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.
Preliminary iPhone 1.1.1 'Jailbreak', Ringtones Soon?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ultimately, it'll *always* be hacked....
I have yet to see *anyone* make an "unhackable computer". If it's truly not hackable, it's a very limited system that's not WORTH hacking into. Anything that can function as a full-fledged computer, allowing you to place your own
code on it and run it there, can be hacked.
This may well continue to be a "cat and mouse game", if that's how Apple insists on playing it. But every time they make code changes in a firmware update, they risk creating NEW attack vectors that didn't exist before.
If all else fails, someone will probably discover a technique to "glitch" the iPhone's processor by plugging it into a specially engineered "dock". (They did this at one point to get into locked-down satellite cards.)
What it comes down to, ultimately, is that Apple can keep spending time and energy on delaying people's access to the iPhone's software and OS, or they can render it a "non issue" by sanctioning the outside development of software. (If they like, keep the phone locked down - but let people submit code to be centrally published through iTunes, either as freeware or shareware where Apple gets a cut of each sale?)
I have yet to see *anyone* make an "unhackable computer". If it's truly not hackable, it's a very limited system that's not WORTH hacking into. Anything that can function as a full-fledged computer, allowing you to place your own
code on it and run it there, can be hacked.
This may well continue to be a "cat and mouse game", if that's how Apple insists on playing it. But every time they make code changes in a firmware update, they risk creating NEW attack vectors that didn't exist before.
If all else fails, someone will probably discover a technique to "glitch" the iPhone's processor by plugging it into a specially engineered "dock". (They did this at one point to get into locked-down satellite cards.)
What it comes down to, ultimately, is that Apple can keep spending time and energy on delaying people's access to the iPhone's software and OS, or they can render it a "non issue" by sanctioning the outside development of software. (If they like, keep the phone locked down - but let people submit code to be centrally published through iTunes, either as freeware or shareware where Apple gets a cut of each sale?)
So I followed a MacWorld article on how to unlock my iPhone, which I did. I used it in Europe last week on a Vodafone SIM, worked beautifully. I also love my 3rd party apps...
So, no reason for me to ever upgrade to 1.1.1, because I'd lose my apps but also I think it'd get bricked because I unlocked it!
So, no reason for me to ever upgrade to 1.1.1, because I'd lose my apps but also I think it'd get bricked because I unlocked it!
AAPL: 167.91 ( +6.4601 )
The market is saying the exact opposite. Ultimately, consumer-electronics buyers (and they're the market, not the water-into-wine crowd that hangs out on this kind of forum) will vote for a system that provides ease-of-use to the most commonly needed features, and will see new Apple (or approved partner) provided applications that come along as 'value-add'.
Frankly, I've been through tech phases myself where I want to slap a V-8 on my lawnmower, but Apple will (wisely, IMHO) provided ease-of-use for primary features.
This crowd makes the mistake of thinking that they're still the prime market. Apple tried that in the 80s-90s. How'd that work out?
Heh I had to laugh. Do you think MMS (picture messaging) and IM clients are high tech? Lol they are on every FREE phone out there dude. Do you know how many picture messages are sent out every day by the 18 to 25 demographic? Oh but wait this overpriced crap ware called iPhone isn't targetted at any normal people is it? With that price you've gotta be kidding me. The stock market is always behind but let me say this, I can tell you for a fact that not one major carrier even has a second thought about iphone exclusivity. Its turned into an overpriced niche product with increasingly bad publicity and if you had any idea how many smartphones like the blackberry are dominating sales over the iphone you'd know apple is riding on market highs FOR NOW. Just wait.
Delusional much?
RIMM added 1.45 million new subscribers last quarter. Thats in 120 countries served by over 300 carriers. In the same time frame Apple sold a similar number of iPhones while only being available in 1 country on a single carrier (far more phones than the Pearl).
Currently Apple is outselling RIMM's new subscribers, attracting more customers in 1 country on a single carrier with a single model of phone than RIMM can with all their models in the entire world market.
In the current quarter RIMM expects to add 1.65 million new subscribers (again this is globally with over 300 carriers), while Apple is on target to surpass 2 million.
Those facts alone should put your ridiculous post into perspective, but looking at future projections things get even more rosey for the iPhone. Apple is expected to have sold 10 million iPhones by the summer of 2008 while RIMM (with its decades of operations) is just now barely over 10 million total subscribers.
I don't think anyone who understands the situation is pleased that Apple has chosen to block third party development on the iPhone, but to try to take your angst about this poor decision and try to paint the iPhone as a failure does your argument no service.
That RIM number is utter absolute crap. Go track the number of BlackBerry Pearl sales alone on all major carriers and it'll blow away your iphone sales like they are the crap they are. And that doesn't even include other the curve and other models. Do you even know that most blackberries are not even added to a RIM subscription plan? So that number is absolute crap.
Yup... probably even more 'features' (really need that ability to download java crapware.)
But if these features are unusable (which to normal users, they by and large are) then they're just bloatware.
If the features are not usable, it doesn't matter how cool they are. I've yet to meet a joe/jane user who is not essentially blown away by the iPhone.
Listen... you clearly hate all things Apple and want a do-it-yourself kit. Good on ya'. Apparently you're not alone.
I personally think Motorola/Nokia/et al phones are so far beyond crap that its embarrassing. Buried features, inconsistent, amateurish interfaces, unusable without a manual.. it's hysterical. And right out of the box, Apple comes up with usability that blows them all out of the water, yet they are suddenly Satan. Very odd.
You don't like the iPhone, then quit your bitchin' and buy the platform that apparently DOES do what you want.
But this vitriol has long since entered into some bizarre pathology on this list.
Those are subscriptions. Not handset sales. Go read that same press release and read the number that says handset sales during the quarter. 2.5 million in just Q1. By the way, apple, tracking handset sales too not subscriptions. Nice try lol.
I think some people are getting too emotional and personal on this iPhone business. If people didn't like the iPhone and all things Apple, would they be loyal posters to a Macrumors site? Personally, I love Apple and always will. I have owned countless Apple products and machines, after years of custom building PC's and coding. The dilemma is that Apple has entered a new market and seems bent on stifling the creativity it so boldly embraced as their corporate philosophy in their "Think Different" campaign when Steve Jobs regained control as CEO in 1997. Since then, Apple has re-invented itself, over and over, to astonishing success. I just don't like this new direction that seems to wreak of Microsoft control and cynicism. I realize as a new product that we should give Apple the benefit of the doubt and time, but as they are actively seeking to control a device that has SOOO much potential, it is a bit mind boggling. I refuse to give a company I have invested a lot of financial stock in and personal pride into a pass. More importantly, if we all acquiesce and give in, then Apple will never get the customer feedback that will essentially push it further above and beyond the competition. It's about expecting more, and this isn't a tall glass of water as developers have already easily tapped into the devices power, whether it was advertised or not. Jobs himself hinted and stated that the iPhone has the ability to run OS X desktop applications, not crippled applications. It is not about people "crying" and "whining". It's about people expecting more, demanding more, and getting what Apple has historically proven, superior products that exceed people's expectations. If we just roll over and stop pushing, then Apple may become just another "Inc.", something I would hate to see happen.
I'm all Apple, and I will defend them when reasonable. I will not blithely let someone dictate what I can and can not do with a product I spent $599 to OWN, not rent.
in the long run I don't think it's good for apple to "close" the iPhone. I would gladly buy the iPhone for 699 or similar to get it "non-subsidized". Like a regular iPod. And, as someone earlier pointed out - OSX is pretty stable etc. Why can't they open it for 3rd party developers when there is an obvious upside?
and avoiding becoming a high-end/PDA/smartphone-player they soon have to do what they did with the iPod - release a lower segment phone (iPhone nano 2.5"?).
and avoiding becoming a high-end/PDA/smartphone-player they soon have to do what they did with the iPod - release a lower segment phone (iPhone nano 2.5"?).
So how exactly is it copy infringement to have song you already own play when your phone rings? I'm still not clear on that? It's already sitting there on a music playing device. I own it. If I want it to play when a call comes in on my device, that's my business, not Apple's, AT&T's or even the artist's for that matter.
I am happy to see that they are making progress on getting applications back onto the iPhone.
However, if they are relying on some buffer overflow or other exploit to gain access to the phone, I fully expect Apple to patch that security flaw in the next update.
However, if they are relying on some buffer overflow or other exploit to gain access to the phone, I fully expect Apple to patch that security flaw in the next update.
apparently you own a license to play the music that does not include playing it as a ringtone.
Talk about splitting hairs. Just because someone came up with a name for it does not make it "different". The term ringtone did not even exist a few years ago. Playing a song is playing a song. Whether I trigger it to play or the device triggers it, is a ridiculous distinction. I suppose that it's infringement when you set up an alarm clock to play a song. I suppose that it's infringement when listening to songs at random also, since I am not triggering each song myself. This is absolutely absurd. This ringtone phenomenon is a complete scam. I'd say it's all covered under fair use. It's mine, it's paid for, I'll do whatever I want with it.
Of course, there's no mention about creating your own songs or sounds and wanting to use them as ringtones. I guess they don't feel that's an option. They wouldn't want anyone creative to have any options in their little scam.
The music industry is by far the most greedy bunch of executives that I can't wish enough bad things for. Its unbelievable the crap they pull. I was reading an article recently that they are starting to go after hair salons in canada for playing CDs without paying royalties.
Few months back, right before the super bowl ... a friend of mine warned me not to have friends over since I have a 61" HD TV. Apparently, the nut jobs actually think that I need to pay them because my TV is over 50". (If I am inviting more then 4 people over)
I really wonder where this world is heading. It will be a cold day in hell before I pay for a song that I have already purchased to be played on my phone or any other device I own. Keep in mind, I am not the type of person who approves of ripping off content, but in this case I make an exception
I'm sure Steve Jobs is just loosing sleep over how he's going to spend his money
For a fact huh? I'm sure you are just "dialed" into to what the major carriers are thinking and doing.
Since you clearly are unable to supply any verifiable facts, here is the RIMM quarterly report.
With 1.45 new subscribers and 3 million new devices I would not say that they are wiping the floor with the iPhone. I could supply more numbers but suspect that you don't really get into such details.
Forgetting 3rd party apps...what is Apple going to do about those countries that require phones to be unlocked?
Skip those markets and focus on the U.S.?
What if a major U.S. state (e.g. Kalifornia) adopts "must-unlock" legislation?
Skip those markets and focus on the U.S.?
What if a major U.S. state (e.g. Kalifornia) adopts "must-unlock" legislation?
Why doesn't Apple create iChat and use your SMS text message count as billing ? T-Mobile used to (maybe still does) use SMS as a gateway to AIM or what not. So, each message is "billed" as an SMS (incoming and outgoing).
Now of course, they offered an unlimited plan for this as well. I am sure plenty of people would pay $9.99 a month for unlimited texts and IMs. AT&T still gets their money (and Apple gets their cut), not to mention it actually creates happy customers. *gasp*
VOIP is another matter ... but honestly, I doubt more then a hand full of people would do this. I don't want to be tethered to an access point during a phone call. That is why I use my cell phone *WAY* more then my house phone. I have used the house phone *maybe* 3 times in the past 4 months.
lol omg
Lol, "the stock market is always behind?" Boy, if that were true, there'd be no reason for CNBC, no reason for tens of thousands of stock analysts, and no reasons NOT to invest.
If that were the case, profiting 15% per year from stocks wouldn't be considered "amazing"; it'd be considered "utter crap."
Take some classes in economics and businesses. If it were easy, we would call it "pwning the stock market", not "playing the stock market".
Whoever posted that should just delete their macrumors account right now....stat!
Lol, "the stock market is always behind?" Boy, if that were true, there'd be no reason for CNBC, no reason for tens of thousands of stock analysts, and no reasons NOT to invest.
If that were the case, profiting 15% per year from stocks wouldn't be considered "amazing"; it'd be considered "utter crap."
Take some classes in economics and businesses. If it were easy, we would call it "pwning the stock market", not "playing the stock market".
Whoever posted that should just delete their macrumors account right now....stat!