Login:
Password:

ITunes Update Makes Some Legit Phones 'iBricks'

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

September 28, 2007, 12:36 PM

While Apple has warned those who have unlocked the iPhone that the latest update would likely break their phones, some users are finding their locked phones broken by the update.

Reports first began surfacing on the website Twitter among users who had a locked iPhone and experienced problems after the update. The issues ranged from a loss of all data on the phone to 'bricking' of the device.

One of the users who reported problems was Patrick Scoble, son of blogger Robert Scoble. In Patrick's case, the phone was still usable, however all his personal data had been removed from the device. Robert's phone update went without a hitch, he reported.

While it just may be bad luck for Apple, the bricking is hitting some high-profile tech luminaries, including venture capitalist Jeff Clavier. And it seems to be fairly widespread -- blogs across the Web had comments from those who were experiencing similar issues.

It is not clear exactly why this is occurring, as Apple has yet to comment on the problems. But the rash of reports from those who have not unlocked or modified their phones indicates that whatever the Cupertino company is doing to 'brick' unlockers may have unintentionally taken out some of its law-abiding customers.

Whether Apple was in its right to brick phones depends on who one is asking. Technology blogger Jeremy Toeman said he was 'on the fence' as to whether Apple was doing the right thing.

"I see on one side: people who used quasi-legal means to bypass a system they most likely signed an agreement not to do, and are now frustrated because they can't do so," he said in comments to a blog post by Robert Scoble.

"And on the other: people who bought a darn phone and want to use it on any network they please, and should probably have such a right. It isn't quite so clear cut in my eyes."

Add a Comment (60 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By thomas.tmc

posted Oct 1, 2007 - 11:53 PM

First they lock 3rd party apps out of iPods so that people are stuck with iTunes, which sucks by the way, and now this?

Next they'll cut the price of iPhones in half, ripping off early adopters. Oh yeah, they already did that.

And people complain about Microsoft?

Score: 0

By romanski@pdx.edu

posted Oct 1, 2007 - 11:25 AM

iPhone a Trojan Horse For Government Surveillance?

http://www.prisonplanet....7iphonesurveillance.htm

Score: 0

By alex_sporik

posted Sep 30, 2007 - 2:06 AM

This is all your beloved Apple :)))

You bought it first for 200$ extra, then they lock YOUR phone, what next ? Just use something more USER-FRIENDLY, for instance Nokia :))) At least they doesn't make these dirty tricks

Score: 0

By dracodos

edited Sep 29, 2007 - 10:56 PM

First off you need to prove Apple intentionally did this. Just them giving a warning that a hacked iPhone may be bricked after an update is not enough for a lawsuit.

But it's odd there's been no word from Apple about this sporadic problem of legit iPhones being bricked and i would assume that if it's the case Apple SHOULD fix/replace those phones free of charge.

So has anyone who hacked their iPhone have any issues with the update? Because i'm curious if the hacked phones are also getting bricked or are they just re-locked.

Oh and by the way consumers DO NOT OWN the software they buy. It's a license, just like music. The only owners of the software is the company that writes/distributes it so altering any software outside of the basic terms of the agreement, violates that agreement. In other words if you screw with it and screw it up, you're on your own. You do have the right to REPLACE that software if you so choose. Which is probably why iPod software like RockBox and ipodlinux continue on.

Score: 0

By Jackanapes

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 5:42 AM

I do not buy Sony products and I will not not buy Apple products. Bottom line is if I pay a premium for something then it is mine to do with as I wish. Now if Apple where to lease me a phone and retain ownership of it then I could see them having the kind of control they seem to want.

I don't get the whole "insure quality" argument.

Score: 0

By ladylust

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 2:25 PM

Actually you own the phone but not the software. The software license is to use, you do not own the software.. just like you do not own the software your using to connect to the internet.

Score: 0

By pitdingo

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 10:30 PM

I know ten people who have iPhones, not one has a problem. Is there any evidence of this other than some forum posting?

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 9:43 AM

Of course pitdingo, Apple's products are all perfect. Only Microsoft's products are bad. Maybe it's time to pull your head out of your a** and admit the facts.

Score: 0

By pitdingo

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 4:19 PM

My post said nothing about M$ products, M$ drone. Do you M$ drones get paid to mention M$ in every post?

I am asking an open question. Has there been any real confirmed evidence of this or is it just some dude on a forum claiming the sky is falling?

I find it odd that all the people i know with iPhones have no problem yet people are talking like every phone is messed up.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 2:07 AM

I wonder how many BD/PS3 players Sony will brick with it's 1.1 spec update?

Score: 0

By pitdingo

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 4:20 PM

we will have to wait and see. You could ask the same question about the next M$ 360 and Wii updates too.

Score: 0

By phenomnaruto

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 1:40 AM

I'm not racist my bestfriend is blackand uses apple .... useless post from pit

Score: 0

By mdotwills

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 8:46 PM

Geez, Apple might be greedy for money after all! Isn't it more the iPhones sold with AT&T contracts the commission for apple? Apple, just let 3rd Party lead the way, your obviously not adequate enough...

Score: 0

By WeezulDK

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 8:02 PM

There is going to be a class-action lawsuit over this whole affair, you watch. The basis of the lawsuit will be Apple's willful intent to brick phones that have been *legally* unlocked versus the "Carterfone" decision as well as the government's blessing last year to consumers to unlock their phones. It's going to get ugly, folks, you can bet that.

Don't let Apple fool you. It's perfectly legal to unlock your iPhone. Just because Apple doesn't want you to doesn't give them the right to do what they're doing.

Any arguments to the effect of "well if you don't like it, don't buy an iPhone" aren't going to cut it. Like I said before, anyone who pays full price for an iPhone while getting locked into an overpriced contract for such a non-revolutionary and behind-the-times technology device is getting shafted.

Score: 0

By saintchuck

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 9:19 PM

Might want to watch accusing people of willful damage.

Apple has never said it is illegal to unlock your iPhone. They have every right to do what they are doing.

"anyone who pays full price for an iPhone while getting locked into an overpriced contract for such a non-revolutionary and behind-the-times technology device is getting shafted"

It should read "willingly getting shafted". Then again, if they think it is a overpriced contract and a non-revolutionary behind-the-times technological device and they bought it anyway they aren't that intelligent now are they?

Score: 0

By WeezulDK

edited Sep 28, 2007 - 11:14 PM

I'm not accusing them of willful damage, (actually, yes, it's pretty much been implied by Apple that it would happen, so yeah I guess I *am* accusing them of willfully doing it, since they pretty much *warned everyone of it* before they did it!) it's pretty much been proven that they're bricking phones/deleting data with this botched patch, all in an attempt to stop people from *legally unlocking their phones*.

You're right, they're willingly getting shafted. I guess some people are gluttons for punishment.

All it will take is the right person to get their data wiped or phone bricked (preferably some bigwig in the FTC or FCC) before the lawsuits ensue. Besides, in such a litigious society as ours, it's only a matter of time. Heck, the frivilous lawsuit stemming from that idiot about the $200 price drop "affecting people who wish to resell their phone later at a discount" is a great example.

Score: 0

By dr_milodog

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 7:32 PM

Maybe Apple will sell a iPatch to fix to the bricked iPhones that people spent way to much money on anyways.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 7:48 PM

People will only pirate it.

Score: 0

By sacaripasa

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 7:16 PM

Don't update. With all the "problems" people are having legit or not, use the phone with its current firmware, don't get the new one....yet. Yes, I have a iPhone, and yes I thought about returning it within the first 14 days because I felt it was too cumbersome and I couldn't get the visual VM to work properly, but I still have it. As for signing a statement that you wont unlock and switch carriers with it, YES that is exactly what they do, my sales rep even circled that paragraph and went out of his way to say it.

Score: 0

By skimore

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 6:46 PM

Apple 0wns your PHONE!!! you have NO control over it!! Master Jobs will do as he feels... If you do not like it he could call Gore(member of the apple board of directors) to throw a freeze on your state!! (Gore Effect)

Score: 0

By Dervish

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 4:38 PM

Did anyone stop to think what would happen when an iPhone sent an activation request into a network that was not AT&T? Everyone was so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.

Score: 0

By Austin814

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 4:30 PM

I like the comment about how QC is getting worse with Apple... is this a fact on how its more difficult to maintain quality when your market share grows?

On another note..
Can an article containing Apple be written without referring to it as "Cupertino company"? Why is it important to mention where Apple is located in every article? I think if we needed to know we could use the mountain view, CA companys website to look it up or alternatively virtual earth offered by the Redmond Wa company.

Score: 0

By dhjdhj

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 11:54 PM

But what if you wanted to know WHAT companies are in Cupertino?

--->Can an article containing Apple be written without referring to it as "Cupertino company"? I think if we needed to know we could use the mountain view, CA companys website to look it up or alternatively virtual earth offered by the Redmond Wa company.

Score: 0

By dlab21

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 4:29 PM

"indicates that whatever the Cupertino company is doing to 'brick' unlockers may have unintentionally taken out some of its law-abiding customers.
i hope you are referring to 'apple law' or something of the sort as unlocking of a device from a carrier is perfectly legal as well as the carrier locking the device in the first place is perfectly legal.

And no the contracts do not and cannot state that unlocking is a breach of the tos.

Score: 0

By wincement

edited Sep 28, 2007 - 10:27 PM

Yeah, but the phone is only legally unlocked if it is unlocked through the carrier who locked it in the first place.

I think I want to say "lock" a few more times. Lock, lock, lock. Ok, I'm good.

Score: 0

By dlab21

posted Sep 30, 2007 - 7:00 PM

that is not true. if the consumer has the means to unlock the device there is no percussions of them doing so.
i have people calling in daily requesting unlock codes for their iphone and I deny them and tell them to 'google it'.

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 2:15 AM

Lock. I was the last one to say lock. ;)

Score: 0

By -Wanted-

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 6:29 PM

How much do you know about WTB and the tempering with FCC approved devices?

Score: 0

By oc-athlonxp.com

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 3:27 PM

I thought I "bricked" my iphone last night after installing the 1.1.1 update. I followed the steps I found by searching the Apple FAQ, KB, and support forums and learned how to "unbrick" my phone. My phone was never unlocked or altered in any way. After figuring out what went wrong (the USB on my computer has been "flaky" after experiencing a power dip several months ago) the update installed without a hitch. After installing the update, all my information was lost. Thankfully, itunes made a backup earlier that day and I restored ALL of my data/songs/settings. The only thing that was not backed up was my e-mail and wifi passwords. What I did was install itunes on a different computer and the update installed without a hitch on my iphone (which was in recovery mode). All in all, i love my iphone. My upgrade path was less painful then with most, as I was already a Cingular/AT&T customer.

Score: 0

By Mystiqq

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 3:04 PM

Dont want to have locked phone? Dont buy iPhone. Problem solved, next.

Score: 0

By phenomnaruto

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 3:03 PM

enjoy your iphones.

Score: 0

By dgootman

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 3:22 PM

You know you're just jealous.
(I don't have one, either)

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 2:17 AM

I wouldn't take it even if they paid me $600. Ok, maybe I would. I'd just take the money and sell the iPhone on ebay.

Score: 0

By phenomnaruto

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 1:41 AM

lolwut? with this many problems imma stay with my phone ... that works

Score: 0

By OSUBrady

edited Sep 28, 2007 - 2:38 PM

I updated my un-modified iPhone last night. All went well but the update took over five minutes and when it was done the phone said connect to iTunes to activate iPhone like it was new out of the box. After the phone connected to iTunes it was fine; no info lost. So it appears that it is reactivating the phone to catch unlocked iPhones. It never did this on previous updates. I personally believe that you should be able to unlock the phone without apple trying to disable the phone. But hey what do I know I am just the customer right...

Score: 0

By tankist

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 3:24 PM

don't you think that all that jumping through hoops is not there to benefit the you as the user but to make sure aplle keeps tight leash on how you use the device. why are you keep jumping?

beyound me how the company can have a right to tell you how to use your (purchased) property?

Now, you looking at not customer oriented product from company that is absolutley not customer oriented and still peps shel out their money... why is this happening (rethoric of cource)?

Score: 0

By GS5

edited Sep 28, 2007 - 4:23 PM

Dude, don't you know that Apple users are expert hoop jumpers?
They've been doing it forever, they're used to it.
You're not going to convince them otherwise.
So just make peace with it:-)LOL

Score: 0

By OSUBrady

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 6:01 PM

Whoa there don't brand me an Apple fanboi just yet! This is my first Apple device.

Score: 0

By GS5

edited Sep 29, 2007 - 3:04 AM

Yeah right, all you Apple fanboys say the same thing. Just admit it and be proud to be Steve Jobs' b!tch:-) LMAO

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 2:20 AM

Well maybe you weren't before you got the iPhone, but now you are. ;)

Note: I was being sarcastic.

Score: 0

By tankist

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 4:29 PM

don't get me wrong, i'm perfectly in peace with them. i realize some people do like abuse, it's just beyound me why.

Score: 0

By Lawrence01

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 2:04 PM

Hearing several reports about how it trashed a persons phone who has not done anything as far as unlocking it or what have you. Apple QC isn't as good as it once was, software as well as hardware.
Yet they still charge premium pricing.

Score: 0

By eoswald

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 5:25 PM

I would agree with this. My MB Pro has had far more quality issues than my PB G4 ever had..

Score: 0

By PostDeals

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 1:27 PM

APPLE is coming close to the evil MICROSHAFT who is forcing their policies and technology upon us.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 2:08 AM

I bet you are posting from a Windows computer.

Score: 0

By iamtux

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 1:32 PM

fail. go troll somewhere else.

Score: 0

By phenomnaruto

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 3:05 PM

second.

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 10:29 PM

Third.

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Sep 29, 2007 - 2:22 AM

Fifth! Oh oops, Forth!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Sep 28, 2007 - 1:10 PM

indicates that whatever the Cupertino company is doing to 'brick' unlockers may have unintentionally taken out some of its law-abiding customers.

So we're now operating fully under the assumption that Apple is intentionally bricking unlocked users?

Any proof of that, Ed? All I've seen so far are modifications no longer working, and the phone locked again. Unless your definition of "bricked" is different than most, we've had no verifiable reports of unlocked iPhones being bricked, and definitely nothing conclusive as to whether it is intentional on Apple's part..

Score: 0

By AaronDobbins

posted Sep 30, 2007 - 11:03 AM

Doesn't it say "unintentionally" in the quote you posted? Ed is saying they were intentionally trying to brick hacked phones and inadvertently bricked some legit users. I really don't make the connection you are making here.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Oct 1, 2007 - 11:08 AM

He was pointing out that Apple never actually said that they were bricking hacked phones, but that Ed is putting it down as fact.

Score: 0

By GS5

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 1:36 PM

No, there's no proof that it was done intentionally.

But does this mean you don't think it was done intentionally???

I'm really curious!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 2:17 PM

Of course I think it was done intentionally. But that still doesn't mean any journalists should be stating this assumption as fact.

Score: 0

By GS5

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 4:19 PM

O.K., Just checking.

But there are other articles out there that infer this same point. I guess it's just to noticeable for anyone to pretend otherwise, even journalists.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 1:13 PM

There have if you google around forums a bit.
But yes, there's no proof it was intentional by Apple.

Score: 0

By JeremyGNJ

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 1:03 PM

Love it!

Score: 0

By GS5

posted Sep 28, 2007 - 12:51 PM

Dohh!!!

Score: 0

By trickyt

edited Sep 30, 2007 - 5:13 AM

Nobody in these forums has explicitly stated that he has read the Apple Terms of Service, and that it does, or does not permit unlocking. Nobody has explicitly quoted the wording of a US law which apparently allows the unlocking of phones (- someone hinted that only the original network can unlock it). So we remain in the dark as to the legal position.

However, iPhone users have allowed their phones to be unlocked by the the use of third party software which has not been approved or tested by Apple. Apple thus can not know whether that software is going to be compatible with later versions of its software. Apple quite rightly has said something like "Unlocked phones might not work...". What else could they say? They simply do not know what changes the software hacks have made (- or do they?), and they certainly could not test the phones to see if they work with every kind of unlock hack.

If you buy any piece of kit these days there is usually a label which reads "warranty void if removed". This is designed to stop you opening the box, messing with the insides and then expecting the manufacturer to pick up the tab for your incompetence. An iPhone is no different. Everyone knows that unlike a PC it was not designed with open architechture, ready to be hacked. If you hack it, you are taking a risk.

Where I think Apple went wrong was to have an exclusive tie in with ATT. Here in Europe, you can buy both unlocked and locked versions of many phones. The locked version is cheaper because it is subsidised by the network carrier.

Apple should have had locked and unlocked versions available on day one, with the locked version being $200 cheaper. The consumer would then have had a choice. That's freedom. The way they did it gives users no choice. It sounds like Microsoft's tie up with PC manufacturers and their software bundling which is subject to lawsuits. Apple should allow an open market by giving users a choice to buy either locked or unlocked phones.

Score: 0

By khetos

posted Sep 30, 2007 - 2:07 PM

same issue im having with telus, and motorola...

im trying to use a iden phone (i880) in a car pc phoco software, for hands free, and it does not work, seems telus locks it, and no one actually takes responsability, or knows.

i call motorola, they say the phone should be capable of doing this, telus says they art sure or dont know, but ill tell you its locked...
soo why do this? its like making a car that goes 100 miles to the galon, and selling it where its been locked to 30 miles a galon, like why?
why make it do sometihng, and lock it to very limited? makes no sence.

Score: 0