“Apple is clearly in a war with hackers over the iPhone and its most loyal fans could take a few hits,” Larry Dignan blgos for ZDNet. “Today’s angst over iPhones becoming iBricks because they were modified is really just the beginning. There are a few reports of non-hacked iPhones going dark following Apple’s latest firmware update.”
MacDailyNews Take: Why is there any “angst” at all for modded iPhones becoming iBricks when Apple warned users ahead of time (and during the update process)? Is it logical to expect any company to support unsupported hacks? Of course, not.
Dignan continues, “The iPhone update is just the latest example. Consider the following moving parts:”
• Apple cut the price of the premium iPhone by $200 just weeks after die-hards waited in line to pay $599 for it. Steve Jobs met these early adopters half way and gave them a $100 store credit. Where’s the other $100? If Steve really cared about you perhaps Apple would have made you better than whole, say a $250 credit.
MacDailyNews Take: Some portion of 0.33% of the U.S was upset that they paid the price on the box and then it changed. The other 99.67% of the U.S. population only sees a much better price. How many other companies offer $100 store credits when they change prices. Take your time, we’ll wait…
• The iPhone sticks you with one carrier–AT&T–that few people want. Why? Apple got the best deal from AT&T. We aren’t privy to the math behind the AT&T and Apple deal, but we do know none of these hacks to unlock the iPhone would be necessary if we had carrier choice. What’s the cost differential between adding a few carriers to the iPhone and wasting time developing software to outflank hackers?
MacDailyNews Take: Interesting question. However, assuming that Apple didn’t use Excel to do the math, one would tend to believe that the differential was great enough to have to sit through half-witted online petitions calling for Apple to change their product and nix their business deals, the fulminations of so-called tech reporters, etc. This is the way Apple has chosen to market the product they developed. AT&T in the U.S. is currently part of the product’s specs. If you don’t like it, there are other (lesser) so-called “smartphones.” It is not an unalienable right that everyone has an iPhone. If you want to deal with what unlocking the iPhone entails, then more power to you. But you shouldn’t complain when unsupported mods go unsupported.
• Apple has the best tech support in the business and could put it at risk over the iPhone. According to Consumer Reports June 2007 rankings Apple had a reader score of 81 out of a possible 100 when servicing desktops and laptops. On laptops the next best score was Lenovo’s 66 and Dell’s 60. One theory behind Apple’s score: Apple owners are an elite–some would say elitist–club. These folks will get whatever Apple pumps out of the product pipeline. Consumer Reports bases its scores on reader surveys. In these surveys perception matters. With the iPhone Apple is going mass market scores for Apple are only going to decline based on the laws of large numbers.
MacDailyNews Take: Another, more logical theory: Apple’s products are more reliable than other companies and Apple offers better tech support than other companies. Radical ideas, we know.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: The more customers a company gets, the more complaints it will receive, as the percentage of “unsatisfied” customers is likely to remain constant despite growth. Apple should do whatever they can to improve support, quality, and their business decisions as they grow in order to protect their good reputation. Apple is not without fault – and can do better with some things – but the worries presented by Digan strike us as more than a bit overwrought.
@@bobsyeruncle
Do you think Apple could’ve even come to market without at least one partner?. Nope.
I’ll tell you the thing that has surprised me: Given Apple’s penchant for being tightly vertically integrated, Apple could have done this without any partner at all or with multiple partners. Although they don’t get a lot of attention, there are a lot of smaller cell phone companies who have no infrastructure at all. All they do is resell the cellular service of other companies. Reselling service is a common practice in the telecommunications world. For example, about 10 years ago, I had cell service from MCI. MCI had no cell infrastructure, they resold the srevice from a variety of CDMA carriers and put together an ad-hoc network. The only thing that MCI did themselves were billing, operator assistance and 411. The actual signal came from Bell Atlantic (now Verizon) or Sprint, depending on where you were. Apple could have done this too: they would purchase service from various GSM carriers (mostly AT&T;) and do it all themselves. That way they’d be able to have the kind of vertical integration that they seem to want. This would have been simpler and less confusing for the end-user and would essentially result in exactly what Apple is doing anyway. The downside of this is that they’d probably be mostly buying AT&T;service and AT&T;service stinks. If they had resold AT&T;service as the “Apple Network”, then customers who are unhappy with the quality of service would blame Apple. Now they have someone else as the scapegoat.
I more or less agree with everything else in your message, but I note that you never really addressed any of the points that I made in my earlier message.
“Given Apple’s penchant for being tightly vertically integrated, Apple could have done this without any partner at all or with multiple partners.”
Basically an MVNO, pretty much all of which have failed – Disney closed its doors today. Jobs said he looked at going the MVNO route, but given the info he had, they decided on a single partner instead. (I bet the Directors were briefed on this as well.) Given Jobs other statement about orifices, an MVNO is what I had thought Apple would do given their brand power but I have much less info.
As for your other points, I agree with 1-3. On 4, I think Apple is intentionally breaking the unlock due to their agreement with AT&T;and others. As for breaking the hacks, I’m not planning to look at the code so I’ll have to read up on what the Dev Team comes up with (and take it with a grain of salt) as to whether Apple is out to intentionally break hacks like Jailbreak and AppTapp.
On 5, it’s atypical compared to Mac, but not atypical when compared to iPod. Apple places iPhone in the iPod camp. I believe in time, there will be a small, thin Mac with a touch screen and wifi/wimax/etc but no cellular, on which Apple will have an SDK and allow 3rd party apps. It is possible that given the power of OS X and amount of RAM, that Apple has serious concerns that an iPhone app (virus/malware) can infect the cellular network. Or it is possible there are still lots of undecided under-the-hood decisions stopping Apple from committing to an SDK, and we just need to give them some time. For those who say Apple should say more, Jobs has said they are considering it and working on a “sandbox”, but hackers choose to ignore it.
And on 7 (6 is missing), who are the customers? Apple is aiming for the mainstream, not the geeks, and the mainstream is not interested in adding hacked apps to iPhone. Among early adopters, maybe 50% are hackers. So the question is how much influence the ‘hacker’ early adopter has in affecting Apple’s brand?
As for comparing this to music and the RIAA, I’d say there are many more people (teens and adults) who are willing to torrent to get their music than threre are who are willing to hack an iPhone.
Still wrong analogy. Putting in gas is like putting in electricity, something that is absolutely necessary for the product to run.
Hacking iPhone to add applications is not something the maker intended for others to do; it’s more like adding turbochargers or altering the engine.
MacLemmings.
Apple created a great core product. They left out obvious features and then screw with the smart people who make them possible.
Apple is just trying to regain control of their ecosystem. Next they’ll wipe out Griffin Tech because they’re out-Appling Apple in accessories.
Get a clue. Many of us just added core apps like IM and RSS and good ringtones that should have been there at launch. The same stuff can be added to any Mac. The fact that the device had to be hacked was Apple’s first attack against users.
They should have embraced the mojo, not stifle it. Even 1.1.1 had little value add. Woo hoo! They gave me another place to buy Apple stuff. No thanks. I’ll go Amazon and stay with 1.0.2.
Evil Apple. I thought they were a customer friendly company but alas I was wrong. They launch a great new phone but force you to get locked in with AT&T;. Even worse – they screw people that spent money to have it unlocked. What happened to free choice? I have been a Apple fan for ever but suddenly I a not…..
Apple fanboys… your brains are mine for eating, you have no soul, i made you react as fanboys, haha, i win. i will never look at this site again to see your replies. haha, i win. you lose. you can call me names, i am so intellectual is that all you can do? i am a smart aple fanboy who likes to fight with ppl on the internets because i have small penis and ape ape ape unga unga oop oop throw shit and die. opp oop respond click here respon opp opoopppppoooooooop
Let me draw a very remote parallel.
I decide to buy a new car. I do my research before I buy the car.
Amongst the drawbacks/features of the car is that it will only be driveable on toll roads. As part of the deal when I buy the car I agree to this. When I buy the car I decide that I can modify it so that it will run on any road. The car company has told me that this not only may void my warranty but at some time in the future make the car undriveable anywhere. The company decides to refund in services one sixth of the cost of my car, as a goodwill gesture. I take the refund. They supply an update to my car which makes the changes I made to it unusable.
What has the company done wrong.
Let me draw a very remote parallel.
I decide to buy a new car. I do my research before I buy the car.
Amongst the drawbacks/features of the car is that it will only be driveable on toll roads. As part of the deal when I buy the car I agree to this. When I buy the car I decide that I can modify it so that it will run on any road. The car company has told me that this not only may void my warranty but at some time in the future make the car undriveable anywhere. The company decides to refund in services one sixth of the cost of my car, as a goodwill gesture. I take the refund. They supply an update to my car which makes the changes I made to it unusable.
What has the company done wrong.
“The more customers a company gets, the more complaints it will receive, as the percentage of “unsatisfied” customers is likely to remain constant despite growth.”
That’s not really true, Apple fanboys will take being assraped by Apple without even dreaming of giving them less than a perfect rating an any survey they ever hear of.
As the proportion of fanatics goes down compared to other users of the platform, subjective reports of satisfaction will go down too.
“This is a phone, not an open source project. “
Actually it’s OS X based, so most of the OS is an open source project.
“Do people get all up in arms when they modify they car to the extent that it voids the factory warranty? No, they understand the risk involved”
A better question is if Ford says your car must run on Exxon gas and you put BP gas in it instead, does Ford have the right to come over to your house and smash up your car?
If you put a new non Ford approved CD into the CD changer, can Ford come over and smash up your car?
How about if you hang an air freshener on the mirror, put in a carseat, put a bumper sticker on the back, can Ford come over and rip all of those things out of your car?
You guys are so pro monopoly, anti consumer rights. It’d be funny if you didn’t spend all your time criticizing other companies for trampling on consumer rights while taking it up the arse from Apple all the time and defending them.
“An iPhone is like a spouse. If it’s not what you want don’t buy it”
Correct, if you buy an iPhone it’s like getting married to your 300 pound cellmate named Bubba. You know you’re in for a lot of things you won’t like. But hey you justify it because you really don’t have much choice after telling all your friends for years that Bubba’s actually a 95 pound blond supermodel gymnast and they should get their own Bubba.
@lbuschjr who write :
“The earlier complaint about being able to use a laptop anywhere in the world and not being able to use an iPhone anywhere is stupid. You don’t need a service plan for a laptop, and your mobile phone is useless unless you have a mobile phone service plan. You can use your laptop in the middle of the Amazon rainforest, but don’t expect your mobile phone to work.”
Sorry but my analogy between MacBook and iPhone is valid abroad. The only thing my MacBook need for recharging his battery is an electric adaptor for 110/220v outlet (not a transformer!). The only thing my iPhone – if desimlocked – should need for working in Brazil is a local SIM card. No local service plan is needed, I only have to buy recharge time to time for this local SIM Card. Get real about international cellular usages, SIM swappings are banal. Those SIM local cards could even be bought (20 euros) on Internet before your travel…
So I insist to ask why the iPhone could not be an international mobile phone as every other GSM cellular!?? Why the iPhone could not have an international usage as every other portable Apple products..?
the author has put forth the idea that Apple is fighting modders by by using updates to disable hacked iPhones and refusing to support ‘Phones that are hacked. by this train of thought it should follow that he would think that adding a new chip or modding the engine performance software of your 2007 Honda Civic should not void the powertrain warrenty of said car.
if you take an item, any item, and modify how it functions as to change it’s origninal intent or specs the company that built the item has the right to refuse to support it. if not, that company would be paying to repair other people’s screwed up messes ad infintum.
“by this train of thought it should follow that he would think that adding a new chip or modding the engine performance software of your 2007 Honda Civic should not void the powertrain warrenty of said car.”
But when you take your modified Civic to the dealer, they shouldn’t be allowed to slash your tires, smash your windows out with a sledgehammer and pour sand in your engine oil just because you installed a modified chip.
There’s a big difference between a company providing an update without giving any consideration to it’s effect on hackers, compared to what Apple did, providing an update specifically designed to wreck phones updated by hackers.
Sarah, you lucky gal! What are the odds of you walking into a store to buy an iPhone just as a customer is loudly agitating about his iPhone going dead?!! Whew . . someone up there must be watching out for you, especially since you don’t seem to have found the relevant information before trotting out to plonk $300 on a device!
Apple, are you listening?!! YOU’VE LOST SARAH! You’re going to regret this!!
Well, at least from now on you can follow Shiva 105’s advice – if you don’t like the rules that come with iPhone, don’t buy it. Apple is not a welfare organization . . . it’s a business.
You Windows fanboys all misunderstand. Being assraped by Apple and enjoying it is just part of the Apple experience.
If Apple isn’t out there obsoleting my Mac by changing operating systems and processors, selling me hardware which overheats, whines, discolors and catches fire, and charging me twice for the same iPod games then I start to feel unloved.
I particularly like the idea of buying an iPhone and having the price drop soon after, and it being turned into a brick by Apple if I so much as use an unauthorized ringtone. That makes me feel special.
Apple really cares about me.
If Apple were ever to stop slapping me a round and giving it to me roughly from behind every once and a while, then they’d be just like any other PC company.
Any Mobile phone manufacturer that limits choice of networks is in for a rude awakening. The iPhone maybe very cool but every other single mobile phone on the market is made to be used on any network and can be bought directly from a manufacturer for that purpose. Apple is going to lose this war with average folks.
“every other single mobile phone on the market is made to be used on any network “
Unlike Nokia, Motorola, Samsung etc who have the resources to develop many different versions of the same phone, The problem is Apple doesn’t have the resources to develop iPhones for all the USA’s different phone standards,
So they went with GSM which would give them the most globally applicable product as most countries worldwide have at least one GSM carrier
The only US networks the iPhone is physically capable of working with are AT&T;and TMobile. So even if Apple changed their mind tomorrow and let you unlock your iPhone, it’d work with one more carrier only.
as far as I’m concerned anyone who f*cd their iPhones and are complaining about it should go to h*ll
and I mean seriously.
to: disallusioned
of course its YOUR phone, but when YOU break YOUR phone its YOUR problem
…bitches.
“when YOU break YOUR phone its YOUR problem”
But when Apple intentionally breaks it for you, in violation of US law which allows you to do what you did, that’s just Evil.
Apple didn’t break shit and you know it. bunch a babies grow the fuk up.
“Apple didn’t break shit and you know it.”
Steve has your fanboy shit all over his dick and is loving it!
I’m a recent MacBook Pro owner and love it. However I don’t view Apple as some sort of wonderful, flawless organisation who are beyond criticism as many on here do.
Frankly I don’t agree with any restrictive practice and this most certainly counts as one. If I buy an iPhone and under any reasonable legal definition I own the product I should be free to use it in any legal manner I see fit. It is simply none of Apple’s business.
Apple has every right to refuse to support a product not used within it’s terms and conditions, but to effectively break the product? Would it be acceptable if you’d just bought a new BMW only to find a BMW representative on your driveway one morning disabling your new car because BMW decided they didn’t like the way you were driving it?
To render a significant number of iPhones unusable simply because Apple don’t like they way you are using the product is the worst form of corporate vandalism I can think of. It’s up there with Microsoft and DRM, most on here don’t have a problem routinely and correctly criticizing Microsoft for their obsessive control.
Apple are exactly the same corporate scum as Microsoft.