iPhone Patch Turns Some iPhones Into iBricks September 29, 2007

i think slightly too far!

I think a better approach would be to simply not allow the updates to be installed if an 'unauthorised' modification is detected

but this is disgusting. if you buy a phone surely it is yours to do what you want with it.

Yes you buy the hardware - but you only get a licence for the software. Thats the way it has always been. (Except for Linux etc.- but even then open source developers have a duty to make sure stuff works - and that the next guy can figure out what has been done.)

At least this way there is no ambiguity! Its now up to the 'developers' of the hacks to fix the software as it is now theirs. The game is cat and mouse remember!

I think apple should have done some effort to make the update compatible with 'popular software modifications'.
Nothing wrong with respecting your customers and showing some class, they aren't AT&T's slaves either are they.

Steve Job ( or is it Steve Gates) is applying the strong arm, and I hope all the potential iphone buyers in the UK take note. The iphone you buy on the 9 Nov will remain unchangeable for the full 18 months of your contract, except at the behest of Steve Gates.
So when the 3G, video enabled, MMS version arrives for Christmas next year you'll still have 6 months to go with you then out of fashion item.
Oh, the price of fashion and a free choice!

This is not cool. I've used windows mobile devices for years, and the great thing about them is the ability to add third party software and unlock them with simple software programs. I've asked my brother to get me a iphone while he's out in vegas, as I'm a huge apple fanboy and hate not being able to sync my windows mobile devices with my macbook pro. I'm now getting abit concerned. I don't think Apple should put restrictions on 3rd party apps, and if the iphone is a mini-computer i.e. it runs full os x, then give us the right to use it as we would a computer, after all it's not like you get the iphone free on a contract, your actually paying for this mini computer!
Apple really need to review their policy with the Iphone, as this is blatently maliciously bricking phones by them, because trust me this is easily avoided by Apple.
Apple you are in danger of turning alot of long time Apple fans away, and becoming too big for your own boots. Steve Jobs might as well morph into Bill Gates, cos I can't tell the difference these days apart from the turtle necks!
I think I might start researching Linux solutions!

So, what happens AFTER the 2 years or 18 months of your contract? Will Apple issue an 'unlock code' to the phone companies to give out? Will upgrades to software still be available? Do you still HAVE to go back to the original 'approved' phone company?

After 2 years it's broken anyway.... How can you make 'irreparable damage' to the software? Isn't that a contradiction? And what the f* is Apple doing. If you buy a device, it's yours and you do with it what you want. If they damage it with a software patch, they are the ones that brake it and should refund the damages caused.

You guys have no idea about software licences, and mobile contracts. You can do what you like with your iphone - you can flush it down the toilet if it makes you feel better - but you will still have to pay the rest of the contract and thats what its all about. ££££

The hardware is yours, but the software is theirs.

If you install 3rd party fixes and hacks - and then expect to be able to get the official upgrade as well then you are asking for trouble. Its a phone. Make some calls to your therapist and then get over it.

PS After your 18months you will want the latest and greatest phone anyway so the unlocking thing is irrelevant. ;-)

Money money money, it's so funny in a rich man's world.

Ahhh, so. The desire to rip the UK off has extended to new heights.

I wouldn't pay £1300 for an I-phoney in the UK and now, I wouldn't even import one.

In fact, I refuse to purchase any Apple products. LOL.

Just buy the new iTouch get all the iPhones best features, and non of the terribly outdated phone performance ;)

I wonder whether the 1990 Computer Misuse Act might apply here?

The relevant section would be:

3(1) A person is guilty of an offence if

a) he does any act which causes the unauthorized modification of the contents of any computer; and
b) at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

3(2) for the purposes of subsection 3(1)b above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing

a) to impair the operation of any computer;
b) to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or
c) to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

The issue here would, of course, be authorisation.