Apple attempts to block free iPhone ringtones with iTunes up

Apple has released an update to iTunes that blocks users from creating free custom ringtones and then syncing them to an iPhone. Despite Apple's best efforts to thwart users, a workaround has already been found and posted to the Internet. A method of using iTunes to create ringtones for the iPhone using songs not purchased from the iTunes Store was first posted by Macrumors.com on Friday. Users confirmed after installing iTunes 7.4.1 last night that the method no longer worked.

However, an Engadget post on Saturday details a workaround for the update, again allowing the free ringtones to be synced to the iPhone

View: The full story
News source: InfoWorld

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

AMD Launches Long-Awaited Barcelona Quad-Core

Next Story

Patent Reform Is Good for Microsoft

29 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I think the point that you should all consider is that what your basically asking is... 'Ive paid my money for a song which i now want to rip, change, edit it etc'
Does anyone here really think that the music biz will let apple give anyone that ability especially when their relationship with the record companies is strained over the pricing as it stands.

Also if a n00b wants to put a ringtone on their phone they pay a 3rd party company to give them a small snippet of a song which, and in most cases, is a re-recorded song by a soundalike. This is usually way over what apple is currently charging.
I do believe that there should be an option for a more experienced user to upload there own ringtones to the device should they want to.

just another example of apple's anti competitive behaviour. someone shouls file an antitrust suit.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if this is a precedent for mobile service providers going forward. Verizon is already trying to limit their customers to using VCast to download ring tones, but luckily there's an easy way around it for now. I'm sure Apple is just trying to cash in on the future of a service based business model.

Apple complained Windows was monopolising the market for audio players on Windows, by simply having WMP as part of the basic Windows package... now they see it fair to make you buy ringtones through them...

I'd personally love to see Microsoft make a music player compatible with the iPhone then argue that Apple has to give the option for an iPhone without iTunes... I accounce... iPhone N!!!

In my eyes this would be a comparable and fair - wouldn't it?

The iPhone is a great product, but the way apple has limited its features in my opinion is destroying all that is good.

well thats just a load of crap, even my old Motorola can upload use ringtones that I have downloaded.

However someone will keep circumventing the problem I hope

Apple are money grabbing in every sense of the word. Not allowing users to sync their own ringtones? What a crap phone! Jeeze!

What you mean it's not fair that you first pay en extreme premium for a smartphone that doesn't qualify as a smartphone, then you also have to use an extra special more expensive thanany other subscription phone subscription for this "premium" phone, that you can't use any music as a ringtone...


Sometimes I wonder if Apple even want peopel to buy their phone. or are they just testing how much they can abuse their own customers and users before they look elsewhere, that way they can balance just on the line for maximum abuse and profit for brand name abuse.

Don't get me wrong, I think this is ridiculous, but most ringtones cost $3.50 in Canada, and most phones I've seen can't use MP3 ringtones. Sure, the iPhone is a smartphone, but it's geared towards the general public. A very niche market to be in. It has some features users don't need, but some restrictions advanced users don't like. A tricky situation, for sure. It's an advanced, yet consumer- (not business) based, phone.

I was about to say... I remember when you used to be able to COMPOSE your own ringtones before those money grabbing corporate companies noticed that they could sell ringtones and remove the compose feature... and I see plenty of phones in the UK that dont have MP3 ringtones... so... ?

Complaining here won't do much, however if you choose to direct your complaints toward Apple (constructively) then maybe something can and will probably be done about it if enough voices are heard.

forcing people to buy your ringtones rather than create there own is just plain greed. will these companies ever cease there monarchies.

I applaud those who have found ways around this ridiculous restriction. I understand that Apple is a business and wants to get as much of your money as possible, but this is a little much. You can only upload a ringtone if you buy it from the iTunes Music Store AND pay for it twice (isn't it 99 cents for both the song and the ringtone)?

But wow... iPhone users can't have custom ringtones and just sync them to the device? I did not know. That is just very sad.

Also - the above analogy is kind of weird... I don't see what MS charging for Ultimate stuff has anything to do with this.

The good analogy is MS making the Windows Mobile edition in a way that users can't drop free ringtones onto their device through ActiveSync or Vista Mobile Center. But oh yeah... they can!

If you didn't figure it out, let me spell it out for you. I wasn't comparing exact feature sets. Obviously Red Hat's "support" charges are nothing like ringtones. I am sure you figured that out, and should have been able to see that the list wasn't comparing feature-to-feature.

It was a general commentary that companies are in business to make money. And they do so by charging people for whatever they can. In each of the cases, I mentioned an item that can otherwise be "free".
* Ringtones
* Software that is already on the DVD and just needs the right code to authorize it
* Support on Linux installs

I am sure if you take a minute, you will see what I mean.

Newsflash: All corporations are greedy!

Microsoft charges extra for the features in Ultimate and so forth, when the DVD contains it all, even for people who buy Home.

Red Hat charges for support licensing on free software.

Businesses are in the business of making money to provide a return on investment for their stockholders.

and how infinitely ignorant a comment like that is!!

As Markjensen posted, ALL corporations will find a way to squeeze one last dollar out of every product they deliver.... even if it's a free one to begin with.


Not sure if most people do this, but use this as an example on backing up. Always keep a copy of the previous version of any software you download..... that way, if you have issues with the new one, you can reinstall.

xMorpheousx416 said,
...
Not sure if most people do this, but use this as an example on backing up. Always keep a copy of the previous version of any software you download..... that way, if you have issues with the new one, you can reinstall.

Or just go here: http://www.oldversion.com/

markjensen said,
Newsflash: All corporations are greedy!

Microsoft charges extra for the features in Ultimate and so forth, when the DVD contains it all, even for people who buy Home.

Red Hat charges for support licensing on free software.

Businesses are in the business of making money to provide a return on investment for their stockholders.


This is real greedy of Apple - why do you HAVE to buy a ringtone from iTunes? Especially if you already own perfectly good versions of the same thing that could be made into the same ringtone.

Microsoft are charging for extra features with Vista, you buy a single license for a specific version - you are not buying all the information on the Disc to use anyway you wish... similar if you want two installations of Windows or OSX you have to buy it twice (or volume license). - you can buy satellite/cable tv that is able to get all the stations/channels ... but you have to pay extra to recieve some of them. Windows could sell all different discs but it just makes upgrading more complex and slower, and would also require more manufacturing or several different discs.

In the UK a lot of support help numbers costs even on paid services let alone free stuff... and a lot of free stuff is usually provided 'as is' without any support... so really RedHat even providing support is more than acceptable.

^^^ Exactly! You have the media with all of the "Ultimate" code in it. But you have an agreement (license) with Microsoft, and they have the right to only allow certain use, for example, Home Premium. And with the iPhone, it is physically capable of playing 3rd party ringtones, but your license/contract with them specifies the use requires ringtones to be purchased through iTunes.

I agree with everyone here that it sucks, please don't take my comments as saying Apple is a great company for doing this. They are just a company out to make every dollar they can.

If it says in the contract you must buy rintones from Apple, thats about as insane as me creating a phone where you must buy images from a set of clipart I have.

markjensen said,
Newsflash: All corporations are greedy!

Microsoft charges extra for the features in Ultimate and so forth, when the DVD contains it all, even for people who buy Home.

Red Hat charges for support licensing on free software.

Businesses are in the business of making money to provide a return on investment for their stockholders.

who said anything about microsoft?!!! we are talking about phones here.

EVERY phone manufacturer have that feature for free.

and not only mp3... AAC.... WMA
actually even windows mobile lets you use music as a MP3!!!

even a cheap 100$-50$ nokia 2630 moto v3 lets you do that

Joseph21 said,

who said anything about microsoft?!!! we are talking about phones here.

EVERY phone manufacturer have that feature for free.

and not only mp3... AAC.... WMA
actually even windows mobile lets you use music as a MP3!!!

even a cheap 100$-50$ nokia 2630 moto v3 lets you do that

I'm glad somebody else thought "why the heck is he talking about Vista?" - it's far more sensible to compare like for like - Windows Mobile versus iPhone. No such 'lock in' exists on any Windows Mobile phone - heck, you can even write *applications* for them. Staggering. Sure, corps are out there to make money but I think it's a reasonable expectation that your mobile will allow some level of user customisation without needed to give the manu. money each time to do so. Is there even another mobile phone out there with such a restriction thesedays? If MS did this with their ZunePhone then they'd be widely derrided. Apple does it and you spread your buttcheeks and say "yes please"?