iPhone....
- Thread starter Mr. W. Coyote
- Start date
I thought my points stood well on their own. Makes no difference whether I am an Apple lover or an Apple hater. Evaluate the comments for what they say, not what you think my motives are.
Maybe I haven't been following this. I thought Apple released a software update that crashed when it ran on the wrong firmware. What makes you think it is identifying anything? Do you have some information about how the update works that I didn't notice?
Maybe I haven't been following this. I thought Apple released a software update that crashed when it ran on the wrong firmware. What makes you think it is identifying anything? Do you have some information about how the update works that I didn't notice?
Its been mentioned in this very thread and you can confirm it all over the net.
Apple's latest update not only crashes the phone but makes it unable to rollback to a firmware revision [and that is what is being patched] prior to the update. At the same time it re-brands the phone by changing the IEMI number, identifying it as a phone that had been hacked and Apple has stated that such phones will NOT have their warranties honored.
So, the patch bricks the phone while identifying it as a phone that has been UPGRADED to work outside of ATT and then Apple refuses to fix it.
Everyone acknowledges [even Apple indirectly] that this is being done to enforce Apple's contract with ATT. A contract that isn't enforceable, legally, upon the end user.
It is a direct slap in the face by Apple to its customers, denying them of their right to use the product they purchased outright in the manner they see fit.
Apple's latest update not only crashes the phone but makes it unable to rollback to a firmware revision [and that is what is being patched] prior to the update. At the same time it re-brands the phone by changing the IEMI number, identifying it as a phone that had been hacked and Apple has stated that such phones will NOT have their warranties honored.
So, the patch bricks the phone while identifying it as a phone that has been UPGRADED to work outside of ATT and then Apple refuses to fix it.
Everyone acknowledges [even Apple indirectly] that this is being done to enforce Apple's contract with ATT. A contract that isn't enforceable, legally, upon the end user.
It is a direct slap in the face by Apple to its customers, denying them of their right to use the product they purchased outright in the manner they see fit.
I like the idea of open platforms as much as anyone, but I know Apple's product is fundamentally different then Ubuntu's. Apple offers a stable, reliable, turnkey solution that requires almost zero technical knowledge. One reason their systems are so very stable and predictable is because they work very hard to completely control the way a user interfaces with the technology. That's OK since their customers like what comes out of the box thank-you-very-much and have no need to add features. Apple is really neither a hardware company nor a software company; Apple is an appliance company. People don't hack their washing machines. And if people did hack their washing machine, you wouldn't expect Whirlpool to fix any problems that resulted from that. In all areas of retail goods, warranties are almost always voided by unauthorized hacking of a product. You can't put nos in your Civic and expect Honda to deal with a blown cylinder. There are plenty of cell phone hacks out there that will likewise void your warranty.
Now, many people who buy computer appliances want hackability. I think this is a cultural artifact from the days when computers were largely assemble and program yourself kits. They want to change their operating system, or bus architecture or whatever. So in the tech world there's this big expectation (which differs from all other electronic appliances) for modularity. But Apple has never played the game that way. And no one should be surprised, thirty years into the game, when they continue to do what they've always done.
You can argue that this makes Apple's products inferior. I think it would be better to say, however, that it just makes them different and intended for a different market.
Now, many people who buy computer appliances want hackability. I think this is a cultural artifact from the days when computers were largely assemble and program yourself kits. They want to change their operating system, or bus architecture or whatever. So in the tech world there's this big expectation (which differs from all other electronic appliances) for modularity. But Apple has never played the game that way. And no one should be surprised, thirty years into the game, when they continue to do what they've always done.
You can argue that this makes Apple's products inferior. I think it would be better to say, however, that it just makes them different and intended for a different market.
If you mean the one that mousy started, I did post in that thread. In fact, I was largely arguing against you and JXM. But there is a subtle distinction between what I (and other people) was saying then and what I'm saying now.
In that thread, I critiqued some of the functionality of the I-Pod. In particular, I was irritated at the inability to offload music from the I-Pod back onto the computer. I still am irritated by that. But I did make the point in that thread that I could only really be irritated by myself since I chose to purchase the product knowing its limitations. I still think it's reasonable for I-Phone users to critique the product for lack of functionality. I just don't think that they should be surprised when they void their warranty by modifying their product. I can complain about the time that my oven takes to get hot, I just can't expect GE to fix it when I start rewiring the heating circuit.
Thanks for reminding me though.
In that thread, I critiqued some of the functionality of the I-Pod. In particular, I was irritated at the inability to offload music from the I-Pod back onto the computer. I still am irritated by that. But I did make the point in that thread that I could only really be irritated by myself since I chose to purchase the product knowing its limitations. I still think it's reasonable for I-Phone users to critique the product for lack of functionality. I just don't think that they should be surprised when they void their warranty by modifying their product. I can complain about the time that my oven takes to get hot, I just can't expect GE to fix it when I start rewiring the heating circuit.
Thanks for reminding me though.
Example: A & B sign an agreement to create a proprietary situation with a piece of electronics that negatively impacts C, the end user and a non-signatory to the agreement. C then finds a way around the proprietary status and uses the appliance as he sees fit, which is differently than per the agreement between A & B. A changes the item purchased by C in a manner as to make it unusable at all.
Does C have no rights in this situation?
Does C have no rights in this situation?
Actually, that's an excellent point.
I suppose the true metaphor would be if I riced out my Honda, took it in when the dome light (or whatever) was recalled, and then had them fry my engine when they saw I had performed warranty voiding modifications.
I guess I can see why people would be pissed.
But then, that's not exactly right either.
I dunno... I think this problem is a little more complicated then I thought.
Wow the new edit box is neat.
I suppose the true metaphor would be if I riced out my Honda, took it in when the dome light (or whatever) was recalled, and then had them fry my engine when they saw I had performed warranty voiding modifications.
I guess I can see why people would be pissed.
But then, that's not exactly right either.
I dunno... I think this problem is a little more complicated then I thought.
Wow the new edit box is neat.
Last edited:
The point is that most "normal" consumers don't intend to hack their appliances.
It would never occur to me to try to hack an iPhone so I could use it with some service other than ATT/Cingular. Just as it would never occur to me to open up my stereo and mess around with it. Or my electric razor.
In the case of the iPhone, I just declined to buy one.
It would never occur to me to try to hack an iPhone so I could use it with some service other than ATT/Cingular. Just as it would never occur to me to open up my stereo and mess around with it. Or my electric razor.
In the case of the iPhone, I just declined to buy one.
Last edited:
If you go to webforums like Howardforums, you will find that 99% of the members there represent the 1% who want to hack the crap out of their phones. They want to add third party apps to their phones. They want to hook their phones to their computers to upload stuff like ringtones without paying for it through their cell provider. They want to tether their computers to their phones without signing up for a data plan. Of course, those are the same folks who will pay full retail to get the newest phone even though they don't qualify for a discount yet. They are also the ones whose biggest complaint about Verizon is that they force subscribers to use their standardized UI on the phones rather than the standard manufacturer UI.
It is a given in a certain part of this community [meaning the users of computer products, and the iPhone is actually a portable computer] that there is a segment that will seek to expand the uses of the software, firmware and hardware that is for sale.
It is also a fact that the industry depends, in part, on this kinds of people because it is where much of its innovation comes from. Particularly so in brand new equipment.
Example: We have a WWW because there were such a thing as ARPAnet and, even more so to the profitability side, early Fidonet [a network of open source type volunteer network coordinators who were responsible for connecting tens of thousands of BBS's across the world back in the 80's] that showed that such networks were 1) doable and 2) could be made profitable.
We used systems, computers, telephone services, etc, in ways they have never been though of being used before. Learned from it in our hobby/voluntary doings and than took what we learned and made it pay. Then CompuServe, GEine, Prodigy, AOL and eventually the internet came along, with venture capital, and did it bigger, faster, better. It all started with those guys tinkering in the garages and basements. Just like commercial radio had before it, and even TV [though some what less so] before that.
Its a given and its shouldn't be curtailed or punished, and that is what Apple and ATT are trying to do. Stymie innovation and punish creativity. Some of the very reasons they exist at all in the first place.
Anyway... end of rant.
It is also a fact that the industry depends, in part, on this kinds of people because it is where much of its innovation comes from. Particularly so in brand new equipment.
Example: We have a WWW because there were such a thing as ARPAnet and, even more so to the profitability side, early Fidonet [a network of open source type volunteer network coordinators who were responsible for connecting tens of thousands of BBS's across the world back in the 80's] that showed that such networks were 1) doable and 2) could be made profitable.
We used systems, computers, telephone services, etc, in ways they have never been though of being used before. Learned from it in our hobby/voluntary doings and than took what we learned and made it pay. Then CompuServe, GEine, Prodigy, AOL and eventually the internet came along, with venture capital, and did it bigger, faster, better. It all started with those guys tinkering in the garages and basements. Just like commercial radio had before it, and even TV [though some what less so] before that.
Its a given and its shouldn't be curtailed or punished, and that is what Apple and ATT are trying to do. Stymie innovation and punish creativity. Some of the very reasons they exist at all in the first place.
Anyway... end of rant.
As far as I know you can't have as EULA that negates my right as an end user to use something I purchased outright and that I now own either as is, or modified as I see fit, for a purpose other than it was originally intended.
In order words, if I purchase an iPhone and decide I want to use it as a door stop that is perfectly within my right to do so. If I want to turn it into an FM radio, the same. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1996 says I can even reverse engineer it if I have a mind to do so [and I did, along with many curious others looking for ways to make it do new tricks].
Apple has a right to void my warranty for it, yes. Do they have the right to, if they find out I did it, send a signal, or code, etc, in the form of an update to the firmware that bricks the device if it runs a CRC check and finds I've been playing with its innards and even goes so far as to block my returning of the device to its factory settings and marking the device as having been doctored in anyway by changing it somehow recognizable to them? [in this case the IEMI #]
There is already court precedent on this where software companies sent virus along in software updates, etc, that says it is a distinct no-no and not to be done.
In order words, if I purchase an iPhone and decide I want to use it as a door stop that is perfectly within my right to do so. If I want to turn it into an FM radio, the same. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1996 says I can even reverse engineer it if I have a mind to do so [and I did, along with many curious others looking for ways to make it do new tricks].
Apple has a right to void my warranty for it, yes. Do they have the right to, if they find out I did it, send a signal, or code, etc, in the form of an update to the firmware that bricks the device if it runs a CRC check and finds I've been playing with its innards and even goes so far as to block my returning of the device to its factory settings and marking the device as having been doctored in anyway by changing it somehow recognizable to them? [in this case the IEMI #]
There is already court precedent on this where software companies sent virus along in software updates, etc, that says it is a distinct no-no and not to be done.
Last edited:
Gift?
If anyone can advise, I'm looking to get a gift for my brother. Basically looking for a pda or smartphone type of thing. Not for business, basically for fun, IMing, *****, and internet. I heard the Iphone has a special youtube player, anything else out there have that feauture? I suppose Flash capability is out of the question? Also a nice big screen and comfortable keyboard would be nice. So basically, a good internet experience without having to look for a hotspot. Any suggestions?
If anyone can advise, I'm looking to get a gift for my brother. Basically looking for a pda or smartphone type of thing. Not for business, basically for fun, IMing, *****, and internet. I heard the Iphone has a special youtube player, anything else out there have that feauture? I suppose Flash capability is out of the question? Also a nice big screen and comfortable keyboard would be nice. So basically, a good internet experience without having to look for a hotspot. Any suggestions?