关于iPhone FW 1.1.1的 公开反应

寂夜清风

APPLE反应还是很快的哈...

. ~' i6 i7 B( G5 l- V6 ]; S1 j( r6 |相对 PALM对FOLEO的反应来说,是快了很多罗
; ?" X/ u7 t  V1 Q; M# D
这份非正式的公开信blabla地讲了大堆理由,主要是因为上周突然发布的FW 1.1.1锁掉了原来大家已经解开的一些东西
( q! o5 T# D/ M3 g* b! M

A note to both Apple and iPhone customers on the v1.1.1 update

( f- B0 F) j' z. r

1 d. ?0 \0 L+ F! A7 [5 D/ e
Posted Oct 1st 2007 12:04PM by Ryan Block
+ y2 u' U* s' Q' Z6 n# r) R- @& OFiled under: Cellphones, Features
/ y/ G& {! l9 s) k
We'rein a unique position here at Engadget, serving the technologycommunity, while simultaneously interacting with and trying to makesense of the moves of the companies our readership patronizes. Apple'slatest iPhone firmware, as you've probably heard, locks out third partyapplications, consequently preventing owners from using their device onnetworks other than AT&T -- so it's easy to see why this is beingviewed as a hostile act, with thousands ready to storm the Cupertinocastle in order to get their hacked iPhones back the pre-v1.1.1 status quo. Make no mistake about it, whether you care about the iPhone or not, this 150MB software update is uniquely controversialand causing a rift -- if not an outright adversarial relationship --between Apple and untold thousands of its core customers, who've usedEngadget comments, blogs, and any other sounding board at theirdisposal. So, may we have a word with both parties?
* Q) g- M5 ~! ^% u7 ^. z
4 l/ Y5 g) |+ S$ r- X) `1 zNow, we'renot going to assume we could possibly be the arbiter of a discussion socomplex as this, but we think there a few things both parties shouldremember. Let's start with the iPhone users. Note: to be clear onnomenclature, when we say a device is "bricked", we mean it'scompletely unusable, not just that it's been re-locked to AT&T, orhad 3rd party app support disabled, ok?
1 x6 l+ m9 v) L- M- g% H. d7 V
iPhone users,

5 c7 A! i  n7 \4 [) A& b. ~) K( oWeknow you're incensed. You paid a premium price for a powerful phonewith a lot of untapped potential, and only a few weeks after the thirdparty iPhone community got to work on a slew of surprisingly well madeapps -- including the holy grail of SIM unlock software (both free and paid)-- Cupertino drops the hammer and shuts it all off in the blink of aneye, in some cases even resulting in the bricking of your device. Butbefore you grab a torch and a pitchfork, there are a few things youshould know.

Apple's first mistake in this mess was the ominoussounding announcement they released last week, a few days ahead of theupdate. Here's the clip from the release:

"Applehas discovered that many of the unauthorized iPhone unlocking programsavailable on the Internet cause irreparable damage to the iPhone'ssoftware, which will likely result in the modified iPhone becomingpermanently inoperable when a future Apple-supplied iPhone softwareupdate is installed. ... Apple strongly discourages users frominstalling unauthorized unlocking programs on their iPhones. Users whomake unauthorized modifications to the software on their iPhone violatetheir iPhone software license agreement and void their warranty. Thepermanent inability to use an iPhone due to installing unlockingsoftware is not covered under the iPhone's warranty."

0 r9 o% D3 k9 `8 O: u) I& F' }+ gApple'sintentions here are perfectly clear and normal -- almost anyelectronics company out there will tell you that their customers arediscouraged from hacking their devices, as it invariably voids thewarranty and might be liable to cause issues in the future. And here'swhy this announcement was a mistake: Apple conflated the issues of SIMunlocking and/or adding 3rd party software with the anticipation ofbricked devices. Basically, Apple sought to preemptively blame the 3rdparty iPhone software community for any devices that their softwareupdate might brick. In the end, stating that the application of v1.1.1to hacked phones "will likely result in ... permanently[inoperability]" ultimately makes Apple look like they're targetingthousands of iPhone modders -- which is why this press release isbiting them in the ass.

3 D5 V- T. N4 D# S6 b9 [; RThere are a lot of Apple customers outthere who have, indeed, had their devices bricked by v1.1.1. We can'tsay for sure how many, but we do know that blog authors to New YorkTimes writers like Saul Hansell and Katie Hafnerhave leveled the pointing finger at Apple for targeting those addingsoftware, in no small part due to the press release above. Apple'srelationship with its customers is souring because, at the outset, manyare starting to believe that the v1.1.1 is nefariously bricking hackedor modded devices; that Apple is somehow hell bent on punishing iPhoneusers who don't want to use the device Steve's way.

Unfortunately,we suspect the truth isn't quite such a juicy story for those lookingto lay blame. We've seen just as many reports of legitimate, "factoryfresh" users getting bricked iPhones as those who've just added apps,SIM unlocked their devices, or done both. In fact, besides a lot ofhearsay and anger from the tech community, we've seen absolutelynothing which indicates to us that Apple is targeting users who'vehacked their phones and is bricking them on update. In an informal andtotally unscientific poll here on Engadget,the number of iPhone users who had never hacked their device but woundup bricked was very similar to the number of users who did hack andbrick their device -- and that's even with polls showing far morevoting users hacked their phones than not.

9 K& j. c* ~# z( `% OWithout anycorrelation in bricking between hacked and unhacked iPhones, it's easyto imagine the v1.1.1 update went out without proper QA testing, and isbricking a certain number of phones indiscriminately. For furtherdetail, we asked iPhone hacker extraordinaire Erica Sadun, of oursister blog TUAW, to weigh in. Shesaid iPhones upgrading to v1.1.1 appear to have a completely "randomdistribution of bricks", implying the far simpler and likelierexplanation is that the update was rushed to meet its release deadline.We know Apple promised the update would be out by September's end, andconsidering how much iPhone software was changed with this update, itstands to reason that Apple worked until the 11th hour just trying tofinish up and push it out the door -- not testing it exhaustively forweeks before shipping to consumers.

So before you pick up anyreal bricks for hurling through Apple windows in a moment offrustration, consider the possibility that some potentially poorchoices decisions on Apple's probably may have led to bricked devices,and the appearance might bethat Cupertino is out to get you for hacking your phone. We sincerelydoubt it's anything that nefarious. But totally locking down the iPhonedoesn't exactly whet our whistle, either, so don't worry, we've stillgot an earful for Apple, too.
& Y6 X% \6 g6 X9 X

' K+ J8 [5 P' ?" S5 _& HOk, Apple.
9 x4 m3 o( h: N% o4 b) G: h
! u- ~& K# l; F% z" s' ?# wLook,you've so seriously backed yourself into a corner on this one. We knowyou think you can't really be taking away what you never actually gaveus. That we were all living on borrowed bits, so to speak, so toughluck when an update breaks something you didn't authorize -- and to acertain extent that's actually a fair stance to take. But the realityof the matter is that the consumer electronics market has changed, andconsumer expectations don't just match what's on the spec sheet. Weknow that you've been extremely clear about what the iPhone does anddoesn't do since day one, and we stand by our initial iPhone review-- we reviewed the iPhone as the device it was on the day of launch,not the device it might one day be. But we still think clamping downthe iPhone is really bad news for consumers.

The first mistakethat was made leading up to this whole debacle was enticing the hackercommunity to develop for the iPhone. Let's be fair, that's exactly whathappened, you can't play innocent here. At Macworld Steve got up onstage and talked about how advanced the iPhone is running a"sophisticated" operating system like OS X, enabling the development of"REAL desktop-class applications", and "not the crippled stuff you findon most phones", only to demand the development community sandbox itsfunctionality in mobile Safari. That's not dangling a carrot in frontof the mule, that's just tempting fate.

7 k* ~5 @4 s, I# H4 O5 c) JThe second mistake wasloosing the iPhone in such a way that it was so easily broken into. Wedon't mean to trivialize the Apple's work in getting the iPhone out thedoor on time, or the open source community's work that went intogaining access to the iPhone and making it ripe for 3rd partydevelopment, but it was only a matter of days before iPhone hackers gotroot access to the device. At its core, jailbreaking an iPhone is justa matter of editing a small number of Unix files, which opens up therest of the phone -- that's like complaining your encryption sucks whenyou're using ROT13. If you were so against users developing for theiPhone, you should have taken the precautions you took with the iPodtouch (which is encrypted to all get out) when initially releasing theiPhone. But now you've convinced buyers of the iPhone's power to run"desktop-class applications" and then practically left the door open.This isn't a fun while it lastedkind of situation, this became the status quo. With AppTapp, 3rd partyapps became so easy to install on the iPhone it was practically anundocumented feature.

- u8 A( ^( f. h+ F8 |The third mistake was putting out thatpress release, which could be construed as being intended topreemptively shift the blame of iPhone brickings to 3rd party iPhonesoftware. There's simply no correlation between iPhone modding andbricking with v1.1.1. So far as we can tell, this fairly major iPhoneupdate just wasn't properly tested, and it's bricking iPhones randomlyand indiscriminately, killing just as many hacked devices as unhackeddevices. To us this smacks a lot of the FUD we heard from Steve earlierthis year, when he said, "You don't want your phone to be an openplatform. ... [AT&T] doesn't want to see their West Coast networkgo down because some application messed up." There's obviously been noshortage of software-adding iPhone users, and yet the wireless companyhaving trouble with uptime these days is RIM.
7 W8 `6 n( k; y8 C+ a+ ~
There has neverbeen a question of whether you have the right to re-lock the iPhone --that's more or less indisputable. We may own the hardware, but you ownthe IP, and while you can't really force us to upgrade, the free marketsays you can upgrade in countless ways you see fit. But with the damagedone, for many users the iPhone lockdown has become a question ofmotive. We may never learn the true reasons why, but it seems only fairto pontificate, especially given Steve's comment in London about the iPhone becoming a cat and mouse game: "[Is Apple] the cat or mouse?"

/ I3 b: @: x+ LPerhapsthis is cause and effect of the SIM unlock solutions. Perhaps someonein accounting ran the numbers and figured out that Apple, which hasunprecedented revenue sharing deals with its wireless carriers, willlose more money from people unlocking iPhones (which requires somelevel of 3rd party openness to accomplish) than it would from justselling the things outright -- therefore, in order to lock out the SIMunlock software, the only solution was to lock out ALL software. Orperhaps you're simply contractually obligated to prevent iPhone unlocksfrom occurring at all costs. (Knowing how much power Apple wields,though, it's hard to believe Steve wrote a blank check to ensureiPhones stay locked at all costs, including customer satisfaction.)

Ormaybe it's because you intend to launch an iPhone software publishingservice. Sure, why not? It's clear 3rd party apps are on the docket,we've heard way too many hints to think otherwise. And since you soclosely control the hardware and software, maybe you're thinking of amore game console-like approach, like the way you sell iPod games --offer customers only Apple-approved 3rd party iPhone software viaiTunes. Developers get their apps certified, users get ease ofinstallation and the assurance that their iPhone won't be knocking outAT&T's West Coast network (har), and Apple gets a cut of the cash.If that is indeed what you're doing, Apple, it sounds to us like you'rein for a world of pain. The only thing worse than taking something awayis taking it away only to offer it back for money.
( z- F6 D) h) Z2 m" ]; t
Look, we,your users, are smart, and we demand more from every company we buyfrom. And as a consumer electronics company, you have a responsibilityto your customers to continuously provide more. You can't put your Legomodel in a kid's hand and throw a fit out when they make somethingbetter than you did. Like it or not, 3rd party developers found a wayinto the iPhone, thus fulfilling the inherent expectation that theiPhone should be an extensible platform. Whether or not you choose topublicly acknowledge it, that expectation is there, period. Sure, youcan try to see this one through, but from where we sit in the middle,an inordinate number of first adoptors, smartphone user that switchedto the iPhone, people that comprise your core customer base arestarting to see you as villainous and money grubbing.

So why notlet Steve give another a press-stopping mea culpa, giving yourcustomers what they want (hey, maybe even throw in an SDK while you'reat it?). Make developing for the iPhone as free and open as it is forevery other smartphone around, and you still get to come out on top asthe company that listens to its customers above all. Sure, the SIMunlock software might still be out there, but you can't fight thisthing forever, the hackers will always catch up, and every wirelesscarrier in the world knows that. At a certain point you're expected todo the right thing for the people keeping you in business, and we thinkthat's happening right now. Even if it is contractual obligation withthe carriers that Apple must stop iPhone unlocking at all costs, isn'tthe buying public at least worthy of an explanation? Enough with thesilent treatment, Apple. A lot of people handed over a lot of money fora cellphone, and we think it's time for some answers -- even if they'rethe answers we don't want to hear.

6 d% {7 `4 Z. @- G  Zhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/10/01/a-note-to-both-apple-and-iphone-customers-on-the-v1-1-1-update/

死老妖

这么多英文？？
7 \0 Q* N* \) ]& k9 x; Z7 x. {
4 v6 }1 [0 {! ]. E0 v不管怎样，已经有黑客通过降低版本后破解了！
: p) j  U! p! |8 b9 h. h
8 Q! _3 {: T/ ^BTW：老乔这也只是表面文章，破不破解对老乔来说真的一点影响都没有，Apple卖的是硬件，而真正受损失的是AT&T