Slashdot Mirror


Apple Releases iOS 4.3.3 To Fix Location Tracking

An anonymous reader writes "Apple has released a software update (iOS 4.3.3) to fix the much-talked-about iPhone Location Tracking bug. Apple faced a lot of criticism over the issue — iPhone and iPad secretly tracks users' locations and saves them in the device's cache as well as in a hidden file which is copied to the PC whenever the computer gets synced with device."

212 comments

  1. bug? by Squeeonline · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm pretty sure it was a feature, not a bug.

    1. Re:bug? by gilesjuk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The data was held in a SQLLite database with a default size of 2MB. This obviously seemed like a small file but in reality it could hold a lot of data. So the file size has been reduced.

      So when are Google going to fix their OS and also stop sending data with a unique identifier back to HQ? yes, iOS seemed like it was tracking you, but the data in the database file on the device is a cache of location assistance data received.

    2. Re:bug? by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Apple says they read your location data.

      From the Apple FAQ http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html:

      8. What other location data is Apple collecting from the iPhone besides crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?

      Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database with the goal of providing iPhone users an improved traffic service in the next couple of years.

      To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple. Claims that they only send location data and never pull it is clearly false. Of course, the database file on the phone was not the actual problem. It was sloppy to back it up, but it was more a tell tale sign Apples actual bad behavior. The bad behavior was in reading peoples location from their phone when they were told not to.

      Google has allowed you to actually turn off tracking by Google. It is part of the setup procedure in every Android phone. They don't even stop you from using location services if you tell them not to collection our location data. If someone shows that Google reading that data when they have been told not to, I will agree that they have behaved badly.

      At this point though Apple hasn't come out and said that they will stop secretly tracking iPhones. They have been specifically vauge about what they collect, but leave enough wiggle room so that they can claim they told you. As it stands, they claim that they are reading your location info. They worded it in a way that most people don't realize they are having their location info transmitted to Apple.

      That is sketchy at best. The big question is, are they still reading location data when location services are turned off, or are they just hiding the fact that they are tracking you? Based on what they have said, and just as importantly, what they have not said, it sounds like they are still secretly tracking users.

    3. Re:bug? by webdog314 · · Score: 1

      The location of the nearest wi-fi hotspot or cell tower *is not* "your location", nor is it "tracking" you. If you look at the actual data in the file, you will find all sorts of entries for places you have never been, or areas you have been to, but at a completely different time. I agree that it was sloppy of Apple to leave the backed up data sitting unencrypted, but it is absolutely different than accurate GPS coordinates of your movements.

    4. Re:bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The location of the nearest three cell towers and their distance from you = your location within a 1 meter radius, thats a circle around you which is approximately six feet across with you in the middle. They could tell with some decent accuracy what room in your house you are standing in for example with that data. Do they send your exact longitude and latitude? Probably not. Do they send enough information so that this can be really easily calculated? Probably. The big problem is the probably, the fact that they can extrapolate which paving stones you walk on regularly is just basic, every day privacy invasion.

    5. Re:bug? by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      Reread what I and APPLE wrote. They are creating a traffic database. This requires knowing where the phone is. You are focused on the file. The file isn't the problem. The file was just the evidence they left that got them caught in tracking users. The fact that you don't think they track your phone proves that they are intentionally being vaughe in their answers to try and trick people into thinking that they are not being tracked.

      Again. The traffic database that Apple says they are creating REQUIRES knowing where the phones are.

    6. Re:bug? by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      The bad behavior was in reading peoples location from their phone when they were told not to.

      To bad this never happened! Data was never transmitted.

      At this point though Apple hasn't come out and said that they will stop secretly tracking iPhones.

      Funny how something that's been public for years is somehow secret.

      The big question is, are they still reading location data when location services are turned off

      Once again they never were.

    7. Re:bug? by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Google has allowed you to actually turn off tracking by Google. It is part of the setup procedure in every Android phone. They don't even stop you from using location services if you tell them not to collection our location data.

      I know Android users aren't that smart but really? Do you even understand the concept of location services? When you use location services your phone can only determine it's GPS coordinates. That in and of itself is pretty useless. So then the APP SENDS THAT DATA TO A SERVER SOMEWHERE where it is logged and the server checks its database to send back a location. The reality is unless you only use location services to display GPS coordinates on your screen. YOUR STILL BEING TRACKED!

    8. Re:bug? by errandum · · Score: 1

      GPS coordinates is "pretty useless"? Are you mad? It's accurate up to 10m +-, it's used by military services everywhere. It's the most widely available accurate way to measure velocity. It is especially accurate if you are moving

      No app needs to send data ANYWHERE. GPS coordinates are calculated based on the strength of a satellite signal. There is no communication with anyone.

      But GPS won't work indoors (although I have no idea why someone would need to use them there), for example, and that's why these "location services" exist. But google allows you to opt in to their use. If you want to benefit from it, you'll get help with your location, provided you are willing to share your data.

    9. Re:bug? by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Exactly how does 42.231,82.629 tell me where the nearest gas station is? It Doesn't. GPS data is useless to humans without a database of some other info to compare it to. Use google maps or google earth then google has your location. Other then a few nav systems that allow you to download a map anything using location services transmits your location.

      And even just getting your GPS coordinates will transmit your location since the phone will ping cell towers to help it speed things up (called AGPS and required by law)

    10. Re:bug? by dudpixel · · Score: 4, Informative

      what iOS does after this update is what Android has done all along.

      1. location updates only stored temporarily.
      2. location updates not stored at all when 'location services' disabled (MENU > Location and Security > Use Wireless Networks)

      The other difference is that Google has been upfront about what they do with location data. They said all along that they use this data and that it is anonymized.
      Apple seem to have come clean now so its all good.

      No reason to hate either side now...unless you want to hate both, because they're both much the same.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    11. Re:bug? by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      what iOS does after this update is what Android has done all along.

      1. location updates only stored temporarily.
      2. location updates not stored at all when 'location services' disabled (MENU > Location and Security > Use Wireless Networks)

      Data sent to google is anonymized. I assume Apple does the same.

      Both of them collect the data to build a database of open wifi locations.

      No reason to hate either side now...unless you want to hate both, because they're both much the same.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    12. Re:bug? by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      oops, double post - ignore the parent comment :(

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    13. Re:bug? by spongman · · Score: 1

      except if you've got a 3G, then you're screwed, still, more, again...

    14. Re:bug? by webdog314 · · Score: 1

      No, it requires knowing where a cell tower or wi-fi hotspot is generally. You're fixated on the "location", but it's NOT the location of the phone that's being recorded. Let me just say it again for you... It's NOT the location of the PHONE that is being recorded. Stop making assumptions about the data. I HAVE an iPhone. I have gone through the process and looked at the actual data recorded. It's NOT where I have been. At best, it's a general map of the cell towers in my area, and in certain instances, points where I might have handed off between a few of them. Much of the data is composed of locations I HAVE NEVER BEEN NEAR. EVER. Are you starting to understand this yet?

    15. Re:bug? by binford2k · · Score: 1

      See, your problem is assuming that an Apple hater will understand logic. They cannot, for it goes against their unshakable absolute TRUTH that Apple is an evil company out to rape everyone they can get their grubby hands on. Facts? They don't need no stinkin' facts. They've got the knowledge and no amount of reality will change it!

      Relevant: http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney

    16. Re:bug? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      A traffic database that says has locations you have never been near would be useless. Only a moron would try to use that kind of data for traffic related applications. That means that Apple is collecting data that is more accurate than what is stored on the phone, or Apple is run by morons. I suspect the former to be true. You seem to be under the impression that the data stored on your phone is the data that Apple is pulling from your phone. Based on the information stored there, and the fact that Apple claims they are collecting data from the phones for a traffic database, we can be sure that they are not the same data sets.

    17. Re:bug? by headLITE · · Score: 1

      People are confusing two separate things here.

      The big noise was about a database on the device itself. This database is a cache that stores locations of WiFi networks that the device requested from Apple because it saw the network. Yes creating that cache involves sending the WiFi SSIDs to Apple and so Apple would be able to create the exact same maps, however for some funny reason this is not what the buzz was focused on. That was only about the existance of the file, and the possibility that it could be stolen. Hence, they are reducing the amount of entries in the cache. This does not change the fact that, in theory, Apple can still build the very same database with unlimited size for any given phone. The same is true for any other system that can determine your location based on anything other than a pure GPS fix, i.e. *every* mobile phone with a GPS, since they *all* use assisted GPS or that WiFi trick, and all have to send some data to a server to determine their position quickly.

      The traffic data is a separate thing where devices report their locations directly for the purpose of inclusion in a traffic database. In theory it'll end up with about the same amount of information in the hands of Apple (or Google or whoever else is doing something similar) as WiFi based or otherwise assisted GPS, but it's much more obvious, so people will want to be able to turn it off :)

    18. Re:bug? by errandum · · Score: 2

      Oh my god.

      I'm kind of pointing out the obvious, but did you know GPS existed before your phone had one? And it used satelites.

      A latitude/longitude IS enough if you have a map with you. Google maps downloads things on the fly, but many GPS softwares have the maps already downloaded and require no data connection whatsoever.

    19. Re:bug? by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      So, you location is tracked with +-200m accuracy (which can be narrowed down to +-50m using careful analysis of the data). So it is OK now?

      By the same token, do you agree to publish your GPS location track? After all, it's accurate to about 30 m.

    20. Re:bug? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      See, your problem is assuming that an Apple fanboi will understand logic. They cannot, for it goes against their unshakable absolute TRUTH that Apple and jobs are gods who can do no evil. Facts? They don't need no stinkin' facts. They've got the knowledge and no amount of reality will change it!

      FTFY

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    21. Re:bug? by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      So, you location is tracked with +-200m accuracy (which can be narrowed down to +-50m using careful analysis of the data). So it is OK now?

      By the same token, do you agree to publish your GPS location track? After all, it's accurate to about 30 m.

      Being tracked and having that data published are two entirely separate things.

      Your bank tracks how much money you have. Do you agree to publish that data?

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    22. Re:bug? by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      In this instance the fanbois win. Those that think that cell tower locations = phone location are incorrect. So it appears you are wrong and the fanbois were better informed, doesn't it?

    23. Re:bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. You're still wrong. Apple stores and transmits the location of the access point or tower to which you are connected - NOT the exact location of your phone.

    24. Re:bug? by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      My bank has received a written agreement from me. Apple hasn't got it.

      So, you do agree that coarse location data is not worthless and harmless?

    25. Re:bug? by afex · · Score: 1

      By the same token, do you agree to publish your GPS location track? After all, it's accurate to about 30 m.

      of course - why else would i have signed up for google lattitude!

      /seriously

    26. Re:bug? by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Well, I use latitude too (to analyze and optimize my routes). But that's because Google has my explicit permission.

    27. Re:bug? by webdog314 · · Score: 1

      ... It's NOT the location of your PHONE, or "you", it's the location of the nearest TOWER or HOTSPOT. So yes, it's "OK" for them to determine the location of the nearest hotspot within 200m. Good grief! How hard is it to understand this??

    28. Re:bug? by cheeks5965 · · Score: 0

      nopee. it stores the location of the tower, but does not transmit it. If you think about it, a phone stores all sorts of stuff. * contents ot text messages sent and recieved * log of calls placed and recieved * contents of emails sent and recieved (up to a certain buffer size) * name, phone, email, address of your contacts It's not a big deal -- the phone as these so it can be useful. no conspiracy here. It would be bad if the phone emailed all this content to steve@apple.com, but there's no evicence that this is so, and the company explicitly says it doesn't do so. In short, [citation needed]

      --
      -- Flame me and I will happily flame you back. Bring it!
    29. Re:bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reread what I and APPLE wrote. They are creating a traffic database. This requires knowing where the phone is.

      No it doesn't. It requires knowing where phones are. Not "the" phone. There's no need to track "a" phone, so unlike Google who feels the need to track "a" phone, Apple doesn't.

    30. Re:bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The traffic data is a separate thing where devices report their locations directly for the purpose of inclusion in a traffic database. In theory it'll end up with about the same amount of information in the hands of Apple (or Google or whoever else is doing something similar) as WiFi based or otherwise assisted GPS, but it's much more obvious, so people will want to be able to turn it off :)

      Turn off "Location Services". That way nobody will know where you are, including yourself.

    31. Re:bug? by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      So it's OK if I attach GPS to your car and then broadcast its location?

      After all, it's not like I would be broadcasting your location. No, no! I'd broadcasting the location of the GPS receiver. Which just happens to be within a few meters of the driver's seat of you car.

    32. Re:bug? by Salvo · · Score: 1

      So when are Google going to fix their OS and also stop sending data with a unique identifier back to HQ? yes, iOS seemed like it was tracking you, but the data in the database file on the device is a cache of location assistance data received.

      What? Are you Crazy?
      That's the reason why Google released Android in the first place! What incentive would Google have to release Android, gMail and Google Docs if they didn't mine their users Data?

    33. Re:bug? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      My point was simply that the argument can go both way (which is true for almost anything)

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    34. Re:bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, really? You should go and read Google's privacy policy. You expressly give them complete access to your all of your data.

  2. Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Darth+Snowshoe · · Score: 0

    My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot. But whatever, hurf durf, Steve wuz spying on us.

    1. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot. But whatever, hurf durf, Steve wuz spying on us.

      OK, so you're justifying Apple tracking their users to within a few hundred yards.

      What CAN'T you justify, fanboi?

    2. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apple's prices.

    3. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love my Mac's, my iPhone is OK (I don't get smart phone wood like some), but I hate being tracked.

      At least with Apple, you can opt out by not buying in. Not true with other well know tracking companies.

      There, fanboi cred verified.

    4. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot.

      Your understanding is flawed. It wasn't logging the nearest cell tower or wifi. It was, based on location, downloading to the phone a list of nearby cell towers and wifi networks (from a crowdsourced database run by Apple) so that when the user used an app that requested the location of the phone, this cache could be used to quickly generate a rough estimate and speed up the GPS location. This is a very useful optimization for most of us and the fact that it allowed people to generate a very rough log of our locations over time was simply an unintended side effect.

    5. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by dnahelicase · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot. But whatever, hurf durf, Steve wuz spying on us.

      OK, so you're justifying Apple tracking their users to within a few hundred yards.

      What CAN'T you justify, fanboi?

      I might be called a fanboi, but they were caching location data in what seemed like a logical manner to speed up location services. Many users, myself included, enjoy speedier access.

      Sure, they should have encrypted it by default, but it's not like their users had any expectation that they weren't being tracked. They were surprised by an unencrypted cache of location data, but ATT, Verizon, Sprint, ???, are already readily tracking user locations of all phones on the network. I would think someone silly if they expected the location services apps they are using aren't tracking them as well.

      People that get upset and say "OMG! APPLE IS BIG BROTHER!" are the same people who get upset when very private information on facebook is seen by people they didn't realize could see it.

    6. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha!
      At first I thought you type Huff Duff, which would have been a clever pun.

    7. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot.

      Your understanding is flawed. It wasn't logging the nearest cell tower or wifi. It was, based on location, downloading to the phone a list of nearby cell towers and wifi networks (from a crowdsourced database run by Apple) so that when the user used an app that requested the location of the phone, this cache could be used to quickly generate a rough estimate and speed up the GPS location. This is a very useful optimization for most of us and the fact that it allowed people to generate a very rough log of our locations over time was simply an unintended side effect.

      In order to get that data a third party would have to either steal your phone or steal your iPhone backups from your computer. Either way, you would have bigger problems than a log file with your locations.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    8. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by kwiqsilver · · Score: 3, Informative

      The database is not of the nearest tower or hotspot. It is of many nearby ones, (e.g. within dozens of miles). By having this cache of local known positions, the GPS can resolve in seconds, rather than in minutes.

      Look at any analysis of the actual data and you'll see that the points do a very poor job of tracking locations. Some of the points are predictions on where you might go. The point of a cache is to have the data at hand before it's needed, so that when it is needed, it's right there. It's possible he was somewhere near Las Vegas is not tracking.

    9. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Belial6 · · Score: 0
      Apple says they read your location data.

      From the Apple FAQ http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html [apple.com]:

      8. What other location data is Apple collecting from the iPhone besides crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?

      Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database with the goal of providing iPhone users an improved traffic service in the next couple of years.

      To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple. Claims that they only send location data and never pull it is clearly false.

    10. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple. Claims that they only send location data and never pull it is clearly false.

      The issue we were discussing is the list of cell towers and wifi networks stored on iPhones and which Apple has changed in this update. As for logging user location data anonymously, I'm sure Apple is doing so, at least they said they were when I clicked through the location stuff on the maps application in my phone. But that is a significantly different from what we were discussing.

    11. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by syousef · · Score: 1

      My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot.

      Your understanding is flawed. It wasn't logging the nearest cell tower or wifi. It was, based on location, downloading to the phone a list of nearby cell towers and wifi networks (from a crowdsourced database run by Apple) so that when the user used an app that requested the location of the phone, this cache could be used to quickly generate a rough estimate and speed up the GPS location. This is a very useful optimization for most of us and the fact that it allowed people to generate a very rough log of our locations over time was simply an unintended side effect.

      In order to get that data a third party would have to either steal your phone or steal your iPhone backups from your computer. Either way, you would have bigger problems than a log file with your locations.

      Or obtain your phone by subpoena.

      In some cases it may be the entire intent of the excercise is to determine what your location has been.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    12. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, you would just have two problems.

      1) Lost phone.
      2) Lost log of years of location data.

      #2 could be a much bigger problem.

    13. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah clearly that data needs to be synchronised to iTunes

      OK, one last time for the cheap seats: Apple syncs everything as part of an iPhone backup. They do this so that when you restore from backup you get the device back to its backed up state (kinda the point), temporary files included. When you actually look at a backup all manner of cache files are included. It is not only a backup of data, it's a backup of device state.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    14. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Dunbal · · Score: 0

      I guess you missed that whole part about consent and ethics, huh? Why don't we just sterilize people with known genetic defects while we're at it. I mean, how could you be in favor of crippled babies?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    15. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by TRRosen · · Score: 2

      WHAT you mean that when I click the button that says use location services the the phone secretly uses location services!!! I'm shocked NOW SHUT UP!

    16. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      The data wasn't sync the users folder was the file just happened to be in it. HEY IDIOT THAT"S WHY ITS CALLED A BACKUP.

    17. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      No, the problem is that when you say "Don't use location services", Apple continues to use if anyways.

    18. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      No actually your understanding is flawed. Data is from radio logs. The poster was Right.

    19. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      NO the don't haven't and never have. The only issue was that the log file was still being updated. However it was not used and could not be without turning location services on.

    20. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      The database is not of the nearest tower or hotspot. It is of many nearby ones, (e.g. within dozens of miles). By having this cache of local known positions, the GPS can resolve in seconds, rather than in minutes.

      I can turn on my HTC Touch Pro 2 (a 2 year old device) when I touch down in Bangkok, Shanghai, Berlin, Los Angeles or Seattle (all places I've been to and used GPS/location services within in the last 5 weeks) and it locks on position in less than 10 seconds. Subsequent uses in the same region (within ~150 km radius) locks within 2-3 seconds. No cache needed - if you have a decent GPS chipset to start with.

      The point of a cache is to have the data at hand before it's needed, so that when it is needed, it's right there.

      Why worry about where I was last week or last month, when I'm looking for position right now... You can query the cell system for current position of the tower to which you are connected, and get the current data in a matter of a second or two. Why do you need to store all the places you've ever been, for something that has relevance right now?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    21. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by ToastedRhino · · Score: 1

      It was, based on location, downloading to the phone a list of nearby cell towers and wifi networks (from a crowdsourced database run by Apple)

      Clearly "based on location" in the above is a loaded statement as it implies that something like GPS coordinates were being used to determine where you were at the time. More likely it was using the nearest hotspot or cell tower to then request a list of hotspots/cell towers in the vicinity. While this would give an approximation of your location, it's a far cry from sending out your actual specific location. That being said, Apple never actually clarified this aspect of it so who knows what's true and what isn't. I'd personally tend to err on the side of "Apple is not trying to screw everyone," though I know others would disagree.

    22. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Smurf · · Score: 2

      No, you (and the GGP) are wrong.

      I suggest that before installing the update you try for yourself to access the infamous database from your latest iPhone backup. (One of the "fixes" in the iOS 4.3.3 update is that the database will no longer be backed-up). You can get the instructions on how to locate the SQLite database and how to open the CellLocation table using the SQLite Manager plug-in for Firefox directly from the people that "discovered" the issue. The most relevant fields are Timestamp, Latitude and Longitude.

      The timestamp field shows the time of an entry in seconds since January 1st, 2001, at 0:00. The first shocking thing is that the data is not acquired continuously or at a regular interval, but rather in "blobs". Each of these "blobs" of data will have several entries, some five or less, but most (in my case) have 60 or more, *many* more, sometimes over 100. All those entries have literally the EXACT SAME timestamp, to the microsecond. I can't believe that my iPhone sees more than 100 different WiFi stations and cell towers at the SAME time.

      Furthermore, most of the many entries for each particular "blob" happen to be several miles (up to 25) from the location where I know I was at that particular timestamp (say, midnight on a Wednesday). And indeed the info is close to useless: the average of all the 121 entries in the blob in a particular case was over 1.5 miles away from my actual location, and even the average of the 15 points closest to me (note that that required a priori knowledge of what you are looking for: my location) was 0.55 miles away.

      My point is: Apple may be collecting the data from the radio logs to create their famous "crowdsourced" database, but the CellLocation table, which is the center of the whole issue, is not data from the radio logs of your specific device.

    23. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      This is a very useful optimization for most of us and the fact that it allowed people to generate a very rough log of our locations over time was simply an unintended side effect.

      A very useful function for sure. I would love to be able remember where I was all last week. I figure since they'll always have this info anyway, we should be able to use it also.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    24. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by syousef · · Score: 0

      Yeah clearly that data needs to be synchronised to iTunes

      OK, one last time for the cheap seats: Apple syncs everything as part of an iPhone backup. They do this so that when you restore from backup you get the device back to its backed up state (kinda the point), temporary files included. When you actually look at a backup all manner of cache files are included. It is not only a backup of data, it's a backup of device state.

      Yeah? They sync firmware?

      What about licenses and DRM which tie purchases to device, meaning restoring to a different device you can lose your data. (Don't care if it allos 2, or 3 or 5 devices....bottom line if you have trouble with your phone you can lose more than the worth of the phone).

      You're living in fanboy fantasy land! It's rotten tomatoes from the cheap seats.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    25. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by syousef · · Score: 2

      The data wasn't sync the users folder was the file just happened to be in it. HEY IDIOT THAT"S WHY ITS CALLED A BACKUP.

      If it's temp data it DOESN't NEED TO BE BACKED UP. See, I can yell too.

      The irony is fanboys such as yourself are this abusive and don't get modded down, but anyone daring to criticise the great Apple (all hail!) gets modded into oblivion. I'm not the idiot here.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    26. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by TRRosen · · Score: 0

      Who's the fanboy here? The data is in the users folder and the whole user folder is backed up. But somehow to you that indicates a clear and malicious intent save the data. Of you may not understand that since when it comes to backing up your data "Droid doesn't".

    27. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by ekhben · · Score: 1

      The HTC Touch Pro 2 uses a Qualcomm CPU with a gpsOne aGPS module. The iPhone 4 uses a Broadcom BCM4750 single-chip aGPS.

      The tracking sensitivity on the gpsOne is -160dB, with TTFF of 1s/29s/35s for hot/warm/cold startup. Power consumption data not available; it's always part of the CPU.

      The tracking sensitivity on the BCM4750 is -162dB, with TTFF of 0.5s/30s for hot/cold startup. Power consumption is 13mW.

      The BCM4750 is a better aGPS chip, but mostly due to its greater sensitivity and independence from CPU choice - there's not a lot of difference in TTFF between the two.

      If you get fix times in under 10sec, but over 1sec, the phone is probably providing hints via a cache.

      Given I have a 3GS with the much poorer Hammerhead II aGPS chipset, patch 4.3.3 is a pretty big net loss for me; I think I'll just skip it until I'm forced to take this Apple bashwagon generated downgrade as a part of a major release upgrade. :(

    28. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      And there are certifiably paranoid haterz who would respond to news of Apple removing location services from iOS with shrieks that this proves they will instead be locating cell phones covertly, at the same time they complain that augmented reality and navigation apps would subsequently suck ballz on the iPhone.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    29. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are medications which can help with this problem you seem to be having.

    30. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      It's already the case that when slave labor practices are brought to light you have thousands of fanboys ranting about raising the standard of living in developing countries and it's better than starving (as if paying a living wage were simply not an option).

      I hate Apple with a passion but think they're actually improving the standard of living in developing countries by offering work there.

      The question is: are the workers free to leave for a better opportunity? If not, then they're slaves.. otherwise they're just poor, and hiring poor people is a nice thing to do.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    31. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      Or subpoena the same information from the carrier... and oh yeah, that tracking hasn't stopped.

    32. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      You're at the complete wrong end of the spectrum.

    33. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by binford2k · · Score: 4, Informative

      What about licenses and DRM which tie purchases to device, meaning restoring to a different device you can lose your data. (Don't care if it allos 2, or 3 or 5 devices....bottom line if you have trouble with your phone you can lose more than the worth of the phone).

      Are you daft, bro? Do you actually have any idea of what you're talking about or just spewing random hater crap?

      I've backed up and restored the same image onto THREE DIFFERENT IPHONES now. Including my upgrade from a 3G to a 4. And can you guess how much data I've lost? Bingo! Not a single app. Not a single song. Not a single video.

      Go back under your bridge, troll.

    34. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by binford2k · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but a public company is bound by US law to maximize profits for its shareholders. And you maximize profits by lowering costs, not by paying higher wages for philanthropic purposes.

    35. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by binford2k · · Score: 1

      What judge in his/her right mind would issue a subpoena for data that could tell you AT BEST "well, syousef might possibly have been in Seattle on the 12th of February. Or it could have been any of millions of other iphone users who were in Seattle on that day. But in any case, knowing where cell towers and wifi hotspots in Seattle are seems to be helping syousef's location services out. Yay!"

      That's right. None.

    36. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      yes, I know. The public good coinciding with the commercial good, wtf? It's almost like that Adam Smith guy was onto something!

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    37. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Yeah? They sync firmware?

      If you are talking about the OS, the latest image is found in "~/Library/iTunes/iPhone Software Updates" no need to image the entire thing each time. Stuff like baseband is downloaded when it gets upgraded to flash onto the phone, again no need to sync it every time.

      What about licenses and DRM which tie purchases to device, meaning restoring to a different device you can lose your data. (Don't care if it allos 2, or 3 or 5 devices....bottom line if you have trouble with your phone you can lose more than the worth of the phone).

      Give me an actual example of this, it doesn't exist (on iOS devices at least.) I can't even think of a third party app that does this.

      You're living in fanboy fantasy land! It's rotten tomatoes from the cheap seats.

      Stooping to cheap and meaningless insults like "fanboy" is an automatic defeat. Stick to rational arguments please.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    38. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about licenses and DRM which tie purchases to device,

      Is this something that is common on other phones? It certainly isn't on iPhones.

    39. Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or subpoena the same information from the carrier... and oh yeah, that tracking hasn't stopped.

      Not to mention that they can get that information without you knowing - unlike your phone.

  3. in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in other news, spotifys synching with your device may fail for unknown reasons.

  4. That was a bug? Yeah right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only "bug" is that they needed to hide it better, oops. I'm sure they've implemented a better hidden and implemented version with this release.

    1. Re:That was a bug? Yeah right... by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      Like Google did with Android? hide it away and make it only accessible if you root the phone.

    2. Re:That was a bug? Yeah right... by $0.02 · · Score: 1

      Actually that was a feature. It's not needed any more since OBL's been tracked.

      --
      If enithin kan gow rong it whil. (Murfey)
  5. Not very helpful by warp_kez · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The update does not help if you are using an older unsupported iPhone or iPod.

    1. Re:Not very helpful by Belial6 · · Score: 1
      My understanding was that this was a new "bug"/"feature". That would mean that any phone capable of having it implemented would also take the fix to remove it. Of course the file wasn't the real problem. The real problem was that Apple was instructing your phone to secretly transmit your location data to Apple even when location services was off. We don't know how long that has been going on, and can assume that the actual problem has only been hidden better based on Apples FAQ http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html [apple.com]:

      8. What other location data is Apple collecting from the iPhone besides crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?

      Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database with the goal of providing iPhone users an improved traffic service in the next couple of years.

      To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple.

    2. Re:Not very helpful by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Once again STOP MAKING SHIT UP!!! The phone did not transmit this data and does not and never has transmitted location data with location services off. There has never been any secret transmission of data! Everything sent to Apple has been known from day 1.

    3. Re:Not very helpful by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Older phones used a different file that can not be accessed directly in any way. Not that this one could be without jail-breaking or the users authorization.

    4. Re:Not very helpful by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Obviously not, given how many people right hear on Slashdot claim that no data was ever sent. Where does Apple outright say that they don't collect data when the services are off? They very clearly avoid answering that.

    5. Re:Not very helpful by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Steve has never outright said he's not an Alien from the planet Kanzis. Therefore he must be hiding that fact right. Yes lets ignore the fact that bunches of researchers inspecting every packet transmitted from the phone have not found any data being transmitted. Steve must be using some of his Alien technology to transmit it via subspace. Put your tinfoil hat back on and go back to watching Fox News.

    6. Re:Not very helpful by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      sure, location based services somehow enables apple to GUESS your location without your phone telling them anything?!

      The phone most definitely transmits your location to Apple, otherwise how would location based services even work? In order for apple to provide ads targetted to your location, they need to know where you are. There are more uses for location services too, all of them requiring the server to know your location.

      I have no problem with this - the data is anonymized and I've yet to hear of even 1 case of the data being misused.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    7. Re:Not very helpful by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Did you even read the post you replied to?

    8. Re:Not very helpful by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      I believe I 'misread' it...sorry. I'll move on now. :(

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    9. Re:Not very helpful by Belial6 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No one has asked Steve if his an alien from the planet Kanzis either. They have asked him if Apple is tracking their phones. Apple has also acknowledged the question has been asked, and in reply to it, they issued a FAQ for the purpose of clearing the air, and yet they still don't answer the question that they were directly asked. Surly, even an Apple fanboy must understand the difference.

  6. FIX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    FIX or hide somewhere else?

    1. Re:FIX by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Most likely hide and then "disclose" by burying disclosure of the file somewhere deep in the bowels of a EULA.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    2. Re:FIX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they fix this "bug" by hiding it better this time. If the thing was implemented at all, it means that it was intentional, such tracking features just do not appear as a miracle from the sky.

  7. I'm bummed by stokessd · · Score: 1

    I must be the only person who thought that feature was nice. Given that it's not shared with anybody, it is nothing but useful for me.

    When I go on vacation or someplace interesting, I drag along a GPS logger so I know where I've been, and I can geolocate my pictures. I have to take another device in my backpack and keep it charged etc. If my phone did that, I'd be happy as hell. There are apps for that, but they suck serious battery. This low resolution database would be a nice compliment to to the GPS logger.

    Sheldon

    1. Re:I'm bummed by cobrausn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right, its a useful 'feature' if they tell you about it and let you turn it off. Otherwise it is covert tracking, even if by accident.

      --
      How does it feel to be a liar with pants constantly on fire?
    2. Re:I'm bummed by stewbacca · · Score: 2

      You can't do something "covertly" "by accident", because covert implies it was done on purpose.

    3. Re:I'm bummed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can if you claim it was an accident... but it wasn't.

    4. Re:I'm bummed by syousef · · Score: 1

      I must be the only person who thought that feature was nice. Given that it's not shared with anybody, it is nothing but useful for me.

      When I go on vacation or someplace interesting, I drag along a GPS logger so I know where I've been, and I can geolocate my pictures. I have to take another device in my backpack and keep it charged etc. If my phone did that, I'd be happy as hell. There are apps for that, but they suck serious battery. This low resolution database would be a nice compliment to to the GPS logger.

      Sheldon

      First of all most of the juice an app draws in that situation will be drawn running the GPS on the phone. It shouldn't make a difference which app does that. The only way it could is if some apps turned off the GPS, logged then turned it back off vs always on. An app could be written for that too.

      Secondly a tracklog that's only accurate to within a kilometer or two is next to useless for geolocating pictures. If you've ever went geocaching you'd realise that relocating something with 30m accuracy can get frustrating. I suppose if you were really disorganised it could at least tell you what city/country a picture was taken, but I'd much rather carry around a dedicated GPS - better signal coverage etc. (I did this on honeymoon in New Zealand...and we took thousands of pictures....I can tell you exactly where on the side of the road we stopped in some cases....and the GPS I used was not as good as the one I own now).

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    5. Re:I'm bummed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are apps for that, but they suck serious battery.

      Maybe you've used it, but the (free) Google Latitude app does not suck much battery and would provide you with the data you want.

    6. Re:I'm bummed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If companies are so angelic about this location tracking, why not tout it as a feature and expose the data for me to use it myself, import it into excel, etc?

    7. Re:I'm bummed by binford2k · · Score: 1

      If they were actually tracking you, then your statement might approach reality. In the meantime, why don't you go read what the file's actually used for instead of spouting about something you have no clue about? Yeah?

      (Big huge giant hint for you: the data points in that database are not the location of your device! As a matter of fact.... they probably weren't even recorded by your phone at all! Shocker!)

  8. Implied Admission? by Sooner+Boomer · · Score: 0

    Isn't this (the update) an implied admission that the original software tracking was wrong? I don't see how it could have been coded in, and have had the behavior described to it, as an accident. What will become of the data already collected?

    --
    Chaos maximizes locally around me.
    1. Re:Implied Admission? by duk242 · · Score: 2

      I think it's more an issue of them thinking that it wouldn't really bother anyone, especially that the point of it was to help the GPS function run better. So this update is probably going to increase GPS location speeds in certain cases (ie. if you're somewhere you haven't been for a while). Apple have said that the data will have its lifespan reduced (ie. it will only keep a short amount of time worth of updates), thus enabling it to still actually work. Also if you turn off Location Services, then the data file will get deleted.

    2. Re:Implied Admission? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't this (the update) an implied admission that the original software tracking was wrong?

      Well, wrong in that it kept a large cache instead of a small one. Most users probably care a lot more about rapidly finding their location all the time than they do about the possibility that someone with access to their phone or an unencrypted backup thereof could generate a very rough estimate of their locations over time.

      I don't see how it could have been coded in, and have had the behavior described to it, as an accident.

      Then you have no idea what the software was doing. Why don't you find out by doing something crazy like reading.

      What will become of the data already collected?

      Data wasn't collected. It was downloaded TO the phone and cached there. The "collected data" was collected on your phone and stored there as well as in any backups of your phone. What you do with it is up to you if you have an iPhone.

    3. Re:Implied Admission? by kwerle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Isn't this (the update) an implied admission that the original software tracking was wrong? I don't see how it could have been coded in, and have had the behavior described to it, as an accident. What will become of the data already collected?

      Good grief. Still want this to be an issue?

      Design document:
      We want to be able to determine location very very quickly. Much faster than GPS.

      Developer: ...OK. I'll just keep a cache of visited towers/wifi and their GPS location cached. That'll be super fast!

      That's it, folks. The whole thing. non-jailbroken apps can't read the cache, so nobody cares. The cache never gets sent to Apple, so nobody cares. But it turns out that the cache is backed up to the computer, so people freak out. OH NOES!

      Design document:
      Make people shut up about this file.

      Developer: ...Good grief. OK, I won't back up the cache to iTunes. And while I'm in the code, I'll trim the cache size - looks like it was getting big for some people.

      That's it. No story.

    4. Re:Implied Admission? by JesseDegenerate · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, and with your extensive knowledge of the apple software build process your going to she some light on it? You obviously don't write software... (or even widgets:D)

    5. Re:Implied Admission? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's disingenuous. It wasn't a cache with a size accidentally set too big. It was a log. It would record years worth of data, backing it up, even copying it to a new phone if you switched. Yes, the intentions were primarily innocent, to aid some functionality... but apple claiming it was a 'bug' is not at all correct.

      Android's location cache is truly a cache; deleted in 24-48 hours, only kept on the phone. Apple should just copy that behavior.

    6. Re:Implied Admission? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good grief? Who the fuck are you - Charlie Brown?

    7. Re:Implied Admission? by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Well duh! why cache data that's already on The Motherships (Google's) servers. And note the file did not keep years worth of data just years old data. Data for each tower was overwritten. Thus the further you went back the less data there was.

    8. Re:Implied Admission? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Developer: ...OK. I'll just keep a cache of visited towers/wifi and their GPS location cached. That'll be super fast!

      And why would anything other than the very last place the user was be required for such an application?
      A "cache" is totally unnecessary when all you want is the user's last known position.

    9. Re:Implied Admission? by Poohsticks · · Score: 1

      Except that - "According to tests by independent security researcher Samy Kamkar, the iPhone was also collecting new data on cell tower and Wi-Fi networks when location services were off, and sending this data back to its servers. It's unclear whether the update stops these collections as well. According to Skyhook's Morgan, the collection of the data and the downloading of the cache to the phone typically work hand-in-hand." - From an article by the Reg. So - I'm sorry but they're collecting data when location services are off and they're transmitting that back to Apple. THAT'S SPYING!!!!

      --
      "The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been wide
    10. Re:Implied Admission? by Ferzerp · · Score: 1

      A location cache would have no need to record timestamps unless the data were to age out (which it did not). Nor would it need to record the same bit of data with a new time stamp while maintaining the old one. There would be absolutely no reason to ever have the same data point twice with different time stamps. In an aging system, you would just update the time stamp on the existing point so that it didn't age out.

    11. Re:Implied Admission? by binford2k · · Score: 1

      No. It's more like the antennagate thing. They're having a big laugh right now back at headquarters. You know why? Because otherwise they'd be crying at the stupidity of you all.

    12. Re:Implied Admission? by binford2k · · Score: 2

      That's even more disingenuous. It was never a cache. Your phone told Apple where cell towers and hotspots were. Apple anonymized and aggregated the data. Your phone then downloaded a subset of that dataset from areas that it guessed might be useful to you. That's it. Nothing to do with your actual location at all.

      And yes, it was user data so it was backed up and moved to a new phone if you switched. Why the hell would you want to download a NEW dataset when you already had one?

      Try reading some. It doesn't hurt much.

    13. Re:Implied Admission? by binford2k · · Score: 1

      ZOMG! Stop the presses!

    14. Re:Implied Admission? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A location cache would have no need to record timestamps unless the data were to age out (which it did not). Nor would it need to record the same bit of data with a new time stamp while maintaining the old one. There would be absolutely no reason to ever have the same data point twice with different time stamps.

      There are two "which it did not" missing in your little rant. One could get the idea that you haven't got the slightest clue what you are talking about.

  9. iPhone 3G? SOL by ral · · Score: 1, Informative

    If you bought your iPhone between Jul 11, 2008 and Jun 7, 2009 (and perhaps after that date) you have an iPhone 3G and you're going to have this bug as long you own the phone. As of March 11, 2011, Apple stopped updating the iPhone 3G.

    It look like after 2 years, you're no longer an Apple customer. You're a former customer until you prove otherwise with your wallet.

    Disclaimer: I can't find any official statement from Apple about their current 3G support policy. But they did exclude th 3G from this update.

  10. 666MB long download by fasuin · · Score: 1

    wow! 666MB to delete a file? not that bad at all!!

    1. Re:666MB long download by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      wow! 666MB to delete a file? not that bad at all!!

      Must be some HP printer drivers in there somewhere.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:666MB long download by dswskinner · · Score: 1

      wow! people can find something to complain about in anything!!

    3. Re:666MB long download by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      Actually I like Apple and this is a huge complaint of mine. They apparently have zero clue about how to do diffs or patching. Every time they make a minor change to XCode it's time to download 4GB again.

  11. Priorities by chemosh6969 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I like how there's more outrage over apple tracking users and then denying it than there is over all the suicides and anti-suicide pledges from the workers making these devices.

    1. Re:Priorities by JesseDegenerate · · Score: 1

      because only apple workers commit suicide http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-13/samsung-electronics-two-factory-workers-commit-suicide-korean-police-say.html
      oh wait, your just over-generalizing on topics you know nothing about, about cultures you obviously know nothing about. That's right.

    2. Re:Priorities by chemosh6969 · · Score: 1

      I like the part where you assume I don't know their culture. I guess marrying one of them and living over there doesn't count. Any more baseless assumptions you want to throw out?

    3. Re:Priorities by maxume · · Score: 1

      He was probably born over there and has married two of them.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:Priorities by JesseDegenerate · · Score: 1

      you smell funny? umm.... you look fat in that shirt. (it's a nice shirt though) my real point wasn't that you know nothing, i was just feeling flamey. It was that that behavior is not exclusive to Foxconn employee's under the wield of steve job's righteous hammer.

    5. Re:Priorities by Draek · · Score: 1

      We're just jaded. Companies in the past have made important gestures towards the privacy crowd when they've complained, but I can't remember any off the top of my head that's done something actually *effective* and not just a publicity stunt (see also: Apple) with regards to working conditions in China.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    6. Re:Priorities by arikol · · Score: 1

      ..let's not forget that Foxconn has a few workers(total number of employees is over 920.000). Even if working conditions were absolutely great and the suicide rate was the same as the USA average (around 11 per 100.000 inhabitants) then we should be expecting around 100 suicides per year from Foxconn workers. Chinese suicide numbers (official ones at least) are lower, or 6 per 100.000 people, so then we would be looking at 55 suicides per year by Foxconn workers.

      The big suicide thing that came up around Foxconn was about 18 suicide attempts over the course of 10 months. That is not to say that there weren't any other suicides by Foxconn workers somewhere (the company is spread out over a few countries), but it isn't this amazing wave of suicides like the press whipped up.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying everything is hunky-dory over there. I don't know the full details though, but I know that Apple isn't the only company to buy from Foxconn. Hopefully some of those companies demand ethical sources of electronic components. That would be the biggest incentive to improve working conditions.

    7. Re:Priorities by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Just shut the hell up with your made up issues. Foxconn workers are far less likely to commit suicide then the general population. The line should be making iPhones makes workers happy saving them from suicide.

    8. Re:Priorities by chemosh6969 · · Score: 1

      Cool beans. It's been a long, hot, awful day over here.

    9. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No shit, imagine if this was Microsoft doing this. All Apple fanboys would be all over it wouldn't they? Just remember...you're probably holding it wrong.

    10. Re:Priorities by frosty_tsm · · Score: 1

      Good statistics, but I wonder a bit about the demographics of the 6 per 100k people in China. For example, do these 6 tend to be out of the work force? Are they in lower quality jobs? What's the suicide rate for employed Chinese (or even Chinese employed in a factory; or electronics factory)? Chinese electronics factory workers might be statistically less likely to commit suicide due to quality of life (i.e. better pay) and other considerations. This would reinforce that the 18 suicide attempts are statistically high.

      (just playing devil's advocate; your post was well thought out)

    11. Re:Priorities by arikol · · Score: 1

      Thank you.

      Well, the 6 per 100.000 in china is an official average statistic. I won't wager anything on that number being near correct. In fact I could easily believe the actual number to be much closer to the USA, even higher.

      I'd wager that your devil's advocate note is at least partially correct (that factory workers who make a living wage might have a lower suicide rate than the national average), but I also have a sneaking suspicion that the official statistics may be doctored somewhat. Looking at stats for Singapore (10), Hong Kong (15) and India (10) it seems that China's numbers don't fit very well in. Japan (24) and South Korea(31) are both ridiculously high.

    12. Re:Priorities by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      Yes well, while everybody here is crying about tracking and suicides, the government has much more important issues to deal with... Focus people...

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    13. Re:Priorities by chemosh6969 · · Score: 1

      I'm glad I left that state. I got stationed there for one year and it was a shitty year. Remember that movie The Car? I was flipping through the channels one day over there and it was on and they also explained that it takes place in Utah, even though it was filmed somewhere else. I cheered that car after every kill it made.

  12. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by gilesjuk · · Score: 3, Informative

    Two years is double or four times as long as other phone providers.

    A Sony Ericsson phone is effectively abandonware as soon as you buy one. A HTC phone is released every 6-12 months and with such a large number of phones to support you won't see many or any updates after 12 months.

    Apple's support for the iPhone is pretty exception in the mobile phone market. So unless you can provide an example of a mobile operator who provided support after two years I think you need to stop whining.

  13. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Haedrian · · Score: 1, Troll

    Given how limited the phone choice is, and how 'special' iPhone users are, and the premium they pay, and the fact that this 'bug' got (or will get) apple into trouble...

    You can hardly compare can you?

  14. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

    And? I am neither a fan nor customer of apple, but I would say that if you last purchased something 2+ years ago... you're *not* a customer. You're a former customer.

  15. I am waiting for iOS 4.4.1 stable release by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Personally, I'm waiting for iOS 4.4.1 - it not only is a stable release, it also has anti-suicide factory-worker code in it.

    (posted from my iPad2)

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  16. Apple Releases iOS 4.3.3 To HIDE Location Tracking by countertrolling · · Score: 0, Troll

    You're welcome...

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  17. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by JesseDegenerate · · Score: 2

    First, it's 2011. Most OEM's support android phones for months, not years. Second, people like you are looking for something to qq about. you would complain if your water was wet. Shut up.

  18. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by dnahelicase · · Score: 1, Interesting

    From my experience, the 3G barely ran iOS 4. I don't blame them for stopping support of it or the "classic". Those users should stay on 3.2.2 and jailbreak it.

  19. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Americano · · Score: 1

    If you live in the states and bought a phone 2+ years ago, you are probably eligible for a very cheap upgrade from your carrier, provided you're willing to re-up your contract.

    Given the high-profile nature of this, even if you're not due for a re-up because you bought a refurb 3G 6 months ago, I'd suggest picking up your phone and calling customer service for your cell provider, and asking them what they can do to help you out. If you're willing to renew your contract, I'd bet they'd be willing to cut you a deal on a new phone (maybe a free 3GS, or a cheap iPhone 4), or a discount on some other Android-ish device if that's your fancy.

    Yes, it would be nice if they supported all of these devices forever. No, they don't do so today. So you can gripe on Slashdot, or you can call your cell provider and see if they're willing to cut you a deal on an upgrade. They usually are if you say "I'll go to $some_other_carrier over this, but I'd be willing to renew my contract today for 2 years if you can make something happen."

  20. Apple nomenclature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iPhone and iPad secretly tracks users' locations

    Am I the only person that's really annoyed by this piece of Apple marketing? Normal English would be: iPhones and iPads secretly track users' locations. Or, the iPhone and the iPad secretly track users' locations. Apple marketing refers to the damn things like they're people. John and Rick secretly track users' locations.

    It's just a really strange way to talk about consumer electronics. They're product lines, not unique entities.

  21. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

    regardless, this demonstrates the benefits of free software. A similar phone loaded with aosp would have lifetime updates thanks to cyanogenmod.

  22. Re:The Singularity... by HermMunster · · Score: 0

    As I understand it it has been ongoing from the first iPhone. This update doesn't work on those phones. Those phones are still tracking. There are still millions of people subject to tracking if this is correct. Where's their fix?

    --
    You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  23. Except it was not useful for that by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Informative

    Since it didn't actually track your location, only present a database of known network points around you, you actually couldn't use it to track anything. I had a look at my own data and you couldn't tell where I lived or worked from it, and those are places I go every day.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  24. Not what was happening Hater by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    OK, so you're justifying Apple tracking their users to within a few hundred yards.

    Nope, wherever you were it was downloading stuff from a mile or two around you, possibly more. Looking at my own data I could not have told where I lived or worked from it, because it was too widespread and of course not related to where I was specifically. Not even centering the range of data collected really told you anything...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  25. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by pz · · Score: 1

    Depends on the warranty, no?

    Automobile emission control systems (and, broadly interpreted, that includes the drivetrain) have an EPA-mandated 10 year / 100,000 mile warranty in the USA. That would mean the car you bought 9 years 11 months and 30 days ago still makes you a current customer.

    Owning something that will be supported or last for only 2 years? I try to avoid that if possible.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  26. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by arikol · · Score: 1

    sorry to burst your bubble (well, actually, not really) but is that what you have seen for Android phones? You know, the ones that can't upgrade from 1.6 to 2..

  27. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by syousef · · Score: 1, Insightful

    First, it's 2011. Most OEM's support android phones for months, not years.

    Second, people like you are looking for something to qq about. you would complain if your water was wet.

    Shut up.

    I see so you arguments are:
    1) Other manufacturers can be bad, so Apple should be too
    2) People should never complain
    3) You like to abuse and bully people

    I bet you'd defend Apple if they went around with squads killing people and committing atrocities. Brand loyalty is for suckers.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  28. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by ral · · Score: 3, Interesting

    OK, so Apple's warranty is for only one year. As far as I know, they haven't violated any of the terms of their 25 page contract I never read. As far as I can tell, their support is as good as any cell phone company. (Not a high bar to get over.) So you're justified in calling me a whiner.

    Still, after paying more for that phone than I've paid for some computers, I'm pretty unhappy with Apple. I've been using Apple computers continuously (but not exclusively) since 1985. I guess I'm pining for the days when a computer was still pretty useful and still getting updates 5 years after you bought it.

    I really don't want to start another 2 year commitment on a smartphone. And the iPad I'm considering looks like less of a bargain if it is going to be made intentionally obsolete in 2 years.

  29. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please show me an android phone that is still officially supported 2 years later.

  30. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by JesseDegenerate · · Score: 1

    No, i just think 2 years in today's market is fair. If they wanted to wow me they could do better. Apple's done it's share of shady stupid shit, but most companies have. (google, ms) I would throw them under a bus if android's UI was actually fully accelerated in 2.3. Maybe ice cream. Or maybe not. rows of icons is boring.

  31. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by JesseDegenerate · · Score: 1

    btw: if you feel abused a bullied, then you sir, have lead a sheltered life.

  32. Give me a break by TRRosen · · Score: 4, Informative

    And People still can't stop making shit up! There is one file. (the Cache) its not hidden. It contains locations of cell towers and wi-fi APs. It does not contain the users location. The data for each tower was over written and only logged when towers came into range. As such the data never could be used to "trace some ones every move". The data would only show the general location of the user (being somewhere near a tower). The app that showed the locations sensationalized the whole thing by showing a week or mores worth of data by default putting in many more data points. Many days would actually contain few or no data points at all. And no one has shown this data being sent to Apple.

    1. Re:Give me a break by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Whenever they're reporting on Apple related news Slashdot turns into a sort of techie version of Fox News, ignoring basic established facts in favor of their own predetermined truth. It's mind boggling really. You don't have to like Apple but ignoring the facts is no way for a geek to behave.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    2. Re:Give me a break by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "And People still can't stop making shit up!"

      1) Who the fuck are you ? I've got $1000 that says you won't talk to me in
              person like you talk on this forum. That's right, fuck stick, in about 1.3 seconds
              you will be MY BITCH.

      2) Where's the proof of your claims ?

      You're just another loudmouth in the chorus, until you give some citations.

    3. Re:Give me a break by DysenteryInTheRanks · · Score: 2

      WiFi APs are good enough to map your location on a map on wifi only iPads (labeled "current location"). Their range is very limited, so coming into contact with one is the same as knowing location -- especially when combined with what other APs are visible to you at the same time -- which is why Apple has always referred to this as a "location" finding technique.

    4. Re:Give me a break by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      Apple are using this data to create a database of open wifi towers. How can they do this unless they have the collected data sent to them.

      I believe the data is anonymized and more than likely quite safe.

      However, to claim it isn't being sent at all is naive. It may well not have been sent if the user had location based services turned off, however.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    5. Re:Give me a break by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Cell towers transmit there location to the phone and the wifi locations are looked up and sent from skyhook. None of this is useful information for Apple they already have access to all that info. This data is not transmitted. When you use location services to find your location it looks at this file and the towers and wifi signals to get a head start for the GPS system if once your location is found there are new wifi signals in the area these are sent anonymously. This file is never sent. only new APs discovered when you activate LS which are of course also added to the file. (OK it's actually 3 files well 1 database 3 tables)

      Cell tower data is always collected and always will be. That's how phones work. Wifi locations are mostly downloaded from skyhook with only newly discovered AP locations being transmitted if the user enables it.

    6. Re:Give me a break by fredmosby · · Score: 1

      The file stores all the known access points within miles of the phone's location. It doesn't indicate which points the phone actually detected. Looking at the data for my phone I couldn't even see the specific cities I'd been to. It showed the state or county at best.

    7. Re:Give me a break by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      How can he talk to you in person, you're an AC.

      That's the trolling equivalent of repeating everything a bully is saying for emphasis while standing behind him and wearing a balaclava with a voice disguiser.

      You claim he's a loudmouth in the chorus, I'd say it was more like centre stage compared to your truly anonymous shouting from the cheap seats.

      Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot.

    8. Re:Give me a break by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      meh then we agree. I said wifi towers, meaning "permanent" wifi APs. sorry - probably wasn't clear what I meant.

      What you described is as I understood it to be.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
  33. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

    agreed but savvy consumers will vote with their wallet and with the benefit of hindsight choose wisely next time. :-)

  34. Re:The Singularity... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're understanding is wrong. It's only been happening since iOS 4. Of course, some phones are EOL at 4.2.

  35. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 2

    1) Other manufacturers can be bad, so Apple should be too

    No but ragging on the one which actually comes out ahead of most, if not all, manufacturers in terms of official support is disingenuous. iPhone 3G was supported from july 2008 to march 2011, that's nearly 3 years worth of OS updates for that model of phone. Its successor, the iPhone 3GS, was released june 2009 at which time the writing was on the wall for the older hardware but it was supported well after that.

    --
    If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
  36. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

    If you bought your iPhone between Jul 11, 2008 and Jun 7, 2009 (and perhaps after that date) you have an iPhone 3G and you're going to have this bug as long you own the phone.

    "'untrackerd' Cydia Tweak stops iOS Location Data Storing."

    --
    If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
  37. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by samriel · · Score: 1

    "Don't expect the company to fix its mistakes, just spend more money!"

  38. No fix for iPhone 3G by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The iPhone 3G has this bug, but is not being fixed...

    1. Re:No fix for iPhone 3G by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1, Funny

      The iPhone 3G has this bug, but is not being fixed...

      That's because Apple wants to know where all the cheapskates live. If you're still using a 3G, you are not worthy. The data will be pooled and you will never, never see an Apple store there.

      It's the truth....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  39. What "Bug" ? by unity100 · · Score: 1

    wasnt there an apple spokesman saying that apple NEEDED to know locations of its customers to provide them 'better service' ? just 1-2 days ago in a story we read here ?

    1. Re:What "Bug" ? by dwightk · · Score: 2

      that was a quote from 6 months ago, repackaged to look like it was said in response to the latest location conspiracy.

      --
      Like anyone can even know that
    2. Re:What "Bug" ? by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      that was possibly google's andy rubin saying the data was 'very important' to them? And the data being referred to was the locations of wifi towers, NOT the locations of their customers.

      In fact, anyone who uses a cell phone, and in particular if they have location based services turned on, are already sending their location to any number of places.

      Its also anonymized. People talk about situations where you may still be able to be identified, but the chances are so remote that there are much bigger things to worry about in life.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    3. Re:What "Bug" ? by unity100 · · Score: 1

      it doesnt matter whether it was from 6 months ago. it says that they were going after locations of people. and it wasnt 'repackaged'. it was in the news just a few days before the flop.

    4. Re:What "Bug" ? by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 2

      No, it was in the news in July, and then somebody took it and made it look like it had anything to do with this issue. It doesn't.

      The information was talking about using people's locations to provide services. Kind of important when you expect your Cheap Gas Finder app to show you prices that are nearby, and such things.

    5. Re:What "Bug" ? by unity100 · · Score: 1

      it has everything to do with the issue. it doesnt matter whether it was said 5 years ago. it means that, the company is INTENT on collecting location data of people. period. it means, in between july and now, they were already implementing what they were speaking. only thing commendable is, they put their mouth where their word is.

      i dont know how hard it is to understand - THEY SAID THEY WANTED TO COLLECT CUSTOMER LOCATION DATA, AND THEY COLLECTED IT. that means, there was no 'accident'.

    6. Re:What "Bug" ? by unity100 · · Score: 1

      they said location data was very important. and it turns out, it was !!!! they were collecting that data through all means. so, the 'accidental' excuse doesnt fly.

    7. Re:What "Bug" ? by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      say what? who said anything was accidental?

      are you talking about their wifi sniffing thing from years ago (nothing to do with what I was talking about) or the location services on android?

      the issue in this story is that apple were storing the wifi location data on people's phones and it was synced to their PCs even when location services were turned OFF.

      They have now fixed it in 4.3.3, so now android and ios act pretty much the same. if you turn location services on, expect your location to be sent to google/apple, albeit anonymously. i dont think we need to lose sleep over this.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    8. Re:What "Bug" ? by unity100 · · Score: 1

      no. im saying that, they had had started saving locations of people long ago, and had attempted to prepare the public to that.those press releases and slip in statements were for that. now, faced with backlash, they are whoring themselves out as in 'accidental'.

  40. Actually it's June 2010 by edxwelch · · Score: 1

    iPhone 3G stopped being sold in June 2010

  41. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Keyboarder · · Score: 1

    The myTouch 3G (i.e. the second Android phone in the U.S.) is currently running Android 2.2. That puts it on par with the iPhone 3GS. The G1 is the first "high end" (there really was no such term when it came out since there were no low end devices) Android phone by HTC to outright stop receiving updates. The Droid, similarly, is running Froyo, and receives important updates. Sure, the low end phones stop getting updates after 6-12 months, but if you consider that the same market is usually met by the previous year's iPhone, it's comparable. Just a point of clarification: while it's true that Gingerbread is the latest version of the OS, most of the improvements were hardware support (and a slight color scheme change). If a phone already functioned on Froyo, the user wouldn't really notice much difference if it was updated. For that matter, bug fixes for 2.2 continued to be released after 2.3 was out. In that respect, Gingerbread could be seen as more of a fork than a true update, and will be merged back in when Honeycomb and GoogleTV are merged in Ice Cream Sandwich. I ran both Froyo (CM 6.1) and Gingerbread (CM 7) on my myTouch 4G and could hardly tell the difference.

  42. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by ral · · Score: 1

    That's sweet - thanks. And since Apple is ignoring the 3G, the risk of jailbreaking it is much lower. Apple's not going to patch the 3G flaws that allow jailbreaking.

  43. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    That reminds me when I was a kid and didn't want to take baths. I would point out to my mom that I shouldn't have to bathe because, after all, other kids would be even filthier than me and that was OK!

    My mom though, would have none of it. She forced me to take a shower daily, under the argument that it didn't matter if other kids were filthier, that I should be clean nevertheless.

    The truth is that companies will try to get away with as much crap as possible, and it's up to us consumers to demand the best possible treatment rather than settle for the lowest common denominator and call it a day, just because "everbody else is the same or worse".

    As an iPhone 3G owner which I've just barely finished paying for (bought in late February 2009), I'm dismayed that Apple has simply decided that a perfectly working piece of hardware just won't get any security fixes. I don't know if they should be asked to provide security fixes forever, or for ten years, or for five. I know two years is too little and I couldn't care less what Sony Ericsson or anyone else does. I didn't buy a phone from them, I bought one from Apple, I still regularly buy stuff from them through their store, and I resent basically being told I no longer matter to them. If they don't think I'm no longer a customer of theirs then maybe I shouldn't be one, a thought that I'll definitely keep in mind next time I buy a phone (two or three years down the road, when my trusty 3G stops working or actually becomes obsolete).

  44. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The two year thing is why I ditched Android and went to Apple.

    Sure, they both have their pros and cons, but at least Apple's updates and supports are going to last near full contract term. Not having my phone declared too obsolete and stating I should move with the times after six months.

  45. Sensationalized by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My iPhone is "tracking my location" a bit like firefox is "tracking my web usage" by using a cache.

    Yes it uploaded the location of nearby towers and public wifi to an Apple database, but I WANT IT TO DO THAT. I don't want to wait 10 minutes for an initial GPS fix like I have to with my car GPS unit.

    What I don't want is any kind of location logging (time and place for my particular device, whether a GPS fix or a nearby phone tower/wifi ) to take place without my knowledge either stored on my phone or uploaded, which is traceable to my particular device.

    Any such behaviour would be legally actionable under most countries laws i would hope.

  46. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by syousef · · Score: 2

    1) Other manufacturers can be bad, so Apple should be too

    No but ragging on the one which actually comes out ahead of most, if not all, manufacturers in terms of official support is disingenuous.

    You're kidding me, right? This is the same manufacturer that's famous for selling a phone that drops out if you hold it wrong, and screens that scratch if you look at them harshly.

    I've had few things from Apple and their support is my #2 reason for disliking them. My #1 reason is lockdown and crippling in order to sell the next model. #3 is their draconian control of the sales channels.

    Every product I've owned or used at work from Apple has given me nothing but trouble. Just junk, and their customer service stinks. Apple is NOT geek friendly, is NOT stylish and does NOT provide good support.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  47. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by shadowrat · · Score: 1

    My car is going on 6 years old. The rOads i drive it on are atill the same. So yeah, im happy to keep it. The roads My iphOne drives on will likely be obsoleted in 2.

  48. GPS is not instant though by romanval · · Score: 1

    The problem with relying purely on GPS is that it can't be in use all the time, especially when the phone is on standby, since it takes quite a bit of power to run the GPS hardware. When the phone wakes up it can take up to 2 minutes for it to get a full GPS lock on it's location.... but by identifying nearby cell towers/wifi base stations, it can return its approximate coordinates instantly.... It just needs to query a database that can return those rough coordinates of such cell tower ID/Wifi base stations MAC, then use the GPS to fine tune it in the background.

    Of course, the issue is that a database that maps cell tower/base station to a GPS coordiate has to be stored somewhere. Your phone either has to access it live (which if it goes to a server can be monitored live and give away your location), or it can access an internal database (like the iphone does, except it got backed up as part of the system image). Either way there's no way around it, since cell towers and wifi base stations don't naturally broadcast their own GPS coordinates.

    Now I don't know about you, but I'd be awfully annoyed wait 2 minutes every time my phone has to figure out where the heck it is; especially if I'm trying to pull up a map at the side of the road, or at a place that GPS won't work at all, such as an underground parking garage.

    1. Re:GPS is not instant though by errandum · · Score: 2

      Most cell towers have your location because they need to know what cell tower you should be using at that time.

      I never said that it was better to use only GPS, but it's point was that GPS only was not enough. Which is bull****- GPS (only) has been enough for loads of applications for a while now, you have to remember that the first pure GPS's were not your phone. It was those little black boxes that simply used satellites to know where you are. They had no wifi or GSM antennae and still worked.

      Obviously that anything that assists you on getting a GPS fix faster is good. But it's not essential.

    2. Re:GPS is not instant though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People tended not to take those black boxes with them unless they were in a car, or hiking. GPS is pretty crappy in a city centre, and completely useless in a covered mall. Technology is tending toward asking your phone "where's XXX store" and it answers you correctly regardless of wherever you are.

      GPS+WiFi data is as near to perfect location services as you're going to get, without a damn good inertial sensor inside to extrapolate from the last known position.

  49. I for one, could care less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    go ahead and track me Jobs... news flash, I'm at your Mom's 24/7 anyways. go ahead, remotely activate my crappy iPhone camera and see for yourself

  50. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

    >I guess I'm pining for the days when a computer was still
    >pretty useful and still getting updates 5 years after you
    >bought it.

    My iPhone 3G was rather creaky with iOS 4. But my 2007 iMac is still my primary computer, still useful, and still getting updates. And based on the developer previews, I do expect it to run Lion fairly well. The only reason I can think of that won't "last" five years is if I switch to a MacBook Pro. And even then, I'd pass it along to a friend who could get some use out of it... almost certainly past the five year mark.

    --
    Imagine all the people...
  51. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And yet somehow they manage to snag the highest ratings for support, every time. Maybe you are the issue in the relationship.

  52. Not For Mine by pgn674 · · Score: 1

    2nd Generation iPod Touches stopped getting iOS updates when they were 1.2 years old. iPod Touch 3rd Generation was released 9/9/09, and iOS 4.2.1 (the last one for iPod Touch 2nd Generation) was released November 22, 2010.

  53. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by jo_ham · · Score: 2

    From your posts in this thread, your clear grinding axe and your belligerent "Apple can do no right" dogma, I suspect that the reason "every Apple product" gives you trouble is down to the common factor in all of those interactions: you.

    Given today's flurry of posts in this thread your neckbeard must be seriously chafed.

  54. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by binford2k · · Score: 1

    you got a problem with your oOos?

  55. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by binford2k · · Score: 1

    I bet you'd defend Apple if they went around with squads killing people and committing atrocities.

    Because that's SO exactly what he said!

  56. Your Browser cache by k2r · · Score: 1

    keeps a list of recently viewed websites. Mozilla Foundation is spying on you!

    This is about the same as Apple has done here. Caching a list of recently seen (or possibly seen based on your location) antennae with their location (not: your location but theirs) to give your GPS a faster fix next time.
    However, while a limit of 2MB browsercache is ridiculously low it turned out that 2MB for location-data is a lot and at least if people turn off GPS this cache could be purged. And saving data on the location of seen GSM Towers while GPS is turned off (some provide them themselves ota) may lead to misunderstandings.

    Nothing to see here but a unintendedly big size limit and a dissonance between engineers thinking "Location is not provided to Apps" and user experience "no location data even if acquired passively is used in any way".

    The other topic - saving your position _for_a_day_ and sending the visible antennae to Apple anonymized - is something completely different.

  57. Ipad 2 64gb + wifi + 3G : 330 USD by addtostock3 · · Score: 0
    welcome to our website: ========== http://www.addtostock.com/ =======

    Good news to tell you: Yes , Trust your eyes! it's really!!! , 100% original , come withinternational warranty! free shipping ,P A Y P A L accepted! Fast and door to door delivery!

    Macbook pro laptops i7 $280- 520 U S D

    Apple iPhone 4G 32GB $260 USD

    Ipad 2 64gb + wifi + 3G $330 USD

    New Ipod touch 64gb$120 USD

    Dell Alienware M17x laptops: $700

    Dell Alienware M15x $500

    MacBook Pro MC024 LL/A $510

    MacBook Pro MC373 LL/A $485

    BlackBerry Pearl 3G 9105$350

    Nikon F 6 - SLR camera - 35mm$685

    Nikon D3000 (with 18mm-55mm and 55mm-200mm lens)$315

    Nikon D3X SLR Cameras$985

    Canon EOS 5D Mark$565

    Playstation 3 PS3 Metal Gear Solid 4$220

    Free shipping , P A Y P A L accepted! Fast and door to door delivery!

  58. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bought a 3G in late May of 2009, just before the 3GS came out. Terrible timing, I know. I also purchased a two year Applecare plan for the phone that has not expired. My contract is also not expired. Why am I not a current customer of Apple?

    I don't want to upgrade now to an iPhone 4; I learned my lesson about buying just before the next model comes out. I'll hold out for the 5.

  59. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by marklark · · Score: 1

    and get an iPhone... ;^)

  60. This is all well and good for AT&T users... by TVmisGuided · · Score: 1

    Let's not forget that there are TWO carriers out there that sell iPhones: AT&T and Verizon. I happen to be a customer of the latter.

    Guess what. While AT&T is going to be getting iOS 4.3.3, my iPhone4 is still plodding along on iOS 4.2.7, and iTunes reports I have the latest software update! When do Verizon users get to catch up with the rest of the world?

    --
    All the world's an analog stage, and digital circuits play only bit parts.
    1. Re:This is all well and good for AT&T users... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Verizon iPhones get 4.2.8 to deal with this.

  61. What's the Big Deal? by Striikerr · · Score: 1

    So, what's the big deal with this? The only problem is the fact that it was left unencrypted. If anyone is upset that a company knows where they are due to their device which they carry, they should keep in mind that the cell phone carriers already know this information and keep it in a database. These databases are made readily available to law enforcement without any requirements for a subpoena or court order. They just log onto a portal, select what they want and pay a nominal fee to the telco. I would think that this is of greater concern than Apple's screwup in not encrypting the file.

  62. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by painandgreed · · Score: 1

    I really don't want to start another 2 year commitment on a smartphone. And the iPad I'm considering looks like less of a bargain if it is going to be made intentionally obsolete in 2 years.

    Great, then do your research. Find a company with a device you like and a history of continued support, and buy that phone and tablet slate instead. Good luck finding one. Buying the Google developer phone is about the closest you're going to get unless you are willing to simply do the work yourself or hope to get stuff via mod community. Maybe the HP slate with Windows. Still, when I did the same looking around to investigate moving to Android, it was the lack of support for any other devices and the continued support by Apple that convinced me to stay.

  63. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1
    Most new appliances: 1 year warranty, if not less. Most electronics: same.

    Like it or not, when you're buying new equipment, you're looking at less than two years' support in most cases. I don't necessarily think this is a good thing (I remember when appliance warranties were 5, 10, 15 year), but the only way to avoid it today is to buy various extended support packages at inflated prices.

    Of course it's not quite the same, as software is not warrantied item to begin with. It's been a while since I read an EULA, but the last I checked , there are disclaimers left and right -- namely, no warranty; and -- as importantly -- no obligation set forth wherein the vendor is required to provide any ongoing updates at all.

    And as you mentioned, automobiles are under special rules.

  64. Re:iPhone 3G? SOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's sweet - thanks. And since Apple is ignoring the 3G, the risk of jailbreaking it is much lower.

    You mean since Apple is ignoring it, all the vulnerabilities you find in a jailbroken iPhone are suddenly gone?