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 Firmware 1.1.2 On The Way
- Thread starter mcdj
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A couple days of lag, I can understand, and deal with. A week or so, well, slow but ok. But 5-6 weeks lag from when it was discovered (the TIFF exploit) and three weeks from when third party people had a fix? No, that is not "half empty"- that is Apple TOTALLY dropping the ball on this one.
I think it just reinforces what Apples real goal is, and that is to break 3rd party apps, unlocks and jailbreaks. Otherwise, a 1.1.2 that fixed the TIFF exploit would have been out weeks ago. And a point upgrade that did ONLY that would have been simple (the hackers did it!), and welcomed.
I am really surprised the TIFF exploit does not cost 99 cents to get, though.
I'm pretty annoyed with them releasing 1.1.2 on the new phones due out here friday, means I won't be able to truly get the most out of an iPhone for a few weeks, if ever.
It's pushing me to not bother getting one.
As for the ringtone discussion. I should be allowed to put whatever I want as my ringtone. Be it song, funny noise or a clip from a movie.
Perhaps they make you pay because other people hear it, and it indirectly counts as broadcast of the song...
Ridiculous, whatever the reason.
It's pushing me to not bother getting one.
As for the ringtone discussion. I should be allowed to put whatever I want as my ringtone. Be it song, funny noise or a clip from a movie.
Perhaps they make you pay because other people hear it, and it indirectly counts as broadcast of the song...
Ridiculous, whatever the reason.
*BOLDING MINE*
If you read the three words which I bolded you will see that you answered your own question.
Umm...you can. Simply buy an iPhone.
Just because a company develops/invents/builds a feature doesn't mean they have to include it in every one of their products. Imagine going into a car dealership and demanding that they include all of the features from their $60,000 model in your $20,000 model. Apple *IS* after all a business. I don't understand why people are bashing them for trying to make money for themselves and their shareholders.
Craig
You are talking apples and oranges here. Cars have VASTLY different hardware/performance, etc. that greatly contributes to cost. A better car analogy would be to say that a company would chose to put air conditioning in one car as a standard option, and not make it available at ANY PRICE in another model even though both models actually had all the air conditioning hardware installed(there just wasn't a knob to turn it on in the one car). Fine, Apple is a business - let them sell me the additional software for $50(like car manufacturers give you options standard on expensive models and make you pay for them on cheap models).
They are being penny wise and pound foolish. Anyone who remembers how horrible Windows 3.0 was and how much better System 7 was ca remember the last time they made this mistake and how much it cost them.
Apple may indeed be taking a cut of the 99 cent ring tone fee, but I will bet you dollars to donuts that the majority of the money goes to pay licensing/publishing fees on the songs. Are you familiar with the concept of mechanical royalties? Anytime you hear a song on the radio or in a movie or in a commercial etc. royalties are being generated (these are separate from sales royalties).
Another interesting tidbit: Did you know that if you own any place of business (restaurant, bar, retail store, office, etc etc.) and you were to setup a stereo system,say in a waiting area and play your own CD's on it for the customers to hear...you are liable to be fined BIGTIME for unlicensed public broadcast of copyrighted material. Thats why (at least here in the US) you see many places of business who use any type of "musak" displaying some sort of ASCAP affiliation sticker which means they pay dues in order to use that music.
This whole deal with paying for ring tones is promulgated by ASCAP/RIAA/ et al because its a surefire means to collect on something which they had limited means to before. If
had allowed iPhone users to freely use any song in their library as a ring tone the music industry would have had a tissy fit. The other companies who sell ring tones for $2-3 a pop...they are the ones really cashing in on it.
Just wait a couple weeks. Apple will drop the price 200 pounds or euros or whatever. They did here!
Seriously, look for something in a few weeks/months when sales dip and they need to hit their numbers. You will get a better deal (maybe) and 1.1.2 will be cracked (and you will be worried about 1.1.3!!!)
I realize that my example was extreme, however the concept still holds true. Apple had to differentiate the iPod Touch and the iPhone enough to not risk sidestepping their deal with AT&T and to justify the difference in price.
iPods have never been interactive devices (aside from the games). They play music and movies and display notes which you can add from your computer. The Touch took the iPod further by adding the wonderful screen and touch interface from the iPhone. The wireless interface is there for one reason alone: to connect with iTunes to purchase music and movies. At the end of the day the Touch *is* still an iPod, not a PDA. Even though Mail and iCal and Safari could easily be included in the Touch, they aren't needed to fulfill the mission of the device.
So I say again, if you want a fully interactive device...buy the iPhone. Don't get mad at
because their product doesn't satisfy all of your wishes and desires; especially when you knew what you were buying.A couple days of lag, I can understand, and deal with. A week or so, well, slow but ok. But 5-6 weeks lag from when it was discovered (the TIFF exploit) and three weeks from when third party people had a fix? No, that is not "half empty"- that is Apple TOTALLY dropping the ball on this one.
I think it just reinforces what Apples real goal is, and that is to break 3rd party apps, unlocks and jailbreaks. Otherwise, a 1.1.2 that fixed the TIFF exploit would have been out weeks ago. And a point upgrade that did ONLY that would have been simple (the hackers did it!), and welcomed.
I am really surprised the TIFF exploit does not cost 99 cents to get, though.
lmao don't be too sure...now that they use only credit cards you better check to see that isn't included in the tax!
Agree with you though..they could've sent an update to fix that long ago...a language pack and TIFF exploit fix is really a waste of time with another update probably around the corner with SDK on the horizon.
I know what you are saying, and I understand that. No problem there.
I think the problem a LOT of people have with this goes beyond this concept, though. First, your examples are ALL commercial enterprises; having a ring tone on your phone is in no way commercial. I, as someone who puts a ring tone on my phone, do not garner any increase in income- directly or indirectly- from that ringtone (which is NOT the case in any of your examples).
Further, the complaint is made that one has already paid for the use of that song. The argument is that the ring tone is a personal use of that song, and should be allowed for free.
I am not sure if there is a legal opinion either way on this... and I am just trying to play devils advocate here. I think the record companies have stepped up and said, "Yes, you have to pay a fee for this usage," but I am not sure that this has been legal;y established. Be an interesting case, that is for sure. You could certainly show that it is a non-commercial use. Whether that matters or not, I do not know...
Who wants Apple's designated ringtones anyway?
That's the problem - who wants pop music for their ring tones? I want mine to say "Hey Bob's Calling", or the free ringtones given out by producers (love 'Oh Cthulhu')
Some day when the iPhone lets me put the files I want as ringtones and adds voice dialing maybe it will be worth the money.
That's the problem - who wants pop music for their ring tones? I want mine to say "Hey Bob's Calling", or the free ringtones given out by producers (love 'Oh Cthulhu')
Some day when the iPhone lets me put the files I want as ringtones and adds voice dialing maybe it will be worth the money.
I am really surprised the TIFF exploit does not cost 99 cents to get, though.
Pay for it???
I thought Apple was going to give anyone who purchased a pre-1.1.2 iPhone a $100 store credit to make up for their having to deal with the TIFF exploit as early adopters!
how about adding support for MMS and sending mass text messages?
wtf....
Thats what I'm talkin' about... seriously... lets actually add some features here - which would boost sales as well - bonus for everyone. And these two features are on my most wanted list...
A couple days of lag, I can understand, and deal with. A week or so, well, slow but ok. But 5-6 weeks lag from when it was discovered (the TIFF exploit) and three weeks from when third party people had a fix? No, that is not "half empty"- that is Apple TOTALLY dropping the ball on this one.
I think it just reinforces what Apples real goal is, and that is to break 3rd party apps, unlocks and jailbreaks. Otherwise, a 1.1.2 that fixed the TIFF exploit would have been out weeks ago. And a point upgrade that did ONLY that would have been simple (the hackers did it!), and welcomed.
I am really surprised the TIFF exploit does not cost 99 cents to get, though.
And I thought Apple's goal was to sell products and make money.
Details of breaking 3rd party apps, unlocks, and jailbreaks will certainly make for a livelier quarterly report though.
I should have clarified that I was citing that example to illustrate one particular case of music licensing issues. I didn't mean to imply that a ring tone is the same thing.
I think that the question is "what is the definition of personal use"? I know that there are a lot of different licensing issues for copyrighted material and I think that the ring tones are probably falling under some obscure rule. I think that "personal use" only includes mediums for which the work was originally intended (ie. played through speakers, headphones, etc for pure listening enjoyment). Once a song (or portion thereof) becomes a ring tone...it is now outside of the realm of what it was originally intended for.
Its kind of like the argument going on in another forum about software licenses. When you buy a song or album you are essentially buying a license to use the works of the artist. You don't literally own the music. I agree it is excessive to have to pay extra for a ring tone, but I sincerely believe that we have the recording industry to thank for that.
Craig
EDIT to add that I am going to research this some and see if I can find out if ring tones do indeed require a separate license and/or what rule they may fall under.
Here's how it goes:
When you buy a CD you have not bought a song, you have purchased a recording of a performance of a song. (the underlying work)
Only the songwriter and the publisher own the song.
A mechanical royalty is paid by the record label (or iTunes) to the songwriter/publisher for every copy sold. It is statutory.
The record label also has to pay the artist royalties as well.
The record label only controls the one unique recording and must pay royalties to all parties entitled for each copy sold.
When a artist is played on the radio, tv, performs in a club or an orchestra plays a composition publicly for profit (and in some cases even for free) they are performing someone's work.
A general performance license is paid by TV stations, venues, radio etc. to ASCAP and BMI. They log the performances and the general license collected by the performing rights societies are distributed to the songwriter and publisher members minus administration costs.
As far as ringtones go, it is a developing area (witness the writer's strike).
Agreements are negotiated as opt in, opt out to writer/publishers, and many do not want their songs "commercialized" in a ringtone.
It is a license. It is not a performance issue though.
When you buy a CD you have not bought a song, you have purchased a recording of a performance of a song. (the underlying work)
Only the songwriter and the publisher own the song.
A mechanical royalty is paid by the record label (or iTunes) to the songwriter/publisher for every copy sold. It is statutory.
The record label also has to pay the artist royalties as well.
The record label only controls the one unique recording and must pay royalties to all parties entitled for each copy sold.
When a artist is played on the radio, tv, performs in a club or an orchestra plays a composition publicly for profit (and in some cases even for free) they are performing someone's work.
A general performance license is paid by TV stations, venues, radio etc. to ASCAP and BMI. They log the performances and the general license collected by the performing rights societies are distributed to the songwriter and publisher members minus administration costs.
As far as ringtones go, it is a developing area (witness the writer's strike).
Agreements are negotiated as opt in, opt out to writer/publishers, and many do not want their songs "commercialized" in a ringtone.
It is a license. It is not a performance issue though.
I'd like to patch the security hole, but not at the expense of losing ringtones (again). Ambrosia is doing miracles, but I would not be surprised if Apple is working on trying to reverse-engineer their code to make each workaround harder.
So, in a fit of irony, Apple drives me into the hands of the hackers since they not only fix the problem, they don't cause new ones.
So, in a fit of irony, Apple drives me into the hands of the hackers since they not only fix the problem, they don't cause new ones.
I'd like to patch the security hole, but not at the expense of losing ringtones (again). Ambrosia is doing miracles, but I would not be surprised if Apple is working on trying to reverse-engineer their code to make each workaround harder.
So, in a fit of irony, Apple drives me into the hands of the hackers since they not only fix the problem, they don't cause new ones.
For the record, I'm for Apple patching any and all security holes too. We don't use any exploits or other nastiness to put ringtones on your iPhone.
Right now, we really have no idea if Apple is breaking iToner in the 1.1.2 iPhone OS. If they do, I think it's safe to assume that Apple really does intend to only allow ringtones bought form the iTunes Music Store on iPhones.
That, to me, would be unfortunate. And not just because we make iToner to do exactly that. It's also because there are ringtones that *I* want on my iPhone that Apple doesn't offer.
Sigh. We'll see what happens when the other shoe drops. We will of course be trying our best to work around whatever they've done, if they have indeed broken us again.
What part of software license do you not understand?
First of all, I support people hacking multitouch OS devices, it's great ! But indigent posts like this just crack me up. You bought only the hardware; the software that makes the phone worth anything is simply licensed to you. Most people understand this, but can't accept for what it actively means. You change the functionality of Apple's properitary software and they DO have the right to make things more difficult for you. Whether or not that makes good business sense in the long run is a different story .... as is the question relating to Apple's intent - malicious or otherwise.
Secondly, who is forcing people to upgrade ? If Apple pulled M$ like bs in auto-updating their software I'd be 100% behind the bricktards, but the fact of the matter anyone who had the knowledge of liberating their phones to be non-standard iPhones knew there was an associated risk !
That all said, I have to thank all the unlockees for being brave and exploring all the potential this exciting new platform has ... you are simply making the future experience for Gen 2 buyers like myself brighter (as it Apple's SDK announcement).
First of all, I support people hacking multitouch OS devices, it's great ! But indigent posts like this just crack me up. You bought only the hardware; the software that makes the phone worth anything is simply licensed to you. Most people understand this, but can't accept for what it actively means. You change the functionality of Apple's properitary software and they DO have the right to make things more difficult for you. Whether or not that makes good business sense in the long run is a different story .... as is the question relating to Apple's intent - malicious or otherwise.
Secondly, who is forcing people to upgrade ? If Apple pulled M$ like bs in auto-updating their software I'd be 100% behind the bricktards, but the fact of the matter anyone who had the knowledge of liberating their phones to be non-standard iPhones knew there was an associated risk !
That all said, I have to thank all the unlockees for being brave and exploring all the potential this exciting new platform has ... you are simply making the future experience for Gen 2 buyers like myself brighter (as it Apple's SDK announcement).
You make me smile- of course it doesn't. This does three things:
Breaks Hacks again.
Adds International Keyboards
Fixes the TIFF Exploit.
Hi,
This whole ringtone situation is really frustrating, I realise that I'm probably in a small minority but I actually produce my own music (And by produce I mean write, engineer, produce etc using CuBase and a rather expensive collection of synths!)
I have, for the last 4-5 years always created my own set of ringtones for my phones, unfortuantely I will be unable to use my own work as a ringtone on my own phone !
I really hope those lovely iToner devs are able to update the app to work with 1.1.2 (If 1.1.2 does break iToner)..
Bri (Not looking forward to the iPhone UK release as much as I was !)
This whole ringtone situation is really frustrating, I realise that I'm probably in a small minority but I actually produce my own music (And by produce I mean write, engineer, produce etc using CuBase and a rather expensive collection of synths!)
I have, for the last 4-5 years always created my own set of ringtones for my phones, unfortuantely I will be unable to use my own work as a ringtone on my own phone !
I really hope those lovely iToner devs are able to update the app to work with 1.1.2 (If 1.1.2 does break iToner)..
Bri (Not looking forward to the iPhone UK release as much as I was !)