The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20120102015508/http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com:80/_news/2010/08/23/4954400-apple-would-use-voice-facial-recognition-as-part-of-iphone-kill-switch

Apple would use voice, facial recognition as part of iPhone 'kill switch'

In a move that seems Big Brother-ish, Apple has a patent in the works that could use voice and facial recognition technology to activate a "kill switch" on its popular iPhone, shutting it down when hackers "jailbreak" or unlock the phone to install unauthorized programs on it, or try to steal information from an unsuspecting iPhone user.

Apple would track "suspicious behavior," the company said, including comparing the "identity of the current user to the identity of the owner of the electronic device," then notify the legal owner of the iPhone about the possible hack.

Marc Rotenberg, Electronic Privacy Information Center executive director, expressed concerns about potential abuses of such a system. "But more to the point, companies that sell products to consumers should not be able to enforce their views as
to what constitutes 'unauthorized use' post sale," he said. "Users should be able to control the use of their products, and that includes jailbreaking iPhones if they wish."

Lee Tien, senior attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, agreed. "The stuff in the patent that has to do with jailbreaking is an obvious concern, because that’s completely legal behavior – it’s not like theft." And while it is still early in the patent process, Tien said, there are some "scary" issues around the technology, including where data collected by Apple would stored, and who would have access to it.

"Hopefully this would be entirely up to the consumer or user of the device whether or not they were going to buy into it at all," Tien said.

When asked about the patent, an Apple spokesperson declined to comment.

Both Tien and Rotenberg said Apple's actions could result in cases similar to what happened in a suburban Philadelphia school district, where tens of thousands of webcam photographs and screen shots on laptops issued to students were secretly snapped by the district.

Officials with the Lower Merion School District officials said the remote tracking system was activated to try to find laptops that had been reported lost or stolen. But the district admitted that the tracking system remained "on" for weeks or months, even after a laptop was found, and wound up taking 56,000 webcam photographs and screen shots from student laptops. So far, at least one student is suing the district over photos taken of him sleeping, as well as on instant messaging and video chats.

Apple's patent, "Systems and Methods for Identifying Unauthorized Users of an Electronic Device," was filed in February 2009, but published Aug. 19 by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. The "kill switch" would be part of a processor that Apple would create.

The company's patent includes some "1984"-ish ways in which it would find iPhone scofflaws. In some cases, Apple said, "a photograph of the current user can be taken, a recording of the current user's voice can be recorded, the heartbeat of the current user can be recorded, or any combination of the above.

"The photograph, recording, or heartbeat can be compared, respectively, to a photograph, recording, or heartbeat of authorized users of the electronic device to determine whether they match. If they do not match, the current user can be detected as an unauthorized user."

The ways a registered owner uses the iPhone and where it's used could also be obtained, Apple said. "For example, information such as the current's user's photograph, a voice recording of the current user, screenshots of the electronic device, keylogs of electronic device, communication packets (e.g., Internet packets) served to the electronic device, location coordinates of the electronic device, or geotagged photos of the surrounding area can be gathered."

"Unauthorized users" could be detected, the company said, by monitoring "activities such as entering an incorrect password a predetermined number of times in a row, hacking of the electronic device, jailbreaking of the electronic device, unlocking of the electronic device, removing a SIM card from the electronic device, or moving a predetermined distance away from a synced device."

Apple is proposing that when an "unauthorized user is detected, various functions of the electronic device can be restricted. For example, access to particular applications can be restricted, access to sensitive information can be restricted, sensitive information can be erased from the electronic device."

The company would then e-mail, text message or leave a voice mail for the legal owner of the iPhone to provide notification about an "unauthorized user."

Jailbreaking the iPhone has been an issue since the first model came out in 2007, although it's mainly limited to those who are technically savvy and are willing to void phone's warranty by doing so.

The problem of hackers looking to steal information is more recent; Apple released a software patch earlier this month to block hackers from gaining access to any iPhone, iPod Touch or iPad running the latest versions of their mobile operating system after security hole was discovered.

"Just because Apple could shut down your iPhone if it’s 'jailbroken' doesn’t mean Apple is trying to seize control of your digital life," wrote Brian Caulfield of Forbes. "In fact, if you want to keep control of it, you might actually want Apple to step in."

Said Tien of EFF: "Let’s wait and see; it's early still with Apple's patent application. But there really are some serious concerns here."

advertisement
advertisement

Discuss this post

Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3

At some point, people who willingly hand over volumes of personal details to companies like Apple and Facebook will wise up and fight back. But until then, they're basically like lambs to the slaughter. Carry on, little sheep.

    Reply#1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:27 AM EDT

    Microsoft in the 90's wanted to gather information for marketing purposes.
    Apple in the 2000's wants to gather information to make sure you can't do anything Apple doesn't want you to do.

    Which is the more "Orwellian" idea?

    • 6 votes
    Reply#2 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:36 AM EDT

    @Carlos...Google already does this in every device, software and service they provide yet nobody blinks. Microsoft never did it and Apple WILL do it because they are a rather "communist" style company. If they want to they will do it and the sheep will just accept it and let Apple do what they want.

    • 3 votes
    #2.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:50 PM EDT

    Are you talking about the eFuse? Because it does nothing like this.

    • 4 votes
    #2.2 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:10 PM EDT

    Why not make a better product? Skimp here skimp there and what do you get? vulnerabilities.

    Just as they use your software they way they want to they will and can do the same to your tracking and detection software.

    Patch - Update - Patch - Update

    Work arounds are not fixes.

    • 3 votes
    #2.3 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:09 PM EDT

    I just want a dang phone for emergencies and convenience. No way I'm buying into any of this so-called "security" garbage. Every solution they come up with creates six more problems. I simply want a phone that will work when I need it; I don't want my photo, heartbeat, voice or anything else (what WILL they think of next?) recorded or saved ANYWHERE. Walmart, here I come. I'll get a pre-paid phone for the glovebox, and that's about all I need. No muss, no fuss, no worries.

    • 6 votes
    #2.5 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:54 PM EDT

    Article has error in para. 4. MSNBC should learn to edit before they publish.

    • 2 votes
    #2.7 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:35 PM EDT
    Reply

    And people thought the eFuse on the Droid X was going to be a bad thing.

    • 1 vote
    Reply#3 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:40 AM EDT

    HTC-Evo, baby! Makes the iPhone look like special Ed.

    • 4 votes
    #3.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:07 PM EDT

    I'm am with you all the way: HTC - EVO ALL THE WAY. Apple has lost their mind. Now they are the hardware Nazis.

    • 7 votes
    #3.2 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:35 PM EDT
    Reply

    Didn't Apple/Macintosh put forth the whole idea of technology not being like 1984 in their famous commercial from 1984? Bring on the athlete with the sweet hammer throw.

    • 10 votes
    Reply#4 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:47 AM EDT

    Am I the only one who recognized this article as bull@!$%#? How is this a killswitch controlled by Apple? With Windows phones and Blackberry phones, they can be disabled remotely by a system admin in the event they are lost or stolen. If you guess an incorrect password n number of times it will wipe the device. This feature is a requirement by many enterprises and has kept Apple out of these businesses. This is a feature customers requested, not a remote killswitch that Apple can throw the switch on. This article sounds too CNN-isn for my taste.

    • 9 votes
    Reply#5 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:56 AM EDT

    Nathaniel...GOOD ON YOU! You're not the only one. What a bunch of yellow, sensationalistic CRAP this story is!

    • 5 votes
    #5.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:38 PM EDT

    Actually, not BS if you follow what has been happening lately.

    A recent change to copyright law makes it so that companies can no longer sue customers who modify their equipment (jailbreaking, etc.).

    Days after this ruling, the patent application for the technology that this article talks about is filed by Apple. Coincidence? Think I'm making it up?

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/20/apple_jailbreak_patent/

    "The application, which was filed in February and published Thursday, specifically describes the identification of “hacking, jailbreaking, unlocking, or removal of a SIM card” so that measures can be taken to counter the user. Possible responses include surreptitiously activating the iPhone's camera, geotagging the image and uploading it to a server and transmitting sensitive data to a server and then wiping it from the device."

    Even though you buy the phone, Jobs seems to believe that the phone is really his. Apple has been disabling phones that have gotten the jailbreak treatment for a while now (through OS updates). This is just the next step.

    Jobs is off his rocker - the company that used a 1984-like ad to warn people about IBM now strives to be Big Brother themselves.

    The reason that the Android kill switch isn't getting attention like this is because your Android isn't threatening to take your picture and send GPS coordinates to Apple if the phone software "thinks" something is up. So the question one must ask yourself - if your iPhone is in the bedroom with you while you change clothes - is if you trust the software enough not to take a nice picture of you at a bad time.

    Backlash doesn't bother Steve, because he knows that the die hards would continue to buy the phone even if it had a remotely triggered C4 package in it - to stop thieves, of course <- (beware - possible sarcasm)

    • 27 votes
    #5.2 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:14 PM EDT

    Backlash doesn't bother Steve, because he knows that the die hards would continue to buy the phone even if it had a remotely triggered C4 package in it - to stop thieves, of course <- (beware - possible sarcasm)

    I'm quoting this just so I can vote on it again, you're my new best friend.

    • 20 votes
    #5.3 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:28 PM EDT

    I wonder if there is a way to reset that facial recognition if you decide to sell it. I got an impression that "remove sim card" and it will activate that kill switch. i.e. sell it to someone else on after market (ebay).

    I know textbook companies try to kill the used textbook market by reissuing every few years and renting out ebooks now. More $$ for them.

    • 1 vote
    #5.4 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:34 PM EDT

    Are you all really that light in the head? There are billions of patents for technology that has never been used. Apple has figured out how to do this......so they are patenting the design. This does not mean they are ever going to use it. Lego patented 12 different Lego interlocking designs for the Lego block. In over 50 years, they have only ever used one of them.

    The biggest complaint from companies has been that the iPhone is not secure enough to give to their executives. So Apple puts a team on developing every form of security measures. With the amount of information, data and documents being stored on and passing through these devices, in ten years hacking these might be the number one way companies commit corporate fraud, or how scam artists hack and drain banks accounts. The law might get to the point where the only way they can prosecute is to have voice, image and location ID of the defendant. If that is the case, then Apple already has the ability to implement it.

    Again, just because a company patents a design, this does not mean that they will ever use that design. In fact, there are more patents that have never been developed than ones that have.

    I love the paranoia and level of over-reacting in this country. It just cracks me up.

    • 1 vote
    #5.5 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 4:12 PM EDT

    Here's the bottom line for a non-techie like me... I love my iPhone but I don't love it enough to accept being treated like a brainless pawn by Apple or anyone else. Between Apple, Microsoft, Google Earth, the US Government and God, I have too many eyes on me as it is. How I long for a good strong solar flare.

    • 2 votes
    #5.6 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:26 PM EDT

    IvanAp,

    Just because others file patents for a technology and don't use it doesn't mean that Apple won't use this.

    Don't view the patent as a standalone key - look at Apple and how they have been trying to deal with people jail breaking their phones - pushing updates via iTunes to kill/brick the phone.

    Now, with that in mind, that puts a little bit of a different light on the patent.

    Also, Steve Jobs has just the right amount of hubris to do it - remmeber, the iPhone 4 didn't have an issue, but Steve gave out free rubber cases to correct the problem that the phone supposedly didn't have. Watch his conference call again and watch him contradict himself.

    So yeah - the patent alone probably would have been a blip on the radar. However, with the change in copyright law taking away the "we'll sue you!" stick, and considering how Apple has taken steps against jail breaking before - oh, yeah, I can completely see him doing it. Not only that, but he'll even convince the unwashed masses that it's a good thing - a feature!

    • 4 votes
    #5.7 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:36 PM EDT
    Reply
    advertisement
    advertisement

    This kind of thing would require an change to the EULA that users would have to consent to, yes?

    Now I need to re-read the EULA more carefully...I suggest all owners do it as well.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#6 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:06 PM EDT

    No one ever reads those... Its like reading the fine print on your lease agreement for a car...

    • 2 votes
    #6.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:46 PM EDT
    Reply

    I guess we have now come full circle from when Apple produced the 1984 Big Brother commercial to today, when Steve Jobs now is the head of the evil empire. I suppose to the people who put their life up on Facebook this will not seem like an unreasonable intrusion but it is offensive that Apple thinks it should be empowered to decide who and what is "authorized".

    • 6 votes
    Reply#7 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:19 PM EDT
    Reply

    My phone is my phone, is my phone, is my phone! I'll do with it what I please. No different than buying a computer and altering it to suit your needs. I lose my phone, I'll accept responsiblity and I'll be the one who decides if it should be disabled. Always amazing how many people will willing give control over and responsibility for their lives to someone else.

    • 10 votes
    Reply#8 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:19 PM EDT

    It's just another example of wage-slave Americans selling themselves into corporate ownership on the installment plan. In spite of all the blaterhing on about "freedom," "liberty" and other while lies we tell ourselves to allow us to sleep better at night, the average American is more than happy to give up these ideals to corporations, who have less responsibility and accountability than even the government.

    I guess the average American is fine with being totally complacent as long as someone else is getting rich off their apathy and lack of self-respect.

    • 8 votes
    #8.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:01 PM EDT
    Reply

    Ironic isn't it that the company who lunched a product by parodying "1984" should be putting that same control freak logic into a 2010 business model?...just sayin'

    • 5 votes
    Reply#9 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:26 PM EDT

    Meant launched, but lunched actually seems more appropriate.

    • 2 votes
    Reply#10 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:27 PM EDT

    The point he isn't telling you is that they want to do this with the owner's permission to protect the device from theft. More selective reporting to start a ruckus over nothing. Competitors know Apple won't sell many phones if people think it's watching them. So some writer takes things out of context to make Apple sound as bad as possible. Just like the iPhone 4 and its made up antenna issues. Jailberaking is just one method of bypassing the phone's locks. Apple doesn't care about the tiny fraction of iPhone users who jailbreak the phone. Most of them restore the original software once they discover that jailbreaking ain't all its cracked up to be anyway. More anti-Apple nonsense. Just like the crap about MS wanting to gather information about its users to watch you. They wanted to gather statistics not individual fact and it's already being done all over the web for advertising. Big Brother my a$$.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#11 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:33 PM EDT

    "Just like the iPhone 4 and its made up antenna issues"

    I'm here to say the antenna issue is real. For everything that is cool about this phone, the antenna issue makes the phone a real pig. Simply an amazing oversight and collosal F-up.

    • 8 votes
    #11.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:15 PM EDT

    Randy-617159 said:

    You're quite wrong about the jail-breaking. If they didn't care, why do a number of their OS updates contain specific code that essentially "bricks" your iPhone if it has been jail broken? Doesn't sound like a company that doesn't care.

    The patent specifically mentions jail breaking as one of the things that the tech would be used against. Now, Steve would love everyone to think he's just looking out for you - but sadly, not the case. Sure, it can be used to track a stolen device - but it also is a way for Apple to maintain complete control of the device - even though you paid for it.

    • 10 votes
    #11.2 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:26 PM EDT

    "Apple doesn't care about the tiny fraction of iPhone users who jailbreak the phone. Most of them restore the original software once they discover that jailbreaking ain't all its cracked up to be anyway."

    You are sorely mistaken, the jailbreak population is no tiny fraction, a LOT of people jailbreak their iphones, just check out ebay or craigslist for jailbreaked iphones, no to mention other types of phones, and ipods as well. You are seriously out of touch with reality. Jailbreaking is actually a booming business for some. Not to mention unlocking.

    • 8 votes
    #11.3 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:02 PM EDT

    Competitors know Apple won't sell many phones if people think it's watching them.

    LOL! You give people FAR too much credit. There was almost no outcry whatsoever when Google was using their street view project as a ruse to steal people's wi-fi network data. In spite of the fact that what they were doing was totally unethical, and very possibly illegal, the average American wage-slave simply turned a blind eye, while the "news" media agencies buried the stories on page 8 or in an online sidebar.

    Sorry, but I highly doubt that the average American has the self-respect or responsibility to reject a product based on the fact that the company producing and administering services for the product is unethical and customer unfriendly. As long as it's easy enough for your average mouth-breather to use, the inconvenience of having a corporation spy on you doesn't matter (that's assuming the average uninformed consumer is even aware).

    People just aren't that smart now-a-days.

    • 4 votes
    #11.4 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:06 PM EDT

    Actually, Apple doesn't care for any of its customers. It's Apple's way or the highway. Overpriced and under-performing, but the fanboys will keep them in business.

    • 8 votes
    #11.5 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:15 PM EDT

    MB,

    Overpriced and under-performing? Where did you get that load from? I spent $1,8 on a top of the line Dell laptop in 2004 that became useless by 2006 when I bought a 2,500.00 loaded Vaio. In 2008 that kept crashing on me because it could not handle Photoshop and Lightroom running at the same time. I went ahead and spent $2700.00 on a MacBook Pro. Two years later it has gone through one OS upgrade, two PS upgrades and one LR upgrade and still runs like a dream. So essentially in four years I spent 4,300.00 on PC's and in three years now I am still at $2700.00 on a MAC and still running strong.

    As for CSR, the computers makers will always tell you it's an MS issue. When you call MS they tell you that because it came pre-installed you have to pay them $45 to answer your question. To this date, Apple has never charged me for phone support.

    Mac's OS upgrade cost $30 bucks......how much did MS charge for the Windows 7 Upgrade again?

    • 1 vote
    #11.6 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 4:24 PM EDT

    Mac's OS upgrade cost $30 bucks......how much did MS charge for the Windows 7 Upgrade again?

    Linux is free and just as good, what's your point? Macs are overpriced for the hardware, this is not new.

    • 3 votes
    #11.7 - Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:33 AM EDT
    Reply
    advertisement
    advertisement

    Yes this is stupidly rediculous method of control Apple is considering. I am suprised that Apple would be so blatant as to try and disable jail broken phones. If they want to void a warranty on a jail broken phone, I'm good with that, but that's as far as it goes.

    Apple already has the MobileMe software that allows you to remotely wipe your phone, and quite honestly if the US cellular industry would get off their asses and actually make use of the global IMEI black list that's available through their current memberships to the GSMA (http://www.gsmworld.com/our-work/programmes-and-initiatives/fraud-and-security/imei_database.htm), then all it would take is a simple call to your cellular provider, and AT THE VERY LEAST disable the phone so that it can't work on any participating cellular network, and at best the phone could be tracked any time it was turned on assisting in the recovery of the device.

    No, the cellular providers insist that they shouldn't have to provide this service for all the extreme lame reasons (and out right lies) they've always given, and now we have a major cell phone maker looking to 'enforce' their concepts of "fair use" on an unsuspecting public.

    As far as reviewing the EULA, there's a reason it's some 80 pages long folks, they're counting on the %99.999 of us not having the time to read it, nor the ability to filter through all the 'legalese'. Changes to an EULA, especially after the opportunity to return the device for full refund is almost on the order of 'bait and switch'.

    Sure adjust the EULA 90 days after we've purchased the phone and no longer have the option to return it if we don't agree with totalitarian rules and extremely invasive policies. It should be law that they can't change the EULA without offering to refund, in full, the original purchase price should we chose to not agree to their EULA.

    With something like that in place, they may practice a more 'service oriented' business model, instead of a 'you paid for our phone, now we own your soul' mentality that they seem to be gravitating towards.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#12 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:35 PM EDT

    This is a feature customers requested, not a remote killswitch that Apple can throw the switch on.

    The difference here is that the feature as written (and you may be right about the quality of the article, so it is "grain of salt" time) isn't an adminstrative feature, it is an automatic way for the phone to shut itself down if it doesn't like your face, or your tone. Or how your heart is beating, apparently. An administrative tool that allowed an enterprise to remotely control the phone would be a customer request; it is hard to see how this is.

    I've said this before, and I'll say it again, Apple is absolutely within their rights to design the iPhone however they see fit. It is up to consumers to vote with their dollars and stop buying them if they don't like how Apple is doing business. If you whine and moan about how unfair Apple is, then buy their products anyway, I have no sympathy for you. If you want to dance with the devil, you better have fireproof shoes.

    Anyone who is surprised that Apple is trying to extert more and more control over their users, say "aye". What? Sorry, couldn't hear you over the crickets chirping, and that loud banging noise as the tumbleweeds go by.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#13 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:37 PM EDT

    This is interesting since Apple has always expressed Zero interest in helping users recover stolen ipods when they are connected to iTunes. They have had that capability for a very long time, but it seems they only get motivated for their own purposes, never their customers. They have failed a number of times lately to step up to the plate, and it's a shame. It's almost like the larger the market share they get, the worse they act. I've been an Apple customer since 1983, so I am not a disinterested party to their treatment of their customers, and I'm not generally an Apple basher. Come on Apple-step up and provide a LoJack type service for ipods!

    • 4 votes
    Reply#14 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:45 PM EDT
    advertisement
    advertisement

    This is why I like any phone other than an apple phone. I can hack apart my other phone and customize it however I want. My friend converted an old 8 bit Nintendo controller into a cell phone once. It had a way more coolness factor than anything Apple ever created. If anybody wants to see the nintendo cell phone just look it up on youtube.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#15 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:53 PM EDT

    Right now, every form of evil in the deepest pit of hell is trying to figure out why stalin is smiling.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#16 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:57 PM EDT

    Because corporate America figured out how to get people to accept intrusions upon individuals' privacy and freedoms in ways that governments would never be allowed to?

    Clearly, Americans are fine with giving up their privacy, rights and freedoms, so long as someone else is getting rich off their complacency. I find it hilarious how people can infer (or above, actually say) that this is "communist," when this is the complete opposite of communism. This is capitalism run amok, where a corporation can corner a market, highly limit competition and impose self-serving restrictions upon buyers/users of their goods and services. One would have to be woefully misinformed (or totally uninformed) to confuse the actions of a multinational corporation that makes billions of dollars with that of a government guided by economic principles that control resources, production and distribution of goods.

    • 3 votes
    #16.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:14 PM EDT
    Reply

    A few years ago everyone was screaming that Apple should step in and track stolen iPods, shut them down and notify the rightful owners. Sound familiar?

    Apple Knows Who Stole Your iPod: 2006
    http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2006/aug/31/apple-knows-who-stole-your-ipod/

    Dateline: 2007 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20078671/

    Tracking Your Stolen iPod : 2007
    http://buzzdroid.com/apple/ipod/tracking-your-stolen-ipod/

    • 2 votes
    Reply#17 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:03 PM EDT

    A few years ago everyone was screaming that Apple should step in and track stolen iPods, shut them down and notify the rightful owners. Sound familiar?

    And now they're leting the iPhone decide if it was stolen or not. Does anyone that uses this phone actually think for themselves or does everyone like Jobs bending them over?

    • 5 votes
    #17.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:33 PM EDT
    Reply

    This won't matter much. Google (with the Android) is doing to Apple what IBM (remember IBM-compatible PC) and Microsoft did to Apple in the 80's and 90's. Apple might be able to keep their niche, but in the end, that's all it will be. Total control, closed platforms lose in the end. You don't believe me, take a look at the number of Android OS phones that are selling. Take a look at your choices between Android and iOS devices. If I have a choice of 5 phones, 4 are Android and 1 is the iPhone, pretty good odds that I will end up with an Android.

      Reply#18 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:13 PM EDT

      From the company that started out selling blue boxes to hack the phone system.

      • 3 votes
      Reply#19 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:13 PM EDT

      I think apple should be able to protect there business

      this is how I would do that

      1 if the owner agrees to the contact when we or she buys the IPhone then the owner is responcible for it's use or misuse.

      2 if you try to change the system or as they call it jailbreak or change the operating system. then apple should the ability to kill that phone

      3 if try you will get a message telling you that your IPhone will self-destruck in one minute and there will be refunds from apple

      • 1 vote
      Reply#20 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:18 PM EDT

      I assume English is not your first language.

      There is a distinct difference between protecting and controlling.

      • 3 votes
      #20.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:40 PM EDT

      What you are talking about is LEASING a phone, not BUYING a phone. With a LEASE the company still owns the phone, you are just buying the service of the phone. When you buy the phone, you OWN it. All of it. All of the time and everything about it. It is yours and the company you buy it from has no right to shut it down or delete anything from it.

      • 4 votes
      #20.2 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:42 PM EDT
      Reply
      advertisement
      advertisement

      Mindless idiots!... I'm just waiting for the solar-flare phenom that will destroy all that is electronic and force people to do business the old fashioned way... talk to people face-to-face!

      Apple?!?... It was the fruit of deception, no?

      • 2 votes
      Reply#21 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:19 PM EDT

      I like where you are going DJ, but the bible doesn't say what fruit it was...

      • 1 vote
      #21.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:56 PM EDT
      Reply

      The paradox is Apple's 1984 Super Bowl commercial that launched the iPhone's great grandad the original Macintosh , where the hot uberbabe throws the hammer through Big Brother's face on screen.

      1984 is as 1984 does.

      • 2 votes
      Reply#22 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:22 PM EDT

      Once I lay out the $$$ for a phone, it is mine. To do with as I please. If I give it to my grandson for a month, and his face is not "recognized" does that shut it down? It is one thing to opt in to programs like the article describes.... another all together to be fed a dose of it.

      If it becomes a situation of force feeding, it is good-by iphone.... hello anyphone that lets me control my own options.

      • 5 votes
      Reply#23 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:26 PM EDT

      Once I lay out the $$$ for a phone, it is mine. To do with as I please. If I give it to my grandson for a month, and his face is not "recognized" does that shut it down? It is one thing to opt in to programs like the article describes.... another all together to be fed a dose of it

      Ibisflight, I agree with you, once I pay for some thing it's mine to do with as I please. But lets look at other companies as well, such as Dish Network and Direct TV. You go into Best Buy and slap a few hundred dollars down for the dish, mounting equipment, and the set top box (I did get free installation..). Do you think you own it? Not, you are actually leasing it. It's in the fine print. I recently cancelled my service with Direct TV to switch to cable, and received a $250.00 bill because I kept the equipment. When I called and complained they said I was only leasing the equipment, and that I had to return it to them (and pay for shipping). Even after I told them I purchased it at Best Buy! But I am getting off topic here.

      Allot of tech companies are starting to treat their hardware the same way (like it's software, you just purchased a license (lease) to use it). It looks like Apple is jumping on that bandwagon now. You don't really own it, cause if you modify (jailbreak, hack, unlock, whatever) it, it will shut it down, or be rendered inoperable!

      For you Apple folk out there, I understand if you opt for it then that's great, that's not my issue, but as Ibisflight said "If it becomes a situation of force feeding...." If the app is forced into a software update, and you are forced to use it in order for the phone to work, THEN it is complete bull!

      • 6 votes
      #23.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:28 PM EDT

      I'll never buy anything from Apple. Just another way for them to be control freaks. Even if someone did steal you iphone do you really think that you will get it back?

      • 2 votes
      #23.2 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:48 PM EDT
      Reply

      I think you are all missing an important point. The first thing the hackers will do, probably no later than the day after it comes out, is find a way to disable the security software. No big deal - look at the things game makers have tried to secure their products, all to no avail. There is nothing that can't be beaten. What one person can create, another can break.

      • 3 votes
      Reply#24 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:31 PM EDT

      Actually, hackers will more likely find a way to hijack Apple's Facetime Friend/Foe server and remotely kill every iphone in the world in one fell swoop. Much more of an effective message about why you should never let a company have this sort of control over a product that they sell you , don't you think ?

      Apple seems to think that you're not buying their equipment, merely renting it from them.

      • 4 votes
      #24.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:57 PM EDT
      Reply

      This is why PC's rule and Apples drool. Although Apple computers are typically, superior to standard personal computers it is factors like high prices and an excessive assertiveness of control over what one can do with his or her Apple product once ownership has transferred from company to consumer that prevent them from dominating the home computer market. If Apple spent less time trying to take away the consumers freedoms and more time in being a friendly company that everyone wants they would not only be able to lower the cost of their products but also make a larger profit. Seriously, how much R & D actually goes into preventing consumers from using their Iphones on non-AT&T networks?

      • 6 votes
      Reply#25 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:32 PM EDT

      This is why PCs are better? You don't recall Microsoft's continuingly dismal record in terms of demanding that people buy their next product in order to maintain operability, even if it's clearly inferior? (Sorry, I am still stinging from Windows Vista)

      Unless of course you are talking about running a Unix or Linux. Unfortunately, not much application marketed for these, but at the base they are clearly superior products.

      No, I'm afraid we have allowed the entire high-tech market to gain proprietary control over their respective market shares, and to prevent anyone from having interoperability that might improve their product or the customer's experience.

      • 1 vote
      #25.1 - Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:03 PM EDT
      Reply
      Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3
      You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
      As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.