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."

70 of 430 comments (clear)

  1. iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    iDidn't buy one so iDon't care about iT.

    1. Re:iPhone by evan2645 · · Score: 5, Informative

      it doesnt brick the phones, it just re-locks them... doing this would make the phone unusable in the UK, but definitely not "bricked" in the classical sense.

    2. Re:iPhone by davetd02 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Engadget is reporting that most phones are being re-locked, not bricked. Seems like that'd be the expected behavior: re-install the OS and it acts like a clean OS. Then if you want to hack it again you can hack it again.

    3. Re:iPhone by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 2, Interesting

      iDidn't buy one so iDon't care about iT.

      I haven't bought one, but I would be curious to know whether you can get AT&T to unlock your iPhone 'legally'?

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  2. Not permanant then? by Retron · · Score: 3, Informative

    The only 'solution' is to unhack your iPhone."
    Interesting, so much for the "permanant damage" bit then that Apple was spouting!

    It reminds me very much of the hacks that went on with the PSP a while back, whereby you could "brick" your shiny new console if you didn't know what you were doing with firmware updates. That one was finally solves by a hack involving accessing the service mode via a modified battery of all things!

  3. Imagine that by photomonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As much as I hate AT&T, Apple chose to partner with them to distribute and provide cellular service for the iPhone. Given all the nefarious and legally questionable stuff AT&T has done over the years, are we really that surprised that they/Apple are taking active measure to prevent people from taking their iPhone to other providers?

    I like a lot of Apple's products, but won't buy an iPhone until they are available through other providers. ATT& is pure, unadulterated evil.

    --
    Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
    1. Re:Imagine that by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ATT& is pure, unadulterated evil.

      AT&T doesn't exist anymore, except in name only. They were purchased by SBC about six(?) months ago. SBC then changed their name to AT&T.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    2. Re:Imagine that by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm tired of this "Apple's the bad guy bricking phones on purpose." They sold you a product that did X. They released an update for X that does Y. In their test labs they tested the update Y with product X. It would be impossible to test the firmware update with every single method of unlocking. Jobs likes to sell the 'whole experience'. He sold you a product that you knew before hand that it was AT&T only. If you bought the phone for the purpose of unlocking, WHY? Why isn't the same crowd crying fowl that every bug fix and software update breaks OSx86. You have to do near the same amount of hacking/tweaking to get OS X on generic hardware. Whenever apple releases an update something usually breaks.

      Bad Car analogy:

      I buy a brand new Chevy. I go home tear out the Chevy engine and put in a Ford engine. A few month / weeks later there's a recall on some part OR I go in for warranty work. The Chevy dealer is going to refuse the work.

    3. Re:Imagine that by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Mostly because the phone is barely functioning at this point. It looks like its going to be a great phone, but at present it is barely able to make calls or do the normal phone things. As the site says, it definitely isn't an everyday phone.

      Personally, I am somewhat skeptical that it will ever be completed enough to use as an everyday phone. But if it does get to that point, there's a good chance that I'll pick one up, as it does look like its going to be quite nice.

    4. Re:Imagine that by T-Bone-T · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, it be more like: they work on the engine like it is the original engine and the incompatible Chevy parts in the Ford engine cause it to break down.

      Apple isn't actively trying to break modded iPhones. They are doing updates to the unaltered software and it the mods break, too bad.

    5. Re:Imagine that by dave562 · · Score: 3
      Thanks, but the Curve does for me everything the iBrick could...with a real keyboard.

      ...and a subpar web browser. Don't get me wrong. I like the Curve a lot, and in the last couple years I've had a Blackberry 7290, 8700 and right now I have an 8800. But the Blackberry web browser doesn't even hold a candle to the iPhone browser. At least give Apple credit where it is due. They have the first decent mobile web browser. You're right about Blackberry's having real keyboards. The "smart" "adaptive" keyboard on the iPhone is a joke if you're used to the tactile feedback from real buttons.

    6. Re:Imagine that by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2, Informative

      AT&T Wireless was bought by Cingular, which was then bought out by AT&T after the SBC buyout, and renamed AT&T Wireless.

      AT&T: Same familiar name, but now with new, enhanced crappiness from SBC and Cingular.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    7. Re:Imagine that by NickFitz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From openmoko.org:

      Currently it is not suitable for users. The state of the software at the moment is pre-alpha. If you order a Neo1973, DO NOT expect to be able to use it as an everyday phone until October 2007 at the soonest, and probably later.

      Not exactly an alternative if you want to be able to make phone calls, is it?

      --
      Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
  4. So now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    it's iCan't ;)

  5. Bricks Are For Lobbing by CheeseburgerBrown · · Score: 5, Funny

    I suggest attaching a nasty note and lobbing them through Apple's iWindows.

  6. Reminiscent of Black Sunday by Evets · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is reminiscent of DirecTV's Black Sunday - if I remember right, they put out an update on Superbowl Sunday that killed hacked receivers, and a good portion of unhacked receivers in the process.

  7. My two cents: by Upaut · · Score: 2, Informative

    A bricked iPhone can be returned for a full switch... Correct me if I am wrong, but its not like they can tell the phone has been "unlocked", as I have not opened this phone in any way, and as such have not voided any warrenty on the hardware.

    In fact I think I will install this update, I have a small scratch on my iPhone driving me insane, which is not enough to warrent an exchange. A bricked iPhone on the other hand from a corrupt firmware, would...

    I will have to explain to my family that they should *not* update the firmware if they want to keep using t-moble, at least until someone else figures out how to unlock the phone. Or I will simply install my backup copy of the current firmware, no harm done and all.

    I mean, being able to play a few games while in airplane mode, having free personal ringtones ripped from our own media, using t-mobile, an ebay tracker, an application that uses cellphone triangulation to calculate your location on the map, an AIM client, a digital recorder for lectures and meetings, a quickbooks app, an ebook reader, and a NES emulator; are all worth more to us then having an itunes store on the phone that lets us know what songs are playing in our local starbucks... I mean with the tmobile 'total internet' package (for $19.95 a month), I can use the tmobile hotspot in my local starbucks, for speeds faster then EDGE.... A greater convinence in my mind.

    --
    3 degrees of separation from Vladimir Putin
  8. This is a _GOOD_ thing people! by __aailob1448 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm sick and tired of all the Apple bashing that hasn't yet taken place.

    Look, Bricking hacked iPhones is the ONLY way to protect the AT&T network from collapsing under the weight of millions of replicating parasites and virii introduced into the carefully nurtured and fragile telecommunication ecosystem.

    Also, if Apple does NOT brick the hacked iPhones, it will go bankrupt and we will all be condemned to using old 386 pcs with DOS 5.0 for our computing needs.

    Also, the police might follow their example and stop investigation child abuse allegations too. WON'T YOU THINK OF THE ABUSED CHILDREN?

    Thank you and death to hackers.

    1. Re:This is a _GOOD_ thing people! by __aailob1448 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I didn't read the article, preferring instead to focus on posting as fast as possible and damn the accuracy, as per the slashdotter's handbook, v1.3b. But you are something else! Not only did you not read the article, you didn't even read the comment you were replying to! You, sir, are the true slashdotter. I am but a hack and a fool and I will now go into exile in the deep, moist darkness of Digg. Good luck to you, sir. May the great IT cockroach smile benevolently upon all your technical endeavors.

  9. Paging Daniel Eran of RoughlyDrafted... by mattgreen · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.

    Also, don't forget the graphs and sound bites.

    1. Re:Paging Daniel Eran of RoughlyDrafted... by drifterusa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't lack a sense of humor -- your comment is amusing -- but why is it Apple's responsibility to be all things to all people? How many different cell phones would you say are on the market? How is Apple restricting user choice by offering one model of cell phone in the way they see fit?

      If Apple wanted to offer an SDK, they would. If they wanted to offer unlocked phones, they would. They don't, and why should they? Yes, they might make more money with these things, but they might not.

      In any event, Apple has decided what product they want to offer. Part of that offering is the ability to update the software periodically to add new features. From what I understand, this is unusual in the cell phone industry. It's fine if people want to hack their phones -- as is said repeatedly, you bought it, you own it, you can do what you want with it -- but why should Apple have to support the changes you make on your own? This is the part of the disgruntled hackers' argument that I don't understand. (N.B. I'm not saying all hackers are disgruntled.)

      You bought it, you own it, you did what you wanted with it, and -- as Apple made abundantly clear in advance and at the time of installation -- it's now incompatible with Apple's latest update. Deal (by not updating and/or by waiting for the hacker community to resolve all the issues).

  10. Re:Non-hacked too. by OriginalArlen · · Score: 2, Insightful
    yeah, the BBC story has a link to this blog page with a lot of pissed-off posts in the comments.

    Me - well, I guess it sucks if you've paid a lot of money, and now you're surprised or something. "Real owner of proprietary system in taking advantage of rights SHOCK!!" It's like people acting surprised that Microsoft installed a stealth update that's wrecked a few systems, even when they turned off automatic updates. Perhaps a few more people will now understand why closed proprietary is intrinsically evil, regardless of whether it's actually convenient for you right now or not.

    --

    Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
  11. Re:ownership of personal electronics by heinousjay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple says "If you've modified your phone in an unsupported way, the next firmware update may brick it."

    The firmware is released, and only installed if you allow it to be.

    What is the problem here? Anyone who bricked their phone did it to themselves. Or are you just super-anti-corporate man?

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  12. I read that, too... in the linked article by sczimme · · Score: 2, Informative


    I've read that it's also happening to non-hacked phones too.

    Yes, that was covered in the linked article. From TFA:

    1) There are also reports of the update causing issues with unaltered iPhones.

    2) Some owners are reporting on technology blogs and Apple's own forums that the update is deleting contacts information, as well as photos and music, on iPhones that have not been modified in any way.

    --
    I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
  13. Re:Sue by russ1337 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    >>> It won't be hard to prove this was deliberate destruction of private property.

    Yeah, but who's property did Apple destroy. It certainly wasn't yours. Apple just let you use their iPhone. They are the ones that 'own' it. *

    * (in this case, 'own' should be spelled with a 'p'.)

  14. Re:Non-hacked too. by venicebeach · · Score: 5, Informative

    First you have to make the distinction between "hacked" and "unlocked". Many of us have "hacked" our iPhones to add third party applications, customize the interface, etc., but have not unlocked it to use with a non-ATT SIM card. It's the unlocking that really screws you. I've been reading all the forums on this to decide what to do about mine, and the vast majority of people who have hacked but not unlocked are able to apply the update with no problems; however it does restore your iPhone to factory state and you lose all your third party apps. The new firmware has not been cracked yet, so you can't as of yet reinstall them.

    I have read isolated reports of people who have hacked/not unlocked phones being bricked and even nonhacked phones. In my reading it seems most of these folks had some sort of SIM issue prior to the update, e.g. replacing the SIM with a nonoriginal for some reason or another.

    The unofficial apple weblog is reporting that despite warnings posted all over the apple store genius bar employees have been quietly swapping out bricked phones.

  15. Re:I wonder...... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 2, Funny

    I built my iHouse out of iSticks, but I'm worried about the iWolf blowing my iHouse down.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  16. Re:Non-hacked too. by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Intrinsically evil.... or possibly an erroneous fluke of a mess up best not to get upset about. Obviously the update wasn't meant to brick locked phones. If it did, it was an accident, not par for the course. My locked phone updated just fine. As with ANY software update, including open source ones, there will be a small number of systems adversely affected.

    With a proprietary vendor you can take it back for repairs or replacement. How exactly will the "l33t dudes" in #linux on IRC help you in your time of need if you don't know how to fix your free software problem yourself?

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
  17. Absolutely by __aailob1448 · · Score: 2, Funny

    A firmware update is a mystical experience that cleanses and purifies the soul of the machine, setting it on the path to higher functionality and bringing it closer to perfection. A few machines MUST be consumed by the holy fire, if there is no risk, there can be no reward. It's all in the book of mormon. Keep the firmware fire alive! Thank you.

  18. Re:ownership of personal electronics by davek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Or are you just super-anti-corporate man? No, but I do ask for some respect from the corporate man. I think it would be far more ethical (and IMO, legal) to display the following rather than bricking the phone:

    "we see that you have altered your iPhone in an unofficial way. Further updates will not be available for your phone. Thank you, have a nice day."

    dontcha think?
    --
    6th Street Radio @ddombrowsky
  19. *NOT* bricked! by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Please people, let's quit talking like newbies.
    If you drop your iPhone in the toilet, or if you microwave it, it will become bricked.

    If you simply fudge it up, to the point where it needs to be restored, it is not bricked. Especially if all the other functions on it function.
    I know that there are a lot of Apple haters out here, but we don't need to be confusing tech terms.

    We all know what a brick is, and what a recoverable system is.

    That being said, why the fuck would they apply an update to a hacked and unlocked phone? Hmm, maybe I'll remove my catalyc converter and ask my certified mechanic to keep working on it. You think he'd agree to that? (just to use a car analogy.)

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    1. Re:*NOT* bricked! by venicebeach · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Please people, let's quit talking like newbies. If you drop your iPhone in the toilet, or if you microwave it, it will become bricked. If you simply fudge it up, to the point where it needs to be restored, it is not bricked. Especially if all the other functions on it function. I know that there are a lot of Apple haters out here, but we don't need to be confusing tech term
      You're missing the point. These phones *are* actually bricked. If you get the invalid SIM card error you can't restore the phone and replacing the original SIM doesn't clear things up. It reverts to the state its in before it is activated -- you cannot access any of the functions: ipod, wifi, etc. -- you can't get past the splash screen.
    2. Re:*NOT* bricked! by Panaflex · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Still not a brick...

      A brick would be you turn it on, and it flashes the screen in bright colors hysterically all the while playing the modem version of Jimi Hendrix.. well, Ok, it just turns back off usually.

      No - there's no real issue there other than something is mysteriously blocking the phone from recognizing the SIM card. I'm sure it'll be fixable somehow.

      --
      I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
  20. Remember MusicMatch? Just wait. by Fished · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Remember when the first generation of Windows-ready iPod's came out, which came with MusicMatch Jukebox? Steve extolled it's virtues ... only to release iTunes for Windows a year or so later. My guess is that Apple will eventually become a carrier, but just weren't ready to dive into that business Quite Yet. Just give it time, they'll stab AT&T in the back.

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
  21. Why do people update software on a phone? by filesiteguy · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hate to ask a stupid question, but I've had many cell phones and cannot remember ever updating the software on them. Even my blackberry hasn't ever updated. Why the iPhone? Are they trying to add right-click functionality?

  22. They're not brick & Apple had no choice & by grouchyDude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1) Apple won concessions from AT&T that were unprecedented. Some of these were really good for users, like a cheap plan with unlimited internet access.

    ) Do do this, they had to make a deal with AT&T that included AT&T being the sole US service provider for 2 years. Unless AT&T has no lawyers (ha ha), you can be assured that the contract includes an obligation by Apple to shut down any hackers and keep them from opening the phone. Thus, Apple has not choice and will be forced to continue to stop hackers on the iPhone, even though insider's comments suggest people there may even personally like the activity.

    3)The new firmware does not "brick" the phone. The use of this term reflects the large number of newbies who don't know what that means. It returns the phone to an unhacked state from which one cannot escape (so far). If you were not using a normal AT&Y iPhone plan, you can't use your phone until you sign up. This applies to phones that have been hacked even a little bit.

    4) The new firmware may not be so easy to open up. My guess is that it will also be cracked, but I would not be surprised if it is more difficult than before since there are several things Apple can do fairly easily, and now they have an awareness of what they need to do. (Wherewas before it was very uncertain what hackers might emerge.)

  23. Re:ownership of personal electronics by Larry+Lightbulb · · Score: 2, Funny

    If it's my phone and I alter it, isn't this an official alteration?

  24. Re:ownership of personal electronics by Space+cowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It always asks.

    The warning was public. The update is manual. Any bad result is entirely the user's fault. This is speaking as someone who's written and installed his own apps - I obviously didn't install the update, because I have more than one brain cell. There's far too many people with a lack of personal responsibility - actions have consequences, and if you can't cope with the consequences, don't do the action.

    Simon.

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  25. Re:ownership of personal electronics by photomonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not at all a matter of law, nor is this particular case a matter of property ownership.

    The law: It's not illegal to sell or license someone a good or service with ridiculous terms attached, so long as the terms themselves are legal and in good faith and the buying party is aware (or can reasonably be made aware) of them. People are actually dumb enough to 'buy' stuff that they don't own or can't control. That's the uneducated market at work for you.

    But this isn't even a matter of ownership. It is pretty crystal clear that you OWN your iPhone. You paid money to buy the hardware, you paid money to license the software, and you pay money to use the cellular bandwidth for calls and data.

    If the software stops working (IE, Apple releases a new firmware/OS that breaks the core functionality of the original, unmodified device), you might be able to get Apple to fix/replace the phone. If AT&T/SBC decides they're not going to offer you cellular service anymore, they have to let you out of your contract without penalty. If you decide to take your $500 iPhone and hit it with a hammer to see what kind of noise it will make, well that's you're problem.

    It's not like if you hack your iPhone, Apple comes to your door and accuses you of destroying their property. You didn't. It's your phone to do with as you please. But the contract you signed probably said something to the effect that they will only support unhacked/unmodified/etc. phones.

    Bad car analogy: I own a Jeep. I bought it new and it is under warranty. If I drive it responsibly and follow the scheduled maintenance protocols, it will stay under warranty for another 2 years. I did put a suspension lift on it; and in doing so replaced and/or modified factory suspension components. I have no expectation that Chrysler will honor the factory warranty for any part of the suspension now, mine or theirs. And that's fine. If the engine throws a rod, you bet damn right I expect Chrysler to fix it under warranty, as it is completely unrelated to the suspension. If, while putting the lift on, I bent the frame or broke an axle, how is that Chrysler's fault? If the suspension modifications indeed were incompatible with the Jeep, how is that Chrysler's problem? They sold me a working product under very clear terms. I chose to make my own changes to it.

    You definitely own the phone. You license/lease the software and service, respectively.

    --
    Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
  26. Re:ownership of personal electronics by Vokkyt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're being a little silly here. I don't think that anyone is going to argue that the AT&T service is pretty bad and also a little infuriating. But that is the contract entered into when you bought an iPhone. You knew this going into it. Honestly, I'm surprised that Apple had the decency to warn people in advance that the update would remove the unlocking. I'm not calling it bricking, because bricking would assume that a legitimately purchased phone that was still in contract is no longer working due to the update.

    Essentially, you're bitching because you made up your own rules to play with, and Apple is playing a whole different game. I'm not saying that you don't have a right to the technology you own. If Apple sent out an update on Macbooks which forced you to use Appleworks instead of any other office suite, you'd have a right to be angry. You didn't sign up for any contract which said you couldn't or that you had to use Apple's program.

    That isn't the case with the iPhone. You entered into a contract knowingly (it was most definitely during the purchase), so what is the point of bitching when you've already broken the rules. Technically, Apple didn't have to tell you, or even hint that a phone would be reverted to an unlocked state. They've been polite; you're the one being a bit unreasonable, in my opinion.

  27. Re:Apple hates freedom by djh101010 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You hack YOUR phone, and Apple says you can't do that. That's why this has a MS feel to it.
    Um, no, you hack your phone, and a re-install of the upgraded OS reverts it to an un-hacked state. Nothing surprising, evil, or permission-ish about it.

    Apple doesn't care if you want to play Tetris on your iPhone. They _do_ have to pretend to care that you want to go with a carrier other than who they have a contract with (AT&T). So if you did something to change who you go through as a carrier, and since Apple didn't write the hack, they don't promise how it'll act going forward.

    What else could they do? They have to keep their business partners happy for legal reasons, and how in the world could they support a third-party hack they didn't write? I don't think it's reasonable to think that they should have to do a full regression testing of every version of every unlocking hack out there. In fact, I'd prefer they don't. I'd rather they spend their time working on features for the mainstream, and let those who unlock their phone do so with the understanding that they unlock hack may not work after you upgrade the software.
  28. Re:Apple hates freedom by davetd02 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No -- Apple offers a firmware upgrade and users choose whether to install it. There's no requirement to install the firmware upgrade. It's entirely optional. It's not being forced on the phone nor automatically installed. If you prefer to run your own software on the iPhone then don't install the new Apple software.

    Apple doesn't have a duty to make sure its software is compatible with every other piece of software that could conceivably be run on the iPhone. If you want to use Apple software then use Apple software. If you want to use other software then use other software. But there's no way to get the best of both worlds -- to modify the OS and then expect Apple to support it.

  29. Typical by pravuil · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Over the past several years, Apple has done this with the iPod, iTunes, and now the iPhone. Their best interest is to keep their products under their control. Whenever there is a method to utilize iTunes through wine they include updates in order to interfere with installation and operation. It used to be that you could download previous versions of their binaries from their website that would work in wine but once there was a capable way of installing them through wine they were altered to impair such activity. I'm talking about 7.0 and up. I haven't tested 6.x and below. This is how they run their business and it's up to them on how they wish to run it. While I don't like it I respect their business decision. Apple makes a good product but it makes sense to use their product only when using their products.

    For the best interest of the consumer, stop using their restricted products. If you do, just don't update the software. I hate saying don't update but it's their policy to break any alteration in their products. Also don't trust downloads of their binaries from other sources. While some can be reliable, it is best to get them from the source. My suggestion is to use Amazon.com with their DRM free music downloads, or use the Real.com subscription to listen to streamed media using Helix or the RealPlayer. There are other online music sites but right now Amazon.com has the model that stands out more than any other for commercial music.

  30. Different types of bricking by Enzo1977 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think the article makes a poor distinction between actually bricking as in breaking the iphone, to returning the unlocked iphone to out of the box settings.

    It seems to me there are two significant end results from updating your unlocked iPhone to firmware v. 1.1.1.

    1. Your phone is dead, non function, inactive, incapacitated and irreparable damage has been done that cannot be undone.

    Or

    2. Your phone has been returned to the "requires activation screen" when synchronized with iTunes, thereby returning the phone to it's 'out of the box' settings.

    From all the posts that I've read on HowardForums, Engadget, and Gizmodo, I find that #2 for the most part, has been the only outcome. Option number two then basically means, your phone is no longer unlocked, but if you follow through with the activation via iTunes and enter into a two year contract with AT&T, you have yourself a fully functional iPhone.

    --
    I hate all sigs, even this one.
  31. Re:Apple hates freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    They _do_ have to pretend to care that you want to go with a carrier other than who they have a contract with (AT&T).

    Wow, you drank the Kool-Aid. It seems AT&T pays Apple for each subscriber on a monthly basis, how much and what for are in dispute. In your twisted representation, Apple would love nothing more to allow you to go elsewhere but for some other reason, AT&T would cry. Based on my reading, I see that Apple wants the single vendor relationship for its own benefit. The reality is Apple would lose the monthly fee for every subscriber not using AT&T. With at least 1 million phones and a few bucks a month ads up to a decent monthly income for Apple. If you do not think that is the reason, you need to take off the Apple glasses and look again.

    Here are some links
    http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=133945
    http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/07/19/piper.iphone.income.share/
    http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9747031-7.html
    http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/14997/

    You can search for Apple revenue sharing AT&T and read more. To think that Apple would not pursue similar kick back deals in other countries would be naive as well.

  32. Re:Non-hacked too. by drifterusa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "It's like people acting surprised that Microsoft installed a stealth update that's wrecked a few systems, even when they turned off automatic updates."

    Actually, it's not like that at all. The imminent arrival of the iPhone update was well-publicized, the possible negative consequences (for those who actively chose to circumvent the warranted use of the device) were well-publicized, and the update procedure itself includes a warning and the option not to install the update.

    "Perhaps a few more people will now understand why closed proprietary is intrinsically evil, regardless of whether it's actually convenient for you right now or not."

    I don't see anything in this story to support your questionable definition of evil. Perhaps a few more people will now understand why heeding warnings (as in waiting to update later or not updating at all -- or even, God forbid, purchasing a device that does what you want it to instead of hoping to make it something it isn't and getting enraged when your experiment hits a bump in the road) is a good idea.

  33. Re:Traditional lan line phones by sgarringer · · Score: 2, Informative

    Until Ma Bell was broken up the only place that sold phones was the phone company. You could rent phones from them or buy them outright. It was illegal to connect a non-phone company provided phone.

    It wasnt until the 80s when you could buy and connect your own phone. So hopefully cellphones progress quicker, I don't want 60 years of being tied to the phone company to get my phone.

  34. Re:Traditional lan line phones by online46 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Look up the Carterphone Decision (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carterfone). Until then, all phones, phone lines, equipment, networks, everything that had anything to do with phones was owned by...American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T). And, yes I remember those days.

  35. Re:HACK vs. UNLOCK by mabhatter654 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they're doing something to check for "tampered" phones, but still running the update anyway. 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.
    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.. 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.
    Apple is clearly self destructing at an alarming rate. Products with half-implemented features, then locked down to ridiculous levels (with out any features) releasing new versions without looking after current customers (I had the 20G photo they stopped updating after 3 months when 30GB video came out... very poor service after the purchase) The iPhone and Touch seem to be the top though. The pricing, and service locks, lack of development platform even after it was cracked... the $200 price drop at 60 days, dud screens on Touch, now disabling the devices. Somebody is getting high off those fumes from the freshly printed money they're raking in. 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.

  36. Re:E-911 concerns by ubernostrum · · Score: 2, Informative

    it is not legal to utterly render a wireless phone useless all calls, as it will violate the 'emergency use only' clause that the FCC requires

    That's not what's happening. If you actually read reports from people who actually have iPhones and who actually unlocked them and then actually applied the update, you'll find that the "bricking" effect simply means that the SIM is locked again, and turning on the phone yields the activation screen which asks you to purchase cellular service from AT&T. It doesn't "utterly render the phone useless", it just kicks it back to factory defaults which -- since it was allowed to go on sale in the US -- presumably comply with US regulations.

  37. Re:HACK vs. UNLOCK by andreyw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why should they make sure their software does something special in the presence of third-party hacks they don't support? Supporting means endorsing, and endorsing means violating their contract with AT&T.

    As to your antique iPod - the only updates are going to be bugfixes. Actually, MOST firmware updates are bugfixes. No updates = no bugs to fix, plus they (and neither do most companies) owe their customers anything to increase the value of OLD products when they could release new instead.

  38. iPhone DOES NOT REQUIRE A CONTRACT! by TrentC · · Score: 5, Informative

    All of this talk of being "required" to sign a contract is bogus. You can activate an iPhone without signing up for a 2-year contract.

    I have a co-worker who did exactly this; he was told how to do it by a sales associate at the store he purchased it from. This is not illegal in any way; AT&T lets you do month-to-month on all of their plans in this manner, if you buy the phone first. Given that the iPhone price is not subsidized by the contract in any way, shape or form, why tie yourself into a contract?

    When you activate the iPhone in iTunes, enter all 9's for your Social Security number. You'll fail the credit check (duh!) and you will be told you can either go to an AT&T store to talk to a representative or you can go month-to-month.

    Given how much whining people have done about being "forced" to sign a with AT&T contract in order to use an iPhone, you would think that month-to-month thing would be being shouted from the rooftops. Are iPhone-bashers just ignoring inconvenient facts?

  39. They can tell and you're iScrewed by MacDork · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A bricked iPhone can be returned for a full switch... Correct me if I am wrong, but its not like they can tell the phone has been "unlocked", as I have not opened this phone in any way, and as such have not voided any warrenty on the hardware.

    If you check the comments here, you see one particular comment of interest:

    Check you IMEI number on the back against the one on the activation svreen (behind the "i"). If you see 004999010640000 on screen you are screwed (for now).

    You see, they can tell,

    This is the problem. THe free sim unlock changed everyone's IMEI to 004999010640000 - so they are now checking the IMEI to when it was first activated to the SIM to ensure a match, and if you look on the back of your box, you'll notice your original IMEI #.
    Which means: You're iScrewed if you update... and I TOLD YOU SO. A month ago, long before any announcement by Apple... Steve said no unlocking. Even though he's wrong this time, he's stubbornly sticking to his guns like always. Maybe you'd like to buy a real smartphone when you get that bad taste out of your mouth. For God's sake, whatever you do, don't say, "Thank you sir may I have another."
    1. Re:They can tell and you're iScrewed by Epsillon · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is the problem. THe free sim unlock changed everyone's IMEI to 004999010640000 - so they are now checking the IMEI to when it was first activated to the SIM to ensure a match, and if you look on the back of your box, you'll notice your original IMEI #.
      If this is true, you're doubly iScrewed. It is quite legal to unlock a 'phone, but it is very, very illegal, at least here in the UK, to change the IMEI. There's some stiff penalties, including time inside, for changing IMEIs or even producing software that is able to change an IMEI on a GSM handset.

      That is, if this quote is accurate. Anyone with a hacked iPhone in the UK had better ensure it isn't (*#06# is the standard GSM code for display IMEI on most handsets). The other angle, if US law is so very different to ours, is what stops AT&T from putting 004999010640000 on the stolen handset blocklist, thereby denying service to anyone on any network nationwide? The IMEI and IMSI (the phone and SIM serial respectively - IMEI is International Mobile Equipment Identity and IMSI is International Mobile Subscriber Identity) are transmitted to the BTS (cellular Base Transceiver Station) when logging on to the network. There's no way you could hide the IMEI from a network operator.

      Gut feeling tells me this report of IMEI cloning is mistaken. If it isn't it's a very crude kludge, not a true simlock release, and is easily defeated without resorting to nasty surprises in firmware.
      --
      Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
  40. Re:fucking apple fanboys by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have always despised the iPod. Massively overpriced etc... However, with the iPod Touch, bloody Steve Jobs has finally made me want an iPod. (I have absolutely no use for an iPhone). But I have no delusions of being able to run third party apps or whatever on it. I want it for what it does out of the box. Anything else down the line is an added bonus.

    As for the iPhone... The early adopters got burned with the price drop. And now the people who hacked their phones can't do what they want to do with their precious toy. I'm sorry, but I find that quite amusing. I realise this will be an unpopular opinion, but Apple is a business like any other. If they want to cripple third party apps for now, that's entirely their choice and, sadly, their right. Anyone who harbors the delusion that when they buy a device they actually own it and can do what they want has clearly not been paying attention to any technology of the last 5-10 years.

    It's not like Apple didn't warn folk this was coming, which is a hell of a lot more than other companies have done.

  41. i don't get it by zrogerz69 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Apple released a product, making it painfully clear it was to remain on the AT&T network, if you don't like at&t, you aren't forced to buy the product if you choose to "hack" it, and make it work on other networks, props to you, but you really can't expect apple to continue to support it... new updates ARE NOT mandatory, only if you choose in itunes. i have an iphone (its not hacked) but if i were to hack it, i would do so with full understanding that apple would not support it

  42. Re:Apple hates freedom by blantonl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is the biggest rant piece of crap I've ever read in my life.

    Let me make this clear: If you don't agree with the T&C's for the iPhone, then don't purchase one

    It is that simple. Don't like it. Vote with your $$ !!

    Why is this so difficult for some people? Are some people born to rage against a machine that they have a choice to not pay money to?

    --
    Lindsay Blanton
    RadioReference.com
  43. Re:Non-hacked too. by Slashcrap · · Score: 2, Informative

    With a proprietary vendor you can take it back for repairs or replacement. How exactly will the "l33t dudes" in #linux on IRC help you in your time of need if you don't know how to fix your free software problem yourself?

    This may come as a shock but generally speaking, phones which run Linux are actually manufactured by, well, manufacturers. They're not assembled from dumpster dived components by bearded hippies and then sold to unsuspecting consumers. I believe that some of them even come with warranties! And I would imagine that unlike Apple they have mastered the idea of having a boot ROM with sufficient smarts to fully reload the factory firmware no matter what bloody state the rest of the system is in. I don't know whether Apple created this situation due to evil or simple incompetence. But I would probably lean towards incompetence, because it's likely to annoy you more.

  44. Re:They're not brick & Apple had no choice &am by MacDork · · Score: 2, Informative

    1) Link please.

    2) You are totally making this shit up. Link please!

    3) The new firmware does not brick "hacked" phones. It does, however, brick "unlocked" phones. If you can't figure out the difference, then please turn in your nerd badge.

    4) Tell us something we don't know.

  45. Re:HACK vs. UNLOCK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To better analogize to a car, this is like a manufacturer sending you a new drive shaft, and you complain when this driveshaft does not fit the custom engine you installed.

    Yeah, you're right, that would be dumb.

    It would be something else altogether when I would come back only to discover my car was rendered full unusable (far below the state it was in when I brought it in for maintainance) because some dipsh*t thought my modification gave him the right to molest my car any way he saw fit.

    That is something quite different than returning the car unchanged, because preliminary checking showed an incompatibility with the requested maintanance.

    Funny : when I only dare to shorthen an URL and thereby retrieve a webpage that was not intended for my eyes I can get send to jail for hacking, but when some company intentionally subverts or disables software running on anything I own its allways rightfully. Did I say "funny" ? I actually ment "strange" :-)

  46. Re:Non-hacked too. by DurendalMac · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ars is saying that iPhones really aren't bricked by this update, so I'd chalk this up to sensationalism.

  47. Re:fucking apple fanboys by djh101010 · · Score: 2, Interesting



    The worst is when people fucking defend apple no matter what. They go and sleep with the worst service provider in the country,

    I get 4 bars of signal with AT&T, in my _basement_. Verizon, at my house, I was lucky to get a call that wouldn't drop in a few minutes.

    they completely lockdown the device with no hope for the third party softwares on the brick,
    Really? Then AppTap installer doesn't exist? I don't have dozens of third-party apps installed on my iPhone? Oh, do tell, AC, how is it I could have hallucinated all of this? Could it be that you're, you know, either lying or ignorant? Either way, you're wrong.

    Personally, I am glad I have not bought any apple device.
    Fair enough. Apparently your semi-literate rant is fueled with both ignorance and hatred - a combination which rarely leads to effective selection of technology by criteria which actually matter.
  48. Unsurprised by TechnicalFool · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you're running hacked software, don't be surprised if an update breaks it. That the shop won't help you fix it doesn't surprise me either. Apple may have marketed themselves as the "cool" option, but if you ever want a taste of what having a Macintosh in every home could be like, look no further than this.

    And people call Microsoft the Borg...


    PS: I'm aware the Apple Mac is a fine machine. I'm aware it works in various ways that Windows doesn't. I'm aware people are very happy with their iMacs and get very defensive about them. However I'm also aware that the amount of lock-in that Apple have on the Mac makes Microsoft look like the Last Bastion of Freedom in comparison.

    --
    09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
  49. Re:Non-hacked too. by GPL+Apostate · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Incompetence. Apple hasn't done anything really clever technically in a long, long time. They rely on 'creative design,' attractive appearances, and heavy heavy marketing.

    They weren't even able to turn MacOS into a modern pre-emptive multitasking OS. They ended up having to buy in a third party OS from NeXT, after spending many millions in failed attempts.

    One of the most difficult things to engineer into a portable device is a robust battery compartment that can use commercial off-the-shelf _standard_ batteries. It's a lazy cop-out to seal the batteries into a product. I know, because I worked for years at a medical device manufacturer where we struggled with a design to let the customer use a simple off-the-shelf 9v battery. It's an EXPENSIVE and difficult undertaking. Again, Apple really isn't competent enough to design a robust battery compartment. My Newton, which is fine in other regards, has a botched battery compartment.

    --
    Microsoft says legacy (serial/parallel) ports are bad. They don't obfuscate the hardware enough.
  50. Re:Apple hates freedom by the_bard17 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Your computer was locked to Windows when you made the purchase. You knew that. You still bought it. You didn't like that, so you install Linux. Then you applied the BIOS update and broke your computer. This is not the manufacturer's fault. It is not Microsoft's fault. It is your fault. The issue is yours, not Microsoft's."

    Funny when you swap a few words around, isn't it? Kinda puts things in perspective.

    When I buy a phone, I ought to be able to put it on any carrier I choose. When I buy a car, I don't have to go to a single branded garage, nor drive on a single type of road, or even put a certain brand gas in it. When I buy a TV, I don't have to plug it into only one company's cable service.

    So would you mind explaining why some big corporation should be able to lock me into their service when I buy a certain phone?

    And don't tell me to exercise my right not to buy it... I'm already doing that.

  51. In any case by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It should have been obvious to anybody with half a brain that Apple would wipe any code that doesn't suit them with the first firmware update. And they are, as you say, legitimately entitled to do so.

    The real idiocy here is where so many people have been sucked in by the marketroids into paying big bucks for a bloody phone with all its caveats. I too have an antique iPod (just a Mini) which is a squeeze for storage space but still works far too well to justify replacing it, and probably will for years to come. Same goes for my current phone. And I get to choose my own mobile service provider, without having to resort to stupid hacks.

    Jumping on the bandwagon of the New Big Thing is wasteful and doomed to eternal disappointment as soon as the Next Big Thing appears on the horizon.

  52. Terms and Conditions of PURCHASE? by lullabud · · Score: 2

    I don't know about anybody else, but when I bought my hardware I didn't or agree to anything other than payment for the hardware. I only agreed to the terms and conditions of a contract while activating my phone with Apple while signing up for AT&T service.

    That being said, you can't expect software updates to suit your needs if your needs are not in alignment with the plans of the device you bought. If I was planning on using my iPhone as a copy machine I can't very well hold it against Apple for not upgrading their iPhone camera with extra features like Efax and OCR. You assume you know the expected behaviors of the device and you have faith that Apple will extend those behaviors. *nix tools, NES ROMs and accelerometer based games are not part of that goal, I guess.

    I guess in this case, we can't even expect that they'll allow us to fool around with our little projects to use their screwdriver as a multi-tool. Screwdriver it is.

  53. Re:Apple hates freedom by WNight · · Score: 2, Informative

    Oh yes, all analogies must be exactly the same in scope.

    Idiot.

  54. Re:Well, I hope for Apple... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 2, Interesting
    With all respect, that's complete rubbish.

    You can be locked in for as long as the contract you've signed specifies you're locked in for. And even if you hack the phone after 6 months, Apple are under no onus to support you with firmware updates because they will argue that you have invalidated a warranty by doing the mod anyway.

    If you don't want the vendor lock in then don't by the product, it's that simple. I've never owned a single Apple product and I probably never will.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  55. Because businesses behave similarly by jeko · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sorry to interrupt your Ayn Rand fantasy that you are in control of your world, but the problem is that businesses shamelessly copy each others tactics, and occasionally outright collude. Let me make this clear -- you don't get to "vote with your wallet."

    When companies first began drug-testing employees, a radically unpopular proposal, the public was assured this was only for "sensitive" positions like public safety workers. "You don't like it, work for somebody else," was the reply. "Public safety" was expanded to include truck drivers. Then waiters. Now, you cannot find legal employment in America without submitting to a drug test.

    Searching customers at the door. This was first done at large "warehouse" stores where the store layout meant you could conceivably bypass the cash registers. "You don't like it, shop somewhere else." Now, my local Wal-Mart, Target, and grocery stores have begun to search. When every store does it, you can't "vote with your wallet."

    Wal-Mart used to trumpet "Made in America." When China began selling goods in America, a huge number of people asked why we're doing business with those murderous thugs after Tienanmen Square. "You don't like it, buy from other manufacturers." As a story on Slashdot pointed out a couple days ago, there's no longer any way to boycott Chinese goods. They're so pervasive that even if you wanted to, even a conscientious person can no longer ensure that a large chunk of their business does not go to China.

    Insurance companies used to swear "We would never come between you and your doctor. We wouldn't want to." Once deregulation came along, they all fell in lock-step, and now doctors have to call and ask some minimum wage clerk if they're allowed to treat their patients. It doesn't matter which insurance you carry.

    Companies do not get to pull nearly as much crap in Europe and Japan as they do here, because in those two places government regulation almost works. I know because I've lived there. No one in America gets to "vote with their wallet" any more because there's no longer any meaningful competition. Through our own stupidity, we've not only returned to the "Bad Old Days" of 1890-1930, we've done them several steps better.

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."