could ruin their phones

Quote

Guest wrote:
could ruin their phones

It would be taken care of much more quickly if you would just email the author, using the link attached to his name, rather than posting a note here that may not be seen for some time.

What seems obvious is not so obvious. But first, the obvious. Like a cheap Las Vegas whore, Mr. Wu needs to get his name out over and over. If Apple corrected a misspelling on its web site, Wu would issue a statement about how it affected a small number of users and is of no concern. Thanks for reassuring us Wu-ster!! And no, that's not a reference to twin brother Gene Munster who is high class enough to keep out of this level of triviality.

Now that we have the obvious out of the way... Why would Apple issue a statement on iPhone hacking? Everyone know the terms of service. All the iPhone hacking sites have plenty of warnings to the naive, the lame, the stupid, and the ugly about bricking their iPhones. Disclaimers abound. Everyone knows the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T in the USA. Apple could easily (and probably has) invent some forensic procedures to determine if an iPhone has been hacked.

So why make the announcement? Answer: to further build the mystique of the iPhone. It is such a cool device that people want to hack it. Make sure everyone knows just how amazingly cool the iPhone is. FWIW, I don't think Apple will be tied to AT&T as long as previously reported. Like all contracts, there is an out, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple exercise that out by Spring. This is a calculated step to that end.

I am so glad I didn't buy an iPhone. We own an iMac, a G4, two video classic iPods (about a year old), and an 8 GB Nano. As a long, long term Mac supporter, but also a Windows developer ona a Dell platform, I have to ask, what the hell was Apple thinking with this nasty, nasty update?

Microsoft doesn't pull this crap on us poor Windows users anymore, why does Apple think it is a good idea now?

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
I am so glad I didn't buy an iPhone. We own an iMac, a G4, two video classic iPods (about a year old), and an 8 GB Nano. As a long, long term Mac supporter, but also a Windows developer ona a Dell platform, I have to ask, what the hell was Apple thinking with this nasty, nasty update?

Microsoft doesn't pull this crap on us poor Windows users anymore, why does Apple think it is a good idea now?

Check this thread. (Scroll up from that message to see the original. Microsoft has applied at least one update to XP and Vista without the knowledge, much less consent, of the user. As a result, the users cannot use their XP repair disks if there is a problem. Sounds pretty "nasty, nasty" to me.

Also, what was so "nasty, nasty" about an iPhone update that added functionality (including some things suggested by the early users) and fixed some problems? Oh, it disabled unlocked phones? Well, folks, unless the owner did the unlocking himself/herself, that phone may not only be in violation of the iPhone user conditions, but may be a violation of US law, the DMCA. The Librarian of Congress allowed an exception to the "anti-cracking" provisions of the DMCA for cell phone owners to unlock their OWN phones for the SOLE purpose of connecting to a network. I am NOT an attorney, but, based on arguments from several attorneys I've read here and elsewhere, it seems that the exception probably does NOT apply to unlocking and selling an iPhone. Besides, Apple warned users that future updates might not be compatible with unlocked iPhones or third-party applications. Unlike the afore-mentioned stealth update to XP and Vista, the iPhone update will not be applied unless the user agrees, after having been presented with the warning.

Apple indirectly promoted the SIM unlocking program, anySim, that caused thousands of iPhones to not work after their new update and should be held responsible for replacing or reprogramming useless phones.

Apple.com promotes the use of third party applications at MacUpdate website:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/news/macupdatewidget.html

MacUpdate.com offers the iPhone unlocking program AnySim 1.0 for download.
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/25818

Since Apple.com refers it's customers to this other website that offers anySim, couldn't people hold Apple responsible for the bricking/disabling/renderingUseless, etc... of our iPhones?

Apple.com recommends MacUpate.com as a source of third party applications for it's products. Someone with more time than me needs to look into holding Apple accountable for the damage they caused to thousands of iPhones. This link between Apple and anySim should be more than enough...

(I have screen shots and links to Google's cache of these links if Apple tries to cover this up)

Apple didn't indirectly promote anything. Apple is not responsible for what is available at a third-party site.

It's like saying that Apple promotes Google. With Google I can find warez. Therefore, Apple promotes warez.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Apple indirectly promoted the SIM unlocking program, anySim, that caused thousands of iPhones to not work after their new update and should be held responsible for replacing or reprogramming useless phones.

Apple.com promotes the use of third party applications at MacUpdate website:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/news/macupdatewidget.html

MacUpdate.com offers the iPhone unlocking program AnySim 1.0 for download.
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/25818

Since Apple.com refers it's customers to this other website that offers anySim, couldn't people hold Apple responsible for the bricking/disabling/renderingUseless, etc... of our iPhones?

Apple.com recommends MacUpate.com as a source of third party applications for it's products. Someone with more time than me needs to look into holding Apple accountable for the damage they caused to thousands of iPhones. This link between Apple and anySim should be more than enough...

(I have screen shots and links to Google's cache of these links if Apple tries to cover this up)

That is pure, unadulterated BS. No person or entity can be responsible for the actions of another person or entity over whom they have no control nor even influence. If you go to MacUpdate and tell them that they're controlled by Apple, they'll probably laugh in your face.

Apple doesn't "promote" MacUpdate. Apple merely provides a listing for a widget from MacUpdate. That's not promoting their service.

Let's put it this way. You have a link to a site on your web site. That site has a link to a site which has a link to a site which links to a site that distributes child pornography. By your logic, you should spend the next 20-40 years in prison.