What is Digg?132 Comments
- Noobist, on 10/10/2007, -7/+127stop exaggerating in your titles!
- cybertron3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+67They said it will break, not be stopped. As a software engineer, I would guess they are totally reworking some stuff in the APIs. It is very likely that after 90 days in the field with 1M+ users, they discovered some bugs that did not come up in initial testing. I would take this as more of a heads up warning than them saying they will throw a wrench in the 3rd party app gears.
- totorototoro, on 10/10/2007, -2/+53They didn't change their minds. The original interview had both points made: Apple wouldn't go out of their way to break the hacks, and wouldn't go out of their way to protect them from being broken. Depending on your bias, you read only the part you wanted to :p
- aspec, on 10/10/2007, -3/+221 word. Contract. If Apple supports SIM unlocking, it's the same as selling it with another provider. This would violate the terms of their agreement.
- fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18This is really kinda a stupid argument. If there are 3rd party programmers working on iPhone apps outside of Apple, they have no control of what they do to it. So if something gets changed because Apple did an update, and it breaks someone elses app, well, dem's the breaks.
Basically, just because it works today doesnt garentee it will work tomorrow. Its not intentional, but a consequence of an evolving system.
So, how about not trying to find bad guys all the time? - pradaaddict, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12Buried as inaccurate. Just because Apple says subsequent updates may break 3rd party apps doesn't mean that they are going to actively discourage hackers. They know it's impossible to stop hackers from hacking.
More importantly Apple knows that consumers will always get what they want out of a product no matter what. Consumers demanded that the iPhone be unlocked and of course it was unlocked. It's the same thing with pirated movies/music/software. If the public decides that they do not wish to pay for something then they will make it happen the way they want no matter what. - Spamcan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10It still doesn't mean Apple will be following Sony's lead with the PSP in actively trying to stop hackers. Just wait a few days after each iTunes and firmware update to see if any problems arise. If OTA iTMS downloads aren't of any value to you theres probably not going to be a compelling reason to take a chance on breaking those third party apps anytime soon anyway.
Unless they majorly update Safari or get Youtube to actually WORK PROPLERLY that is.. - geminitojanus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Apple says "your applications will probably break". They didn't say "Don't hack".
Why will they probably break? Because the ABI/API isn't stable. This isn't news at all, it's something every iPhone hacker has known since they've put their hands on the device (and probably long before that). Until there's an an API release from Apple, don't expect stable 3rd party applications. - berfmurret, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12buried. sensationalist title.
- isellmacs, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I dunno how many diggers play WoW, and of those how many use mods, but after each patch they do many 3rd party add-ons or mods either don't work right or are outright broken.
This strikes me as more of a "write-at-your-own-risk" style then a "we're-gonna-break-your-*****" style. - craig4, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8I think the greatest reversal would be NBC trying to come back to iTunes.
- johnpaul191, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7buried. inaccurate title.
interesting article, but the bogus headlines are getting out of hand. - meatmcguffin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Can you point out where the DRM is in the iPhone that hasn't been put there by the music industry? While you're there, can you point out any DRM in any other Apple products?
The nearest Apple have come to anti-hacker restrictions that I can remember is the TCM chip in the intel dev machines that was stripped out for release machine. Oh, and seeing as you're a Windows troll it's worth pointing out that OS X doesn't have serial numbers while Windows has a remote kill switch that triggers when MS's servers crash. - colincornaby, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Changes mind? Um, this is the same thing they said the other day.
- Radar3D, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5There's no "???," all three are "Profit."
- razei, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7i doubt you even know what that means.
- eridius, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5No, we'd probably be relieved because MS's default position would be to actively break 3rd party hacks.
- pradaaddict, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5you are attempting to argue semantics over the internet. don't you have anything better to do with your life?
- lukifer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5You mean they'll be changing APIs which aren't finished yet, thereby breaking apps based on them? Shocking.
- sleepwalkers, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4They didn't reverse a damn thing. The initial statement was that they weren't going to aim to stop third party applications, which everyone took that as Apple saying "Go ahead, hack away, our updates won't break them!"
This statement is the same thing, but it's saying "We're not going to give a ***** if it breaks them, and it probably will in some way, shape or form."
This exaggeration of the initial statement is what caused this second, nearly identical statement to be made. - ahawks, on 10/10/2007, -3/+71) So much for Openness?
You are aware the iPhone is about as closed as can be. No SDK, no documentation for developers. Lock-in with one cell provider. You can't even easily replace the SIM card.
2)
They have to watch their backs, or AT&T will get pretty pissy about people buying iPhones for use with TMobile. - streak, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Indeed. Apple already "broke" 3rd party add-ons with its software updates... After the updates, 3rd party software is nowhere to be found on the device. The update process first performs an integrity check, which fails with the installation of 3rd party software. This failure results in a complete reset of the iPhone, eliminating all customizations, including any 3rd party software. If you don't mind having to re-configure your iPhone with every Apple update, this is a complete non-issue. (Why is this so difficult to fathom?)
- MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3and you're welcome to do with it as you please. Just don't be surprised if one of your hacks breaks.
- MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3over90000 what are you talking about? Can you show me one (just one) quote from anyone at Apple that stated that Apple will support third-party additions to the iPhone? There's no conspiracy here. Apple will make occasional changes to the iPhone OS for bug fixes or additional features they want to add and if it breaks an iPhone hack so be it.
You rolls the dice you take your chances. It'll be re-hacked not long after anyway. - MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3pradaaddict! Stop it! You're confusing him with honesty!
- picsectionpleez, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I hate Engadet. They are the National Enquirer of the Tech world.
- morcheeba, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You're thinking trademark laws, not copyright. The obligation is to go after the people diluting your trademark, or else the whole value of a trademark (to identify the source of a good) is useless. Plus, no one is copying apple firmware - they are adding their own stuff to it.
- yabos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Exactly. People don't understand that Apple will be changing APIs left and right and they don't want to have to maintain a stable API, at least not yet.
- eridius, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5You know what's worse than a "Mac apologist"? Mac haters who try and exaggerate or make stuff up in order to justify their position.
- pradaaddict, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5I buried you because MS Office, Adobe stuff, GIMP, and other open source apps work just fine on OS X.
Also Apple does not command all digital distribution of music, TV, and movies. They do bundle but there are hundreds of widely available options open to consumers and we know that. - FearlessFreep, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Buried as inaccurate.
All Apple is saying is that they don't care if you add third party apps to your iphone, but they are not guaranteeing that said apps won't break with further updates. There's no official SDK for the iphone and Apple is not going to bother with backward compatibility, so you're pretty much on your own if you want to go that route; Apple won't stop it but won't support it either - Rizin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3This is just to protect themselves from Lawsuits now that the Unlock is out
- CrimsonBlur, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Stupid title and description. The statement before was that Apple is perfectly fine with people creating their own native apps and aren't interested in actively suppressing modifications, etc. Here they are saying that despite their neutral position, apps are likely to break because the system is not open. They don't care if people make 3rd-party apps, they're just saying it's not their responsibility to make sure their updates don't break compatibility.
- jthomp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Its true. With every past update I've had to restore before applying the update. Then I added my apps back on. Doesn't really bother me.
- MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think they might notice when they stop working
- PhireN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No not that simple. The unlock only requires a 3rd party app to install and can survive restores. But an apple update might still break it, by overwriting the baseband firmware, or refusing to work if it dectects an unsupported sim.
- toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Not necessarily.
- MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Wow! Fascinating comment and so topical. You're much too smart for digg and should leave...now
- MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yes because being on the front page of digg means fanboys successfully killed the post.
- meatmcguffin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Surely the point is that no matter what happens you can reinstall everything in exactly the same way as before. Apple could really screw devs over by doing even the slightest changes but they don't bother and in a way they're preventing iPhone updates from bricking hacked phones - seems like a nice thing to do :P
- eridius, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2And at least the WoW addon API is documented and mostly stable.
- DaffyDuck, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Apple chose AT&T because it has the most subscribers. Since you aren't an AT&T subscriber, they apparently don't care.
- tnoy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Most of the people that would be doing that, are probably working on the Neo1973 right now.
- milkmage, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3what? you can't successfully operate a paperclip? that's all it takes to open the SIM door (yes, there's a door neat the 'sleep' switch at the top) sticking a paperclip in the hole to release the chip is less effort than removing the battery (to get to the SIM on my BBerry)
- IEatHamburgers, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Stupid sensationalist, exaggerated titles... A more accurate title would have been "Apple to iPhone users: You're on your own with this one."
- heifetz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Is this becoming more of an issue on Digg? Most of the stories on the front page are ones with exaggerated, inaccurate titles. Most of the people who end up digging them probably never bothers to read the actual article.
- MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No Batman or Green Lantern either! I want my money back!
- InitialDMP5, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2wow next time read and try to understand what was said. Or did you pull out your jump to conclusions mat?
- r3zonance, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"...and nobody would be none the wiser."
So you mean everyone would know then? - batmant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i agree. no where in this article does it say "don't hack your iPhone". The titles are getting ridiculous.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 128 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is