A note to both Apple and iPhone customers on the v1.1.1 update
We're in a unique position here at Engadget, serving the technology community, while simultaneously interacting with and trying to make sense of the moves of the companies our readership patronizes. Apple's latest iPhone firmware, as you've probably heard, locks out third party applications, consequently preventing owners from using their device on networks other than AT&T -- so it's easy to see why this is being viewed as a hostile act, with thousands ready to storm the Cupertino castle in order to get their hacked iPhones back the pre-v1.1.1 status quo. Make no mistake about it, whether you care about the iPhone or not, this 150MB software update is uniquely controversial and causing a rift -- if not an outright adversarial relationship -- between Apple and untold thousands of its core customers, who've used Engadget comments, blogs, and any other sounding board at their disposal. So, may we have a word with both parties?Now, we're not going to assume we could possibly be the arbiter of a discussion so complex as this, but we think there a few things both parties should remember. Let's start with the iPhone users. Note: to be clear on nomenclature, when we say a device is "bricked", we mean it's completely unusable, not just that it's been re-locked to AT&T, or had 3rd party app support disabled, ok?
iPhone users,
We know you're incensed. You paid a premium price for a powerful phone with a lot of untapped potential, and only a few weeks after the third party iPhone community got to work on a slew of surprisingly well made apps -- including the holy grail of SIM unlock software (both free and paid) -- Cupertino drops the hammer and shuts it all off in the blink of an eye, in some cases even resulting in the bricking of your device. But before you grab a torch and a pitchfork, there are a few things you should know.
Apple's first mistake in this mess was the ominous sounding announcement they released last week, a few days ahead of the update. Here's the clip from the release:
"Apple has discovered that many of the unauthorized iPhone unlocking programs available on the Internet cause irreparable damage to the iPhone's software, which will likely result in the modified iPhone becoming permanently inoperable when a future Apple-supplied iPhone software update is installed. ... Apple strongly discourages users from installing unauthorized unlocking programs on their iPhones. Users who make unauthorized modifications to the software on their iPhone violate their iPhone software license agreement and void their warranty. The permanent inability to use an iPhone due to installing unlocking software is not covered under the iPhone's warranty."
Apple's intentions here are perfectly clear and normal -- almost any electronics company out there will tell you that their customers are discouraged from hacking their devices, as it invariably voids the warranty and might be liable to cause issues in the future. And here's why this announcement was a mistake: Apple conflated the issues of SIM unlocking and/or adding 3rd party software with the anticipation of bricked devices. Basically, Apple sought to preemptively blame the 3rd party iPhone software community for any devices that their software update might brick. In the end, stating that the application of v1.1.1 to hacked phones "will likely result in ... permanently [inoperability]" ultimately makes Apple look like they're targeting thousands of iPhone modders -- which is why this press release is biting them in the ass.
There are a lot of Apple customers out there who have, indeed, had their devices bricked by v1.1.1. We can't say for sure how many, but we do know that blog authors to New York Times writers like Saul Hansell and Katie Hafner have leveled the pointing finger at Apple for targeting those adding software, in no small part due to the press release above. Apple's relationship with its customers is souring because, at the outset, many are starting to believe that the v1.1.1 is nefariously bricking hacked or modded devices; that Apple is somehow hell bent on punishing iPhone users who don't want to use the device Steve's way.
Unfortunately, we suspect the truth isn't quite such a juicy story for those looking to lay blame. We've seen just as many reports of legitimate, "factory fresh" users getting bricked iPhones as those who've just added apps, SIM unlocked their devices, or done both. In fact, besides a lot of hearsay and anger from the tech community, we've seen absolutely nothing which indicates to us that Apple is targeting users who've hacked their phones and is bricking them on update. In an informal and totally unscientific poll here on Engadget, the number of iPhone users who had never hacked their device but wound up bricked was very similar to the number of users who did hack and brick their device -- and that's even with polls showing far more voting users hacked their phones than not.
Without any correlation in bricking between hacked and unhacked iPhones, it's easy to imagine the v1.1.1 update went out without proper QA testing, and is bricking a certain number of phones indiscriminately. For further detail, we asked iPhone hacker extraordinaire Erica Sadun, of our sister blog TUAW, to weigh in. She said iPhones upgrading to v1.1.1 appear to have a completely "random distribution of bricks", implying the far simpler and likelier explanation is that the update was rushed to meet its release deadline. We know Apple promised the update would be out by September's end, and considering how much iPhone software was changed with this update, it stands to reason that Apple worked until the 11th hour just trying to finish up and push it out the door -- not testing it exhaustively for weeks before shipping to consumers.
So before you pick up any real bricks for hurling through Apple windows in a moment of frustration, consider the possibility that some potentially poor choices decisions on Apple's probably may have led to bricked devices, and the appearance might be that Cupertino is out to get you for hacking your phone. We sincerely doubt it's anything that nefarious. But totally locking down the iPhone doesn't exactly whet our whistle, either, so don't worry, we've still got an earful for Apple, too.
Ok, Apple.
Look, you've so seriously backed yourself into a corner on this one. We know you think you can't really be taking away what you never actually gave us. That we were all living on borrowed bits, so to speak, so tough luck when an update breaks something you didn't authorize -- and to a certain extent that's actually a fair stance to take. But the reality of the matter is that the consumer electronics market has changed, and consumer expectations don't just match what's on the spec sheet. We know that you've been extremely clear about what the iPhone does and doesn't do since day one, and we stand by our initial iPhone review -- we reviewed the iPhone as the device it was on the day of launch, not the device it might one day be. But we still think clamping down the iPhone is really bad news for consumers.
The first mistake that was made leading up to this whole debacle was enticing the hacker community to develop for the iPhone. Let's be fair, that's exactly what happened, you can't play innocent here. At Macworld Steve got up on stage and talked about how advanced the iPhone is running a "sophisticated" operating system like OS X, enabling the development of "REAL desktop-class applications", and "not the crippled stuff you find on most phones", only to demand the development community sandbox its functionality in mobile Safari. That's not dangling a carrot in front of the mule, that's just tempting fate.
The second mistake was loosing the iPhone in such a way that it was so easily broken into. We don't mean to trivialize the Apple's work in getting the iPhone out the door on time, or the open source community's work that went into gaining access to the iPhone and making it ripe for 3rd party development, but it was only a matter of days before iPhone hackers got root access to the device. At its core, jailbreaking an iPhone is just a matter of editing a small number of Unix files, which opens up the rest of the phone -- that's like complaining your encryption sucks when you're using ROT13. If you were so against users developing for the iPhone, you should have taken the precautions you took with the iPod touch (which is encrypted to all get out) when initially releasing the iPhone. But now you've convinced buyers of the iPhone's power to run "desktop-class applications" and then practically left the door open. This isn't a fun while it lasted kind of situation, this became the status quo. With AppTapp, 3rd party apps became so easy to install on the iPhone it was practically an undocumented feature.
The third mistake was putting out that press release, which could be construed as being intended to preemptively shift the blame of iPhone brickings to 3rd party iPhone software. There's simply no correlation between iPhone modding and bricking with v1.1.1. So far as we can tell, this fairly major iPhone update just wasn't properly tested, and it's bricking iPhones randomly and indiscriminately, killing just as many hacked devices as unhacked devices. To us this smacks a lot of the FUD we heard from Steve earlier this year, when he said, "You don't want your phone to be an open platform. ... [AT&T] doesn't want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up." There's obviously been no shortage of software-adding iPhone users, and yet the wireless company having trouble with uptime these days is RIM.
There has never been a question of whether you have the right to re-lock the iPhone -- that's more or less indisputable. We may own the hardware, but you own the IP, and while you can't really force us to upgrade, the free market says you can upgrade in countless ways you see fit. But with the damage done, for many users the iPhone lockdown has become a question of motive. We may never learn the true reasons why, but it seems only fair to pontificate, especially given Steve's comment in London about the iPhone becoming a cat and mouse game: "[Is Apple] the cat or mouse?"
Perhaps this is cause and effect of the SIM unlock solutions. Perhaps someone in accounting ran the numbers and figured out that Apple, which has unprecedented revenue sharing deals with its wireless carriers, will lose more money from people unlocking iPhones (which requires some level of 3rd party openness to accomplish) than it would from just selling the things outright -- therefore, in order to lock out the SIM unlock software, the only solution was to lock out ALL software. Or perhaps you're simply contractually obligated to prevent iPhone unlocks from occurring at all costs. (Knowing how much power Apple wields, though, it's hard to believe Steve wrote a blank check to ensure iPhones stay locked at all costs, including customer satisfaction.)
Or maybe it's because you intend to launch an iPhone software publishing service. Sure, why not? It's clear 3rd party apps are on the docket, we've heard way too many hints to think otherwise. And since you so closely control the hardware and software, maybe you're thinking of a more game console-like approach, like the way you sell iPod games -- offer customers only Apple-approved 3rd party iPhone software via iTunes. Developers get their apps certified, users get ease of installation and the assurance that their iPhone won't be knocking out AT&T's West Coast network (har), and Apple gets a cut of the cash. If that is indeed what you're doing, Apple, it sounds to us like you're in for a world of pain. The only thing worse than taking something away is taking it away only to offer it back for money.
Look, we, your users, are smart, and we demand more from every company we buy from. And as a consumer electronics company, you have a responsibility to your customers to continuously provide more. You can't put your Lego model in a kid's hand and throw a fit out when they make something better than you did. Like it or not, 3rd party developers found a way into the iPhone, thus fulfilling the inherent expectation that the iPhone should be an extensible platform. Whether or not you choose to publicly acknowledge it, that expectation is there, period. Sure, you can try to see this one through, but from where we sit in the middle, an inordinate number of first adoptors, smartphone user that switched to the iPhone, people that comprise your core customer base are starting to see you as villainous and money grubbing.
So why not let Steve give another a press-stopping mea culpa, giving your customers what they want (hey, maybe even throw in an SDK while you're at it?). Make developing for the iPhone as free and open as it is for every other smartphone around, and you still get to come out on top as the company that listens to its customers above all. Sure, the SIM unlock software might still be out there, but you can't fight this thing forever, the hackers will always catch up, and every wireless carrier in the world knows that. At a certain point you're expected to do the right thing for the people keeping you in business, and we think that's happening right now. Even if it is contractual obligation with the carriers that Apple must stop iPhone unlocking at all costs, isn't the buying public at least worthy of an explanation? Enough with the silent treatment, Apple. A lot of people handed over a lot of money for a cellphone, and we think it's time for some answers -- even if they're the answers we don't want to hear.
Image by Refracted Moments. Big ups to Erica at TUAW and the iPhone Dev Team.








Reader Comments (Page 5 of 7)
Oligo32 @ Oct 10th 2007 1:27AM
Totally agree. It's like we are not customers to them, we are "users" of their hardware/software. Talk about control of the people..... and their purchased products. What's next, iPhone follows your every move and tells the goverment what you are doing? Sounds like Google.. ups...
BTW, was thinking of buying an apple mac book pro, now I think will stay with my PC and have those constant SP files from Mickey. Rather than have apple tell me next time that I can have something on it that I made because it's not Apple approved. :p
andy78 @ Oct 1st 2007 2:36PM
I dont know, but didnt the iphone make other cellphone companies step up their respective games... wernt the other companies holding out on tons of technology until the iphone was released???
didnt apple already take 30 steps forward for the consumer, creating a device that does alot of stuff "out of the box" that no other "out of the box" phone does? If I want a sidekick, dont I have to be with t-mobile???? I may be way off base. but this feels like apple gave everyone an inch... and nerds, like always, want their mile.
YouFaceTheTick @ Oct 1st 2007 2:37PM
People tend to forget they own the device, but apple owns the software. The OS is licensed to users but it is not owned by users.
Users can change the OS but then have the sense to never download a patch or update. Any idiot knows if you hack an OS you run the risk of jacking up the OS by downloading a patch.
gescamil @ Oct 1st 2007 2:38PM
though I don't like it, apple isn't doing anything wrong. They are in the right to force their product to do only what they want it to do. If a customer isn't happy with that, then tough titties. Apple has been completely straight forward about what the iphone can and can't do. If someone wants to mess with it, then they should know going in that they are voiding the warranty. The whole "the consumer expects more" logic is bullshit. Yeah, I want a device that cuts wood, drills holes, and grills some steaks, so if I hack a circular saw to do that...what happens when I chop off a finger, drill and eye out, and burn my foot? I can't go complaining to craftsman and george foreman for not making it safer for me to mod their tools. Apple gave us something amazing, not completely what it could have been, but an amazing first step. It had to pull some strings to get it to us, so it has to make sure not to fuck that up. I purchased the phone knowing exactly what it was going to provide me with...and knowing that sooner or later, it was going to expand in what it could do, therefore I have no reason to bitch about it.
Balam @ Oct 1st 2007 2:41PM
I wish engadget was all apple news!!!!!
YouFaceTheTick @ Oct 1st 2007 2:44PM
Reading the posts I'm getting a good laugh at all the folks who think it's their "right" to hack an OS AND download a patch that adds new features. You can't have it both ways, kids. If you hack software, then you can't expect the updates to work.
John M @ Oct 1st 2007 8:34PM
amen people seem to be missing the point...you cant have all those 3rd party apps and the new features apple releases....pick one or the other...cant have your cake and eat it too
brent @ Oct 1st 2007 2:53PM
I'm with Apple on this one. They are a company who invested money and time into developing their product, is it so wrong to protect that? Especially when users are using it outside of intended use.
People knew the risks and danger of unlocking a phone that's not meant to be unlocked. To cry about it after the fact is just being delusional. Really, there are far greater injustices in this world.
james @ Oct 1st 2007 2:54PM
Apple,
Don't make a "revolutionary device" and expect power users to sit around and gawk at it's beauty. OF COURSE they are going to hack it and try to push it and use it to its fullest capabilities.
Who doesn't chip their sports cars? Who doesn't overclock their PCs? Who doesn't make cantennas to get better wifi signals?
YouFaceTheTick @ Oct 1st 2007 3:29PM
If you chip your car and blow the motor, VW won't cover it. Overclock your CPU and Intel won't replace it. You mod, you run the risk of destroying your toy without recourse.
andy @ Oct 1st 2007 2:56PM
"Look, we, your users, are smart, and we demand more from every company buy from." -- Can someone correct this sentence so indeed, we the users, are smart and sound smart!
Mark Bennett @ Oct 1st 2007 2:56PM
OK Ryan,
Lets say I get tired of seeing the Engadget pages the way you publish them and I no longer want to be locked into just the advertising that Engadget locks me into seeing. So I create a 3rd party application that people like me can install into their browser that allows us all to edit your content as we wish, maybe change some photos to ones we like better, and oh yeah, strip out all of the Google ads served on the Engadget page. I see at the bottom of your site that there a a bunch of terms of use, privacy notices ect, but who really reads that stuff or cares bout it anyway?
Would you guys at Engadget really just sit around and endorse such a hack that eroded your revenue stream and changed the quality of your product? Is the customer needs always more important than the companies goals? If the answer is yes then please put your money where your mouth is and post a big article welcoming programmers to try to create such a application in the spirit of open access.
gescamil @ Oct 1st 2007 2:59PM
thank you.
Shaaheen @ Oct 1st 2007 3:09PM
Steve, "If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right.", so give users what they want! Life isn't so long to play cat and mouse forever.
TD @ Oct 1st 2007 3:12PM
I always think it's funny how people complain about their apple products when they're clearly outside of the license agreement. Apple has no obligation to insure that your phone works when you put unauthorized software on it. If they had made it an open platform, and an update was causing bricking and loss of data, then I agree that they would be liable for those losses, but they didn't make it an open platform. You knew this when you bought the phone. If they bricked your iPhone that doesn't have mods, I'm sure they will be happy to replace it.
NOTASOCCERSTAR09 @ Oct 1st 2007 3:13PM
cheese that must have taken a long time
Geoff @ Oct 1st 2007 3:16PM
I like how you classify all "iPhone users" as those who have willingly decided to hack their devices in order to circumvent the system established as part of the iPhone environment, entailing everything from APPL's agreement with AT&T to the EULA of the iPhone software itself.
I am an "iPhone user" and yet I found myself content with the factory-provided software and features, and based my purchase on that alone, knowing that the future would bring additional enhancements to those features.
This new upgrade has not left me in a lurch with a $600 brick. It's left me with a slightly more stable, slightly enhanced version of what I bought 2 months ago. I can now do things with my iPhone I could not do before.
What's the problem with that again?
Jah @ Oct 1st 2007 5:11PM
No problem at except that people who did not hack their iPhones or add 3rd party apps also have ended-up with iBricks! And as the article says, the iPhone has a desktop quality OS and Apple hinted therefore that full desktop capable apps would be available - they raised expectations!
wireless.nemo @ Oct 1st 2007 3:17PM
Oh give me a break. This is not Apple's fault. It's nobody's fault except the people who bought hacked the iPhone.
People knew that there was going to be no third-party app support, people also knew there would be no iPhone SDK. But they chose to buy it anyways. Now that people hacked the phone and are getting screwed, it's not up to Apple to change their stance on what they initially provided. It's the peoples own fault, considering 1) apple clearly stated it, and 2) the apps and stuff going on the phone clearly state that there is no guarantee your phone will work after the update.
people need to stop bitching about this and realize it's no one's fault except their own.
I.E @ Oct 1st 2007 3:17PM
what's all the brouhaha about? The iSheep that bought the iphone KNEW beforehand that it was going to be closed to 3rd party apps but they stupidly went ahead and bought it now they crying all over the place. You knew what you were getting when you but the crap so now live with it.
g2 @ Oct 1st 2007 3:22PM
This article is well written and well timed - Thanks!
Apple should renegotiate with ATT and release an official unlock and SDK for iPhone. They don't have resources to be a cell phone company and it is ruining their business. The iPhone will do for Mac sales opposite of what iPod did, which will push them into irrelevance as other platforms move ahead. Apple needs to get it's priorities straight as to what kind of company they want to be, media , computer or whatever. Get back to basics.
Note that the Intel x86 mobile internet device processors are around the corner and other computer-phones will come to market. For now I can't recommend anyone buy an iPhone, since the Touch is available. There are absolutely NO productivity apps on iPhone. ATT Edge network is too slow and if you have wifi, just use a Macbook. You are better off with a Treo or Blackberry. That's advice from an Apple user.
It could have been a breakthrough device...
selen @ Oct 1st 2007 3:26PM
In order to unbrick I've did following. Apple didn't want to replace my phone so I have connect usb cable to my car battery and burn it.
I went to other store and they have replaced it without question. Just told them that my phone was too hot all the time.
So, who wanna play.
St. Stephen @ Oct 1st 2007 4:32PM
Lmao that is hilarious!
Mohammed Mudassir Azeemi @ Oct 1st 2007 4:53PM
Very Nice!
I like!
Hoyt L Kesterson II @ Oct 1st 2007 3:29PM
I updated my phone last week while in Geneva. It fixed a problem where the correct local time was not being displayed. I'm willing to wait while Apple adds functions to the phone. I'm waiting for voice recognition support to allow me to keep my phone in my pocket when initiating calls. If some clever programmer posts an application to do that now, I'll still wait for Apple's version. Why - because I want my phone to do the stuff Apple announced it will do; and when it doesn't, I want to use Apple support.
I've had a Mac for a long time (the first fat mac in Arizona in fact). I use to add bunches of extension for nice functions, boomerang being one of my favorites. But I ended up with a system that was fragile. With OS X I have avoided such temptation and as a result have a system that goes for months without a reboot.
I've taken the same approach with the iPhone. I don't begrudge those who have added functions. However, I find many of them incredibly whinny. If you modify the services delivered with the product, have the knowledge and guts to realized that you have walked away from Apple support and are now dependent on a community of tinkerers. You don't go to Apple for support and you don't update with new software until those who actually know what going on say the update is safe. Same rules that they use in the TiVo community.
Apple has a right to control their platform. If you don't like it, vote with your feet and walk away. If enough do, then Apple will change their policy. I have no problem with Apple's actions and partnerships. I left Verizon to get this phone. Ever since I signed up with AT&T they have signaled they are willing to adapt to their new market needs. No more fallen forests to produce bills, wider coverage, improved throughput on edge, and just in time for my trip to Geneva, a way to purchase 20 MBs of data transfer for the period I was there (ok, I had to purchase a minimum of one month but the pricing is not onerous).
I like this phone. I paid $600 for it and I don't feel ripped off (although the $100 refund will go a long way to paying for the next OS release). I can read it in the Phoenix sunlight. I was able to pick up email via cellular while at a cafe in Geneva. The tech guys at ITU were impressed at how easily I connected to their Wi-FI network. They were not broadcasting the SSID so I just entered the name under Other. The tech guys said that other attendees were having difficulties hooking up with their smartphones.
Ireland @ Oct 1st 2007 3:34PM
The difference this time is it's not just an Apple v MS game, there's a lot more competitors out there in the phone business. It's not just MS that Apple needs to change it policies to beat.
Camperton @ Oct 1st 2007 3:45PM
Personally, I'm gonna wait till the iPhone supports 3rd party apps, or at least beefs up and adds to the ones that come pre-installed before I buy one. They haven't even been released here yet, but just using my Touch which has soooooo much potential I can feel the frustration. Such great hardware and GUI such a shame it's so limited by Apple. Why not let me check my email, add calendar events, iChat over wifi and set custom backgrounds. It just seems ridiculous not to. I hope it's just a matter of time. If someone hacks the touch to allow for an email app and AIM I'll be all over it. I sympathize with the modding iphone users.
coffee @ Oct 1st 2007 3:47PM
I just want to see the latest gadgets, not get some bloggers' $.02 on some debacle involving some gadget I don't have.
Yes, that's very selfish and personal. I would visit TUAW if I wanted more Apple news, or Engadget Mobile for more phone news.
More gadgets, less software/unlocks/commentary.
Linda @ Oct 1st 2007 3:57PM
I bought an iPhone knowing what it would do and what it would not do. I accepted that and bought it in full support of its abilities and lack thereof. Your attempt to moderate something that you have no business moderating is full enough to cause me to stop reading and supporting your site!
Cizan316 @ Oct 1st 2007 4:01PM
Is there a way where I can just get apple iphone news?
keith @ Oct 1st 2007 4:58PM
www.engadget.com
makesmoves @ Oct 1st 2007 4:03PM
Is'nt all a game nowadays anyway? We should be happy that we have modders and hackers and people who can physicaly make a difference unlike the political arena. So in regards to Apple i mean duh!!! Like we think any big business, corporation, company, or government really cares about us on the level that is appreciated. Its an assumption so why go crazy when Apple performs the way we already know it will. GB Engadget
Tyatne @ Oct 1st 2007 4:16PM
Once upon a time... A great empire built a well to revolutionize the way people fetched water... Millions of people drank water from that well... The water was pure and divine... People loved it... They were warned not to jump in it and that it will hurt... The empire had offered an innovative way to draw water using a pulley and there was a possibility in the future to build an elevator to make it easier... But the sides of the well had holes which people could use to climb down... It seemed easy although it was not recommended... Thousands of people tried but fell down into the well and found it impossible to climb back up... They blamed the empire for their sufferings... They begged for a stronger pulley to rescue them... The water was still pure and divine... yet evil for some... The moral of the story is - Learn to be content with what you have, Change takes time and effort to be fruitful, If you try to change the wheels of a moving car then it will crash!
cgpublic @ Oct 1st 2007 4:32PM
Ryan, Not to put too fine a point on it, but who do you think that you're kidding with this endless iPhone diatribe? Engadget is a 'for-profit' entity that obviously does not abide by journalistic standards, controls or sense of fair play. Along with other, uninformed do-nothings who spend all day blogging, you enrich yourselves on the traffic which is driven not to mention the e-mail addresses which are collected in the process of inflaming Apple loyalists while pandering to a bunch of malcontents who obviously chose to disregard the terms of use for the contract they willingly agreed to when they activated their iPhones. It's a real shame that Apple has to be dragged in the gutter because people such as yourself can find a dollar in the muck. Count me out as a future Engadget reader and
count me in as a very happy iPhone user.
Michael @ Oct 1st 2007 4:35PM
Thank you so much for this piece. Very well written and very well done. I hope you listen to this, Steve.
Przd @ Oct 1st 2007 4:53PM
Well said, particularly the letter to Apple. Apple realizes the importance of advertising, and their recent moves have cost them many millions in bad advertising, even if the number of users actually affected is small. Better get on the ball, guys.
keith @ Oct 1st 2007 4:56PM
Is it really that serious?!?!?! I think time and energy could be better spent towards topics and ideas that directly effect us.
War in Iraq, anyone?
saintchuck @ Oct 1st 2007 5:12PM
Dude, check the URL you typed into your browser.
kaosbunny @ Oct 11th 2007 11:05AM
How is the war affecting you? I bet everything I own that you're tucked away safe in a western country where your biggest problem is which pair of sneakers to buy.
Go to IMC if you want to start a hippie rally.
Florida Wild Turkey @ Oct 1st 2007 4:57PM
I am getting really tired of folks blaming others for their problems...
1. It is stealing to unlock an iPhone and use it on any other service - Apple
and AT&T have every right to expect the revenue from the two year service
agreeement.
2. It is Not stealing to not buy an iPhone - that is a viable alternative choice.
3. NO ONE forced anyone to download the update - those with unlocked phones
had been warned and still did the deed - THEY are too blame for their state
TWICE over...
Time for Apple to stand up the anarchists and hackers - you had your fun - you
can now resume trying to hack version 1.1.1
Ali K @ Oct 7th 2007 5:18PM
"It is stealing to unlock an iPhone and use it on any other service"
Flat out wrong. It's perfectly legal.
There is a debate over whether or not Apple's reaction to void people's warranty and brick their phones a legally-bound action; and it seems like it just might be fine. But there is no doubt about unlocking phones to be perfectly legal and certainly not an act of "stealing"!
Florida Wild Turkey @ Oct 7th 2007 6:20PM
Opinions are not fact - when you buy you are agreeing to use it according to the terms of service - and those terms prohibit unlocking - read them if you have not. US contract law - which is what applies is very clear on this.
You have a choice - and the choice is to buy and use another phone/service...
As for the bricking - I believe it pretty clear by now that what Apple did was update it's software - they could care less what the update did to unlocks and hacks - and felt no obligation to write software that left unlocks and hacks intact - glad they did - and love the new version.
And the voiding of warranty is part of the same terms of service/sales agreement - that is what gives you a warranty - but it expressly notes unlocks and hacks void the warranty - not Apple the user.
Hideki @ Oct 1st 2007 4:58PM
Hihi
The curious thing is Apple weren't always like this
When they sold the Apple ][ computer, (a fairly revolutionary machine at the time) it came with a hardware reference manual containing a fold out schematic, they were pretty much begging you to use their technology in new and interesting ways, modify it and do whatever you wished really
Can you imagine buying a Commodore 64 computer and only being able to run Commodore software on it? would it have been the best selling 8 bit computer of all time if they had? I suspect it wouldn't have. Would the Apple ][ have made it into most US schools if it hadn't been possible for the schools to make whatever changes they needed? I don't think so...
Somewhere in the last 25 years, the manufacturers of consumer electronics have lost their way, they've forgotten who pays their wages, who they're here to serve
If I spend my hard earned cash on a piece of electronics it should be up to me and me alone how I use it, I have paid for it, it is my property. It is not up to a company who no longer owns this device to tell me how I can use it.
This isn't an isolated case either, if you've not heard of trusted computing it's well worth reading this article: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html
The real question here is who is the master?, you or the company you bought your hardware from.
YouFaceTheTick @ Oct 1st 2007 7:21PM
It's your property but the OS is APLLE'S property. They own the OS and you pay for the right to license it. you do not own the OS on your iPhone. If you disable some portion of the OS on purpose, then you can't logically expect Apple's Update to work correctly. The update is designed for a clean OS; the EULA on the update states as much. Any person who hacks an OS or any software normally has the sense to never run an update.
John Calrk @ Oct 3rd 2007 8:42PM
The reason why the Apple ][ came with all that 'documentation' was because of Steve Wozniak. Steve Jobs was, and is a up tight control freak, and as the original Mac (that is 'post Wozniak' design) showed, his idea is that nothing goes into the box with from 'the outside'.
Then there's the Apple engineers who seem to think that any idea they have, no matter how arcane, no matter how 'limiting' the idea may be for 3rd party integration, must be the 'best thing on the planet'. Apple Software Engineering complements the closedness of Jobs about 'how things ought to be'.
Sure there are 3rd party products for the Macs. But definately for the iPod/iPhone class of widgets it is back to the 'Mac' model of 1984, where only a select few would be chosen to supply the needs of the unwashed masses of desiring users.
Apple acquired a certain industry following. Even Jobs when he left to found Next, could not overcome that momentum, and Next failed... So, not everthing that Steve touches turns to 'gold'... Upon return to Apple, Jobs may have given some 'vision' but he also canceled any movement towards allowing third party hardware to run 'Apple OS's', dispite the fact that some of that hardware was better than the hardware produced by the 'superior' Apple engineers.
Even those who have joined the Apple Developers, produced useful suplimentary products, are not immune from the capricious nature of how Apple 'works'. There are a number of entities that no longer produce 'apple' products, because of the difficulty in integrating with Apple API's relative to 'other os's', or the fact that Apple may just produce an equivalent function or feature, and cut the 3rd party out of a market altogether. Some 'business' types say that's ok... however, other business types suggest that no one will invest in a company where the primary producer, in this case Apple, does nto have a really significant market share < 20%, and is often willing to eliminate a product's market by developing a competing feature.
For those who have always been 'outside' of Apple, or its developer groups, and have been 'consumers' of Apple products, perhaps these issues are insigificant. In such cases, Apple on average has supplied sufficient functionality in a timely fashion so there is no need to worry about whether 3rd parties get reasonable support, or assurances their apps have a market...
Do I use Macs... sure... but it is not because of any love for Steve and Apple in general. Until the consortium of IBM and Motorola fell appart, the Power-PC was superior to the Intel archetecture. Intel has improved the speed of the processor without making too much change to the CPU archetecture, so has compensated for basic lacks of a now 30 year old CPU. IBM move away from the 'consumer' world for a second time... and Motorola has been in sort of a milaise for years...
Ah, but of course Apple even moving to the Intel x86 archetecture of course made it so that Mac OS will not run on anything but Apple hardware... perhaps 'in the works hackery' will allow that to not be the universal case... so once again Apple with drew from the brink of open hardware systems.
Speaking of that change in CPU... I was utterly amazed how people thought that was such a 'sudden' change... obviously few knew that Darwin (the core OS/Kernel) and the precursor, Next OS, both ran on x86 based machines, and could have been 'available' with the Mac OS interface 'years' ago... say 1999/2000 time frame... but of course, the infinitely wise Steve saw fit to not allow that...
To sum up... The 'locking' up of iPhones is not an unexpected development, given Apple under Steve's direction in the past.
Jah @ Oct 1st 2007 4:59PM
I have used Sony Ericsson, Nokia and HTC Smartphones with firmware that can be updated. It is very very rare to have a 'bricked' phone. What are Apple doing (or not doing)?
Tim Ficke @ Oct 1st 2007 5:10PM
@HATERS
If Engadget stopped posting all of this stuff about Apple and the iPhone you all would be complaining too. Seriously if you didnt care you wouldnt read it but you all are reading it so STOP YOU COMPLAINING AND STFU!
Baz @ Oct 1st 2007 5:13PM
So all hacks and 3rd Party programs the recent iPhone / Touch 1.1.1 update were erased off of all devices that users were so bold to install with The Stevo's permission.
He wants these devices to be simply Content Retrieval Devices (or CRD, if you like) to sites he and his corporate co-sponsors direct you to. He has no apparent interest in allowing 3rd Party providers access into the sealed little cash cow, while programs that are there now (over and above iTunes access) are likely there under duress from his marketing staff. You can be sure whatever hacks and programs that are created hereafter will be deleted in each subsequent point updates, until something forces his hand.
What both the Touch (and now with the 1.1.1 update, the iPhone) does do however is accommodate the ability for Apple to bypass either PCs or Macs in the process of viewing, buying and downloading from iTunes. In truth, what this does allow for is for Apple to dump the costly home market mini, iMac and Macbook (advertising, sales staff, software development, support chain) in favour of those who can afford to pay-to-play on their Pro line of products - and for everyone else, you get an iPhone or Touch. A bad case of computer Nazi - "No Mac for you!".
Doubts? When was the last time you saw the home user-friendly "Hi. I'm a Mac" ads?
***************
He offered his customers (and the hacking / development community) a Maserati, but put a governor on it, so it can only go 20 mph. It does the barest minimum the device is meant to do, but not as effectively as it should.
The Smug Bastard from Cupertino has done more in the last month to alienate both new users and his Apple'ites and done more to hurt the image of Apple as the The People's Company than anything since Gil Amelio was CEO.
Leonard Nimrod @ Oct 1st 2007 5:15PM
This is no different than unsupported Safari plug-ins occasional not working when Apple updates Safari. Apple clearly isn't going out of its way to disable 3rd-party apps they are merely choosing not to consider them when they have enough on their plate dealing with the update for unhacked iPhones.
Just like with the Safari plug-ins, the hacker community will find a solution for getting 3rd-party apps on 1.1.1.
This BS about Apple puropsely bricking phones is just rubbish.
L2 @ Oct 1st 2007 5:15PM
Ryan B.,
Nice post man, don't mind these other fools.