Gizmodo
Latest
AT&T changing eligibility dates for new iPhone
MobileCrunch reports that AT&T has been quietly tweaking the upgrade eligibility dates for the next iPhone. While most of those who purchased the iPhone 3GS at launch had an upgrade date available sometime in November, far be it from AT&T to stand in the way of a new iPhone purchase. They've been changing the dates without fanfare to as soon as June 21st, 2010. That doesn't really confirm anything, but it's almost a forgone conclusion at this point that Apple will release a new iPhone in June. I would say (as a guess/prediction) that we'll first hear about it during WWDC, and that it'll hit store shelves near the end of the month. Unless there's a big surprise in the pipeline, we've probably already seen this phone as well -- you've probably seen the leaked shots that precluded the whole "left in a bar" situation (that is still under investigation, as far as we know). It's possible that phone was just a prototype, and that Apple won't go for those weird silver buttons, but most likely, that's the phone we'll see Steve holding on stage in just over a month. Excited?
Did iPad kill the Courier tablet?
Microsoft's Courier project was an exciting and fascinating concept. When it first appeared last year, the folding two-screen tablet was one of the most incredible things we've seen out of Redmond for a long time. Similar in concept to Apple's Knowledge Navigator concept device, Courier used a combination of touch and pen-based computing to generate a lot of buzz and interest about what was going on in Microsoft's labs. Gizmodo is reporting that the project was killed yesterday. There's speculation that the intense popularity of Apple's relatively low-cost iPad, coupled with the imminent arrival of Android-based tablets and possibly even WebOS slates from HP, could have scared the software giant away from releasing the device. Nobody outside of Microsoft knows for sure how far along Courier really was -- the video that was widely distributed last fall was obviously a marketing dream -- or how much the proposed device would have cost. With two iPad-sized touchscreens and a strong, yet lightweight hinge mechanism holding the Courier screens together, it wouldn't have been as inexpensive as the iPad. Although those of us at TUAW are Apple fanboys to the max, we regret that the Courier never made it to market. Competition is good, and when a possible contender fails to make it out of the conceptual stage, it's a loss for all of us.
Found: The iPhone prototype finder
Wired has located and interviewed the man who "found" Apple's lost prototype iPhone in a Redwood City bar: 21-year-old Brian Hogan. With a statement from his attorney, Hogan has shed a great deal of light on the ongoing saga of Gizmodo's premature unveiling of Apple's next-gen iPhone. The story, as told by Hogan, supposedly goes like this: Another bar patron handed Hogan the iPhone when the patron found it lying on a nearby barstool. This patron asked Hogan if it was his iPhone, then abruptly left. Hogan asked nearby bar patrons if the phone belonged to them. When no one said it was theirs, he and his friends left with the iPhone. Critically, there's no mention that Hogan made any effort to leave the phone with the bartender, which is what I probably would have done in that situation. [Ed: After you put together a hands-on and gallery for TUAW, you mean.]
Found Footage: Jon Stewart scolds Apple over the Gizmodo stolen iPhone fracas
Leave it to Jon Stewart to put things into perspective. In this segment from The Daily Show, Jon satirically cops to being an Apple user since the 80s and takes Apple to task for stealing the evil empire crown from Microsoft in their handling of the Gizmodo lost iPhone incident. After Giz gave back the iPhone, the cops busted down its editor, Jason Chen's door. "Don't they know there's an app for that?" Say what you will, I think Jon nailed it. Watch the full clip after the break. [via iPhone Savior]
Apple visited the iPhone 4G's finder before the police did
With all of the chaos going on around the lost iPhone case, everyone has more or less assumed that Apple is behind the police department's actions in searching Gizmodo Editor Jason Chen's house late last week. Of course, no one believes that the sheriff is working for Apple, but most people seem to be under the impression that Apple wants to get to the bottom of the case, and that the company is pulling strings in law enforcement to try and do that. However, some new information discovered by Wired suggests that the story may be more complicated than that. They have heard claims from an anonymous source that Apple already knew the identity of the person who found the iPhone, and allegedly sold it to Gizmodo. Someone identifying themselves as being affiliated with Apple apparently arrived at the finder's house in Silicon Valley last week, looking for the finder (and possibly the phone) but finding only a roommate, who didn't let them in. Wired's source also says that the person who found the phone never tried to keep it a secret and even contacted Apple and searched Facebook for someone to return the phone to. When money finally changed hands (from Gizmodo), Wired's source says it was "for exclusivity," and not for a sale of the actual device. Of course, this is all a mix of hearsay and conjecture, spoken by an anonymous source who may or may not know about the case. The bottom line at this point is that the police investigation is underway. If they find evidence that makes them believe a crime was committed, then we'll see them take action. Until then, though, it's unclear exactly what happened with the iPhone's finder and whether the "sale" was illegal or not. [via Business Journal]
The Gizmodo iPhone saga flowchart
Fast Company has come up with an awesome Gizmodo iPhone Saga flowchart to help us follow the increasingly confusing case. The flowchart allows users to pick what they believe to be the true facts, and it lets them follow the trail to its "obvious" conclusion. Possible outcomes include: it was all an Apple conspiracy, bloggers are journalists, and Gizmodo bowed to corruption to get site traffic. So, where did you end up?
Police investigating lost iPhone prototype raid Gizmodo editor's home
The backstory of the lost fourth-gen iPhone prototype acquired by Gizmodo last week is certainly already the stuff of some legend, but hold on tight, because it just got even wilder: Giz editor Jason Chen's house was apparently raided by California's REACT computer crimes task force under the authority of a search warrant on Friday night and his computers and several other items were seized. That means a criminal investigation led by the San Mateo police and district attorney is almost certainly in full swing, which is, well, crazy. As you know, we published images of the iPhone prototype last Saturday, so we're tracking this story as closely as we know all of you are. For now hang tight and we'll share more info as we get it. Update: TechCrunch reports that the investigation is on hold for now following claims by Gawker that Chen should be protected under California's Shield Laws, meant to help protect journalists from revealing sources. The District Attorney will reportedly reevaluate whether those laws do apply, and as such will not go through the seized possessions until a decision's been reached in the coming days.
Talkcast tonight at 10 PM EDT: legal matters, iPhone devs, and more
Do we have a lot to talk about tonight on the TUAW Talkcast? Heck, yes! We have the aftermath of the Gizmodo 4th-generation iPhone fiasco, and a discussion of the possible legal ramifications of that situations. We'll talk about that poor Apple engineer who lost the phone to begin with, and how he may benefit from that faux pas. Several of the TUAW staff are at the Voices That Matter iPhone conference in Seattle this weekend, and we may be talking with them about what's going on in the world of iPhone OS development. To participate on TalkShoe, you can use the browser-only client, the embedded Facebook app, or the classic TalkShoe Pro Java client; however, for maximum fun, you should call in. For the web UI, just click the "TalkShoe Web" button on our profile page at 10 pm Sunday. To call in on regular phone or VoIP lines (take advantage of your free cellphone weekend minutes if you like): dial (724) 444-7444 and enter our talkcast ID, 45077 -- during the call, you can request to talk by keying in *8. If you've got a headset or microphone handy on your Mac, you can connect via the free Gizmo or X-Lite SIP clients; basic instructions are here. Talk with you then!
Determining civil and criminal liability for the lost iPhone
Editor's Note: One of the advantages of having an attorney on the TUAW team is the opportunity for this sort of deep-dive legal analysis. We asked Lauren to dig into the circumstances and statutes around the case of the mystery iPhone, and she obliged. While Lauren is a real lawyer, she's not your lawyer, nor is she licensed in California, so please do not make decisions about what to do with found property in bars without consulting your own legal counsel. Ever since Gizmodo put up those pictures and claimed to have Apple's next iPhone in hand, questions have been swirling about what the repercussions, if any, might be from a legal perspective. While the iPhone's peddler probably ought to be finding himself a lawyer, the more interesting question is this: is Gizmodo courthouse-bound? This question has gotten increasingly more interesting in light of the fact that as of today, CNET reports that Silicon Valley police are looking into the matter. Let's break it down, with a lengthy look at just who might be wronged and how. Find the nearest leather chair, a bookcase of legal tomes, sew on your elbow patches, and get ready to look contemplative. There are two entities to which Giz could be forced to answer: they are Apple, and the State of California, representing both civil and criminal liability respectively.
Police launch probe into lost iPhone sale
It sure seemed like this whole "lost iPhone" saga might be over, but maybe things are just getting interesting: CNET is reporting that Silicon Valley police have launched a probe into the sale of the prototype iPhone left at a bar in Redwood City to Gizmodo.com. Apple has reportedly spoken to police about the incident, and a computer crime task force is on the case, currently investigating whether there's enough evidence of wrongdoing to file charges. It's possible that there isn't, and this really is over, but if police find that laws were broken with the sale of the unreleased property, charges might be filed. Jonathan Ballerano (via Daring Fireball) has a little more insight on Gizmodo's possible liability. If a case is brought against Gizmodo, says Ballerano, the question will be twofold: whether Apple took reasonable steps to protect their secret (as in, not leaving it in the hands of an engineer who might lose it at a bar), and whether Gizmodo had knowledge that the phone was a trade secret at the time. On the first point, Ballerano says that California law is relatively lenient, and given that Apple needs to field-test the phones, somehow, they could probably make a case for reasonable protection of their secret. On the second point, Ballerano believes that yes, Gizmodo willfully disclosed something they knew was a secret, and expects that if either a suit or a charge is brought, Gizmodo will pay. But at this point, it's up to the police and Apple to decide how far they can pursue Gizmodo and on what grounds they might go after them. We'll have more legal analysis coming up about the case -- stay tuned.
David Letterman's "Top Ten Excuses of the Guy Who Lost the iPhone Prototype"
On Wednesday night, David Letterman's Top Ten list was dedicated to the guy who lost the 4G iPhone prototype. The phone was later found and sold to Gizmodo. Some of the excuses Letterman thought the Apple engineer who lost the iPhone should use: "Couldn't call Apple for help because I lost my iPhone." "Thought there was an app that would wisk [sic] it back to my house." "At least I didn't lose my finger like that iPad guy." "It didn't work anyway -- it uses AT&T." What's more entertaining than his Top Ten list is watching Letterman's little rant about his utter disdain for the iPhone prototype story. "This comes under the category for me of 'who cares'," Letterman said. "Honestly, I just couldn't care less about this."
Apple: We want our device back
Apple's Senior VP and General Counsel Bruce Sewell sent a letter to Gizmodo's Editorial Director Brian Lam requesting that their mystery iPhone be returned. From the letter: "It has come to our attention that GIZMODO is currently in possession of of a device that belongs to Apple. This letter constitutes a formal request that you return the device to Apple. Please let me know where to pick up the unit." Brian then posted GIZMODO's reply for all to see: "Bruce, thanks. Here's Jason Chen, who has the iPhone. And here's his address. You two should coordinate a time. [Blah Blah Blah Address] Happy to have you pick this thing up. Was burning a hole in our pockets. Just so you know, we didn't know this was stolen [as they might have claimed. meaning, real and truly from Apple. It was found, and to be of unproven origin] when we bought it. Now that we definitely know it's not some knockoff, and it really is Apple's, I'm happy to see it returned to its rightful owner. P.S. I hope you take it easy on the kid who lost it. I don't think he loves anything more than Apple." It's the flippant, disrespectful (using "Bruce," not "Mr. Sewell," the "burning a hole in our pockets" line and calling the unfortunate late-20s employee who lost the phone "the kid") tone that permeates this letter -- and, indeed, their handling of the entire ordeal -- that irks me. Also, there's no conceivable way they can claim that they didn't know it was Apple's property, "found" or not. We don't know how this story will end, but Giz's adolescent, "Whoops-a-daisy" mockery won't win them any new fans. Enjoy those "warm, fuzzy, huggy feelings of legal compliance."
World's most costly beer: The one that led an Apple engineer to misplace his phone
More on the ongoing saga of the wayward next-gen iPhone. Gizmodo just posted their version of the story behind the story: They say that an Apple employee who works on the iPhone's baseband technology left the mysterious phone at the Gourmet Haus Staudt, a Redwood City bar and restaurant that's not far from Apple's campus. [Insert joke about German beer and engineers here.] Anyway, the gentleman who found the phone apparently waited for the phone's owner to return for some time, and was able to identify him from his Facebook profile on the phone. He intended to return the phone the next day, but it was bricked (or MobileMe deactivated) the next morning. That's when he began noticing ... strange things. Like the front-facing camera and the barcodes on the back. [Insert surprised wisecrack that Apple's prototype units don't have "lock with passcode after 10 seconds" turned on by default.] That was back on March 18. Gizmodo says they got the phone some weeks later, and today they confirmed it was a legit Apple item by calling the engineer at work. At Apple. Where he still apparently has a phone and access to a desk. [Insert shock and astonishment.] It's a fascinating read, and if nothing else, it more or less confirms that yes, we're looking at an official Apple prototype. Lesson of the day: Do not, do not, mix beer and priceless unreleased iPhones. Meanwhile, here's an obvious point: it's clear Gizmodo had few or no qualms about publicly announcing the name of the Apple staffer who lost the phone (which I originally reproduced in this post, but redacted based on feedback from readers). When should we expect the follow-up story announcing the name and employer of the person who found the phone and in turn provided it to Gizmodo?
iPhone 4th-gen prototype lost and found in the wild
What you see above might just be the fourth generation iPhone. The pictured prototype was reportedly lost in a Redwood City, Calif. bar and found its way to Gizmodo for immediate deconstruction. Though the phone has been remotely deactivated, preventing its fortunate locator from running any Apps on it, there are a few external design changes that may have some implications as far as the device's gaming capabilities are concerned. The foremost of these changes is a new, front-mounted camera, which will make DSi porting much easier -- in other words, "put your face in the game" gimmickry could become common in new iPhone games. Also, according to Gizmodo's preliminary findings, the new hardware's screen appears to have a higher resolution than the 3GS screen (at least, it's smaller in size). The back of the prototype does not reveal the amount of internal memory in the device, but previous reports have suggested the next iPhone will have up to 80GB of space (which would be a stupid silly amount of games). Additionally, there's a larger battery installed in the lost-n-found unit than the one in the 3GS. Finally, the prototype sports a new shell with a flat back, which apparently feels "freaking amazing." That's always a good thing for handheld gaming, right? [Via Engadget]
Eight cruel iPad wallpaper tricks
Pranksters, start your engines. Gizmodo lists eight tricks you can play on your iPad-owning, smug and self-satisfied friends to wipe the grins off their mugs. They've got a full gallery of options here; I especially like the SPOD screen, and the Wishful Thinking version shown here (multitasking! Flash! VERIZON!!) is quite funny. If you like the Blue Screen of Death or the Bloody Hand (which is oddly reminiscent of a certain scene in James Cameron's last big blockbuster), chime in below -- or include links to your own favorite background screens.
Apple played favorites with iPad access
Boing Boing's Rob Beschizza has an insightful look at something that no one's really noticed yet: Apple definitely played favorites when it came to sharing the iPad. Here's the list of outlets and writers that got access to the iPad for an early review. You'll note that Boing Boing is on there, as is PC Magazine. Engadget and Gizmodo (along with TUAW, though we got one anyway) are not. Time is on there, Newsweek is not. Clearly, Apple's being careful about who's given access, and there's no one reason why an outlet might be on the list or not. And it might be even more confusing than that -- Fake Steve Jobs (a.k.a. writer Dan Lyons) tells a story about how Apple sent word out that they were unhappy about Newsweek officially hiring him after the FSJ reveal. Apple isn't just controlling access -- they're doing their best to control the entire media perception of the company. One thing that Beschizza doesn't mention (he goes on to gloat a little about Boing Boing's history with Apple) is that, in those first few days of iPad app reveals, it was pretty clear which developers had gotten an iPad early. Firemint, PopCap, MLB, EA -- there are hundreds of thousands of developers on the App Store, and Apple came to only a few to offer them a development iPad to play with early. Unfortunately, again, we'll never know the criteria for selection there other than Apple's whims (and I presume the whole thing is wrapped so tightly in an NDA that we won't even know when and how the offers were made), so we don't have a full picture of what access was offered and how. But there's no question that Apple made specific choices about how and where to send the iPad -- some people and companies got in, lots didn't.
Apple C&Ds Gawker over bounty on tablet info
Yesterday, as you might have heard, the blog Valleywag offered up a total of $100,000 in prize money for information on the rumored Apple tablet. They posted on their site that they were offering bounties for pictures, information, or eventually a full $100,000 for a hands on of the currently unannounced device. As expected, Apple has brought the legal hammer down on Gawker (who runs both Valleywag and Gizmodo), ordering them to cease and desist the bounty hunt for tablet information, and even threatening under California law that it is illegal to (paraphrasing) acquire, use, or disclose Apple trade secrets while knowing that the person who gave them to you was under a confidentiality agreement. Valleywag hasn't updated their original post (and presumably, their lawyers will have confirmed with them that there was some legal course for what they were doing -- they do say to would-be leakers that they shouldn't do anything illegal to get their information), but Apple threatens legal action if any secrets are leaked or published. Very exciting, no? Gizmodo's headline claims that this is confirmation of the tablet's existence, but we're not so sure -- while obviously there have been lots of rumors about the tablet (some of them possibly even leaked from Apple itself), soliciting trade secrets for a payoff is against the law, and we're sure Apple would pursue legal action whether or not there was a tablet device. Just the fact that they sent a C&D hardly means "confirmed." But it will be interesting to see what happens, either if Valleywag doesn't call off the hunt, or if they do find something worth paying for. Most likely, they'll end up hearing about it when we do: at the rumored event later this month.
Steve Jobs, the moral high ground, and the return to Apple
Adam Lashinsky's CEO of the Decade cover story at Fortune this week pointed out a fascinating "what if" in Apple history. What if Steve Jobs had tried a hostile takeover of Apple? According to the story, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison and his friend Steve Jobs were on a beach in Hawaii in '97 when Ellison, under the influence of a few margaritas, floated the idea of buying Apple to bring Jobs back into power at the company he had co-founded with Steve Wozniak. Jobs declined, although Ellison had funding all lined up to allow The Steve to make a hostile takeover of the company. He told Ellison that a takeover would make people think he was greedy, just wanting to make money out of Apple. Ellison later stated that "He (Jobs) explained to me that with the moral high ground, he thought he could make decisions more easily and more gracefully." Over at Gizmodo, Jesus Diaz surmises that it was more than decision-making that went into Steve's refusal to push his way back into power; it was love. As Diaz notes, "Steve wanted to be wanted. He knew he was loved by the public and the press. After all, everyone likes the story of a legend coming back-to see him succeed or, better yet for Hollywood drama, fail. More importantly, the company was his company. He didn't have to buy it! That was absolutely preposterous, he probably thought at the time. He knew he was going to return as King once again, acclaimed by his troops and his people, so why spend any money?" Since his return to Apple, Steve Jobs has, of course, brought the company from the brink of extinction into profitability and recognition. Whether or not he would have been equally successful as a result of a hostile takeover is a great plot for an alternative universe sci-fi novel, but it adds a lot to the legend of Steve Jobs to know that he was able to regain control of the company through a combination of connections, persuasion, and his love for his company. The rest is history. As Ellison stated in his Fortune interview, "The difference between me and Steve is that I'm willing to live with the best the world can provide-with Steve that's not always good enough." That difference explains why Apple continues to amaze us with their products, why Steve Jobs is so important to the company, and why Jobs was the hands-down choice for Fortune's CEO of the Decade. [via Digg & Gizmodo] Post edited to properly credit Fortune.
The question of emulators
Gizmodo recently posted this video, which is beautiful to any PSX-era gamers: it's Final Fantasy VII running right on the iPhone, like buttah thanks to the 3GS hardware. How is this possible? Through the magic of emulation -- ever since computers got powerful enough to pretend to be other computers, people have resurrected old consoles and hardware by writing code that makes old games and software think its right at home in the computer it belongs in (an old NES system, a Genesis, or even a Playstation or Nintendo 64). As a result, by loading up ROMs into an emulator program, you can play old games you can't find (at least working) in the store any more.But the problem, as it usually does, lies in the legality. Even though those games are hard to find, companies still often own the copyrights on them (Square, for example, just released FFVII in an official emulator on the PSP, and they wouldn't be very happy with someone else releasing it on the iPhone). So while it's very easy for someone to write software that pretends to be an old NES (and there are lots of jailbroken apps around that will do just that), it's not easy to get all the rights and legal sign-offs to make it legit. Legit enough for Apple to keep it in the App Store, anyway. And while the video Gizmodo shows is awesome, and is possible on a jailbroken phone, it's not likely we'll ever see that app make it through Apple's approval. Not to mention that even when people jump through the legal hoops, Apple isn't happy with running other systems' code on their hardware anyway. Lame.That doesn't mean that the old games are gone forever -- there are certainly emulators of open-sourced or expired hardware on the App Store (here's one for Chip-8), and obviously there's a commercial reason for companies who do own the copyrights on popular games to bring them into the App Store officially. But as great as it would be to have a GBA emulator that automatically played any GBA game ROMs you loaded into it, that kind of stuff will have to stay in the jailbreak underground for now.
Would Blackberry's price minimum ensure a quality App Store?
Here's an interesting idea for the App Store. Gizmodo posts that the new Blackberry "App World" has set a minimum price on its apps, asking no less than $2.99 for whatever you buy in there. At first glance, that's pretty rough -- there are a lot of free apps on the App Store right now that we wouldn't pay 99 cents for, much less $2.99. But then again, Gizmodo is willing to at least suggest the benefit of the doubt: maybe it's done on purpose, to get us past the scourge of the many fart and other useless apps populating the App Store. Maybe if every app is sold for $3 or more, they'll end up all being worth that much, too.But we have to agree with Gizmodo's conclusion, too: while it would be nice if every app on the store was worth more than $3, there are definitely a few apps out there that are worth having the lower (and free) prices for. And to add to that, it's hard to believe that, even at $3, every app would strive to live up to that price -- most likely what will happen is that you'll end up with just as much crap on the Blackberry's store, except that you'll be paying $2 more for it.Still, it's an idea. If Apple did a little price tweaking, is it possible that they could ensure a little more quality to what shows up on the store? Or, in the case of the junk that's on there now, will we just end up with higher-priced junk?
