Skip to content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Add
About | Wiki | Legacy

Third party apps on iPhone void warranty

Yet more reason to avoid iPhone, just confirming how locked down it is and how dependent its users have to be on Apple.

Gizmodo blogger Brian Lan says: "You heard that the new firmware bricks unlocked iphones? Get this: Apple just confirmed to me that running any third-party app at all voids the warranty, and you won't be covered if your iPhone bricks for whatever reason. The reasoning is that Apple cannot distinguish between other third party apps and those that have been confirmed to combine with the new firmware to cause iPhone Brick-itus." -- Read more

It also quotes the Apple press release related to the issue:

"CUPERTINO, Calif., Sept. 24 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Apple has discovered that many of the unauthorized iPhone unlocking programs available on the Internet cause irreparable damage to the iPhone's software, which will likely result in the modified iPhone becoming permanently inoperable when a future Apple-supplied iPhone software update is installed. Apple plans to release the next iPhone software update, containing many new features including the iTunes Wi-Fi Music Store (www.itunes.com), later this week. Apple strongly discourages users from installing unauthorized unlocking programs on their iPhones. Users who make unauthorized modifications to the software on their iPhone violate their iPhone software license agreement and void their warranty. The permanent inability to use an iPhone due to installing unlocking software is not covered under the iPhone's warranty."

More:

Comments

It seems Apple still want to

It seems Apple still want to control branded hardware even if the physical device now belongs to a private individual. I wonder when the first anti-competition law suit will come against the iPhone etc? As it is behaving in a despicable manner when it comes to people's freedom to choose. Sigh, Apple is a rampant monopolist.

Maybe "monopolist" is not

 

Maybe "monopolist" is not the right word, as far as I can tell there is nothing forcing anyone to buy an iPhone (except fanboy craze of course Laughing out loud ). But I agree they do the lock-in thing way too much. If only there was a nice noun for a company that behaves that way.

true

tbuitenh wrote:

Maybe "monopolist" is not the right word, as far as I can tell there is nothing forcing anyone to buy an iPhone (except fanboy craze of course Laughing out loud ).

Indeed this is true, although I believe that they are trying to create a monopoly over the software on their hardware.

Since some might justify

Since some might justify such an attempt (to create a monopoly over the software on "their" hardware) I find it worth posting a reminder that the hardware is actually no longer theirs. The iPhone payed for by the user should be the property of the user and therefore trying to control what the user runs on it is basically an intrusion over private property.

In fact, this same principle applies to copies of software too. Apparently software isn't enough anymore, now even hardware is being subjected under the control of its vendor.

This really shows the way Apple, and many other in the industry, are increasingly thinking, that as vendors, simply because they produced something originally, they should be able to hold complete control over every unit that comes from that original, every "copy" so to speak. In a way, this just further exposes the real nature of proprietary interests in their most negative sense as simply totalitarian. Tech companies that pursue such goals are basically becoming (or already are) control freaks.

And it all goes from that simple fundamental shift in perception. Rather than being perceived as equal, the customer and the vendors are increasingly seen in imbalance. Consumer merely consumes and for that serves the vendor and its interests. The vendor in turns, indeed, treats the consumer as a mere pawn, a pitiful human who should be happy that the vendor even has something to offer, let alone ask for some *rights* in addition to having some sort of limited access to what he payed to consume.

In other words:

Apple: Behold the iPhone, the new revolution, the shiny, the irresistible, the sheer beauty and power in your palm.
Pitiful consumer: I want it! I want it! Gosh, here's my $600 for it.. Give it to me! Give it to me now!
Apple: Thank you for your money. Here's the iPhone, now sign up here and here and here and here.
Consumer: I want to change my battery!
Apple: Thou shalt come to Apple to change your battery.
Consumer: I want to use my iPhone with other telecoms.
Apple: Thou shalt use iPhone only with providers that we choose.
Consumer: I want to use another software with my iPhone.
Apple: Thou shalt use only our software on OUR iPhone.
Consumer: But it is mine! I payed for it!
Apple: Thou shalt shut up for you shall be happy that we have made this wonder and sold it to you in the first place. Therefore we deserve to be in control over it perpetually. And remember, you SIGNED!!!

Pitiful indeed. Well, let's not let ourselves be pitiful consumers and let's avoid buying from companies who treat their customers as such.

And the consumer in the above story should just trash the thing and, you know, start over.. buy Neo1973 when it's out.

Thanks

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.