Prototype iPhone was left at bar by Apple software engineer

1235789

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 161
    olternautolternaut Posts: 1,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post


    Does it really matter? I'm sure he is in the witness protection program by now...



    I'm just curious as to the bounty Apple will place on their Wanted: Dead or Alive posters...



    Haha. Some low life bounty hunter/ex-hell's angel on a harley will poppin wheelies while laughin maniacally as he streaks down the highway hot on Gray's trail......shotgun N grenades in tote.
  • Reply 82 of 161
    From this point forward, if I ever do something really, really, really stupid and get called on it, I will respond by saying, "I underestimated how good German beer is."
  • Reply 83 of 161
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mael View Post


    Allround I feel bad about this saga.



    I feel bad for Apple's security.



    I feel bad for the young man involved in losing this phone.



    I feel bad about the way Gizmodo are gloating.

    .



    This is hilarious - from Gizmodo, the guy who found TRIED TO CALL APPLE TO RETURN IT, and was brushed off:



    "He reached for a phone and called a lot of Apple numbers and tried to find someone who was at least willing to transfer his call to the right person, but no luck. No one took him seriously and all he got for his troubles was a ticket number."



    Good job Apple - karma really sucks sometimes don't it?
  • Reply 84 of 161
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Olternaut View Post


    In the end, that may very well be what Steve Jobs N company does....shrug and move on.

    But you can bet your life Jobs is fuming is top off all now! Heads will roll over this on the Apple campus. You guys are underestimating how much of a control freak Steve Jobs is.

    Jobs is more than simply annoyed.



    But there's a major part of me -- indeed, the shareholder part -- that is also getting tried of these types of SJ annoyances and control-freakishness. Apple has become too big and important to be subject to hissy fits by one individual (Fwiw: I happen to think he is a genius, and have nothing but the utmost respect for him).



    I was comfortably past Apple being conflated with Steve Jobs, but looks like like we are right back there again. It worries me.



    Perhaps this is where the wisdom, maturity, and counsel of the Board comes in.
  • Reply 85 of 161
    olternautolternaut Posts: 1,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    But there's a major part of me -- indeed, the shareholder part -- that is also getting tried of these types of SJ annoyances and control-freakishness. Apple has become too big and important to be subject to hissy fits by one individual (Fwiw: I happen to think he is a genius, and have nothing but the utmost respect for him).



    I was comfortably past Apple being conflated with Steve Jobs, but looks like like we are right back there again. It worries me.



    Perhaps this is where the wisdom, maturity, and counsel of the Board comes in.



    Ha! The board members are handpicked to be favorable to Jobs. Plus, I think they're scared of him.

    The ones that stood up to him to make sure Jobs stayed in check have either moved on or past away.
  • Reply 86 of 161
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Perhaps you think I am excusing what these guys are doing. Or that I am elevating them to a pedestal to which they do not belong.



    Neither is my intention. I think you misunderstand.



    I am simply suggesting that, as a $220B market cap company (and the the third most valuable company in the US), Apple is not necessarily viewed anymore by the public at large that 'scrappy little outsider' that many of us grew up with over the past 25 years. Rather, someone like a Gawker or Gizmodo is.



    Seriously: Does it really pay for Apple to take on something like this, and get into a public pi**ing contest? In my view, no. After all, it's the fourth generation of the product, and as many have pointed out, it's not as though they are implementing something here that others in the market haven't put out there (even if less successfully).



    Fair enough, but I'd argue that Gizmodo is hardly deserving of loveable monikers like "scrappy."



    Anyone who knows them, knows that they have no integrity and few brains between them. Their entire "career" is a long series of juvenile stunts and insults. I read one insightful, intelligent article there once by Jesus Diaz, but that's pretty much it. The rest is hateful nonsense, smugly served by some of the most selfish foul-mouthed porn-freaks I've ever talked to.



    I agree that things being what they are the Gizmodo guys will probably get off scott free, but I think they shouldn't. They should go to jail.
  • Reply 87 of 161
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Olternaut View Post


    Ha! The board members are handpicked to be favorable to Jobs. Plus, I think they're scared of him.

    The ones that stood up to him to make sure Jobs stayed in check have either moved on or past away.



    If I thought that were true, I'd sell my shares NOW.



    While they are certainly not antagonists, I don't think the Board is a bunch of pushovers.



    Not in today's governance environment.
  • Reply 88 of 161
    the guy who lost the phone is f***ed. i bet that was his dream job and he was just responsible for one of the most colossal leaks in apple history. I feel bad for him. I'm sure if he gets the phone back he'll have less penalties to endure, but he's still gonna loose his job. may not be able to get another like it ever or at least for a while.
  • Reply 89 of 161
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Fair enough, but I'd argue that Gizmodo is hardly deserving of loveable monikers like "scrappy."



    Anyone who knows them, knows that they have no integrity and few brains between them. Their entire "career" is a long series of juvenile stunts and insults. I read one insightful, intelligent article there once by Jesus Diaz, but that's pretty much it. The rest is hateful nonsense, smugly served by some of the most selfish foul-mouthed porn-freaks I've ever talked to.



    I agree that things being what they are the Gizmodo guys will probably get off scott free, but I think they shouldn't. They should go to jail.



    I don't know their history or their predilections, to be honest.



    I've only been to their website in the past couple of months -- since the iPad, basically -- and I have to say that I find their stories to be quite reasonable and informative. Perhaps it is their temporary (or new) persona. Certainly nothing that has jumped out at me as suggesting hatefulness, or a lack of integrity or brains!



    PS: I think I am going to call it a day! Can't wait to see what tomorrow brings......
  • Reply 90 of 161
    rot'napplerot'napple Posts: 1,839member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    I learned one thing from this whole thing.



    At least there's AT&T cellular coverage at Gourmet Haus Staudt!



    I've learned one thing too...



    Got to get me to Germany! Guten Tag Frauleins...



  • Reply 91 of 161
    olternautolternaut Posts: 1,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Fair enough, but I'd argue that Gizmodo is hardly deserving of loveable monikers like "scrappy."



    Anyone who knows them, knows that they have no integrity and few brains between them. Their entire "career" is a long series of juvenile stunts and insults. I read one insightful, intelligent article there once by Jesus Diaz, but that's pretty much it. The rest is hateful nonsense, smugly served by some of the most selfish foul-mouthed porn-freaks I've ever talked to.



    I agree that things being what they are the Gizmodo guys will probably get off scott free, but I think they shouldn't. They should go to jail.



    Agreed. The gizmodo bunch are really a bunch of foul-mouthed high schoolers. What keeps them in business though is that they seriously know their tech hands down. And they know it in an aggressive way which other tech blogs can't get close to.

    You have to give em that.



    But their childish antics gets them into too much trouble.
  • Reply 92 of 161
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,167member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by whytoi View Post


    Maybe the GPS isn't working yet on that prototype phone.



    More likely has to do with iPhone OS 4.0 beta and its known issue with Find My iPhone, which is not yet working in the beta. Maybe they used Exchange remote wipe.
  • Reply 93 of 161
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,088member
    Folks here are getting way too deep with the SJ mentality. I'm an AAPL holder as well and as far as I'm concerned, this is simply a case of a very secret product "A" being sloppily handled by someone who will be forever labeled the "village idiot" if this story is in fact true.



    Apple, like any company, has every right to safeguard the secrecy of their products. Does Apple go too far? That would be left to one's personal opinion. I personally think that in the cutthroat business of consumer technology where one product can literally define the next direction, one has to maintain absolute secrecy for fear that the competition will get their copy-machines fired up. Any company would lose their advantage if secrecy was not implemented. The "open" community just does not get this because they don't have their own money on the line.



    With all the things being developed at Apple's skunkworks lab, who is to say this is even the 2010 4G phone? This could be a candidate for 2011 or even 2012. Perhaps it could even be simply an internal proof-of-concept. The truth is no one knows what Apple has planned. I will be on the floor laughing if all these turned out to be a ruse or simply gossip to throw pie at the media. The folks at Gizmodo certainly deserve it. If they knew they had what was considered trade secrets and or stolen property, I hope they get the pants sued off from them. Bunch of low-life National Enquirer paparazzi vermin.



    It certainly will not change my opinion of whether to wait for June or hold off if the new phone does not have the same features as this prototype. I believe the public at large will not even dwell on this issue since only the nerds and geeks are the ones paying attention to these articles.



    Regardless if these photos are legit, I will still get my next iPhone in June to replace my aging 2G iPhone. What has transpired today will have no effect to me or to anyone else that actually has a life. I believe most consumers will think the same way.
  • Reply 94 of 161
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post


    So to disable their iPad, they must get through my firewall, break into my network and then disable the iPad? Sounds illegal to me. I doubt an iPad is communicating on a seperate network broadcasting itself just in case mobileme comes knocking.



    If it's not your iPad/iPhone, then you have it illegally, and the legal owner has the right to disable it through whatever defenses you put up. That's what remote wipe is set up to do.



    On the other hand, if it's your iPad/iPhone, nobody can disable it except you.
  • Reply 95 of 161
    shrikeshrike Posts: 494member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hewsthat View Post


    the guy who lost the phone is f***ed. i bet that was his dream job and he was just responsible for one of the most colossal leaks in apple history. I feel bad for him. I'm sure if he gets the phone back he'll have less penalties to endure, but he's still gonna loose his job. may not be able to get another like it ever or at least for a while.



    The phone was lost on March 18th. He's apparently still employed at Apple. I empathize easily, but if I were him I would be prefer to be fired or would have quit. He was put into a gigantic position of trust and essentially nukes Apple's entire marketing of the next gen iPhone, something Apple keeps dearly close to the vest, over a few beers.



    Maybe he'll get a second chance, but I don't have much sympathy for him at all. He lost a trade secret over a few beers. He better be wallowing in despair and better have quit drinking permanently.
  • Reply 96 of 161
    shrikeshrike Posts: 494member
    You can't underestimate it. He basically destroyed Apple's reputation, aura, carefully honed brand over a few beers. That's an unimaginable hit. It gave competitors a 2 month lead on a response. It will take years for Apple to regain it's veil on its marketing strategy. Years.



    Sympathise all you want, but the consequences simply isn't knowing what the 2010 iPhone is going to be 2 months early. Oh well such is life. This does mean Apple is going to be locked up pretty tight for awhile, but then again when the atmosphere is like this mistakes can be made easier. It's simply easier before this when everything appears to be a smooth running engine.
  • Reply 97 of 161
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Assuming for a second this is neither a hoax, nor a controlled leak, this kid should be fired and sued by Apple for causing irreparable damage to Apple. Of course in several weeks he'll show up on a secret video working on the line at the Foxconn plant in China.
  • Reply 98 of 161
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    Is it just me or was it a low blow to expose the guy's name like that? Maybe it's just me...



    putting the name might give an air of credibility to it.



    however what surprises me is that it was lost a month ago and the finder never just took it to an Apple store guessing they could track it down by the serial or some such.



    Also, Gizmodo admits to paying for it, that doesn't really look good after the whole Valleywag tablet games.



    I really can't help wondering if this is all a hoax, by Gizmodo. They aren't above it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post


    How could they remote wipe an iPad that only has wi-fi? A 3G enabled one yes, but I can't think of a way to disable the wi-fi only one. However, you can also take out the SIM card. Either or.



    it only has to be online for the wipe to work. doesn't matter how
  • Reply 99 of 161
    allblueallblue Posts: 393member
    You know, there is a fundamental principle here. Whatever the authenticity of the story, if you find something that someone else has lost, surely you try to return it to them or hand it in to the police, don't you? If it is a scarf or something similarly trivial and difficult to return that's been left on a train that's different, but an expensive device that will almost certainly contain important personal data on it? The guy that 'picked it up' (or was that picked it out of his pocket?) with the intention of personal gain, was stealing it. So many people in these and similar forums use the word 'steal' inappropriately when referring to copyright infringement, which is a far more complex matter, but not many seem troubled by the prime face act of stealing by the unnamed party here. An indication of the lack of moral scruple in these times perhaps?
  • Reply 100 of 161
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by delreyjones View Post


    However, if it's really true that Gizmodo paid the finder $10K, I think they're both criminals and I hope the DA agrees. No fraud involved here. There was a buyer and seller in property that did not belong to them, and the motive was profit. I don't see any significant free speech issue. And I, for one, don't expect Apple to be shy about talking to the prosecutor's office about this. I can't predict how it'll be handled, but I certainly am interested to find out.



    You sound like a first year law student. A + B = C. Not quite the case. Gizmodo allegedly paid to handle the device (i.e. take pictures), not own it. They even called the owner to "return it". Even though they probably only called to get a confirmation on the device they still appear to have the intention to return in. So no there was no sale of stolen property.



    I'm sure there might be something illegal about the whole situation, maybe something to do with exposing trade secrets. I'm sure Gizmodo's attorneys know the risks of what they did and made a gamble. It's interesting that they didnt post information about the internal parts, other than the battery size and SD card. No RAM information, no processor type, nothing really to tell us about the new inner-workings other than what is already apparent from the outside (i.e. something that would be apparent to a "finder").



    I'm by no means an expert on this but its pretty ridiculous to say these people are criminally liable. Its not like someone broke into apple, stole a iPhone 4G and sold it to the highest bidder. There was a lost phone, some pictures were taken, and the phone is going to be returned.
Sign In or Register to comment.