Note to Apple: Stop Thinking Like a Phone Company

Well written Erick, I totally agree with your view. Like you said we dont expect computers to work with only one broadband service provider so there is no reason for us to buy an iPhone that only works with one service provider. its a valid arguement

Apple is being so stubborn about this. I don’t care about the carrier lock-in as much (although it is crappy), but the software hacks for this thing are awesome. I haven’t “hacked” mine yet but I am certainly interested in some of the things like the nintendo emulator and “GPS”. What is Apple’s problem with people doing this? Stock iPhone is pretty good, I’m very happy with it, but there’s so many extra things you can do with the third party apps.

Erick - you forget one thing - moving is not so easy. It’s like trying to go crosstown on 50th street, you just don’t do it.

the early term fees will keep some in the phone even if they think they want out.

and no matter how cool the gphone will be, you are way more sexy carrying an iphone.

apple always had this problem
ans still consumers like them so
much or maybe they are stupid
enough to buy apple restricted
stuff it’s the same with the ipod
and the same with the mac os

rc

trading tennis blog

Apple has always been a closed platform (in terms of both hardware and software). It’s either Steve’s way or the highway. Locking the phones down is completely consistent with Apple’s philosophy that treats users like an ATM machine.

the masses are initially impressed with the apple iphone’s look, technology, fashion, etc…but they will revolt sooner or later; they don’t want to be locked into only one service provider option - no one does.

google phone will definitely prove to be a very formidable opponent to the iphone - it’ll be only a matter of time before mr jobs starts to sweat

Yeah, I think Apple is one company that has been successful with its brand of closed-system design. People are actually happy to have Apple’s shackles on.

Excellent post and thought. Though if you know anything about the history of Apple you know there isn’t a chance in hell that your idea will ever happen.

Referencing the PC as a case study was your biggest mistake.

http://answers.nobosh.com

If Steve Jobs doesn’t have restrictions of his products, Apple could surpass MS in revenues.

Everyone seems to forget that there’s more to consider here than just Apple. What about AT&T?

I suspect that Apple is contractually obligated to defend their AT&T lock-in for the duration of their exclusivity period.

@ 8.

I think the writer was correct in referencing the PC as his case study. The PC is open to any OS, and Apple is not. So people choose PC over Apple, even though the latter is of quality product.

OK - the morons who reference the PC, and “the PC is open to any OS, and Apple is not”. Hello, I have Windows and Linux running happily on my iMac right now?!?!

Perhaps what Apple did was simply update the iPhone. They have stated they don’t support third party development at this time, however they have not said they won’t do in the future. I can only imagine the junk we’d get, and why should they support that? Perhaps when they get an SDK out the door, they will support it, just like they do with Mac OS X on the desktop. That’s not closed? In fact, neither is the iPhone… connect various third party hardware to it - check; use more websites than any other phone - check; use existing bluetooth devices - check. Sounds open to me!

In fact, didn’t they state they won’t intentionally break third party apps just this week? I think they did.

Listen guys, before commenting, please know what you are talking about. Do you even own an iPhone?

@henry: You are blind, sorry about your condition.

Of course they’ll say they won’t intentionally brick your iPhone. It reduces liability and eases what has become a lot of bad press for Apple. If Apple has some obligation to KEEP these devices locked, they should say so and save a little face. I won’t have an iPhone until I can use it with my provider without worrying about bricking it on the next update.

@thomas: well put

shouldn’t belong before a chinese iphone copy comes out that looks and works exactly the same but costs less and can work on every network

And the #1 reason why Stevie is doing this? Simply because of the resurrection of Newton 2.0

Steve wants to keep the iphone and ipod touch limited in their capabilities and develop certain boundaries with what you can and can’t do.

Once they come out with a iNewton (pda and ipod in one package) you will be able to install 3rd party apps and do what you want with it…

It would suck if he came out with the iNewton, charged ppl $499 / $699 for it and no one bought it because their iPhone had all the features already…

what do ya’ll think? am i smokin something or onto something?

It’s just another walled garden - there’s nothing wrong with those. But the hackers and digerati want it to be something that it isn’t - an open source platform.

Gee, I wonder why Apple would want to preserve the appearance of unbreakable carrier exclusivity while in the middle of negotiations with European carriers.

I would bet the ranch that this has as much to do with AT&T as it does with Apple. The carriers/telcos are scared stiff that they will get shafted like they did when they got stuck connecting copper wires to peoples houses while companies like Yahoo, AOL, and Google made a mint pushing data over those wires.

A snazzy multi-touch piece of hardware, WiFi, and Skype are the trifecta for the consumer, but a nightmare for the carriers. They will beg, cheat, lie and brick peoples iPhones in order to keep them selves in the middle of each and every transaction that happens on the mobile web. Google and other Internet giants understand this, which is what is motivating them to jump into the spectrum auction. Everyone thinks its about open hardware standards… it’s not.. It’s all about VoIP, the music you buy, how you pay for it and the carriers getting their cut. Look at the new offering that “graciously” allow customers to use VoIP clients on their T-Mobile phones if you buy their “special” WiFi router and pay an additional fee.

My palms sweat, my heart pumps and I get major techno-lust when I see my friends iPhones, but I won’t make the jump until I see a nice official Skype icon on the home screen

Great story and well written.

I can’t work out that if it is legal to unlock phones why can’t people do it? In Austrlai it’s legal so does that mean when/if this thing comes out here, the 100 or so that are sold can’t be unlocked?

Lots od weird things things Apple does - fixes prices, tries to stop people returning faulty goods to retail stores (I remember some big dept stores having signs saying that you could not return you faulty ipod that you bought from them back - you had to deal with Apple directly, thats rubbish and as far as I know against law), and this iphone thingy.
I don’t know how they get away with it.

I don’t know why the US is so stuck up on the iPhone, because it is so 1st generation when Japan and Korea are already into the 3rd generation models of the iPhone. Now if a more enterprising phone company would make service available for these phone from Asia, the iPhone would already be dead before it was brought to the US market.

Every tourist in America is laughing at us for using this piece of crap.

I personally would have purchased at least 3 iphones (one for myself and two for my family plan members) if we could use this damn thing on t-mobile.

Nokia isn’t locking their phones to one provider, why is Apple doing it is beyond me.

It is sad to see what is happening to Apple during the last two years.

Apple’s problem as many have said, is they are control freaks. Sometimes that is good, but this time its bad:

http://smoothspan.wordpress.co.....r-success/

If this was just about honoring an agreement with AT&T, Apple should have only made the iPhone available via AT&T where they could ensure the contract was with AT&T. But the phones are available from more places than that. I find that just a little bit disengenuous to offer it without the carrier contract and then to render the phone junk if you have the temerity to take advantage of it.

Sincerely,

BW

Adding to my last comment: as soon as good DJing software that can match Ableton Live becomes available on Linux, I am switching from Mac to Ubuntu.

The irony here is that Steve got his start in technology hacking telephone company switches and selling ‘blue boxes’…

All people in Japan and Korea care about with regards to phones is if it looks cool. Their user interfaces suck horribly. You can buy unlocked Asian phones from ebay pretty easily. Very few people bother because their interfaces are so bad.

The iPhone is popular not because it has unique features that other phones don’t. Pretty much everything the iPhone does could already be done by existing phones as soon as it was announced. The iPhone is popular because of the user interface. It’s pretty obvious which people posting here will never grasp this fact.

Why did the iPod trounce all those cheap Asian knock-offs? The Asian versions had many more features built in and were cheaper. But their interfaces were atrocious.

Finally, this page is full of spoiled whiny brats. Don’t mess with firmware if you’re too dumb to realize it could screw your device. How many people posting messages even know what firmware is and why they shouldn’t screw with it unless they’re willing to risk bricking their device?

“It is sad to see what is happening to Apple during the last two years.”

Yeah… a 200% gain in the stock price. What a mess…

You don’t get it - if the rumors about their deal is true, it’s essentially Apple’s network piggybacking on AT&T. If the rumors are true, Apple owns the customers and splits the monthly service charges with AT&T. It would not be surprising if the new $399 price point was a loss-leader to secure market share and that future profits are projected on a customerbase. If this is the iPhone business model, then Apple has to protect their ground or risk losing significant money.

Imagine if the Sony PS3 were hacked to be Halo compatible and only play Xbox games. Sony loses several hundred dollars per sale on the PS3 and expects to make it up in game sales.

Point being, if this is Apple’s iPhone business model the iPhone wont be around for long.

I don’t fault Apple for blocking the hacks. Blocking installed software, that’s another story…

@JABevan If the iPhone is sold at a loss, how do you explain the pricing for the iPod Touch? The “phone” part can’t add much to the cost (since you can get a generic one for peanuts.) With the iPods, not so many people buy songs from iTunes, the profit on the songs is small, and there is no lock-in.

I agree about the need for consumer freedom & unlocked hardware.

Of course, with the new FCC rules, this will be a non-issue when the new rules take effect, and such device locking becomes illegal. (as it should have been for YEARS now)

I love Apple but I hate ATT far more than I love Apple. We will not own iPhones while ATT is the only choice as a service provider. Steve you are compounding your mistakes and creating a lot of bad will with these moves.

Why are we discussing that we want the iPhone to be legally unlocked? Look around!, most all carriers in the US do not sell or approve of unlocked phones being used on their network. Why would the big 4 act any different in regards to the iPhone? Sure in future years you will see iPhones for each of the carriers but just like all other phones they will be branded to be used only by a specific carrier. That is just the American Cellular Business Model, yes the cell companies are crooks, but that is just the way it is. Wishing for support for unlocked phones is ludicrous.

When you buy an iPhone, your really buying a great software interface experience, and possibly a fashion item. The hardware specs on the device itself are lame with the exception of the touch screen.

People often forget that Apple is a public company interested in making money. They are not an open source software company and cannot evolve their products to exactly what everyone wants unless it fits their business model. They are accountable to investors and If they invested $$ into setting up ring-tones purchases and predicted $$$$ to their investors for earnings, they are not to fond of the idea of you making them yourself.

Besides having control over your products isn’t always a bad thing. Look at what happened with Facebook.

The problem is that jobs is a control freak and very very Arrogant. The solution is don’t buy his stuff and let him know why.

WHY? Beacuse when we spend out money to buy something it’s our to do with as we want. PERIOD.

Hopefully, much of the threat of bricking cracked iPhones comes out of Apple’s need to show compliance with their contractual obligations to AT&T. The folks in Cupertino realized pretty quickly that the hardware was simply too expensive and would not generate enough sales to reach their initial lofty goals. It is also safe to assume that internally, they have to be pretty happy that a few additional hundred thousand units have been sold over the past couple of weeks to people that had zero intentions of breaking their service contracts with non-AT&T providers.

Now that cracking the iPhone has become a reality, it’s also pretty obvious that Apple can’t stop future hacks. The hardware has been compromised, so it’s also pretty obvious that current production models will always be able to be unlocked, no matter how many firmware upgrades are released. After all, there is absolutely no way Apple can force a cracked iPhone owner to update their firmware.

Here is my 2 cents on this.

For better or for worse (probably worse), the mobile industry has a different value chain than the PC industry. Service providers still have a major say in what consumers can or cannot use. Steve Job is just playing the game of the industry, which, ironically, is not too far from the Mac/iTunes/iPod model.

I am sure that these exclusive deals are very lucrative for Apple. So, from a business angle, I think Steve Job is doing a great job at immersing his company in this new industry.

From a consumer angle…. well… for now, I will pass on the flying pixel phone, and stick with boring but more open devices.

I wonder how they’ll make their approach here in Asia come 2008.

Erick, that is the first reasonable and yet simple explanation I’ve heard for hoping Apple would be more open to third-party applications and modifications for their iPhone/Touch.

I keep shaking my head at these ridiculous complaints that Apple is horrible or turning into Microsoft for “intentionally” bricking their devices and constantly messing up with their consumers. I understand the resentment but I don’t agree with it. I have an iPod Touch and I didn’t buy it expecting more than what it was. I understood it’s “limitations” (I put it in quotes because I’m damn happy with it. But of course it could always be a little better, why not.). But I think it’s silly to essentially hack your device and then bitch about it when it’s not supported. Of course it’s not supported.

However, I think your explanation for why Apple might want to reconsider this game plan of locking their devices is a valid one. These devices ARE mini-computers and people WILL want to customize them. I think people will be eating their words on these issues in the years to come. At least that’s my hope.

I enjoyed the article and think you make great points.

I believe Apple’s largest successes and greatest pitfalls come from this very issue of whether to open up or due to maintaining a closed system. They’ve gotten back into the more mainstream computer market in large part by opening up their computing platform by building it upon a flavor of unix. They’ve also began using the pentium chip so that more software would work easily on their systems.

In short, I think the best decision is to open it up and build a larger community rather than close it off to only those that enjoy the shackles.

I agree your argument. iPhone that only works with one service provider can’t be taken for consideration!

I have come across the site http://www.veeker.com.
Veeker is teh first messaging service designed for video and picture messaging on mobile phones and the Web. It’s a unique and powerful combination of the management and archival capabilities of email systems, the fun and vitality of video and picture sharing sites, and the immediacy of mobile messaging.

Using Veeker, you and anyone you know can exchange video and picture messages on mobile phones, email, profile pages and blogs, and, of course, Veeker.com. The service is free, incredibly simple to use, works on most any phone in most every country, and requires no download or install.

Sorry to say, As much as I respect Steeve as an entrepreneur. Iphone is not Ipod or computer. Definitely, mass penetration than any computer or any music player.

Apple is just becoming a pain name through Iphone. Is it beginning of the end of apple computers. May be apple will be a succesful phone company. But will never get the love from their beloved users.

I will short apple in the long. Any want to sell me some options on AAPl.

Vijay actually has a point. What gives apple its status and causes people to buy it is the way it creates follower, not just customers. And because these followers so love the cult of apple, they’re willing to pay more for sometimes not much more than a shiny case. If they lose that, they’ll lose a lot over the long run.

I wonder what Apple will do in Belgium as locking mobile phones is forbidden by law. The act of locking a phone is not a crime, but the fact that a product is tied to only one carrier is not allowed here. So every phone you buy in Belgium is unlocked. Maybe our unlocked iPhones will be our new export product or will Apple change their global strategy only because of Belgium?

Why is it that everyone has seemed to forget about AT&T when it comes to the iPhone? All Apple is trying to do is protect itself… you really think that Steve has a problem with more people buying the iPhone and unlocking it… i doubt it.

Instead of blaming Apple, why don’t you look at it from all angles. You have NO idea what is in the contract between both companies… AT&T didn’t agree to sell the iPhone to only end up having people be able to unlock it and go to a new carrier.

Why does everyone believe that having an open platform is a better consumer experience? I mean you must be kidding if you think the PC experience vs. MAC experience is actually a better experience. Ask any Vista user, how they are enjoying their wonderful open platform filled with conflicts, driver nightmares and incompatibility bugs.

I mean sure the open platform results in more choices, more providers and lower prices, but inherent in that platform is complexity. The software to operate on the platform is harder to build, more complex and littered with bugs.

I am happy to have a closed platform if the experience is actually better. And it is in my opinion on both the iphone and Apple Mac platform. So, go ahead and keep it closed, that works for me just fine, if I continue to be thrilled with the products and experience.

I agree entirely with this post. Here in Asia, where the iphone has yet to be officialy launched, there are a LOT of people purchasing iphones and using them as glorified ipod touches for the longest time. That is, until the hacks came in, and then people started using the iphones here as phones. But if apple will “brick” it in the future, it will only alienate these early adopters who are often the most die-hard apple fans. Losing this segment of the Asian market simply due to exclusivity deals with an american telco will have severe repercussions I think, and it not necessarily a move Apple will want to make.

Personal disclosure: I am from the Philippines and I didn’t get an iphone yet, though i am sorely tempted.

I agree completely. I didn’t buy the iPhone cuz I wanted a new “phone”. I wanted a new gadget that I can change around however I want. Boo to Apple.

Karim Baz

BikerDan is on the right track. The cellular market in the US is much different from any other country. The US cell companies have/had to pay a boat load of $$$ for their spectrum space.. then they have to sign a contract with a cell manufacturer (all of them in foreign lands - Asia, Europe) to develop and deliver the end device/gadget/phone to the US… after all that back and forth, testing, and operational expense overhead, the new device/gadget is finally released to the public. Then, the end user suffers because - it’s a unique gadget, offered through one mobile telco, in the US. The taxes and services are over the top ($) because the business model doesn’t work.

The US is so behind in the mobile space compared to every other nation. This may change and I’d like to see a US product override this whole spectrum allocation situation. Give me a lean, well designed WiMAX/mesh networked device.

In closing, I’d like to see the air waves in the US become FREE… I guess Steve Jobs needs to start talking to the FCC. (as if he isn’t already!)… Not that we need Jobs to stand up for a new infrastructure… It should be a citizen movement…

None of the above comments/opinions reflect the opinions of Apple, mobile cos, or cell phone manufacturers… It’s just one US citizen’s opinion. I hope the first amendment still stands! Godspeed..

The ONLY reason why Apple has been able to deal with Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, O2, Deutsche Telelcom, and Orange is that Apple LOCKS the iPhone to the carrier’s network. That is THE factor that makes Apple powerful and enabled Apple to obtain monthly usage revenue streams from the carrier.

Until Apple came along, ALL handset makers had to cripple their phones by removing features or capabilities that the carrier did NOT want on the handset.

Ringtones anyone? Carriers can charge $2.50 to $3.00 for a ringtone of THEIR size choice and THEIR song segment choice because THEY want the ringtone revenue and control the network services.

Apple broke the carriers’ monopoly with its approach.

Users now have more choice, more capability in their hands, and a more pleasant experience because of Apple. Users do NOT get to choose the carrier. “That’s life in technology.”

I wonder how many of these iPhone owners actually complaining about this locked iPhone.. 2% 10% 50% 80%??

Does anybody have a copy of the contract? Erick, while I agree with you, the contract may read differently.

Apple is simply honoring the contract they signed. AT&T has exclusivity for the iPhone. Apple signed that deal and are legally bound to provide that exclusivity.

Once that contract expires, who knows. But, right now, Apple is contractually obliged to ensure AT&T networks are the only networks for the iPhone.

Man most of you people are way out there. The VAST majority of people do not unlock their phones and they buy a new one every two years or so. If they didn’t I wouldn’t be inundated by those freaks in booths at the mall.

Apple is in the cellphone playground. You can’t just walk into that playground and change the rules - they just won’t sell your phone. A phone without a carrier is well an OpenMoko.

Look at the music market. Two/Three years ago music companies showed nothing but contempt for iTunes and Apple. Three billion songs later the music industry is running scared. Does anybody think AmazonMP3 would have happened without the success of Apple/iTunes and their closed platform?

This is a wakeup call for the cell phone market and hopefully the bed-buddies Nokia, Motorola et al get the message and design phones that are functional, user friendly and stylish. Hopefully the market changes to providing phones people want and not phones that the cell carriers want you to have. Apple did not sell one million iphones because people are happy with what they have.

choosing Apple=choosing a closed platform

But iPhone is also a great product, I think.

This is a great post. It should be sent to Apple, perhaps printed out and sent as a letter.

Despite what PC users think, OS X is not a closed platform, lol. There are an abundance of 3rd party software titles and hacks for my Mac. The iPhone however is a closed platform. Lets talk about the iPhone, not Apple. Apple shields itself from relying too heavily on 3rd parties to avoid brand dilution and ensure a good user experience. That said, I have an iPhone and I do use the hack for 3rd party installations. I would like to continue using these hacks, but I do understand that this is not simply an issue of “Apple likes to be restrictive for no reason at all.” Come on guys, be reasonable.

I wonder how many of the bloggers above actually use Macs. Apple was a closed platform 15 years ago but there isn’t much you can’t do/install on a Mac these dats. It is pretty easy, using Terminal, to hack into the UNIX underpinnings and do pretty much as you please. It’s not like they lock you into using Safari, Mail, iCal, etc. - all of that stuff can be replaced by open-source and, gasp, Microsoft offerings.

I am giving Apple the benefit of the doubt on this one. I am sure that in 12 months time they will open the phone up to 3rd-party apps or have some sort of sandbox web-environment. My guess is that they wanted to get the phone right before addressing the headache of people bricking their phones by installing stuff.

Thankfully the old software of iPhone still works with the unlock. I’m staying with the old one.

Apple’s offerings are closed because they offer stability.
AT&T’s offerings are closed because they want to screw the consumer.
Steve Jobs thinks he can extend this Apple stability out to the networks that people use (for features such as Visual Voicemail).
But AT&T isn’t in it for stability, and so Steve Jobs is going to lose.

If we want Apple to stop acting like a phone company with regards to the iPhone then we really should be complaing to the FCC. Apple plays nice with the carriers because they have to. That’s why iPhone software is a cat and mouse game. It will be until the carriers have to change the game, not Apple.

Personally, I love everything the iPhone can do. I just don’t like being stuck in a two year contract. That’s not Apple’s fault….it’s the FCC’s.

@Aaron …. bro I think you 100% right on here. Most seem to miss the big picture and the role of the Telecoms

“…Google and other Internet giants understand this, which is what is motivating them to jump into the spectrum auction. Everyone thinks its about open hardware standards… it’s not.. It’s all about VoIP… ”

Being able to provide wireless internet over an open spectrum would ( and will!?!) completely disrupt the telecom business model. Imagine what having an iPhone /google phone/ wifi device in a country with ubiqitous wireless internet would entail ?
Not only do you obviously get a huge explosion of communication and technology, but MaBell gets put to death nearly overnight.

Its unfortunate that corporate driven politics are the only thing holding technology back in this area. Even if you are the most hardline of capitalist I would think you would have to agree that ubiqitous internet would accelerate our technology and culture in unimaginable but almost certainly “economically productive” ways.

If you are worried about our ability to compete with China/India/Japan etc , then you should be praying for the death of Ma Bell and her progeny, she is directly stifling our communication technology.

I think this nails it better:
http://www.iphonenewsblog.com/.....phone.html

Hmmmm, I always thought that microsoft allowed for more changes to their software and apple only let you pick a background.

of course apple lets you pick more than a background, but its limited far more than other OS.

hear hear!

“They could be tuned a million different ways to the needs of a million different customers.”

This is a rather vague statement that doesn’t really drive at the heart of the PC’s success in the industry. A lot of the PC’s success had to do with perception, and IBM, and the strategy Apple adopted to try to beat IBM being one that didn’t pay off. You do seem to mention software, and yes software availability had a huge role in the success as well.

Steve Jobs has not forgotten this lesson about developer support, and I’m pretty sure he and the miracle workers at Apple are working out a way to allow 3rd party software without exposing OS X to all the bugs and crashing that Jobs, rightly, simply will not tolerate on the iPhone. There are at least a few things, like missing protection and tolerance features found on OS X for Mac, or a dedicated memory system for 3rd parties, that Apple may have had to leave out to bring out more performance in the software to make the iPhone snappier. Jobs would do that.

I hope this process doesn’t take too long though, because the iPhone could very well live or die based on 3rd party support.

Feel free to copy my letter

1 Infinite Loop
Cupertino, CA 95014

Mr Jobs,

I’m writing to express my recent disappointment with Apple Inc. I’m disappointed with the bitter attitude towards third party development on the iPhone. As I’m sure you’re aware many methods of unlocking and developing software for the iPhone have surfaced. Instead of embracing this progress and development Apple has chosen to stomp it’s foot on developers and hurt the very people that want to give you money. I can understand your desire to control the phone but there is something most companies don’t realize. The ability to unlock hardware and develop applications for it makes it MORE desirable in the eyes of a consumer. This is something I would expect Apple to understand.

I implore Apple to release a mature SDK for the iPhone and not release firmware specifically for the cause of closing doors which allow unlocks.

In a corporate playing field littered with selfish and cut throat businesses I look to Apple as a beacon of reason and sanity. Please don’t let me down.

Loyal Apple User since ‘88

Hey, great post, just signing the statement, cause I think apple needs to wake up to this.

Thanks.

Why do you (and almost every other site on the web lately), keep spreading this *lie* that Apple is bricking phones that have third party apps installed? This is just not the case at all. You also directly imply, without any evidence whatsoever, that this was an *intentional* malicious act on Apple’s part. That this is “payback” of some kind to those that defy them.

NONE OF THIS IS TRUE.

Yes, if you have unlocked your iPhone, updating it to the new version of the firmware will brick it, because you screwed up the original firmware that the update expects to find.

All the rest of the stuff you hear is absolute nonsense. If you have third party apps, they are erased by the update, the iPhone is not “bricked” by the update because you had third party apps, it just returns it to normal.

LIES LIES LIES.

YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD!

This is exactly why I won’t buy an iPhone. I need something that does what I need it to do. Things like run real software, vpn access for work, etc. It doesn’t matter how nicely animated the iPhone is, it’s bricked from day one and I don’t see myself getting it (probably ever).

Say what you want about palm and winmob devices, but at least you can do what you want with them.

Apple Sicks Lawyers on Innocent Kids Over iPhone!

A couple of imaginitve, curious kids who figured out how to unlock the iPhone are under legal assault from Apple!
Why do we let them get away with this type behavior? Strangling the creativity in our youth, inhibiting free trade and commerce. These bright young men should be applauded for their heroic efforts to give people choice. Why all of the legal machinations against the young and impressionable?
I for one don’t want to live in a world where Steve Jobs and the iGustapo can walk into the High School Science fair and start turning over tables screaming,

“No! No! That’s my idea! Don’t change our stuff you brats! I’ll sue your parents! Guards catch that one, beat him! Muahahahahaha!”

An old friend wrote me just yesterday;

“… My son Scotty looked up at me the other day and asked, ‘Mommy, can I make a better radio pretty please?’ - Steve, I was heartbroken but had to tell him, ‘No Scotty, I’m sorry but It might make Steve Jobs mad’. At that moment I saw the twinkle leave his eye and we both sobbed …”

People! For goodness sake, protect your children from these people. Let the children’s laughter remind us of how we used to be.

I might be one of the few iPhone users that didn’t install any 3rd party apps. Thanks to all of you guinea pigs for letting me know what happens.

The phone came loaded to do what I intended it to do. I can view my mail (and attachments), surf the web, make calls, listen to music. What else do you want to do with it? Ok, there are some things that were left out (like chat) but I’m sure it will come out in a future update. Why do you think there’s extra space for more icons? Be patient and quit trying to mod your phone with stupid apps you probably don’t need anyway.

At least they proved ‘irreparable damage’ could be done to software.

Unbrick your iPhone. Go here http://iphone.fiveforty.net/wi.....1_to_1.0.2. They don’t have call functionality restored yet, but it’s only a matter of time.

I don’t understand why everybody is blaming apple. Its like iTunes with DRM..it was not apple’s choice,but the record labels.

Now amazon gets the credit for selling DRM free music, but it was Apple’s which drove a wedge into the CD sales that had a catalyst effect for this change.

Steve jobs is not going to publish the memos of meetings or legal contracts signed with AT & T to justify Apple’s decision. Selling iPones on every carrier would have been Apple’s first choice and only a retard can believe that Apple would have liked to restrict iPhone to just AT & T. Just think what it would have done to sales figure, if iPhone could be used on any network ? The carriers are absolutely monopolies, something that even a company like Apple cannot fight. They have to play the cell phone game at the carriers terms. Call up AT & T and tell them you want a “un-locked” iPhone and not Apple.

iPhone is going to have the same effect , that iPod/iTunes had and is going to be good for the overall industry.

We should thank Apple to even get this conversation started and stop blaming the rebel cos he showed us the possibilities.

Stop advising Apple and start advicing AT & T’s and Verizon’s

I agree! Customization is very important to customers.

As much as I dislike Google, I get the feeling that they will have an open phone/platform.

Apple is messing this one up royally. It does make perfect sense why they are going out of there way to break 3rd party apps considering the unlocking software was eventually software- based. The real question is: how can Apple allow 3rd party apps without the threat of software-based unlocking software? There really isn’t a way to allow one while still fighting the other. It should make for an interesting balancing act if they choose to somehow go down that path.

I agree, Apple needs to let us do as we wish with our iphones.

@ venkatish, I agree with your point. Carriers are pretty powerful in the market, you get a really good handle on how the carriers work if you’re in telecom. It’s not to say Apple isn’t suffering from it, but agree it seems naive to think this is all about Apple.

this is a good article.

This whole iPhone thing is so weird. In most parts of Asia, we can buy any phone we like and use it with any carrier we like. And the phone companies still report billions in profits every year. The last time we had phones locked to carriers was 10 years ago. Why is the US market so backward?

Erick, great post.

Perhaps Apple is doing the right thing by going slow. They´d never get far with the telcos if they`d just picked up the fight from the start, bringing iChat or VOIP–the telco´s nightmare.

But now…

Now that the things is proven to sell, and that Apple is about to release the SDK, VOIP will have to come. With luck, it will also come to the ipod touch (though it has no mike–an easy add-on). I hope that Skype won`t blow away their chances. In fact, I hope to see iChat, Skype, and Gtalk (Msn messenger is doubtful, right? What message would MS be sending to Zune customers?)

iTunes took a long, long, time to move to DRM-free. It was taboo a few years ago.

This issue–of 3rd party applications, and community building, and freedom of choice on your apps–is one issue which Apple perhaps did the right things by going slowly.

The other issue is the lock-in to AT&T. That´s sad, and I guess it´s here to stay. But if the iPod touch eventually gets skype or iChat; the game changer will be well on its way. And there will be nothing AT&T could do about it.