Apple's decision last week to bundle an iPhone-crippling firmware upgrade with 10 security patches for the device was a mistake, analysts said Monday. Thursday's iPhone Update 1.1.1 included not only new features and functionality -- including access to the iTunes Wi-Fi Music Store -- but plugged holes in the device's built-in Safari browser, e-mail software, and Bluetooth implementation.
But it was the news that the update "bricked," or disabled, iPhones modified to work with networks other than AT&T that caught the attention of security analysts like Andrew Storms, director of security operations at nCircle Network Security. "With the iPhone update, Apple is now producing a fear of taking their patches," Storms said. "If they release a functionality update and security fixes at the same time in the future, some users will think twice about applying it. They'll ask themselves, 'What will it break this time?' Will it backfire on me?'
View: The full story
News source: InfoWorld
But it was the news that the update "bricked," or disabled, iPhones modified to work with networks other than AT&T that caught the attention of security analysts like Andrew Storms, director of security operations at nCircle Network Security. "With the iPhone update, Apple is now producing a fear of taking their patches," Storms said. "If they release a functionality update and security fixes at the same time in the future, some users will think twice about applying it. They'll ask themselves, 'What will it break this time?' Will it backfire on me?'
View: The full story News source: InfoWorld
Pip'
I mean, lets face it, the odd user is BOUND to have trouble installing firmware updates, it's the kind of update that, in the event something goes wrong, could brick your device for a number of reasons (and not because the user has modified it), so Joe Average user is going to think "if my firmware update goes bad, what's to stop Apple just saying "well you shouldn't have modified it then" and leave me with an expensive door stop? I'd better not install any updates at all".
If you ask me, it was pathetically stupid for Apple to block these firmware hacks. Instead of penalising the user, they should have blocked the security holes that allowed this in the first place and gave their security team a slap.
Why? If I alter something on my new TV and it breaks it I'm sol. If I swap out the EPROM chip in my new car and it cooks the engine the car maker will not honor the warranty. Why should iPhone owners get special treatment?
<But normal users have had issues with this update as well.>
And they should get all the help they need. Does anyone know what the failure rate has been with the iPhone?
Why? If I alter something on my new TV and it breaks it I'm sol. If I swap out the EPROM chip in my new car and it cooks the engine the car maker will not honor the warranty. Why should iPhone owners get special treatment?
But what if you do that and it works fine, then your TV manufacturer comes over to your house and puts an Axe through the screen?
That's (metaphorically speaking) more or less what Apple has done in this case.
I agree. Sorry, I chose a poor example.
However, as the poster below points out these people violated the contract. And I bet that is how Apple will get out of this.
Why? If I alter something on my new TV and it breaks it I'm sol. If I swap out the EPROM chip in my new car and it cooks the engine the car maker will not honor the warranty. Why should iPhone owners get special treatment?
<But normal users have had issues with this update as well.>
And they should get all the help they need. Does anyone know what the failure rate has been with the iPhone?
I'd say the failure rate would be pretty damn high, considering not even a month after they went on sale apple was already selling refurbed iphones.....thats a pretty quick turn around...i'd stay away from the crappy iphone like it was the plague
Unhacked iphones that end up bricked would be fully supported by Apple anyway, there are ways to read the chips onboard even if it doesnt boot.
FUD isn't really an article.
Do you think they'll patch the phone? I'm betting not. "Sorry, you want the newest one.. go buy another." Why people buy into this crap, I'll never understand.
It's a locked phone so understandably AT&T is making a claim that the intellectual parts of the phone remain properties of AT&T and THIS very version of the hardware/software will only receive updates if it's being used with AT&T. So don't phone HP any more if you install their version of Windows Vista on your ASUS laptop.
Ok, some are, but most are going to use another phone and wait for the next hack to fix their iphone.
Either way, it appears that apple is going out of their way to do this, which will just hurt longterm sales.
It's like somehow installing Roxio EMC DE (Dell Edition) under Windows XP retail on a custom-built box. Do you still expect to get support or updates from Dell or Roxio?
So when the user buys a LOCKED iPhone, they agree to follow the terms of service and in turn, Apple and AT&T agree to offer support given that the phone's un-modified and operated within AT&T network (hence the term locked). The moment the phone has been modified, it's breach of contract on the user's part and it's no longer AT&T's or Apple's obligation to support that phone and they have every right to attempt protect/restore the original terms of use. The user with the modified phone can refuse to re-enter the original contract by choosing not to update the software.
All only makes sense.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.