Last edited by DefCon-17 (2007-12-27 16:53:07)
negative.DefCon-17 wrote:
..And then Apple disables your iPhone?
Yeah, pretty much.DefCon-17 wrote:
..And then Apple disables your iPhone?
Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-12-27 17:00:14)
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...Bertster7 wrote:
Yeah, pretty much.DefCon-17 wrote:
..And then Apple disables your iPhone?
Cracks like this on online-centric Apple products are a stupid waste of time, that will ultimately work out very expensive for those doing them (when their hardware gets disabled).
I would have thought EA didn't mind that i want to change the noise of certain guns in BF2 to ones that don't annoy me... but its still not allowed.ig wrote:
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...Bertster7 wrote:
Yeah, pretty much.DefCon-17 wrote:
..And then Apple disables your iPhone?
Cracks like this on online-centric Apple products are a stupid waste of time, that will ultimately work out very expensive for those doing them (when their hardware gets disabled).
Not sure that is true but good come back lolig wrote:
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...Bertster7 wrote:
Yeah, pretty much.DefCon-17 wrote:
..And then Apple disables your iPhone?
Cracks like this on online-centric Apple products are a stupid waste of time, that will ultimately work out very expensive for those doing them (when their hardware gets disabled).
flashlight?ig wrote:
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...Bertster7 wrote:
Yeah, pretty much.DefCon-17 wrote:
..And then Apple disables your iPhone?
Cracks like this on online-centric Apple products are a stupid waste of time, that will ultimately work out very expensive for those doing them (when their hardware gets disabled).
did ea cancel your cd key, or did they reset your stats?White-Fusion wrote:
I would have thought EA didn't mind that i want to change the noise of certain guns in BF2 to ones that don't annoy me... but its still not allowed.ig wrote:
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...Bertster7 wrote:
Yeah, pretty much.
Cracks like this on online-centric Apple products are a stupid waste of time, that will ultimately work out very expensive for those doing them (when their hardware gets disabled).
"Apple released its firmware upgrade, version 1.1.1, last week. The upgrade effectively rendered hacked iPhones useless -- thus coining the term "bricking" for its end result. A workaround posted Monday on the iPhone Dev Wiki, however, allows users to restore some functionality to their devices, though not phone service."ig wrote:
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...Bertster7 wrote:
Yeah, pretty much.DefCon-17 wrote:
..And then Apple disables your iPhone?
Cracks like this on online-centric Apple products are a stupid waste of time, that will ultimately work out very expensive for those doing them (when their hardware gets disabled).
hard to disable phone features when there never were anyDefCon-17 wrote:
"Apple released its firmware upgrade, version 1.1.1, last week. The upgrade effectively rendered hacked iPhones useless -- thus coining the term "bricking" for its end result. A workaround posted Monday on the iPhone Dev Wiki, however, allows users to restore some functionality to their devices, though not phone service."ig wrote:
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...Bertster7 wrote:
Yeah, pretty much.
Cracks like this on online-centric Apple products are a stupid waste of time, that will ultimately work out very expensive for those doing them (when their hardware gets disabled).
?
Last edited by ig (2007-12-27 17:09:22)
I'm just telling you/people not too be overly surprised in the case of a disabled device.ig wrote:
hard to disable phone features when there never were anyDefCon-17 wrote:
"Apple released its firmware upgrade, version 1.1.1, last week. The upgrade effectively rendered hacked iPhones useless -- thus coining the term "bricking" for its end result. A workaround posted Monday on the iPhone Dev Wiki, however, allows users to restore some functionality to their devices, though not phone service."ig wrote:
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...
?
Never were any phone features on an iPhone? The clue's in the name.....ig wrote:
hard to disable phone features when there never were anyDefCon-17 wrote:
"Apple released its firmware upgrade, version 1.1.1, last week. The upgrade effectively rendered hacked iPhones useless -- thus coining the term "bricking" for its end result. A workaround posted Monday on the iPhone Dev Wiki, however, allows users to restore some functionality to their devices, though not phone service."ig wrote:
i really doubt apple cares that i have a flashlight and solitaire on my ipod...
?
I didn't know anyone bought them for the phones, I thought they were purchased so you can tell the weather directors at the airport when it's safe to take off?Bertster7 wrote:
Never were any phone features on an iPhone? The clue's in the name.....ig wrote:
hard to disable phone features when there never were anyDefCon-17 wrote:
"Apple released its firmware upgrade, version 1.1.1, last week. The upgrade effectively rendered hacked iPhones useless -- thus coining the term "bricking" for its end result. A workaround posted Monday on the iPhone Dev Wiki, however, allows users to restore some functionality to their devices, though not phone service."
?
iPHONE
As for the iPod touch, it has internet features that will be lost. Great idea, to enable a few extra features you, at the very least, run the risk of losing a massive chunk of functionality.
Great plan.
Excuse me? I have a Touch and have no problems whatsoever with it being jailbroken.Bertster7 wrote:
Never were any phone features on an iPhone? The clue's in the name.....ig wrote:
hard to disable phone features when there never were anyDefCon-17 wrote:
"Apple released its firmware upgrade, version 1.1.1, last week. The upgrade effectively rendered hacked iPhones useless -- thus coining the term "bricking" for its end result. A workaround posted Monday on the iPhone Dev Wiki, however, allows users to restore some functionality to their devices, though not phone service."
?
iPHONE
As for the iPod touch, it has internet features that will be lost. Great idea, to enable a few extra features you, at the very least, run the risk of losing a massive chunk of functionality.
Great plan.
Same thing? No. Apple may release a few games or other software to satisfy a few people, but they will never allow the decent amount of access the community can make.Winston_Churchill wrote:
Whats the point of doing this? Apple said they were going to allow third-party access to the Touch and iPhone in February, so whats the point of risking it if you're going to get the same thing with no risk in less than a month?
Last edited by Defiance (2007-12-28 01:03:12)
Lol, as if Apple will be able to match the output quality of the programs the open source community can?Winston_Churchill wrote:
Whats the point of doing this? Apple said they were going to allow third-party access to the Touch and iPhone in February, so whats the point of risking it if you're going to get the same thing with no risk in less than a month?
If it's true what Winston says, then you have missed the point. Third party acces to the Touch and iPhone means other parties can create software, just like with this 'crack'. They wont make new fancy stuff themselves (if this rumor is true)BlackKoala wrote:
Lol, as if Apple will be able to match the output quality of the programs the open source community can?Winston_Churchill wrote:
Whats the point of doing this? Apple said they were going to allow third-party access to the Touch and iPhone in February, so whats the point of risking it if you're going to get the same thing with no risk in less than a month?
This is apple, so they probably mean a select few teams of coders with the apple seal of approval can create the code.xGj wrote:
If it's true what Winston says, then you have missed the point. Third party acces to the Touch and iPhone means other parties can create software, just like with this 'crack'. They wont make new fancy stuff themselves (if this rumor is true)BlackKoala wrote:
Lol, as if Apple will be able to match the output quality of the programs the open source community can?Winston_Churchill wrote:
Whats the point of doing this? Apple said they were going to allow third-party access to the Touch and iPhone in February, so whats the point of risking it if you're going to get the same thing with no risk in less than a month?
From Wikipedia:BlackKoala wrote:
This is apple, so they probably mean a select few teams of coders with the apple seal of approval can create the code.xGj wrote:
If it's true what Winston says, then you have missed the point. Third party acces to the Touch and iPhone means other parties can create software, just like with this 'crack'. They wont make new fancy stuff themselves (if this rumor is true)BlackKoala wrote:
Lol, as if Apple will be able to match the output quality of the programs the open source community can?
From http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/17/ste … uary-2008/On October 17, 2007, Steve Jobs, in an open letter posted on Apple's webpage, announced that a software development kit (SDK) for the iPhone would be made available to third-party developers in February 2008. Due to security concerns and Jobs' praise of Nokia's digital signature system, it is also suggested that Apple will adopt a similar method. The SDK will also apply to the iPod touch.
Try doing your research next time.Steve Jobs has posted an open letter revealing that Apple will be releasing a 3rd party Software Development Kit (SDK) for iPhone and iPod Touch applications. The SDK will be released in February 2008.
At this time, the letter only appears on Apple's Hot News page:
We've reproduced it here in its entirety:
Let me just say it: We want native third party applications on the iPhone, and we plan to have an SDK in developers’ hands in February. We are excited about creating a vibrant third party developer community around the iPhone and enabling hundreds of new applications for our users. With our revolutionary multi-touch interface, powerful hardware and advanced software architecture, we believe we have created the best mobile platform ever for developers.
It will take until February to release an SDK because we’re trying to do two diametrically opposed things at once—provide an advanced and open platform to developers while at the same time protect iPhone users from viruses, malware, privacy attacks, etc. This is no easy task. Some claim that viruses and malware are not a problem on mobile phones—this is simply not true. There have been serious viruses on other mobile phones already, including some that silently spread from phone to phone over the cell network. As our phones become more powerful, these malicious programs will become more dangerous. And since the iPhone is the most advanced phone ever, it will be a highly visible target.
Some companies are already taking action. Nokia, for example, is not allowing any applications to be loaded onto some of their newest phones unless they have a digital signature that can be traced back to a known developer. While this makes such a phone less than “totally open,” we believe it is a step in the right direction. We are working on an advanced system which will offer developers broad access to natively program the iPhone’s amazing software platform while at the same time protecting users from malicious programs.
We think a few months of patience now will be rewarded by many years of great third party applications running on safe and reliable iPhones.
Steve
P.S.: The SDK will also allow developers to create applications for iPod touch. [Oct 17, 2007]
Steve Jobs points to Nokia's digital-signature system as a "step in the right direction" and promises some system that balances developer access and security.
Yet....haffeysucks wrote:
Excuse me? I have a Touch and have no problems whatsoever with it being jailbroken.Bertster7 wrote:
Never were any phone features on an iPhone? The clue's in the name.....ig wrote:
hard to disable phone features when there never were any
iPHONE
As for the iPod touch, it has internet features that will be lost. Great idea, to enable a few extra features you, at the very least, run the risk of losing a massive chunk of functionality.
Great plan.