Steve Jobs is still laughing at you
 

With the release of the iPhone software patch (v1.1.1) users of unlocked phones have been experiencing some technical difficulties, namely their phones being locked and turned into expensive paperweights.

The patch

Problems discovered

The grim discovery

I will admit, that what he's done is deliciously evil. Create a frenzy, shackle users to a subpar carrier, and punish those who break free. He'd make an excellent dictator, I think.

Is he shackling them to an inferior carrier because he wants to or because the contract between Apple and AT&T requires it?

He didn't shackle anyone.. if you want to blame anyone blame the other carriers for not stepping up to the plate. AT&T was the only one willing to give the kickbacks that Apple wanted.

Can we really blame Apple for putting an update out there that protects their product?? Not really.

I don't think we can blame apple for doing what they're doing. That doesn't mean that they don't suck a little more because they are doing what they are doing.

AT&T is the largest network and they don't have the crappy software of Verizon to mess up the iPhone. As for people unlocking the iPhone.... ROFL to them. Obviously they're not familiar with Apple. Apple products are designed and built not to need to be modified. I've had the same Mac for 4 years and I've never really needed to modify anything. I'm typing this on Safari, the default browser. When I chat, I use iChat. It's already ready already. People are just too obsessed with open source. Wait for the Google Phone and instal Linux on it or something.

And that is the essential problem with Apple. Somehow they missed the memo that people-especially tech savvy skilled computer users who are likely to spend $600/$400 on a phone-like to screw with things to make them do what THEY want them to do, not necessarily what something was originally designed to do. People like to be able to customize interfaces and options and add new programs and options. It personalizes a device, a device which ought to do what the USER wants it to do, not what Steve Jobs wants it to do. I have no idea why they're so pissy about third party applications on the thing. It doesn't make sense to me.

Now, hacking it off the AT&T network is quite another problem, and I certainly appreciate why the feel obligated to protect their contractual obligation. Those people were creative, but ought not have expected anything else. I would think that if the problem became too prevalent that Apple might be liable to AT&T, but I'm not exactly sure how their contract works.

It's simultaneously Apple's biggest strength and weakness. It creates incredible stability when everything is designed to work together by the same people. Yes, obviously a lot of people want this freedom to change what they have to make it unique, and I can appreciate that, but what happens when the iPhone is running a ton of third party software and it starts crashing? I mean the phone comes with music, photos, phone, contacts, internet, and video. It has a lot of features. I wonder if people are modifying it just to modify it.

When you say "it doesn't make sense to me" I understand that, only I'm on the flip side of that. I don't understand why you'd want to jam the iphone full of apps you'll probably never use and that aren't Apple stable and are designed so well.

Well, one of my friends has a couple mods there are really neat. One re-skins a lot of things from standard apple to custom icons and background and keeps his chosen background up all the time. Another is an NES ROM emulator that he's been playing FF1 on and has IM'd me at least twice a day about updates to his party and their progress.

I think people want to have the option to change things, knowing that if they do add software that it may cause instability, and that lots of people are happy with what Apple naturally provides them with. Some people mod just to mod, sure, but others just like to have a tweak or addition here or there just to spice things up a bit.

It's not as if he people that hack their iPhones to work on other networks went out and nicked them from an Apple store - they dropped hundreds of dollars on an iPhone and if anyone should be upset it should be the carriers that lost out on new handset sales.

He's not evil but even Steve Jobs must realize that they're merely grasping at straws when you consider the immense popularity of the iPhone. And when you couple that popularity with those ridiculous monthly plans - it's easy to see that the tweaks won't stop.

Sorry Steve.

The reality is that there is no cell phone carrier worthy of Apple (I know that sounds cocky, but seriously think about it). Apple is massively dedicated to innovation. American cell phone networks aren't innovative. Apple had to force AT&T to agree to the mail innovation. Think of it this way, would you blame Apple if your cable internet sucked? Of course not. Apple is the software and the hardware, it's not the service provider. AT&T is to blame 100% for crappy plans and poor customer service.

As for the software, I suppose that's subjective. I think it's perfect the way it is, and as a Mac user, customizing the thing doesn't make sense. It's like you drive civics your whole life, modifying them like crazy to squeeze as much out of them as possible, and you finally buy a Porsche and you don't need to modify it.

Funny you mention that considering AT&T is the least innovative of the major carriers. Sprint Nextel and Verizon are on Rev. A of their EVDO network. Sprint Nextel is gearing up for a nationwide WiMax (4G) rollout. AT&T? They're still chugging along on an old EDGE network that's barely faster than dialup. Innovation is not AT&T's strong suit.

So long as the iphone is a popular item and locked to at&t there will always be people hacking it up to work on other networks. Apple will never truely win until they get the other networks to not allow iphones on their network, but why would they do that when apple alienates them by being exclusive with AT&T.

Steve Jobs is certainly a greedy evil bastard.

That said, I have an iPhone, and the moment that it becomes unhackable, I will stop updating my firmware. Apple WARNED people that 1.1.1 would break their shit -- to update before restoring after that warning is a sign of idiocy in the face of the multiple warnings there were about how it would break unlocked phones.

Lawsuits should arise. If I bought a car, modded the engine, and took it to the dealer for an oil change, I would expect them NOT to permanently disable my car without permission.

Cars aren't cell phones. Not only that, but you'd void the warrantee of your car if you modified it.

Well, actually:

and:

The more I read of it, the less attractive the iPhone becomes.

Legally, a vehicle manufacturer cannot void the warranty on a vehicle due to an aftermarket part unless they can prove that the aftermarket part caused or contributed to the failure in the vehicle. To automatically void the warranty would be a violation of the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. I've had this battle with dealers before.

And 1.1.1 is just about cracked now (not that I even have an iPhone). The games will continue. I also hear that 1.1.3 is already in the works, probably to patch the Safari issue that allows this crack.

The the failure, just a difference that makes the car less dependable and thus the warrantee doesn't cover it. I can prove that a CIA can be less reliable than a stock air box (the filter, which can easily be punctured, is more exposed with a cone filter, whereas the stock air box protects the filter). If I can void it on a CAI imagine what would happen if forced induction were used.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act forbids circumventing copy protection technology. It's that simple, everyone. The iPhone crackers are breaking the law. Hackware sellers should be prosecuted.

I really hope people will read the following link. It's quite brilliant.
http://homepage.mac.com/lesposen/blo...513/index.html

Enjoy.

No, No we can't.

I'm still waiting for Rogers to pony up and carry the iPhone. Waiting impatiently.

Will, you're going to have to explain to me how the DMCA applies in this situation. What copy protection technology is being circumvented in this case?

The software on the iPhone is copy written. 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)-(c)

Unless that software contains copy protection techonology, then it's not applicable to the DMCA.

Additionally, the Library of Congress has made an exemption for the prohibition of circumventing "Computer programs in the form of firmware that enable wireless telephone handsets to connect to a wireless telephone communication network, when circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of lawfully connecting to a wireless telephone communication network.*

It may be debated whether nor not using an iPhone to connect to a network outside of AT&T is lawful, but if you're paying for the service of that other vendor, I would think that it is indeed lawful.

*Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works

What is the author of that article hiding the ball about, will? He keeps talking about "brave new future of awesomeness" but I'm not specifically aware of a pending thrilling announcement that Apple's keeping shut up.

That being said, that's the least objective psychological profile I think I've ever read. I guess his point is well meant, but he's either going to piss you off for all the same reasons that people are already pissed off or he's going to be preaching to the choir. Characterizing the entire situation as a family seems bizarre at the onset but it strangely convincing. Beyond that, I think he gives Jobs WAY too much credit, agency and deference.

It's not a lie, Apple fanboys. Jobs and Apple CAN make mistakes. Really! They've made some bad ones in the past, though they're on a pretty solid streak at the moment.

They have a great design team and a great vision of integration, but the paternalism is and will always be what kills me about Apple. Far from explaining that, this article apologizes for it and says, "I'm better off that way." I'm not, and that has nothing to do with wanting Steve Jobs to like me and has everything to do with wanting my technology to look and do and contain what I want it to, not what Steve Jobs wants it to.

I think there are an incredible number of computer users (especially advanced computer users) who agree with that, and Apple will always alienate them so long as the policy is that "our technology does what we want it to not what you can imagine it might."

Sorry? I mean that happens like every year. If it's not the iPhone, it's an iPod update or a new laptop. Apple is quick to develop and release new things.
It's not a profile. It's a subjective study of the market by using his experience in clinical psychology with family units to illustrate his points. Love him or hate him, Jobs is one of the most important people in computers not just today, but for years back. And Job is firmly at the head of Apple. If there were to be a "daddy" archetype for Apple, it's clearly Jobs.
We've all seen the AppleTV. We all remember the iBook toilet seat. No one thinks Jobs is infallible, even the most devoted Apple users.
Apple is not Windows, nor linux. People are still having trouble dealing with that. Apple is not massively open source. They're more authoritarian, but they're massively stable and better integrated. That's the reality. I know it's fun to toy and tinker and such, and I've enjoyed trying out Ubuntu, but it's a different animal than Apple's products. It's not stable, the apps available are hardly stellar, and it's a pain to have to go out and find things in order for it to perform basic computer functions. If you want a phone to do what you want it to do, then wait for the google phone. It's probably going to be more open source, but less stable and less functional out of the box.

I guess my point is why not have it both ways. People that want to keep their iPhones (and whatever else follows suit) clean and just as Steve wants them to be can and it'll be all the great things that it can normally be. However, what's the harm in letting people mod and tweak if they want to knowing that they're risking introducing instability or incompatibility? These people know they're making it do something "it's not intended to do" and accept the consequences of that fact.

Not that blizzard is a model company, but its WoW mod community is a good example. The default interface works and does everything you want it to and if something breaks the FIRST thing they'll say when you talk to tech support is, "Delete all of your third party interface modifications. Does the problem still happen?" If it does, they deal with it (usually). If it doesn't, then they tell you, "Can't help you, the 3rd party mod world is a wide wonderful place. Good luck." When blizzard updates the game and changes what mods will work and how, the 3rd party modders have to fix their shit to make it work or retire from modding. Same could be true here and, as far as I can tell, there isn't a HARM from having that policy other than old fashioned paternalism.

It's a far cry from saying "we can't help you if you break it" to "we're going to turn your phone off."

I can't be sure, but I suspect that the bricking was at the insistence of the evil stepmother, AT&T. Apple has never done bricking of any kind before, and it's a break in precedence. AT&T has been known to be complete asses about stuff like this.

People have tried to mod the iPod to play .wav files. Has Apple bricked those iPods? Of course not.

copyRIGHTED.

Sorry ... pet peeve.

I have to agree with Will about "iPhone" hacks here and Apple in general. It is their closed design that keeps them stable.

But it's not just stability we're talking about ... it also helps them with support. I work closely with the help desk (I'm the sysadmin) and we get tons of calls every day asking for computer support. Most of the calls are from PC users with wildly various problems. The Macs just work ... most calls concerning Macs are about connecting it to our (Windows 2003) network for fileshares or whatever.

However, I'm a tinkerer. I like PCs running Windows and other "open" OSes. I have no use for a Mac in my world which is why I don't have one.

Doug

Oops! Sorry.

I'll weigh in on the side of "why the hell not" when it comes to modifying software values in a piece of hardware... so Apple writes their software to make their hardware stable and reliable, and someone goes off and mods some software, gaining functionality, and maybe sacrificing some overall stability. If the stability introduced is unacceptable, all said person has to do is revert to an earlier version of the software... factory reset, problem solved.

Unless the software modifications result in hardware failure, what's the problem? People too attached to Apple's co...er... hype and "innovation" are free to leave their hardware as it came, with all the bells and whistles. For bellaholics and whistlepheliacs, the option is there to personalize... if doing so makes the phone crash, too bad - for aftermarket software problems you've got to go to the aftermarket techs, or *cough* reinstall factory software. Generally custom mods are too difficult to do for people who don't understand what they're getting into, and reverting to earlier software is often outstandingly easy. On an iPod all that's necessary is a simple button sequence you can look up on the internet and the defaults are all loaded from some flash on the mainboard... somehow I doubt that if Apple made their phone mod-enabled that anyone would complain.

I just don't see what the big deal is. There are still people out there that buy a Porsche to modify it, because the best can always get better with a personal touch. It's not like having the option to mod forces anyone to do it.