Apparently the new update my "brick" your phone. The arrogance of Apple completely amazes me. You shell out a ton of money for their little gadget, then the company wants to dictate you exactly the (limited) terms under which you are allowed to use the property that you bought. I suppose next they'll determine which of your friends you're allowed to call :rolleyes:

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0.../index.html?hp

OK, BUT... you agree to the terms when you turn on the device... so it you don't care for the terms, then don't get the device.

Also, I'm curious about how all this would have been if they had gone with Verizon or Sprint, and there was no "unlocking" to be done. Only due to GSM is this even an issue. What would have happened if it was on a non-GSM carrier to begin with?

I get that some people want to install apps on their phone, but I am using a couple of Web 2.0 apps on my iPhone that work GREAT. Why don't the developers just use that format to deliver the applications users want?

Sales tax is not like VAT, there's no "getting it back". If you purchase the item in CA, for example, the tax is due and what you do with it later is your own business. The only exception to this is if you order it remotely from outside the state and the seller ships it to you. Then no tax is due at all.

Yes, of course, nobody is compelled to buy the device, but that doesn't change my opinion of Apple and its arrogance. This is like Ford trying to dictate what things you can put in a car you bought from them.

There would be no unlocking issue, sure, but you'd still have the locked-platform / applications issue. Not every application can be delivered over the Web.

From reading the blogs most people are furious at this. Not only are their phones relocked, they also lost all their third party applications. Not a very friendly move by Apple...

Technically if your state has a sales/use tax you owe sales/use tax to your state even when purchasing via mail or internet. Do people pay the sales/use tax on internet purchases, usually not. But that doesn't mean they are not legally obligated to report and pay the tax.

Apple hasn't broken anyone's phone. Why, my unlocked phone is working perfectly!

You don't want the new update, don't install it. Apple didn't promise me an itunes wifi music store, or any of the other crap in this update when I bought the device.

People are all getting bent out of shape acting like it's a malicious effort on Apple's part. All they're saying is that if you went mucking with the insides of the phone's OS and then updated a new version on top of it, things are liable to break. Apple sure as hell aren't obligated to make sure all the hacks and random games that people have snuck onto their iPhone continue to work. It isn't sold as an open platform.

Here here!
That said, I do appreciate double spacing to get a period space (a la BlackBerry) the improved volume on calls (both speakerphone and standard speaker), and the double clicking home button to go right to the phone interface. But not everyone has to have those.

I find this a little wierd, given that audio tunings and loudness for GSM calls have to pass PTCRB type approval.

I guess it'll be a contest to see whether Apple or the hacking community offers a better set of features over time.

Like someone posted above, you don't have to install any updates if you prefer the applications and games and using T-Mobile on an unlocked phone.


Also wonder whether Apple trying to reverse the hacks made it take longer for this update to come out.

So for iPhone owners who are content to use the product as sold, they may have waited longer than they otherwise would have for these fixes and new features, because of the hacks and the owners who installed those hacks.

give it　2weeks
 

with all the expirience the hackers have already with the phone, i expect the new features to be extraced and to be offered as hack versions or that the hacker get the new firmware hacked so everybody can use.

its the same with the PSP hacks etc.

sony, apple who ever tries to block something wont suceed. its just a matter of time until the hackers figure it out.

of course within 4weeks apple will again release a new firmware with new "features "

i am super happy with my iphone, it works, i have skype/icq, msn , mail on it.
i dont have to power my pc all the time.

now i have to find the best RSS reader so i can monitor FT and get alarms on interesting contents :) (anybody has a good program?)

dp

But if YOU put something on your Ford that cause it to blow up, should FORD pay to fix it?

Are you sure it isn't intentional on the part of Apple? The way they talk, it certainly sounds like they were trying to relock phones and deactivate software people added on.

I might agree with you if this was perfectly accidental, but it seems more like Apple wanted it this way.

No, of course not.

A better analogy to the current situation, however, is this: You drove your friend Pete around, even though you know Ford has a grudge against him. Ford found out, and then next time you brought your car in for warranty service they blew it up.

Like I said above, it sounds like Apple is intentionally playing these games, not that they were unintended. If it was completely unintended on Apple's part, then I retract my statements. I just don't think that's the case.

hacks out
 

anyway, hack is out for the new firmware less than one week later :)

so who cares about 1.1.1 ...

cheers dp

Hack for what? I've been watching Hackint0sh and haven't seen any mention of anything new ... people have found ways to roll-back to the previous release (the OS code, but not the low-level phone related firmware), but their phone connectivity is still broken.

I did see someones conjecture that iTunes was using signed firmware with the iPod touches, and likely the same with the new iPhone release. If that is so, I think iPhone hacking on the latest and greatest firmware really will be hosed except for the most dedicated (and I wouldn't count myself in the dedicated). Apple has expertise in per-device DRM content protection, and treating the firmware similarly shouldn't be a big leap. If all else fails, it would cost Apple less than $1 in HW to add a TPM to the iPhone at which point they could guarantee themselves the phones would stay locked (barring HW mods).

I'm an architect for a popular embedded system and we've long considered using signed firmware images for integrity and feature activation licensing. We are big business, but thankfully don't have nearly the same visibility or interest as an iPhone. The effort hackers are putting into breaking into the devices, with no expectations of monetary gain, is worrisome though, since it isn't any different than what organized professionals out to make money could be doing.