 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / T-Mobile / October 2007iPhones as fashion bricks
"Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones that have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." http://informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/10/iphone_bricking.html > "Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones > that have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." > > http://informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/10/iphone_bricking.h > tml Not anymore my friend....got mine unbricked and re-unlocked. Check out the instructions from this article: http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10863 >>"Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones >>that have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10863 Congratulations. Problem is AAPL apparently plans to treat iPhone hackers the same way satellite providers treat subscription card hackers -- they periodically issue electronic bombs to brick the phones/cards. > Congratulations. Problem is AAPL apparently plans to treat iPhone > hackers the same way satellite providers treat subscription card hackers > -- they periodically issue electronic bombs to brick the phones/cards. So you advocate stealing channels that you don't subscribe to? >>Congratulations. Problem is AAPL apparently plans to treat iPhone >>hackers the same way satellite providers treat subscription card hackers >>-- they periodically issue electronic bombs to brick the phones/cards. > > So you advocate stealing channels that you don't subscribe to? You apparently advocate AAPL broadcasting corrupting "updates" to devices they have freely sold. Moron. > You apparently advocate AAPL broadcasting corrupting "updates" to > devices they have freely sold. They updated the firmware of the phone. If you've tinkered with the way the phone was intended to work, you shouldn't bitch. >>You apparently advocate AAPL broadcasting corrupting "updates" to >>devices they have freely sold. > > They updated the firmware of the phone. If you've tinkered with the way > the phone was intended to work, you shouldn't bitch. I wouldn't own this fashion acccessory with or without its problems. > I wouldn't own this fashion acccessory with or without its problems. So go bitch to someone who gives a sh.t. >>I wouldn't own this fashion acccessory with or without its problems. > > So go bitch to someone who gives a sh.t. For the benefit ot T-Mobile customers... "Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones that have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." http://informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/10/iphone_bricking.html > For the benefit ot T-Mobile customers... > > "Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones that > have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." For the benefit of those who are capable of rational thought: Apple designed the iPhone to be used with a specific carrier (crappy though they may be). This fact has been well publicized since Steve announced the device way back in February. Tinkering with the firmware to make it do things it wasn't designed to do may render the device inoperable. And contrary to News' dumbass remarks, free tools are readily available on the Internet to fix iPhones which were rendered unusable after the 1.1.1 upgrade (because people had tinkered with the firmware). >>For the benefit ot T-Mobile customers... >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Tinkering with the firmware to make it do things it wasn't designed to > do may render the device inoperable. Really sad that you'd rationalize manufacturer behavior like this. AAPL gets a vig from the fools at AT&T, so that's the motivation. > And contrary to News' dumbass remarks, free tools are readily available > on the Internet to fix iPhones which were rendered unusable after the > 1.1.1 upgrade (because people had tinkered with the firmware). Since you apparently can't or choose not to read, the "remarks" (in quotes) are those of the InformationWeek writer. That issue aside, why should this even be be necessary? See rationalization, above. > Really sad that you'd rationalize manufacturer behavior like this. > > AAPL gets a vig from the fools at AT&T, so that's the motivation. If you don't mess with it, it will keep working. If you try to make it do things it was not designed to do, it's your fault for screwing it up. >>Really sad that you'd rationalize manufacturer behavior like this. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > do things it was not designed to do, it's your fault for screwing it > up. And when you successfully enhance it, AAPL e-bombs it. Nice. Not. > And when you successfully enhance it, AAPL e-bombs it. Nice. Not. The iPhone was designed to be used with a specific carrier. This has been well publicized since day one. If you do something to change that, you run the risk of the device no longer working. How difficult is that to understand? And as I have stated, the issue is moot as there are free solutions out there fix it if you have tinkered with it and rendered it unusable. >>And when you successfully enhance it, AAPL e-bombs it. Nice. Not. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > And as I have stated, the issue is moot as there are free solutions out > there fix it if you have tinkered with it and rendered it unusable. How difficult is it (for you, only, apparently) to understand that NO OTHER MANUFACTURER DOES THIS? Are you just thick, or are you an AAPL-pologist? > How difficult is it (for you, only, apparently) to > understand that NO OTHER MANUFACTURER DOES THIS? Many phones are locked or oterwise festurliited at the request of carriers. Most Verzon phones have bluetooth OBEX disabled, some of T-Mobile's newer Nokias don't allow "unsigned" Java apps from being installed, and virtually every US GSM phone is sold SIM-locked. Like most of the hype surrounding the iPhone, there's nothing really new here either! ;-) > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >surrounding the iPhone, there's nothing really new here either! ;-) > Feature crippling prior to sale/distribution, yes. Unwanted electronic bombs as updates, no. e-bombing is unique to AAPL. > How difficult is it (for you, only, apparently) to > understand that NO OTHER MANUFACTURER DOES THIS? > > Are you just thick, or are you an AAPL-pologist? Apple made it, they can do as they please. If you don't like the product, vote with your wallet. >> "Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones >> that have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10863 Glad to see The Man isn't keeping you down. Dave > "Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones that > have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." No they haven't. There are several developers who have already gotten around it. But, shouldn't Apple be allowed to decide what's in their product? Should Ford let Chevy engines to be put in their cars? When you go hacking any device, you run the risk of wrecking it. If you don't like it, go buy some crappy LG phone and STFU. >>"Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones that >>have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > When you go hacking any device, you run the risk of wrecking it. If you > don't like it, go buy some crappy LG phone and STFU. Are you aware of any other cellphone manufacturer that treats its "customers" so shabbily? No? Then STFU yourself, moron. > Are you aware of any other cellphone manufacturer that treats its > "customers" so shabbily? No? Then STFU yourself, moron. It was well publicized that iPhone service was AT&T/Cingular only for months in advance of its release. >>Are you aware of any other cellphone manufacturer that treats its >>"customers" so shabbily? No? Then STFU yourself, moron. > > It was well publicized that iPhone service was AT&T/Cingular only for > months in advance of its release. Does this state or even suggest in the slightest that the manufacturer AAPL will brick the phone if you choose to use it otherwise? No, it does not. I am not aware of any phones sold with a subsidy block can't be unlocked, without retribution from the manufacturer. The network operator is another issue, but most give the unlock codes freely after as little as 90 days service. >> "Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones that >> have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > When you go hacking any device, you run the risk of wrecking it. If you > don't like it, go buy some crappy LG phone and STFU. If I buy a Ford and want to put a Chevy engine in it, Ford is not going to come to my house and tell me I can't. Bad analogy. Dave >> "Apple has designed the 1.1.1 upgrade to permanently brick iPhones that >> have had their baseband modified to unlock the SIM." [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >But, shouldn't Apple be allowed to decide what's in their product? >Should Ford let Chevy engines to be put in their cars? From the moment the financial transaction is completed, it's not Apple's product any longer. Should Ford be allowed to prohibit you from using any gas other then that sold by a Ford authorized supplier?  SignatureYou can get more with a kind word and a 2x4 than just a kind word. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.