Apple promoted AnySIM through their website before disabling iPhones!

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Sign up

schorch

New Member
Oct 1, 2007
2
0
0
#1
Apple indirectly promoted the SIM unlocking program, anySim, that caused thousands of iPhones to not work after their new update and should be held responsible for replacing or reprogramming useless phones.

Apple.com promotes the use of third party applications at MacUpdate website:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/news/macupdatewidget.html

MacUpdate.com offers the iPhone unlocking program AnySim 1.0 for download.
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/25818

Since Apple.com refers it's customers to this other website that offers anySim, couldn't people hold Apple responsible for the bricking/disabling/renderingUseless, etc... of our iPhones?

Apple.com recommends MacUpate.com as a source of third party applications for it's products. Someone with more time than me needs to look into holding Apple accountable for the damage they caused to thousands of iPhones. This link between Apple and anySim should be more than enough...

(I have screen shots and links to Google's cache of these links if Apple tries to cover this up)
 

OJsakila

New Member
Jul 15, 2007
3,021
1
0
Jupiter's sulphur mines
#3
Apple indirectly promoted the SIM unlocking program, anySim, that caused thousands of iPhones to not work after their new update and should be held responsible for replacing or reprogramming useless phones.

Apple.com promotes the use of third party applications at MacUpdate website:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/news/macupdatewidget.html

MacUpdate.com offers the iPhone unlocking program AnySim 1.0 for download.
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/25818

Since Apple.com refers it's customers to this other website that offers anySim, couldn't people hold Apple responsible for the bricking/disabling/renderingUseless, etc... of our iPhones?

Apple.com recommends MacUpate.com as a source of third party applications for it's products. Someone with more time than me needs to look into holding Apple accountable for the damage they caused to thousands of iPhones. This link between Apple and anySim should be more than enough...

(I have screen shots and links to Google's cache of these links if Apple tries to cover this up)
Loosers contribute to clogging the court system with crap like this. Go away, bitcher.
 

T3Logic

New Member
Bronze
Sep 4, 2007
35
0
0
Daytona Beach
#5
As a coder I can tell you that what they did was intentional.

One of the most simple statements of any programming langauge is the "If" statement.

What they have done is something like this:

If imei sim card number does not match phone imei number then pop up box that says invalid sim
 

x999x

New Member
Gold
Aug 6, 2007
1,656
0
0
#7
Apple indirectly promoted the SIM unlocking program, anySim, that caused thousands of iPhones to not work after their new update and should be held responsible for replacing or reprogramming useless phones.

Apple.com promotes the use of third party applications at MacUpdate website:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/news/macupdatewidget.html

MacUpdate.com offers the iPhone unlocking program AnySim 1.0 for download.
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/25818

Since Apple.com refers it's customers to this other website that offers anySim, couldn't people hold Apple responsible for the bricking/disabling/renderingUseless, etc... of our iPhones?

Apple.com recommends MacUpate.com as a source of third party applications for it's products. Someone with more time than me needs to look into holding Apple accountable for the damage they caused to thousands of iPhones. This link between Apple and anySim should be more than enough...

(I have screen shots and links to Google's cache of these links if Apple tries to cover this up)
1) Your widgets link is to the Desktop version of the widgets, for which they were implied.

2) MacUpdate is not Apple, check the whois data

MacUpdate Whois:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Domain Name: MACUPDATE.COM
Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
Whois Server: whois.tucows.com
Referral URL: http://domainhelp.opensrs.net
Name Server: NS1.THEPLANET.COM
Name Server: NS2.THEPLANET.COM
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Updated Date: 10-oct-2006
Creation Date: 01-may-1997

Tucows Whois:

[/FONT] [ whois.tucows.com ]

Registrant:
Tucows.com Co
96 Mowat Avenue
Toronto, Ontario M6K3M1
CA
Domain name: TUCOWS.COM
Administrative Contact:
Administrator, DNS dnsadmin [AT] tucows.com
96 Mowat Avenue
Toronto, Ontario M6K3M1
CA
+1.4165350123x0000
Technical Contact:
Administrator, DNS dnsadmin [AT] tucows.com
96 Mowat Avenue
Toronto, Ontario M6K3M1
CA
+1.4165350123x0000
Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.
Record last updated on 26-Sep-2007.
Record expires on 06-Sep-2008.
Record created on 07-Sep-1995.
Domain servers in listed order:
DNS1.TUCOWS.COM 216.40.37.11
DNS2.TUCOWS.COM 216.40.37.12
DNS3.TUCOWS.COM 216.40.46.59
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Expiration Date: 02-may-2011[/FONT]
The moral of this story?

Sosumi
 

SmartAlx

Zealot
Gold
Jun 7, 2007
1,087
8
38
#8
2) MacUpdate is not Apple, check the whois data
Read the entire post please: Here, I'll post the relevant entry for you...
Apple.com recommends MacUpate.com as a source of third party applications for it's products.
In effect the reality is that Apple supports a website that supported AnySim.
 

SmartAlx

Zealot
Gold
Jun 7, 2007
1,087
8
38
#9
(I have screen shots and links to Google's cache of these links if Apple tries to cover this up)
The Wayback Machine is made for this purpose...

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/news/macupdatewidget.html

The second link hasn't been archived though unfortunately. Keep the screenshot if it matters to you. But the case is a tad too convoluted to hold up in court. The connection between Apple and AnySim is mostly coincidental.
 

guest 5

Member
Bronze
Jul 5, 2007
614
0
16
#11
Look people...

Apple provided a new update (1.1.1) which re-flashed the WHOLE iPhone with a new ROM. The (Apple) did not write the software to preserve your unsupported data or re-lock the phones that were unlocked. The software by itself written by Apple does this natively. There is no intent to disable phones, because Apple had stated previously to this update that they will not write their iPhone ROMs to be compatible with unsupported software or unlocking, thus the bricked phones. People that updated basically had software that created an unfavorable environment for the 1.1.1 update to install properly, thus making the phone unusable after the update.
 

Bosco115

New Member
Bronze
Jun 23, 2007
42
0
0
#12
You sue happy prick. You are what is wrong with this country.

Apple issued a statement saying STAY THE frack AWAY FROM THE UPDATE if you've unlocked the phone. Then people who unlocked it update the phone and, whatddya know, it doesn't work anymore.

SUE SUE SUE! Idiot.
 

schorch

New Member
Oct 1, 2007
2
0
0
#13
Theory

Theory:

Apple needed to protect AT&T's exclusive relationship with them
and needed a way and an excuse to re-establish the exclusivity between
them. If they did not either brick or re-lock hacked iPhones, AT&T
could sue Apple for a breach of contract. It would be a bigger loss,
financially, to lose AT&T than to lose a few thousand consumers.
 

DocHolliday

Member
Bronze
Sep 28, 2007
53
0
6
#14
Look people...

Apple provided a new update (1.1.1) which re-flashed the WHOLE iPhone with a new ROM. The (Apple) did not write the software to preserve your unsupported data or re-lock the phones that were unlocked. The software by itself written by Apple does this natively. There is no intent to disable phones, because Apple had stated previously to this update that they will not write their iPhone ROMs to be compatible with unsupported software or unlocking, thus the bricked phones. People that updated basically had software that created an unfavorable environment for the 1.1.1 update to install properly, thus making the phone unusable after the update.

I agree with you in premise, but if it was that simple, people could have removed 3rd party apps, or re-locked their phone, ran the update, then unlocked it again, and, or re-load 3rd party apps and everything would be just peachy, but the fact is those 3rd party apps don't work anymore.

I'm not saying sue Apple, but it would be a bit naive to think no thought went into preventing people from unlocking after the update, or from loading 3rd party apps after the update.
 

guest 5

Member
Bronze
Jul 5, 2007
614
0
16
#16
I agree with you in premise, but if it was that simple, people could have removed 3rd party apps, or re-locked their phone, ran the update, then unlocked it again, and, or re-load 3rd party apps and everything would be just peachy, but the fact is those 3rd party apps don't work anymore.

I'm not saying sue Apple, but it would be a bit naive to think no thought went into preventing people from unlocking after the update, or from loading 3rd party apps after the update.

And I also agree with you. But remember that one could argue that the new software has to be re-broken to allow 3rd party apps or unlocking to take place. It's new software, thus a different process to unlock and add apps.