Note we're talking about the 2010 iPhone, not the 2011 or the like. Not only is Apple not going to be *that* terribly put out if details get out at this point (they're going to be publicly announced soon anyhow), but it's highly unlike the firmware in this prototype differs in any way from the end product. We're basically talking about a "release candidate" iPhone here. It would defeat the whole point of having people go out and use them if the hardware/firmware differs from the exact same thing they're intending to give customers. The engineer ought to have a choice to enable that feature unless you're suggesting Apple plans on making it mandatory for all customers...
I would expect that a sensitive field prototype would be required to have a 1 minute passcode lock and automatic total device wipe (including firmware) after a very small number of failed passcode entries.
Relying on remote wipe seems silly, since any serious industrial spy would put it in an RF-proof jacket ASAP and only examine it in a room sealed from outside RF to prevent remote wipe.
You read too many spy novels.
Any serious industrial spy wouldn't bother wasting time and resources on a product that's going to be publicly revealed in a matter of weeks or months at most in any case. You don't invest in that kind of equipment and expense for so little payoff...
Apple would be overjoyed to know competitors are wasting money like that instead of spending it on something that might actually help them in the marketplace.
Indeed. It's amazing how many people are acting like this was the loss of the battle plans for the military, or the loss of a top-secret military prototype weapon system. IT WAS A PHONE PEOPLE! Yes, it was a prototype, but it was a prototype PHONE! A consumer electronics phone, at that, not some top-secret military communications device. For crying out loud...
If the guy gets more than a talking to from the boss and endless, merciless jokes at his expensive from his coworkers, someone doesn't have a sense of proportion.
Legally, you are correct -- Gizmodo is guilty of receiving stolen property.
The reason Gizmodo wanted the device was to verify its authenticity. If they weren't sure it was authentic, it blows a hole in the idea that they knowingly received stolen property. It wasn't until they had it that they concluded it was the real deal. At that point it is then their responsibility to attempt to return the stolen property. You can't attempt to return stolen property before you know it's stolen.
(Yes, even if you find something of value that someone else misplaced, you are still guilty of "theft" if you make no effort to return it to it's rightful owner.)
And, given that they have done so, it follows they are not guilty of theft.
However, I believe that would be a criminal matter, not a civil matter. Furthermore, I think Apple would like to avoid drawing any further attention to this SNAFU. Apple is within their rights to demand the phone back with no compensation, but offering a "reward" would go a long way towards making sure this received no further publicity. (Gizmodo insisting on being paid for the device would probably be considered extortion.)
I believe being able to publish the stories they have is their reward... quite possibly with Apple's covert blessing in return for the return of the device.
Cancer three times, a stroke and a war wound enough? Probably not.
Apparently not. Some people learn important life lessons from hardship, and end up becoming better to other people. Alas, some people just become bitter assholes...
He didn't just make a mistake. He left a prototype in a bar while out drinking. That's flat out incompetence and he should be fired for it. I have zero sympathy for the guy, this growing trend of business people and government officials leaving sensitive equipment and data behind is just pure incompetence and being lax.
You obviously have no sense of perspective. This isn't leaving a laptop with the plans for an invasion lying around. This isn't leaving a laptop with a million SSNs or credit card transaction records. If he did something like that, I'd agree, he should be fired. But all he actually did was leave a new iPhone in a bar, one that could be easily remotely bricked, at that. He deserves a talking to from his boss and some laughs at this expense from his fellow employees. Anything more than that just shows an inability to keep a sense of proportion about these things.
Putting this out in public shoots his chances at getting a job anywhere else if he decides to leave Apple, assuming he isn't fired or demoted as-is.
You do realize that employers often google prospective employees now, right?
You realize there are jobs you can get, even as an engineer, where you're not allowed to take prototypes out in the field in any case. In which case, this whole incident would be a non-issue.
If Steve Jobs wanted to be really cool about this, he could let this poor engineer be the one to present the iPhone on stage when they finally release it:)
I could see that. Especially if they have him "accidentally" drop it, fall out of his pocket or something, as he's walking up on stage.
Laws about having to return found property are commie bullshit.
Um, I think you have that backwards. NOT having laws protecting personal property is commie bullshit. If you find my bike unattended in the park and ride off with it, you're a thief. If it's not yours, don't take it. Simple enough principle. Those who don't follow it ought to be taken out back and shot...
... I think the odds of a cpu core being actually physically broken and somehow not crashing the system are roughly equivalent to being struck dead by lightning while holding a winning Megamillions ticket. During a blue moon in December on the day they release Duke Nukem Forever.
Wait... you're saying Duke Nukem Forever is going to be released on December 31st, 2028?
The best test would be to run World of Warcraft for many hours a day for a few weeks. This not only stresses a variety of subsystems, but accurately simulates your real-world usage of the machine.;)
Can we please cut back on iCrap related stuff already?... I'm sorry, but there's just so much stuff that can be covered that splashing/. with iPhone/iPad news feels like wasted bandwidth.
So, if you don't like beans, when you go to a buffet, do you spoon a big helping on to your plate, then complain to the staff for putting beans on the buffet? Because, that would be almost as stupid as being here reading and commenting on this article if you're not interested in it.
It's interesting that Apple has this killswitch -- looks like a good security feature to have. I wonder if regular iPhones have it, and if it's available as a 'value-added-service'.... Maybe that's how it is with other companies' products as well.
Every remotely updateable smartphone is killable, period. It doesn't matter what company, what matters is the logical necessity that entails from being able to send new software to your phone.
Admittedly keeping sensitive information on a hand held is just asking for trouble...
Alas, it's practically unavoidable, short of not actually using it. Simple using anything is likely to leave evidence of usage, the details of which are going to be considered by many to be sensitive information.
... Gizmodo has a legal duty to return the property to its owner. Failure to do so is both a crime (petty theft) and something that they can be sued for (conversion). There's a host of other crimes and torts that they're admitting to.
Sorry, I missed it. Where did they admit to not returning the device, once they'd concluded it was Apple's? Granted, they didn't say that they did, but to "admit" to what you say, they've have to actually state that they didn't.
As for their reward, I think we all just read it...
They didn't find it in a bar. Someone found it in a bar, and brought it to them.
That said, it is theft if you take something that isn't yours. Period. "Finders keepers" is neither legal nor moral. If you find something valuable lying around, but it isn't yours, you have two moral possible courses of action: (a) leave it alone, where it is, in case the owner returns for it, or (b) take it to prevent someone from stealing it, and attempt to return it to the rightful owner.
For some reason, people seem to understand that if you find someone's bike in the park, it's theft, even if it's unlocked, to take it as your own, but a $20 bill is pocketed without the slightest regret or attempt to ask around, "Hey, did anyone drop this over there?" I've gotten looks of surprised shock after running after someone who used an ATM before me and accidentally left behind a bill, or change in a machine.
If it's not yours, don't take it. Why is this principle so hard for so many people to understand?
"Martellaro talks about Apple’s use of “controlled leaks,” a process by which it is able to release information...
...Just because they haven't "accidentally" left physical hardware before doesn't change the fact that this fits with Apple's previous admission.
Actually, it does. It doesn't fit with Apple's previous admission or their past behavior. It's entirely possible, but if so, it's a dramatic change from previous behavior.
Dude, you made a logical argument that does not support the conspiracy theory. That obviously makes you a fanboy...
Anyone who hasn't drank the Apple koolaid automatically and wholeheartedly supports any negative comment made about them, no matter how poorly reasoned or just plain wrong. Get with the program!
I've been to many bars with many cellphones and I've never lost one,...
News flash: you are not the center of the universe. What has happened to you in your life does not form the basis for any kind of logical argument about what is or isn't normal in the world. To argue in this fashion indicates a fundamental (probably unconscious) assumption about your place in the universe that is essentially delusional, elevating your place in it to a greater importance than it actually has.
Apple was never the leader in features or chipsets. However, they are the leaders in packaging, marketing, and UI (the latter being disputable by some folks, especially on Slashdot). And those things translate into mindshare and sales.
Which is to say, in a perfectly market-based way, Apple is the leader in terms of features people actually want. Saying Product X is a "better" product because it runs X GHz faster, has Y more RAM, supports feature Z, etc., is the kind of technical obtuseness that causes many companies to fail where Apple succeeds. The market doesn't lie -- Apple produces a superior product, period. Pointing out the ways it is inferior to other products only points out which features are actually not that important for producing a superior product.
Slashdot Mirror
Note we're talking about the 2010 iPhone, not the 2011 or the like. Not only is Apple not going to be *that* terribly put out if details get out at this point (they're going to be publicly announced soon anyhow), but it's highly unlike the firmware in this prototype differs in any way from the end product. We're basically talking about a "release candidate" iPhone here. It would defeat the whole point of having people go out and use them if the hardware/firmware differs from the exact same thing they're intending to give customers. The engineer ought to have a choice to enable that feature unless you're suggesting Apple plans on making it mandatory for all customers...
I would expect that a sensitive field prototype would be required to have a 1 minute passcode lock and automatic total device wipe (including firmware) after a very small number of failed passcode entries.
Relying on remote wipe seems silly, since any serious industrial spy would put it in an RF-proof jacket ASAP and only examine it in a room sealed from outside RF to prevent remote wipe.
You read too many spy novels.
Any serious industrial spy wouldn't bother wasting time and resources on a product that's going to be publicly revealed in a matter of weeks or months at most in any case. You don't invest in that kind of equipment and expense for so little payoff...
Apple would be overjoyed to know competitors are wasting money like that instead of spending it on something that might actually help them in the marketplace.
He told the guy to ship it to him and he would refund his money... he got the phone, and a angry call about not getting any money back..
Haha! Brilliant!
Indeed. It's amazing how many people are acting like this was the loss of the battle plans for the military, or the loss of a top-secret military prototype weapon system. IT WAS A PHONE PEOPLE! Yes, it was a prototype, but it was a prototype PHONE! A consumer electronics phone, at that, not some top-secret military communications device. For crying out loud...
If the guy gets more than a talking to from the boss and endless, merciless jokes at his expensive from his coworkers, someone doesn't have a sense of proportion.
Legally, you are correct -- Gizmodo is guilty of receiving stolen property.
The reason Gizmodo wanted the device was to verify its authenticity. If they weren't sure it was authentic, it blows a hole in the idea that they knowingly received stolen property. It wasn't until they had it that they concluded it was the real deal. At that point it is then their responsibility to attempt to return the stolen property. You can't attempt to return stolen property before you know it's stolen.
(Yes, even if you find something of value that someone else misplaced, you are still guilty of "theft" if you make no effort to return it to it's rightful owner.)
And, given that they have done so, it follows they are not guilty of theft.
However, I believe that would be a criminal matter, not a civil matter. Furthermore, I think Apple would like to avoid drawing any further attention to this SNAFU. Apple is within their rights to demand the phone back with no compensation, but offering a "reward" would go a long way towards making sure this received no further publicity. (Gizmodo insisting on being paid for the device would probably be considered extortion.)
I believe being able to publish the stories they have is their reward... quite possibly with Apple's covert blessing in return for the return of the device.
Cancer three times, a stroke and a war wound enough? Probably not.
Apparently not. Some people learn important life lessons from hardship, and end up becoming better to other people. Alas, some people just become bitter assholes...
He didn't just make a mistake. He left a prototype in a bar while out drinking. That's flat out incompetence and he should be fired for it. I have zero sympathy for the guy, this growing trend of business people and government officials leaving sensitive equipment and data behind is just pure incompetence and being lax.
You obviously have no sense of perspective. This isn't leaving a laptop with the plans for an invasion lying around. This isn't leaving a laptop with a million SSNs or credit card transaction records. If he did something like that, I'd agree, he should be fired. But all he actually did was leave a new iPhone in a bar, one that could be easily remotely bricked, at that. He deserves a talking to from his boss and some laughs at this expense from his fellow employees. Anything more than that just shows an inability to keep a sense of proportion about these things.
Wow you went from rational skeptic to tin-foil-hat loony in less than 2 sentences! My hat is off to you, sir.
I believe his point was that he was a tin-foil-hat loony all along. The fact that you think he started as "rational skeptic" is worrisome...
Putting this out in public shoots his chances at getting a job anywhere else if he decides to leave Apple, assuming he isn't fired or demoted as-is. You do realize that employers often google prospective employees now, right?
You realize there are jobs you can get, even as an engineer, where you're not allowed to take prototypes out in the field in any case. In which case, this whole incident would be a non-issue.
If Steve Jobs wanted to be really cool about this, he could let this poor engineer be the one to present the iPhone on stage when they finally release it :)
I could see that. Especially if they have him "accidentally" drop it, fall out of his pocket or something, as he's walking up on stage.
Laws about having to return found property are commie bullshit.
Um, I think you have that backwards. NOT having laws protecting personal property is commie bullshit. If you find my bike unattended in the park and ride off with it, you're a thief. If it's not yours, don't take it. Simple enough principle. Those who don't follow it ought to be taken out back and shot...
... I think the odds of a cpu core being actually physically broken and somehow not crashing the system are roughly equivalent to being struck dead by lightning while holding a winning Megamillions ticket. During a blue moon in December on the day they release Duke Nukem Forever.
Wait... you're saying Duke Nukem Forever is going to be released on December 31st, 2028?
w00t!
"In reality if you attempt to enable extra cores they will either work or they won't."
Citation needed.
Err, I don't think you need a citation for any logical tautology (in this case, P or not P).
The best test would be to run World of Warcraft for many hours a day for a few weeks. This not only stresses a variety of subsystems, but accurately simulates your real-world usage of the machine. ;)
Really? Is it possible for a profit motivated organisation to be benign?
It's as possible as it is for any human organization to be benign. (You can take that as a yes or a no, depending...)
Can we please cut back on iCrap related stuff already? ... I'm sorry, but there's just so much stuff that can be covered that splashing /. with iPhone/iPad news feels like wasted bandwidth.
So, if you don't like beans, when you go to a buffet, do you spoon a big helping on to your plate, then complain to the staff for putting beans on the buffet? Because, that would be almost as stupid as being here reading and commenting on this article if you're not interested in it.
It's interesting that Apple has this killswitch -- looks like a good security feature to have. I wonder if regular iPhones have it, and if it's available as a 'value-added-service'. ... Maybe that's how it is with other companies' products as well.
Every remotely updateable smartphone is killable, period. It doesn't matter what company, what matters is the logical necessity that entails from being able to send new software to your phone.
I'm afraid the doctors are going to tell me what I already know...
I need bifocals. *sigh*
What happened? I swear it was just yesterday I was playing Asteroids at the arcade...
Admittedly keeping sensitive information on a hand held is just asking for trouble ...
Alas, it's practically unavoidable, short of not actually using it. Simple using anything is likely to leave evidence of usage, the details of which are going to be considered by many to be sensitive information.
... Gizmodo has a legal duty to return the property to its owner. Failure to do so is both a crime (petty theft) and something that they can be sued for (conversion). There's a host of other crimes and torts that they're admitting to.
Sorry, I missed it. Where did they admit to not returning the device, once they'd concluded it was Apple's? Granted, they didn't say that they did, but to "admit" to what you say, they've have to actually state that they didn't.
As for their reward, I think we all just read it...
They didn't find it in a bar. Someone found it in a bar, and brought it to them.
That said, it is theft if you take something that isn't yours. Period. "Finders keepers" is neither legal nor moral. If you find something valuable lying around, but it isn't yours, you have two moral possible courses of action: (a) leave it alone, where it is, in case the owner returns for it, or (b) take it to prevent someone from stealing it, and attempt to return it to the rightful owner.
For some reason, people seem to understand that if you find someone's bike in the park, it's theft, even if it's unlocked, to take it as your own, but a $20 bill is pocketed without the slightest regret or attempt to ask around, "Hey, did anyone drop this over there?" I've gotten looks of surprised shock after running after someone who used an ATM before me and accidentally left behind a bill, or change in a machine.
If it's not yours, don't take it. Why is this principle so hard for so many people to understand?
"Martellaro talks about Apple’s use of “controlled leaks,” a process by which it is able to release information...
...Just because they haven't "accidentally" left physical hardware before doesn't change the fact that this fits with Apple's previous admission.
Actually, it does. It doesn't fit with Apple's previous admission or their past behavior. It's entirely possible, but if so, it's a dramatic change from previous behavior.
Dude, you made a logical argument that does not support the conspiracy theory. That obviously makes you a fanboy...
Anyone who hasn't drank the Apple koolaid automatically and wholeheartedly supports any negative comment made about them, no matter how poorly reasoned or just plain wrong. Get with the program!
I've been to many bars with many cellphones and I've never lost one, ...
News flash: you are not the center of the universe. What has happened to you in your life does not form the basis for any kind of logical argument about what is or isn't normal in the world. To argue in this fashion indicates a fundamental (probably unconscious) assumption about your place in the universe that is essentially delusional, elevating your place in it to a greater importance than it actually has.
Apple was never the leader in features or chipsets. However, they are the leaders in packaging, marketing, and UI (the latter being disputable by some folks, especially on Slashdot). And those things translate into mindshare and sales.
Which is to say, in a perfectly market-based way, Apple is the leader in terms of features people actually want. Saying Product X is a "better" product because it runs X GHz faster, has Y more RAM, supports feature Z, etc., is the kind of technical obtuseness that causes many companies to fail where Apple succeeds. The market doesn't lie -- Apple produces a superior product, period. Pointing out the ways it is inferior to other products only points out which features are actually not that important for producing a superior product.