Slashdot Mirror
Hacked iPhones Confirmed As Bricking With Latest Update
mhollis writes "Field experience has confirmed that if you have a hacked iPhone, it will become an iBrick if you use Software Update to install the latest update on your iPhone. The BBC reports: '[Apple's] warning has now proved correct as many owners are reporting their phones no longer work following installation of the update. Apple requires iPhone owners to take out a lengthy contract with AT&T in the United States but there are a number of programs on the net that unlock the device for use with other networks.' The only 'solution' is to unhack your iPhone."
I want to see a thorough defense of restricting user choice on the net by this time tomorrow. Your essay must have no less than 1,000 words, at least three Zune references, and at least one reference to Ballmer throwing chairs. Bonus points if you make a reference to the Borg.
Which would result in a more entertaining and informative bit of text than your post. Thanks for playing Teh Intarnetz.
better analogy:
You buy a chevy. The dealer says you can only use Shell gas. There's no Shell station in your neighborhood, but you find a little funnel you can put on your gas tank lid that lets you put in Mobil gas. You go to the dealer to get your free oil change, they notice you put the attachment on your gas tank lid, and they pull out a shotgun and start shooting your engine. Why? they had a deal with Shell, and they have to enforce it or the deal's off.
What a strange bird is the pelican, his beak can hold more than his belly can.
So...you have to sync it again after the update? I know it's fashionable to hate anything that is popular, but this seems weak to me.
I read the internet for the articles.
So, Apple does some things I think are lame (like this and DRM on iTunes). But you're saying I shouldn't hold it against them, because they don't *want* to do lame things, they're just forced to.
Poor Apple, these big mean companies keep holding guns to their head and making them sign contracts that say they have to do lame things. But their products are happy and shiny, so you know they're really the good guys.
A Federal Act (law) called the DMCA prohibits some reverse engineering, particularly surrounding encryption, etc. The iPhone is a cell phone. An exemption to the Federal law granted by the Library of Congress and it permits *ALL* individuals to unlock their phones. Apple developed the iPhone and Apple knew about this exemption prior to releasing the iPhone and selling it. Therefore Apple knows that altering the unlock is a violation of the exemption of the DMCA and hence a violation of the DMCA.
If you own an iPhone how long are you supposed to live with it being locked?
If you do not own an iPhone are you aware that you can't use the phone for anything at all until you get it unlocked? No internet, no ipod, no calculator, no maps, no wifi, nothing!
Did you know that it can only be unlocked by signing up to AT&T? (Or by hacking.)
Therefore, did you know you can't use the phone for anything until you agree to the 2 year service plan with AT&T?
What happens after 2 years? Are you just going to throw away the phone?
If you expect to keep using that phone then when the 2 years are up would you not like to use a different service provider? If so, how can you do that?
If your service plan expires after 2 years are you aware that your phone may be relocked and you can't use it?
If this is the case then your service agreement would be longer than 2 years because it becomes a brick after the 2 year service agreement unless you choose to sign up with AT&T again.
The federal exemption was created for a reason and this is most likely that reason. It is to keep you from having to commit to one provider even beyond the initial contract. The cost of the phones are most likely a factor in the reason behind the exemption.
Also, there's a Federal Act that limits the rights of companies such as Apple from dishonoring their warranty. When they offer a warranty they have certain requirements under law. One of the notable things is that it is not legal for a company to dishonor the warranty just because the item was modified. They must show that it damaged the item. Since there is no evidence that the iPhones have been damaged there's no legal basis behind Apple dishonoring the warranty for someone that has unlocked it.
Apple is essentially being dishonorable in this matter. The laws clearly give the owner of the iPhone the right to modify it (for good reason). Apple knew about those laws before they released the phone; as did AT&T. Apple has since broken the phones of many who have unlocked their phones and they have done so intentionally. On top of that they have relocked the phones even though the federal law says that you can unlock your cell phone. Apple's action are dishonorable because they are picking and choosing when to obey the DMCA. They expect consumers to obey it and in fact, acted in a hostile way toward consumers whom they believe are in violation of the DMCA. But when they are bound by the DMCA they choose to ignore it because it benefits them.
In addition they are being dishonorable in that they have found a way to violate fair use. You have a tune you purchased that you like. You want to use it as a ringtone? You can't, unless you agree to pay for the song a second time. If your ringtone is only 15 seconds that's fair use. I'm sure it can be longer or shorter but it is fair use. Apple is effectively cheating you (hence acting dishonorably) because they want to be able to pick and choose which laws they are willing to obey.
This isn't a matter of you altering their product and reselling it such as altering the OS and renaming it and reselling it, or even selling it illegally. It is a matter of them choosing to not obey the rules of law. They know these laws exist and the exemption.
No one can say you don't have the right to unlock your cell phone. If not then you can't tell anyone that they are breaking the law by doing so. Since the law permits this action explicitly it protects cons
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
"they're doing something to check for 'tampered' phones, but still running the update anyway."
.) Somebody is getting high off those fumes from the freshly printed money they're raking in."
Only if the user of the "tampered" phone says s/he wants to run the update.
"There's a bunch of things Apple could have done differently, from simply not running the update to requesting that the user put the correct data in then load the new improved lock software. Like you said, the phone is not "bricked" but they deliberately leave an error they refuse to correct at the shop."
Sorry, the phone got into the condition it's in because the user decided to modify the phone and then, despite warnings, decided to run the update.
"In my opinion that is 'malicious prosecution' of the contract terms. Because the phone still physically works it is obvious that the phone COULD be fixed, Apple is refusing. Also, the update does not stop if it will fail.."
Why should Apple spend precious resources figuring out how to fix myriad iPhone issues caused by incompatible third-party software?
"To use a car analogy, this would be like having an unwarranted mod, nox, stereo equipment on your ride. When you take the car in for a routine oil change they say you're out of warranty.. and cut the offending parts off your car with a chainsaw rendering it undriveable.. when you drove it into the shop just fine. Then telling you that it's "your problem" it's not under warranty."
Analogies (to cars or otherwise) are usually painfully inadequate, but it would be more like the shop giving you this spiel before touching your car:
We have discovered that some unauthorized mods available around town may cause irreparable damage to your model of car. IF YOU HAVE MODIFIED YOUR CAR, THIS PROCEDURE MAY RESULT IN YOUR CAR BECOMING PERMANENTLY INOPERABLE. The inability to use your car due to unauthorized mods is not covered by your warranty. Do you want us to proceed?
That is a rough paraphrase of the warning Apple gives during the iPhone update process, adapted for your analogy. You can easily say "no" and drive away -- though unlike a car's need for oil, there's no indication an iPhone will stop running without periodic software updates.
"Apple is clearly self destructing at an alarming rate. . . . (I had the 20G photo they stopped updating after 3 months when 30GB video came out . . .
Something does not compute if your history of self-destruction dates at least to a 20GB iPod photo yet they're still raking in the dough today. (Then again, one could say the same about Microsoft. My reply would be that Microsoft's cash cows are more entrenched and less easily displaced than Apple's.)
"Not to mention they sacrificed their core OS Leopard to make this 'innovation' happen? I like Tiger better than Win XP but Leopard is way late... should have been out in the spring and it's holding up development for the core group of Apple fanbois that just want to do cool stuff."
Assuming Leopard ships in October, I wouldn't call four months "way late." For a baby, sure. For an operating system, not so much.
So the new driveshaft comes with a big notice that says WARNING!! THIS DRIVESHAFT MAY DAMAGE YOUR CAR AND RENDER IT UNUSABLE IF INSTALLED IN A CAR WITH A MODIFIED ENGINE!" And you ignore the warning, install it anyway...and what do you know, it damages your car! So you run around complaining that the manufacturer is "some dipsh*t [who] thought my modification gave him the right to molest my car any way he saw fit"
Or would that be dumb?