Apple releases new iPhone 2.1 beta as crackers break 2.0.1

[AppleInsider]

Apple has issued a third beta of its iPhone 2.1 upgrade but is being characteristically secretive with details of what it changes. Simultaneously, however, the just-launched 2.0.1 firmware has already been cracked to allow unofficial apps.

Beta 3 of the upcoming iPhone firmware makes no specific mention of new additions and, upon early inspection by those familiar with the update, primarily resolves bugs from earlier builds.

The fix nonetheless comes just a week and a half after the release of beta 2 and indicates a short turnaround schedule for Apple's test releases, which started on July 24th.

The 2.1 refresh is expected to center around the background push notification service that allows live apps to receive Internet data while shut down, but will also have directional GPS support that enables more complex navigation than the simple positional system used with 2.0.

Those not content to wait for official Apple software solutions, however, now have their own update.

The iPhone Dev Team's PwnageTool 2.0.2 allows users to jailbreak any iPhone running the recent 2.0.1 firmware that appears to have broken previous hacks.

Like earlier builds, however, full unlocking to enable support for unofficial cellular carriers is limited to original iPhones due to a change in the cellular baseband with the 3G hardware, which prevents the previous trick from working.

As always, these tools carry the risk of bricking the iPhone's firmware and have no support from Apple either during or after the install process.

[Ireland]

I went from an unlocked 2.0 iPhone to 2.0.1 without restoring it, and it's still unlocked and working on my carrier (not O2). Apple may like the money I'm giving them (30%) through all the apps I'm buying after all.

[zunx]

Why is Apple so stupid sometimes? Did they not learn from the old Mac vs DOS days? Apple, free the iPhone once and for all! Free from carrier. Free from developer. Free, fee, fee. Any carrier. Any application. As should be. Let the user decide! Actually it should be illegal to block in such way something that you have paid for! Imagine a computer blocked to be used with some ISP or with some application. Sounds ridiculous? Well, that is sadly the situation with the iPhone and the iPod Touch.

[Rod76]

Originally Posted by Ireland

I went from an unlocked 2.0 iPhone to 2.0.1 without restoring it, and it's still unlocked and working on my carrier (not O2). Apple may like the money I'm giving them (30%) through all the apps I'm buying after all.

That's my point exactly, they are in a position that "bricking" the phones would cost them more than they'd gain. Unless of course the bricking is being done on principle.

I've spent nearly 200 in the App Store to date and I think they'd be foolish to stop me from giving them money. Hell, if Apple would just unlock my phone I'd have no need or desire to Jailbreak.

[Bergermeister]

Something you have paid for... but as a license, so it is more of a lease.


If someone doesn't want to be confined, then they don't have to buy the iPhone. There are certain advantages that come from being locked or having the App Store: at least everything is checked once before going on your machine. No spyware will get on.

Hope 2.1 improves Japanese input. It is slow, even for me. The wife is going crazy; she now has started using her old phone again for email.

[Akac]

Originally Posted by Rod76

That's my point exactly, they are in a position that "bricking" the phones would cost them more than they'd gain. Unless of course the bricking is being done on principle.

I've spent nearly 200 in the App Store to date and I think they'd be foolish to stop me from giving them money. Hell, if Apple would just unlock my phone I'd have no need or desire to Jailbreak.

Not principle. Legal. AT&T contract requires it.

[MacVicta]

Please, no more features. Fix what's already there.

[Cubert]

I hope 2.1 returns the speed and fluidity of the iPhone OS. My friends who have one say that the first upgrades of 1.0 really helped, but 2.0 was a step backwards for "snappiness".

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by MacVicta

Please, no more features. Fix what's already there.

Why, did you expect new features in 2.1? I didn't.

[wizard69]

Originally Posted by MacVicta

Please, no more features. Fix what's already there.

This I agree with 100%! I updated my 3G to 2.0.1 and it actually seems worst software wise. Calendar seems to be more broken and nothing was done with Mail. Apple very much needs to get these firmed up. Especially clear up all the issues with calendar syncing.

Dave

[TheBum]

Let's hope they fix the Mail app issues where getting any mail at all requires a reboot of the phone if you've gone from a cell network to a wifi network or vice versa.

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by Ireland

I went from an unlocked 2.0 iPhone to 2.0.1 without restoring it, and it's still unlocked and working on my carrier (not O2). Apple may like the money I'm giving them (30%) through all the apps I'm buying after all.

When you say you "went from an unlocked 2.0 iPhone to 2.0.1 without restoring it, and it's still unlocked and working on my carrier (not O2)", do you mean an original Gen 1 (EDGE) iPhone or the Gen 2 (3G), because as far as I know, there is no operator unlock for the 3G phone yet.

Just looking for clarification. The newly release DevTeam now jailbreaks, but does not unlock the 2.0.1 release from Apple.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Bergermeister

If someone doesn't want to be confined, then they don't have to buy the iPhone. There are certain advantages that come from being locked or having the App Store: at least everything is checked once before going on your machine. No spyware will get on.

I know, all this spyware on my Mac is beginning to bug me. Apple should have been pre-checking all those Mac apps for us.

[The General]

Originally Posted by TheBum

Let's hope they fix the Mail app issues where getting any mail at all requires a reboot of the phone if you've gone from a cell network to a wifi network or vice versa.

I do both mobileme and exchange with work and never have this problem.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by sapporobaby

When you say you "went from an unlocked 2.0 iPhone to 2.0.1 without restoring it, and it's still unlocked and working on my carrier (not O2)", do you mean an original Gen 1 (EDGE) iPhone or the Gen 2 (3G), because as far as I know, there is no operator unlock for the 3G phone yet.

Just looking for clarification. The newly release DevTeam now jailbreaks, but does not unlock the 2.0.1 release from Apple.

I installed 2.0 software on a 1st gen. (aluminum) iPhone. I used PwnageTool to unlock and jailbreak the phone, I used 2.0 software on an unsupported network for a week or two, and then when 2.0.1 came along, I simply installed from iTunes, like one would on a regular AT&T contract iPhone (right on top of the of the cracked software), and the software installed fine, despite being an unlocked and jailbroken iPhone.

The result; Apple removed the jailbreak, but left the phone unlocked and fully useable on the same unsupported network.

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by Ireland

I installed 2.0 software on a 1st gen. (aluminum) iPhone. I used PwnageTool to unlock and jailbreak the phone, I used 2.0 software on an unsupported network for a week or two, and then when 2.0.1 came along, I simply installed from iTunes, like one would on a regular AT&T contract iPhone (right on top of the of the cracked software), and the software installed fine, despite being an unlocked and jailbroken iPhone.

The result; Apple removed the jailbreak, but left the phone unlocked and fully useable on the same unsupported network.

Ah, okay. Thanks. I thought I had missed something.

[Mitch1984]

I'm quite annoyed with your ill informed reply, Apple lock down the iPhone because people cannot be trusted to not develop a hack that for the iPhone, the best way for Apple to prevent this is to have some form of control over what apps are installed on the iPhone.

I have chosen not to jailbreak my phone so I can use my phone knowing that trusted apps only are installed only on my phone.

I mean why would anyone develop an app for jailbroken phones only and not through the app store.
To bypass riles of course.

[eAi]

Could the 'directional GPS' be announced with the release of TomTom for iPhone perhaps? I could well be that TomTom asked apple to add directional GPS...

That said, the direction can obviously be easily calculated by just comparing two positions over time - that's all GPS can do, so the only thing Apple can be doing is calculating or interpolating the data at a low level - I'm not sure why this can be done any better at a low level than in software...

[solipsism]

1) The word 'cracker' is racially insensitive (I'm not serious)

2) Pwnage Team should change their version numbering to match that of the iPhone that it can be used with, with an 'A', 'B', etc. following the names as it seems to be confusing to some that don't pay much attention to these things.

[bsenka]

Originally Posted by zunx

Imagine a computer blocked to be used with some ISP or with some application. Sounds ridiculous? Well, that is sadly the situation with the iPhone and the iPod Touch.

I could not agree more. Not just computers, imagine if every cable company had its own proprietary TVs too! Even other phone manufacturers don't do this. Most of them make models that are available through almost every teleco around, GSM or CDMA (some even work on both). There is no acceptable excuse for Apple to force you to use their carrier of choice if you want their product.

[aresee]

Originally Posted by bsenka

There is no acceptable excuse for Apple to force you to use their carrier of choice if you want their product.

It could be the price that Apple had to pay in order to access the networks. It's in ATTs' interest to keep the iPhone customers locked to their network.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by bsenka

I could not agree more. Not just computers, imagine if every cable company had its own proprietary TVs too! Even other phone manufacturers don't do this. Most of them make models that are available through almost every teleco around, GSM or CDMA (some even work on both). There is no acceptable excuse for Apple to force you to use their carrier of choice if you want their product.

That argument doesn't work for many reasons. One, there are not diverse options to choose from like there are with mobile carriers and the many MVNOs. Secondly, most cable companies still require you to rent (or buy in some case) the digi-boxes and/or modems from them.

Beyond that, the argument makes no sense in the US as there are no other carriers that can utilise a 3G iPhone so what you are really saying is that any cell manufacturer would be required to support all cell carrier types and frequency bands even if it's at their expense and goes against their business model.

The same people that say that Apple is branching out too quickly seem to be the same ones who say that Apple isn't offering enough options by not branching out more.

[antiorario]

Originally Posted by bsenka

I could not agree more. Not just computers, imagine if every cable company had its own proprietary TVs too! Even other phone manufacturers don't do this. Most of them make models that are available through almost every teleco around, GSM or CDMA (some even work on both). There is no acceptable excuse for Apple to force you to use their carrier of choice if you want their product.

As far as I understand, the problem in the United States is that only AT&T supports the 3G technology on which the new iPhone works, which is also what it needs to work in other countries. So switching carrier would be pointless.

That is not true where Apple has deals with more carriers, like in Italy, where I was able to buy a perfectly unlocked, contract-free iPhone just a few days ago...

[bsenka]

Originally Posted by solipsism

That argument doesn't work for many reasons. One, there are not diverse options to choose from like there are with mobile carriers and the many MVNOs. Secondly, most cable companies still require you to rent (or buy in some case) the digi-boxes and/or modems from them.

There's LOTS of options, and nobody else locks you in to one company for anything. I've never had to buy/rent any kind of extra box for my cable. Do have a modem for my cable internet, but that is free and so it the appropriate network card if I need it. I did not have to check which ISP was or was not Mac-compatible. Again, this is a very appropriate comparison. What if Apple said that Macs only worked with DSL and not cable or (ugh) dial-up? It's not acceptable, and the excuses people make for it are laughable.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Beyond that, the argument makes no sense in the US as there are no other carriers that can utilise a 3G iPhone so what you are really saying is that any cell manufacturer would be required to support all cell carrier types and frequency bands even if it's at their expense and goes against their business model.

There are many other carriers, using different protocols, and the other phone manufacturers don't have any problem with this. Want the latest Moto, LG, Samsung, HTC, Blackberry, etc? just pick your favorite carrier (GSM or CDMA), and they either have it or they can tell you when they are getting it. Apple is the only one who thinks this excuse has any validity.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by bsenka

There's LOTS of options, and nobody else locks you in to one company for anything. I've never had to buy/rent any kind of extra box for my cable. Do have a modem for my cable internet, but that is free and so it the appropriate network card if I need it. I did not have to check which ISP was or was not Mac-compatible. Again, this is a very appropriate comparison. What if Apple said that Macs only worked with DSL and not cable or (ugh) dial-up? It's not acceptable, and the excuses people make for it are laughable.

As previously stated, your argument doesn't make sense.

There are many other carriers, using different protocols, and the other phone manufacturers don't have any problem with this. Want the latest Moto, LG, Samsung, HTC, Blackberry, etc? just pick your favorite carrier (GSM or CDMA), and they either have it or they can tell you when they are getting it. Apple is the only one who thinks this excuse has any validity.

I don't know of a single cell manufacturer that hasn't offered exclusivity to certain carriers. The Samsung M800 is the first one that comes to mind but it's a common practice. I beleive there is a BB model that just came to AT&T with 3G whereas before you had to use Verizon or Sprint.

[applewiz]

Lets go with the
CECT P168+ and forget hassling with Apple.

[tmedia1]

I refuse to buy an iPhone until they return Netshare to the App Store!

[tmedia1]

Originally Posted by wizard69

This I agree with 100%! I updated my 3G to 2.0.1 and it actually seems worst software wise. Calendar seems to be more broken and nothing was done with Mail. Apple very much needs to get these firmed up. Especially clear up all the issues with calendar syncing.

Dave

It's funny, the more things move forward, the more they seem to move backwards. My old Palm Treo syncs with my calendar perfectly.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by tmedia1

I refuse to buy an iPhone until they return Netshare to the App Store!

What's your reasoning? If it's principle and you live in the US then the fact that your AT&T contract forbids it shatters any moral high ground stance. If it's for usability, then a jailbroken iPhone can achieve the same thing in less steps and for $10 cheaper.

[a_greer]

Originally Posted by Bergermeister

If someone doesn't want to be confined, then they don't have to buy the iPhone. There are certain advantages that come from being locked or having the App Store: at least everything is checked once before going on your machine. No spyware will get on.
.

that is pure BULLSHIT

I everything were carefully checked and vetted, Apple wouldnt be constantly pulling apps, like that I Am Rich app, and internet 3g sharing. If either of those apps didnt line up with the EULA/TOS related to the SDK and store, then Apple shouldnt be publishing it.

And if Apple was testing for overall quality, why are there so many apps that are just one image, and that do nothing, like the Republican app and the Democrat app.

And for that matter, why would I WANT apple to vet the apps for this when they are too fucking incompetent to get their own email app working on this piece of shit that is the 3g ihpone

[mdriftmeyer]

Originally Posted by Rod76

That's my point exactly, they are in a position that "bricking" the phones would cost them more than they'd gain. Unless of course the bricking is being done on principle.

I've spent nearly 200 in the App Store to date and I think they'd be foolish to stop me from giving them money. Hell, if Apple would just unlock my phone I'd have no need or desire to Jailbreak.

Joe Schmoe and a small group of Jailbreakers versus the overwhelming majority of iPhone users, from business professionals to surgeons and more who could give a rat's ass about jailbreaking tells me that Joe you have a lot to learn about Legal Contracts and the Carriers who will sue Apple if they don't make an earnest attempt at blocking the Jailbreaking.

[success]

Originally Posted by Bergermeister

Something you have paid for... but as a license, so it is more of a lease.


If someone doesn't want to be confined, then they don't have to buy the iPhone. There are certain advantages that come from being locked or having the App Store: at least everything is checked once before going on your machine. No spyware will get on.

Hope 2.1 improves Japanese input. It is slow, even for me. The wife is going crazy; she now has started using her old phone again for email.

I think I can be quoted as warning people about this. I said on about four different threads including my own rant about how no ones cares about the iPhone in Japan. I still haven't seen one person using one. Waste of money. Just buy an iPod Touch.

I just started dating a girl who works for Softbank. We were both eating alone at a restaurant and so of course I just had to start talking to a cute girl eating by herself I was thinking of getting an iPhone through her but she told me the iPhone looks cool of course but its reception is not that great compared to say AU/KDDi. This has always been the case and is why many new mobile users in Japan choose AU/KDDi for their first phone like I did. When I first arrived in Japan my Japanese friends told me to use AU because they have the best reception. No subway dropouts etc. The Japanese input is slow and some features like fun cool emoticons are non existent.

She uses an older phone herself. Won't touch the iPhone.

[bsenka]

Originally Posted by solipsism

As previously stated, your argument doesn't make sense.

It's your objections that don't make sense.

I don't know of a single cell manufacturer that hasn't offered exclusivity to certain carriers. The Samsung M800 is the first one that comes to mind but it's a common practice.

M800 is the CDMA version of the F700. Choice, Samsung gets it.

I beleive there is a BB model that just came to AT&T with 3G whereas before you had to use Verizon or Sprint.

AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint all have Blackberries though don't they? I've seen attempts at short-term model differentiation between carriers, but I've never seen true mfr exclusivity until the iPhone.

A really good example of a company doing a phone launch properly, is HTC's Diamond. By the amount of talk on Howard Forums, this one seems to have at least as strong demand as the iPhone, if not more. The Diamond is coming out for almost everyone, GSM and CDMA, all within a few months of each other.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by bsenka

It's your objections that don't make sense.

If capitalism doesn't make sense to you, but a communistic approach to doing business does, then we will can never possibly see eye to eye. I believe in a free market, and that means that companies can work together to further their goals.

M800 is the CDMA version of the F700. Choice, Samsung gets it.

No, they aren't. Even if the difference was only the cell type you've still ignored that it's available to Sprint and not Verizon.

AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint all have Blackberries though don't they? I've seen attempts at short-term model differentiation between carriers, but I've never seen true mfr exclusivity until the iPhone.

They do, but RiM has issued exclusivity to carriers, just like Apple is doing. Are you saying that Apple should be required by law to provide a diverse model line up of their product line and disallow any exclusivity? If so, you have a lot of lobbying to do and lot of toes to step on.

A really good example of a company doing a phone launch properly, is HTC's Diamond. By the amount of talk on Howard Forums, this one seems to have at least as strong demand as the iPhone, if not more. The Diamond is coming out for almost everyone, GSM and CDMA, all within a few months of each other.

Good for HTC. If the demand is high and it's available to every carrier then should be no problem unless you think that every company should exactly the same. We live in a capitalist society. If you don't like the laws then you need to work to have them ratified. Did you complain when Intel used Apple to showcase some low-production high-end chips or is this just an issue with the iPhone not being available for the CDMA carrier you want to use? Assuming it's Verizon, would you have been vocal about your dislike of such a common exclusivity contract if Verizon had paired with Apple?

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by eAi

Could the 'directional GPS' be announced with the release of TomTom for iPhone perhaps? I could well be that TomTom asked apple to add directional GPS...

That said, the direction can obviously be easily calculated by just comparing two positions over time - that's all GPS can do, so the only thing Apple can be doing is calculating or interpolating the data at a low level - I'm not sure why this can be done any better at a low level than in software...

Actually you need 4 satellite receptions to get an accurate fix as space is in 3 dimensions. Also it would hinge on the receiver in the iPhone (most likely not a SIRFstar III), and the antenna placement. I would think that the iPhone has the processing power (my Nokia N82 has turn by turn ability), it would just be up to Apple to allow 3rd party guys to develop for it.

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by success

I think I can be quoted as warning people about this. I said on about four different threads including my own rant about how no ones cares about the iPhone in Japan. I still haven't seen one person using one. Waste of money. Just buy an iPod Touch.

I just started dating a girl who works for Softbank. We were both eating alone at a restaurant and so of course I just had to start talking to a cute girl eating by herself I was thinking of getting an iPhone through her but she told me the iPhone looks cool of course but its reception is not that great compared to say AU/KDDi. This has always been the case and is why many new mobile users in Japan choose AU/KDDi for their first phone like I did. When I first arrived in Japan my Japanese friends told me to use AU because they have the best reception. No subway dropouts etc. The Japanese input is slow and some features like fun cool emoticons are non existent.

She uses an older phone herself. Won't touch the iPhone.

I have to agree with you about this as well. Here in Finland, I hardly see anyone with the iPhone. In fact Sonera is calling people that put their names on a waiting list to get one. It seems that people are not happy with the 2 year lock in that Sonera is offering. Right now if you want, you can get a black 8 or 16 gb, as well as with the white ones. Apple does not seem to understand customers outside of the US that well. Not saying that they aren't having success but they seem to be applying a US biz model to European customers that are in some ways a bit more savvy in regards to mobile telephony than their American counter-parts. People here see it that Apple is screwing them with the contract and that Sonera is the enforcer behind this stupid policy. Some have even written Sonera to tell them that once their iPhone contract is up, they plan to leave Sonera and go to any other operator no matter what.

[sapporobaby]

Originally Posted by solipsism

1) The word 'cracker' is racially insensitive (I'm not serious)
.

Well, it depends on where the comment is directed I guess. Doesn't "cracker" in the software world denote someone that cracks a code or device for less than ethical, or financial reasons? The last time I checked the DevTeam, nor Zibri were selling their wares but were offering them for free. Zibri was accepting donations but his site is mainly ad driven.

It seems as though AI used the term "cracker" do denote something nefarious on the part of the hacking community. They were able to deliver something Apple won't. Unlocked phones for the masses.

P.S. you are right about the DevTeam following a normal naming convention for their tools.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by bsenka

There's LOTS of options, and nobody else locks you in to one company for anything. I've never had to buy/rent any kind of extra box for my cable. Do have a modem for my cable internet, but that is free and so it the appropriate network card if I need it. I did not have to check which ISP was or was not Mac-compatible. Again, this is a very appropriate comparison. What if Apple said that Macs only worked with DSL and not cable or (ugh) dial-up? It's not acceptable, and the excuses people make for it are laughable.

What you don't seem to be taking into account is that phone service came before cell service. Computer standards are far worse than what we see for cell service. So it;s a confusing mess all around.

You are wrong in that you can't just buy any software and hardware for your Mac, or for your Windows box, and that goes triple for a Linux box. There are standards. You can't even get drivers sometimes!

What Apple is conforming to are the demands of the carriers, and the governments in various countries.

Apple does what it must wherever it is.

As for AT&T, that was the first carrier, in the first country. Apple was trying to get as much out of that as possible. I can't blame them, though I think it was a mistake, and I've stated that before.
But, it's not as simple as you are suggesting it is.

There are many other carriers, using different protocols, and the other phone manufacturers don't have any problem with this. Want the latest Moto, LG, Samsung, HTC, Blackberry, etc? just pick your favorite carrier (GSM or CDMA), and they either have it or they can tell you when they are getting it. Apple is the only one who thinks this excuse has any validity.

Again, only partly true. Try to get the Instinct that's available on Sprint anywhere else. You can't. It's ONLY for Sprint. There are many other examples of that for every carrier. Sometimes a phone is also exclusive for several months on one carrier, or even for a year.

In fact, it's that that the iPhone wasn't available everywhere that we're seeing some carriers open their networks to more compatible phones, something they didn't do in the past.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by tmedia1

It's funny, the more things move forward, the more they seem to move backwards. My old Palm Treo syncs with my calendar perfectly.

Oh goody, I'm sure that will make them stand up and take notice. Bother AT&T about it, not Apple. I'm pretty sure Apple couldn't give a crap if you use it or not.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by a_greer

that is pure BULLSHIT

I everything were carefully checked and vetted, Apple wouldnt be constantly pulling apps, like that I Am Rich app, and internet 3g sharing. If either of those apps didnt line up with the EULA/TOS related to the SDK and store, then Apple shouldnt be publishing it.

And if Apple was testing for overall quality, why are there so many apps that are just one image, and that do nothing, like the Republican app and the Democrat app.

It's really a good question.

And for that matter, why would I WANT apple to vet the apps for this when they are too fucking incompetent to get their own email app working on this piece of shit that is the 3g ihpone

But now, you're just hyperventilating.