to adjudicate questions not arising out of law. Courts of equity are somewhat different, but they no longer exist independently, for the most part, hence your confusion on the following.
Those are actions arising in equity, not in law. Still, the only way to have custody taken away from you is by a judgment that you are not fit or are otherwise legally ineligible to be a parent. In the case of marriage dissolution, that is a matter of resolution of property disputes (in which the question of legal title is settled) or is based, in the case of an annulment or a divorce proceeding itself, that the marriage cannot be preserved through legal force.
The resolution of conflicts in equity is not a subject of this thread, and you, like the other poster, are deeply confused.
A contract is binding with the force of law. It establishes, modifies, and defines substantive rights, and the court is bound to enforce it except where it conflicts with laws of greater hierarchical status.
You seem to be confused about the distinctions between law and equity, and as evidenced here, the distinctions between public and private law.
Tort and contract actions are private law actions, through which only unlawful (i.e., illegal) acts or omissions can result in a judgment. If you did not violate the law, you cannot be held liable.
Well, I hadn't intended to get into equity, that was an example. However, where in first year contracts is a contract held to be analgous with law? Case cite please (and/or statute). It has the FORCE of law, you are correct, and is BOUND by law. HOWEVER, it is NOT law. Find me one case where (aside from a defense to formation of a contract for illegality), a court has ever said that a party's actions were illegal BECAUSE THEY BROKE A CONTRACT. Any one will do, any jurisdiction. I'll give you a hint - doesn't exist. And yeah, I took first year contracts too. Nowhere was it covered that a contract is law. You don't even have to find a case cite. Name any first year contracts textbook that calls a contract "a law."
Laws, by their definition, have to be passed by a body with the authority to do so. Please, tell me WHICH law breaking an NDA with Apple violates. It should be easy enough - you insinuate you've been to law school. Get on lexis or westlaw, should take you 2 minutes to find it. Another hint - if you can't come back with a SPECIFIC law (cite to the specific law, it HAS to be published and passed by a body if it is a law), it is a PRINCIPLE OF CONTRACTS. It is not "illegal" to violate a contract. It is a basis for liability. Which is why courts NEVER hold that a defendant has "broken the law" in violating a contract. Find any case, in the thresholds of American jurisprudence, that hold this. It's a two minute search in westlaw, but doesn't exist. Courts hold that a defendant is "liable for breach of contract." Not breach of any specific law. This should be self-evident to any attorney.
And yes, I do practice transactional law and deal solely with agreements. They are not law, which is why they are agreements. And it's still iffy to say that they have the force of law, but I understand what you're trying to say by that.