What is Digg?105 Comments
- sholt, on 10/10/2007, -4/+26No, the iPhone is just locked because that's the way the cellular providers in the US work. There is no technical reason for it.
- OneManArmy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16Direct link to dev team post http://hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=8235
- stevealford, on 10/10/2007, -8/+18All iPhone applications have root access. Think about this scenario for a second: Say there are 1,000 people in the US right now trying to develop a custom app (pretty low estimate, I'd say). Each one of them is ***** around with code that could potentially render their iPhone useless. Should Apple fix it for them because it's under warranty if they mess it up?
If their custom app doesn't cause any problems until you load it onto your phone with another app that has similar code or writes to the same location, then it bricks your phone, should Apple fix it for you?
When you bought your iPhone, you accepted the EULA. You knew in advance that it was a locked phone. If you hack it, you break that agreement... yet you expect Apple to fulfill their end of the agreement and still cover the warranty and service? - staticfish, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10There is a free third party fix for that international prefix problem available here
http://hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7736 - alex7575, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Interesting that you're using the same argument MS uses for forcing manufacturers to get their drivers "approved" by MS.
- totorototoro, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10Where is the "condemning Apple" part of the statement? Sounds like a pretty matter of fact and realistic statement to me.
- sholt, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Well, the whole bit about the locking parts of the firmware being a "bug" is a touch combative.
- phoomp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I know of another company that also puts tasty morsels to tempt customers to download it's homebrew breaking software updates. Though, I've never heard of a PSP bricking from installing a Sony update ...
- mraustin1337, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7I'm glad they brought up the point which bothers me. "Unauthorized Access" to your own Hardware. They sound like ***** MPAA.
- alex7575, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Have you stopped to consider that Apple makes a comission from the carriers they make deals with.
Apple is like that cool chick you used to go out with, the perfect girlfriend, good looking, sharp, fun... but when she figured out she could just sell her virginity to the highest bidder, that turned her into a $2 whore. - sholt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4No, you are incorrect.
There is an exception to the DMCA that makes it not illegal to unlock your own cell phone. It does not require the providers or manufactures do anything different. - davebg8r, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9Perhaps with Apple doing so much to undermine the type of product we want and that they promised (they did say it will be able to use 3rd party apps) this will void my 'liking Apple' warranty. I have already delayed purchasing my new Macbook Pro to see how they handle things with the Iphone. The Iphone was my first step towards switching and so far I dont like what they are doing.
- bigz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6awesome, I quite like my $400 "sim free" iPhone. Beats paying £270 plus £45/month for a useful UK iPhone. I'm now waiting to see if I can flash my US phone with UK firmware when it becomes available. There are a couple of niggles that I want to get rid of (like caller ID not working on +44 numbers in my address book)
- wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4This is a universal and well worn argument.
It boils down to this: I can do anything I want with the *hardware* i own. Apple intentionally bricking my phone because I choose to exercise my right to do as I please with my own hardware is *ANTI-CUSTOMER* and over reaching.
I dont care why they wish to control my hardware, or what the EULA says. Apple is basically destroying *my* rightfully owned hardware. - Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5It's *****, but if they have that in their terms of the warranty, it's still your fault for breaking them. For all they know, some custom software you've installed made that little ARM processor run pegged until the battery died, and the heat from doing so damaged something else because the software in question overrode a temperature check.
Yes, it seems like being a *****, but there might actually be a REASON they do it. Software CAN damage hardware, however unlikely. It technically shouldn't do anything worse than uncover a preexisting flaw, but there you go. I believe that HW and SW warranties should be separate and that voiding them would only be done appropriately, but that's not the case. If you don't know the terms, it's your own fault, and if you do but don't agree with them, you shouldn't have bought it in the first place. - Ebacherville, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I was going to get a iphone only for the third party apps.. Apple lost that sale.. th iphone is just a fancy phone if we cant ad our own apps to it.
- geoken, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5MS doesn't force anyone to get their drivers approved by MS. If you want to slap a windows compatable sticker on the box then your stuff needs to get approved, but your free to develop whatever you driver you want and never show it to MS and have it work perfectly.
- Singee15, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5The best part of that article (in true programmer style):
"The text of the statement, with modifications for grammar and spelling, follows after the break." - Swift2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3They're not saying you will brick your iPhone by updating it, they're saying you might, and they can't be held responsible. In other words, buy an iPhone, use it according to the agreement, and if it bricks you'll get a new one, or free repairs for as long as your warranty goes. If you screw around with it, you're breaking the agreement, and there's no warranty. Plus, when they want to do something like, say, the Wireless iTunes store, or whatever, if you take a hacked phone and try to get the update, they're not guaranteeing that it won't brick it. To unlock the phone, you have to change the firmware and the modem code. Why should Apple test updates so that it won't break your hack?
"To live outside the law, you must be honest." - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6the problem arises when it's a hardware issue and apple refuses to service it. it's the same situation as that guy who had linux installed on his laptop and pcworld refused to fix a hardware issue because of it.
- Swift2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Uh, yes they do. In Vista, you need to have a signed driver. Otherwise, it won't work.
- wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I prefer to think that Apple is like that good looking chick, that turned out to be really lousy in bed, and incredibly controlling and shallow.
- uberfu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3people are forgetting one thing:
Regardless of whether Apple wants to bow to the pressure of the masses or not [like they sometimes have] - they are under contractual obligation with AT&T for 5 years - remember the Exclusivity Agreement they both bragged about for months ?
Yeah - well Apple has to build that little "bug" the Dev Team mentions into their product or AT&T could slap them with a breach of contract action_ So odds are better than not this will continue thru the end of their committment_ With the exception that Apple as of late has had the tarck record of kicking over ant hills - so we'll see_
Maybe in 2012 this will be less of an issue_
This is no different than the DRM issue with iTunes_
What I find interesting is that you buy an iPhone and commit to a 2 year agreement with AT&T [aside from any hacking] - AT&T and Apple have a 5 year agreement - so what happens at the end of 2-years if you want to move to another carrier and your contract is up ? Wouldn't they be obligated to allow you to then use any carrier you want and they'd have to allow for support when migrating to another carrieer ?
It is going to get real interesting over the next year and a half_ - VitriolAndAngst, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8Has anyone ever heard of such a thing in the history of business? Much less with Steve Jobs at the helm?
You have a development team going through the equivalent of a mutiny to open up a product to the user, when the corporate policy is a closed platform. I admire their chutzpah, but how do they keep their jobs? Is this just confusion in the ranks, a weird marketing strategy, on hand doesn't know what the other hand is doing, an insurrection, or,... as my gut tells me, a "loop hole" where Apple cannot officially endorse an open platform due to contracts with AT&T but the developers can.
I think we will know pretty quickly on the next update, and if we hear something like FUD from AT&T.
But how on earth do you get such a tight product, that works brilliantly from a company that is brand new to the cell phone platform, with almost flawless execution, and then a flip-flop like this right on the heals of a 30% price drop. At least nobody can say the iPhone experience is boring. - alex7575, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I do understand your argument, and even agree with your argument. But I choose not to be "looked out" for my best interests. In the day and age of Open Source development, any kind of locking process is just a step backwards.
Also I think you're missing the point slightly, I think the common fear is that Apple will purposely brick the iPhones, and that in my opinion is just spitting on the face of the consumers that love their product so much that they had to go through all sorts of crap to have one. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4You will be buried, but you hit the nail right on the head. You bought the product knowing full well what it's restrictions were, yet you signed up anyways.
Would expect an automaker to honor its warranty if you removed the (speed) governor from your engine's computer and subsequently blew said engine because you pushed it too hard? Or if you ***** with the timing to try to squeeze out more power and threw a rod? (bad analogies? you get the point). - Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Then why is everyone only making a big stink about the iPhone being locked? Jesus, Verizon phones don't even have SIM cards, yet plenty of people were pissed when Apple didn't go with them over AT&T (FYI: they would have, but didn't like VZ's terms). Verizon locks down the USB port on phones and disables bluetooth for file transfer even if the phone's software supports it, so you have to do generally non-trivial hacks in order to drag on a custom ringtone that they'd have otherwise charged you four bucks a year for.
Part of it is that there are only two carriers that work off of GSM in the US, and they wanted something that would work worldwide without needing to re-tool the machinery for an international phone (and put in a different modem). Part of it is that they want to offer special features like Visual Voicemail (and for as few voicemails as I get, I love it - I can only imagine for people who get a lot), which requires certain back-end changes on the network. And, of course, some of it is the cut of the monthly fee that Apple is taking. I'm sure that they'd have been happy to sell an unlocked phone if they could have made that happen across all supporting networks (but lacking exclusivity, no network probably would have gone for the necessary changes). - Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4All DVD drives sold period. And just like any other drive out there, I can change the region five times before it's locked permanently (and it's trivial to get around it with software before or after the fact).
That's an MPAA issue, not an Apple one. Go hate on the right company, thanks. - noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -8/+11"Apple does indeed bend over backwards to appease "the man" and screw the people. "
Also known as following international law and restrictions. - alex7575, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5So if I promisse you a Ferrari and give you a Pinto, you shouldn't be mad right? A Pinto's still a car...
- alex7575, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I should have put quotes around "forcing", you're right.
- cave, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Keyword in the phrase *firmware*. They could have done a soft lock.
- genericface, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4This is Digg, we don't look for other rational explanations, only knee jerk reactions based on our preconceptions.
- zeroMPHfallover, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No, there isn't, but it also won't succeed if it bricks the iPhone.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Apple Fans -vs- Apple , kewl : )
- pop1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"several hundred thousand people have unlocked their iPhones"
Wait. That doesn't add up. If Apple just recently sold the 1 millionth unit of the iPhone, and several hundred thousand people have unlocked theirs, that means a sizable percent of the sales didn't convert to AT&T subscribers.
I don't think that's the case.
Other than that, all power to iPhone unlockers. I hope Apple realizes it would have made a lot more money if it hadn't locked the iPhone to AT&T and instead positioned the iPhone as a programmable device (and without needing to drop the price). I wonder how many more millions of units it would have sold by now... - Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4They never said third-party apps that you can install on the phone. What you're talking about is promising a car to someone who expects a Ferrari and giving them a Pinto. That just makes them foolish and you a douche - it's the same situation here. We were promised apps, expected proper installable stuff (which we DO have, just not with permission of or help from Apple), and got web apps.
Also, it sounds like Apple IS working on bringing proper installable third-party apps to the phone, going by some leaked developer comments. Just don't expect to hear anything like that on-the-record until a Stevenote. Honestly, I wouldn't be too surprised to see it happen alongside Leopard's release or at MWSF'08 in Jan. - bigz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Thanks for the link - I will give that a try later!
- Swift2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I've installed updated DVD firmware on my Pioneer. It came from the Pioneer site. Technically, they had only a Windows installer, so I used hacker stuff for the Mac. It worked fine. However, if it had bricked the DVD player/recorder, would Pioneer have fixed it for me? Given me a new one? Maybe, because it was their firmware code that screwed up. If I have gone to Joe Hacker's site, and tried his hack that gave it more abilities, like a faster write speed, would Pioneer have replaced the bricked recorder? Don't think so.
The FCC has said that unlocking a phone is legal, but charging for the software to do it isn't. And I don't think Apple has any alternative to voiding warranties when you hack the software, because they're not in control. Now, should they release a "software development kit"? Yes. But will they void warranties when you hack it to another carrier? Yep. - WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+264bit Vista, not 32bit. I agree that an OS vendor only allowing approved drivers and kernel space code is just plain wrong. If I want to write my own driver, and install it on my own computer, then it's no one's business but my own. MS can take their locked down kernel space and stick it somewhere warm...
- geoken, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3What are you talking about. Read the ***** title of this submission. How is this not about the phone being locked or unlocked. It's about apple intentionally bricking unlocked iPhones, not about Apple refusing warranties on iPhones with 3rd party apps.
- cyssero, on 04/18/2009, -0/+2Same set was 150MB on ThePirateBay.
- dagamer34, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4It's understandable if Apple made it's update check to see if a phone is "normal" and then go ahead with the update and prevent and update if it's been "hacked". There's only one state to check. Instead Apple will apply the update anyway to brick phones. That's just plain malicious. If they say that there are "so many states" that the phone can be in, well check for the state that you expect and only update then. Is that so hard?
Trust me, bricking phones on purpose (and this really is on purpose) for completely legal things will cause an uproar. - etandrib, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Right. No one is saying it is locked because of a "technical" problem. It is a licensing issue. Politics, licensing, standards, laws, etc.
- Swift2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I think it's great to hack your phone, and I think our business structure should be such as to make it legal. But to be more realistic, hacking is a dangerous sport. Hack your computer and you could turn it into a brick. And if you do, how can any corporation be held responsible. They tell you not to hack it. You do. Well, I know people who now have T-Mobile on the iPhones, and they're waiting breathlessly for the iTunes Wireless store on their hacked phones. It's a dilemma, isn't it?
- sholt, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Is there a manufacturer out there that sells, at a reasonable cost, a DVD drive without said locks in firmware?
- zeroMPHfallover, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4A web app is not an app. It's a web app.
- uberfu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Totally agree_
I go buy a car from a Chevrolet dealership - they aren't forcing me to goto ONLY Shell to fill my gas tank_ They aren't forcing me to goto ONLY Goodyear when I need new tires_
Do you know how many heads would roll if this crap played out in the automotive industry ? - fuxjoey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What a quick response & slap Apple in the face.
- uberfu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"several hundred thousand unlocked iPhones...."
This number can easily be as low as 200,000 out of 1 million_
Several means multiple - Multiple means more than one_ -
Show 51 - 100 of 105 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is