×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Jobs Says No Tethering iPad To iPhone

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the wi-fi-should-be-good-enough-for-anyone dept.

Networking 423

tugfoigel writes "Anyone who currently owns an iPhone and was hoping they would be able to use it as a mobile Web access point for a Wi-Fi iPad just got some bad news. Reportedly, Steve Jobs has said this will not happen. Swedish blog Slashat.se claims they e-mailed Jobs directly to ask him whether or not you'd be able to tether your iPad and iPhone and received a terse 'No' in reply. According to the report, the email headers made it plausible that the reply had come from Jobs's iPhone."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

423 comments

You get what you pay for? (2, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409868)

Why did anybody think that they'd allow users to tether the iPad to anything when it's 3G data plan only costs $30 a month? With its limited OS, you can only run official apps that can't have high-bandwidth uses (like streaming video) on 3G. That's the reason you get such a discount compared to a $60 a month 5 GB plan...

If you want to tether a computer and have iPad and iPhone and let them think they're on WiFi, you want a $60 a month plan and a MiFi device from either Verizon or Sprint.

Re:You get what you pay for? (5, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409892)

You're confused. This isn't about tethering something through iPad. This is about tethering iPad (the model without 3G) through iPhone. It's something that you can do with any cheapo netbook and any cheapo phone (not even smartphone).

I don't see why anyone should be "allowing" (much less "not allowing") me to tether things the way I want, either. In fact, this kind of thing - "Unlimited mobile data plan for just $X! <small>for use with selected mobile devices with provider-supplied Web browser application only!</small>", which is so prevalent in North America, really irks me - back in my home country, I would get a proper data plan which lets me use teh tube however I see fit, without any such bullshit, for those very same $X (usually less, in fact).

Re:You get what you pay for? (5, Funny)

LynnwoodRooster (966895) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410160)

This is Apple we're talking about. It just works. Unless of course it doesn't, in which case you didn't need to do it anyway. Think different!

Re:You get what you pay for? (3, Insightful)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410412)

This is Apple we're talking about. It just works. Unless of course it doesn't, in which case you didn't need to do it anyway. Think different!

Funny, I've heard the same statement from Linux/Ubuntu users as well. :)

Re:You get what you pay for? (1)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410168)

Because if they allow it the price for "Unlimited mobile data plan for just $X!" doubles or triples. Other customers would not be happy with that. You should start focusing on trying to get a new plan available for more money instead of trying to screw over the common customer who doesn't use their data plan for anything other than e-mail and an occasional webpage.

Re:You get what you pay for? (1)

quenda (644621) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410256)

It's something that you can do with any cheapo netbook and any cheapo phone

Any except Apple! Nothing new here. I got the iPod touch way back and really liked it except it stopped working as soon as out of wifi range.
Very frustrating, when I had a 3G phone in Bluetooth range.

Easy solution: ditch the iPhone (you don't need it now that you have an iPad to look cool and run those must-have app's), get an uncrippled phone with wifi, and run a wireless access point on the phone.
e.g. Joikuspot on Symbian or Maemo. Some WinMo phones have it built-in.

Re:You get what you pay for? (3, Insightful)

bondsbw (888959) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409894)

I would pay more for the option. But I'm still waiting for AT&T to enable tethering on the iPhone.

While I'm here... my biggest gripe is no multi-tasking. Apple enables multi-tasking, they sell me an iPad... it's that simple. Heck, I'd take limited background APIs. But the fact that no third-party multitasking is allowed will keep the device out of my hands.

Re:You get what you pay for? (0, Redundant)

tsadi (576706) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410258)

> my biggest gripe is no multi-tasking

This is always the first thing I read in any story related to the iPad.

But has it really been confirmed that multi-tasking will not be enabled in the iPad? [citation needed]

Re:You get what you pay for? (1, Insightful)

Totenglocke (1291680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410354)

You're complaining about lack of multi-tasking and honestly, unless they changed the iPad to be able to have mutliple windows on screen at the same time, it wouldn't really be worth it. I have a jailbroken iPhone 3GS and multi-tasking didn't really do anything but burn up the battery, so I turned it off after a couple of days.

Attn: Taco (1)

Adolf Hitroll (562418) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409900)

There's noway I can be friend or fan of somebody "owning" a Facebook account.
You've become your own parody.
Plz kill yourself or get back to the reality.

Rob Malda's tranny died under mysterious circumsta (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410338)

Rob Malda's tranny died under mysterious circumstances

New details about Rob Malda's past may come out in the divorce proceedings with his wife of 8 years, Kathleen. Page 6 speculates that she may fight the prenup, citing Malda’s infidelity with various street trannies.

In 2007, Malda was caught by Dexter police with a transvestite hooker in his car. He told his wife that he “stopped to help a person crying.” Several other hookers sold tales of Malda’s solicitation to the tabloids, and all of them were convinced to recant, with one exception:
Paul Barresi, a private detective who claims he was hired for damage control by Malda when the scandal broke, tells Page Six: “I called [Malda attorney] Marty ‘Bull Dog’ Singer and told him I could round up all the transsexuals alleging sexual dalliances with Malda.” And they would all recant their stories.

“In less than 10 days,” Barresi says, “I got them all to sign sworn, videotaped depositions, stating it wasn’t Malda himself, but rather a look-alike, who they’d encountered - with the exception of Suiuli.” In 2008, she fell to her death from her Dexter roof.

Atisone Suiuli was the tranny found in Malda’s car in 2007. After being caught by police, she had proof that she was with Malda and wouldn’t change her story. How convenient for him that she died soon afterwards.

Re:You get what you pay for? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31409958)

Steve Jobs could through a baby into a industrial tree shredder and you would still defend him.

Re:You get what you pay for? (4, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410060)

You sir just sent the English Language screaming through a tree shredder.

Re:You get what you pay for? (4, Funny)

feepness (543479) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410436)

Steve Jobs could through a baby into a industrial tree shredder and you would still defend him.

In his defense the baby was being kind of a dick.

Re:You get what you pay for? (4, Funny)

mr_da3m0n (887821) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410458)

Steve Jobs could through a baby into a industrial tree shredder and you would still defend him.

In his defense the baby was being kind of a dick.

Yeah we don't know what was that baby's problem.

Re:You get what you pay for? (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410000)

Sorry, but at least part of the problem is, why am I expected to buy separate data plans for each mobile device that I have? I have paid for a data plan for my phone, so why should I have to pay for an additional plan for either the iPad or the MiFi?

That's the reason you get such a discount compared to a $60 a month 5 GB plan...

What's the reason? Is the "unlimited" data plan for the iPhone or iPad capped under 5GB? If AT&T wanted to charge $60 for 5GB, they easily could have done that, but they chose to charge $30 for "unlimited" data. If I use a set amount of data, what difference does it make to them if some of that data passes to another device?

Let's just be honest hear: They're charging too much and imposing arbitrary restrictions because there's minimal competition, minimal regulation, and they believe that their customers will put up with being charged for a separate plan for each and every device they own.

Re:You get what you pay for? (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410146)

Sorry, but at least part of the problem is, why am I expected to buy separate data plans for each mobile device that I have? I have paid for a data plan for my phone, so why should I have to pay for an additional plan for either the iPad or the MiFi?

Most of the world doesn't. If you're stuck on a carrier with CDMA, you have to. But if you're using GSM/HSPA/EDGE/etc, you don't.

YOu take the SIM out of your phone, stick it in your MiFi. I'd say to stick it in your iPad, but that requires a micro-SIM, in which case you need one of those and an adapter to fit into your phone. But there you go, one phone, one SIM, one plan, one monthly bill.

Of course, it also means if your phone rings, you're stuck answering it on whatever device it's currently inside.

Re:You get what you pay for? (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410212)

Which is how some people got data for much cheaper than AT&T's normal pricing, they bought a Go! phone and added the data plan then moved the SIM to their netbook or other mobile data device and never used any go minutes paying just the much lower monthly fee for data and only $20 every 6 months for new minimum minutes on the phone. This doesn't work as AT&T dropped data as an option on Go! phones after this got fairly popular.

Isn't this anti-trust / tying / anti-competitive? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410302)

Ah, yes, the good old days. News flash -- they're GONE.
Now even the USA's crappy GSM carriers are trying to control which GSM devices
you can use your GSM service plan with by creating some artificial 'incompatibility' (i.e. bullshit deceptive marketing assertion) between their
plan X and device Y. If you have a shiny enough GSM device, or even just anything
that ISN'T purchased through your carrier directly in association with your specific service plan, expect them to either block your data service or forcibly
switch you to a "compatible" (read: two to four times the cost for the same technical service) data plan. You're screwed if you try to use a netbook, laptop, USB GSM modem, PCMCIA / Expresscard data modem, "smartphone" (whatever that is these days .. apparently even the dumb ones run an OS and have ARM11 CPUs and internet and JAVA). Or if you "tether". Then you're treated as a prime mark for extortion and they'll try to charge you $30, $40, $60, $+++ / month just to use your existing service with the sim in or connection to one of those devices.

IMHO that seems to violate the Carterphone regulatory precedents, as well as the USA's anti-trust "tying" laws about trying to sell X service plan only with X carrier branded / approved model devices, even if other brand devices are FCC approved for use with that carrier in the USA, i.e. there's no technical or regulatory / legal incompatibility causing them reason to deny or restrict service.

Lawyer, anyone???

Tmobile even has an "android data plan". Yes, who'd have guessed it. If you happen to be running an open source OS on your phone, you get to pay 3x the amount you'd pay for THE EXACT SAME SERVICE if your phone ran Symbian. Sounds a lot like anti-competitive / unfair discrimination to me.

It would be the same as having your ISP try to charge you 4x the prices if you have a Mac, and 6x the prices if you run LINUX as if your PC has the ISP branded version of Windows XP installed. Why would we STAND for this in this day and age DECADES after this kind of anti-trust BS got AT&T broken up, carterphone, etc.???

Re:You get what you pay for? (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410418)

There's no real reason that I should have to buy a MiFi and swap SIMs in and out. My phone has WiFi and should be able to set up an ad-hock network.

Re:You get what you pay for? (1)

Totenglocke (1291680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410362)

Let's just be honest hear: They're charging too much and imposing arbitrary restrictions because there's minimal competition, minimal regulation, and they believe that their customers will put up with being charged for a separate plan for each and every device they own.

Hence why, if I got an iPad (I won't since it doesn't do anything my iPhone doesn't do), I would use my jailbroken iPhone and do bluetooth tethering (which according to Jobs / Apple, the iPad DOES support) to give it internet.

Re:You get what you pay for? (2, Informative)

BearRanger (945122) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410040)

$15 a month in the US. The iPad is primarily a wi-fi device, or so it seems to me. Why would anyone pay for the unlimited data plan?

Re:You get what you pay for? (1)

Totenglocke (1291680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410386)

The problem isn't $15 a month vs. $30 a month for unlimited, because I agree, most of the time you'd be using it you'd be somewhere (house, work, school) that has WiFi. The problem is it's $15 for 250 MB or $30 for unlimited (some claims say limited to 5 GB). The fact that the $15 a month plan gives you so little data shows that they're using it only as a selling point to try to look good but that they made it pretty much worthless to use the $15 a month plan. I have an iPhone and mostly have it on wireless and it still doesn't take long to go well over 250 MB in a month. Just stream a dozen videos on youtube and you're already halfway through your 250 MB for the month.

Re:You get what you pay for? (1)

Ichijo (607641) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410062)

Why did anybody think that they'd allow users to tether the iPad to anything when it's 3G data plan only costs $30 a month?

I'll pay $60 a month then.

Re:You get what you pay for? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410330)

Dear Apple,

I am a homosexual. I bought an iPod because of its well-earned reputation for being
"the" gay smart phone. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a
whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and text with
other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new iPod as a way to entice
and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if
you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.

With much gayness,

Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

When they came for the iPhone users (0, Insightful)

merc (115854) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409884)

In all seriousness, I'm proud to live in a Microsoft and Apple-free household.

Maybe someday when they realize how harmful DRM really is I'll take another look.

Nonsense like this isn't convincing me I'm wrong.

Bye.

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (1, Funny)

wampus (1932) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409926)

Christ, you sound like an AA meeting.

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (4, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410028)

FYI, there's also AAA, C, D and 9 volts meetings.

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (2, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410078)

Perhaps his tone simply derives from his Overclockers Anonymous meetings.

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (1)

meerling (1487879) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410374)

I've always liked Atomic Batteries, can run your space probe for 20 years and my junk usually doesn't survive 10...

Re:When they came for the ... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31409966)

When they came for the people who misappropriated Niemoeller for stupid shit they suddenly realized they were going to a much larger lake of flaming brimstone than they had originally thought necessary.

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410030)

In what way is the DRM in Windows 7 harming me?

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (3, Informative)

Kitkoan (1719118) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410114)

In what way is the DRM in Windows 7 harming me?

Tthe glitch where it thinks it's been pirated and down grades you to changing to a black background and nags you to buy a real copy (even though you are using one)

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (2, Funny)

kjart (941720) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410372)

In what way is the DRM in Windows 7 harming me?

Tthe glitch where it thinks it's been pirated and down grades you to changing to a black background and nags you to buy a real copy (even though you are using one)

It must not be nagging very effectively if he hasn't noticed it yet.

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (2, Interesting)

jmactacular (1755734) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410198)

I recently tried changing my IP from auto assigned to a static ip on my win 7 box, and after it rebooted, it said it needed me to activate windows. What doofus would make your network settings tied to windows activation? Or anything that might change after you've already activated it?

Re:When they came for the iPhone users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410032)

Good concise answer.

How are they going to stop it though? (3, Insightful)

lordsid (629982) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409888)

Personally I'd like to know how he thinks he's going to stop it. Nothing like telling someone 'no' to challenge them.

Re:How are they going to stop it though? (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410098)

Chances of stopping 100% of cases? Pretty much zero.

Chances of making the process annoying, complex, and/or risky enough that relatively few people will bother? Pretty much 100%.

When all you see is the aggregate profit/loss numbers, those relatively few will be basically irrelevant. If they somehow manage to use massive amounts of data, AT&T will just ban them anyway, and probably charge them a stiff ETF for the privilege.

That's the thing to keep in mind: Content-level DRM is doomed because it only has to be cracked once, it can spread like wildfire in the clear from that point forward. Device-level DRM only has to be reverse-engineered once(per iPhone OS update, hardware revision, silent baseband revision bump, etc.) but the crack has to be applied per-device. TOS-level control can be circumvented merely by ignoring it; but you face the constant threat of termination and possible penalties.

Re:How are they going to stop it though? (1)

rsborg (111459) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410222)

Personally I'd like to know how he thinks he's going to stop it. Nothing like telling someone 'no' to challenge them.

Seriously... any device that serves as a wifi AP should be a valid signal for the iPad... how are they going to discriminate? If I did have a wireless-enabled family, I'd seriously consider just using the verizon MiFi and iPod Touch / iPad wifi (in addition to other devices, laptop, etc).

hackers say yes tethering (1)

Khashishi (775369) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409890)

how long before it's cracked?

Re:hackers say yes tethering (4, Insightful)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410036)

I guess it depends on the size of the rock you choose to crack it.

Re:hackers say yes tethering (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410170)

how long before it's cracked?

Hopefully not a long time. However, given that the second run of iPhone 3GS aren't completely jailbroken yet (they require a tethered jailbreak every reboot), Apple may have learned and make the new iPads even more difficult to jailbreak.

Now, given that Apple's developers make stupid bugs, if you're planning on this, I would suggest buying an early revision iPad as it will likely have the buggy boot ROM allowing an easy jailbreak. A few months down the road (when a jailbreak happens) might be too late.

So, the iPad may take suggestions on the iPhone 3GS to be even harder to jailbreak. Or, given it's a new SoC, there may be exploitable bugs that make a more permanent jailbreak possible. It's a tossup at the moment.

iPad failurez (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31409902)

http://f00.inventorspot.com/images/ipadTT.preview.jpg

that's all I've got to say about that.

why buy an iPad when you can get nice 16 or 17 ounce computers...

Fujitsu LifeBook UH900 Mini-Notebook

This is why I'll never own anything apple. (2, Insightful)

mirix (1649853) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409910)

Steve's deathgrip on what I can and can't do with _my_ device... Why would anyone subject themselves to that?

Re:This is why I'll never own anything apple. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410318)

Ditto. I actually dropped my Cable connection and have been exclusively tethering via my Droid for the last 2 months!

Re:This is why I'll never own anything apple. (1, Troll)

Degro (989442) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410328)

Apple as of late has really rekindled my appreciation for Windows on my personal computers. Sell me the hardware and then let me do what the f**k I want. I'm just waiting for the next major version of OSX brings in the wonderful strangle hold of the app store too...

Re:This is why I'll never own anything apple. (1, Informative)

larkost (79011) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410360)

Maybe because the devices his company produces do what most people want, and do those things really well. Not everyone want to go digging under the hood. Most people really don't care about what is happening under the hood, they just want it to happen. For example I will be buying a 3G iPad when they come out with the express idea of playing with it for a month before giving it to my grandmother.

She needs something to replace the email-only station that she has, and I think that the simplicity of troubleshooting ("press the big button if you get in trouble"), and the single-midedness of doing one task at a time will mean that she might just venture out beyond the email-only realm she has been in. With a computer the first step to get to email is simply too much, and it does not matter Windows, MacOS, or linux for that statement. But with an iPad there is a chace that she will be tempted to view the photo sharing sites that my parrents and aunt have setup.

And my fiencée has already said that she might use it to replace her Windows notebook that has been nothing but a headache in the year she has had it (a couple of bad design choices by HP have caused real problems and it has already had two warentee issues). For the most part she just does email and web surfing. The only thing she was worried about was that she might not be able to save PDF reciepts from the bills she pays online (a legitimate worry).

As to myself, I am a professional geek and I specialize in MacOS. While I dig pretty deep in the desktop version of MacOS X, and do some lite programming (mostly on the heavy side of scripting), I have never been tempted to jailbreak my iPhone, or dig into the iPhone SDK. It is an appliance for me, and I am happy that it just does the job I want it to do.

Didn't he say this.. (1, Interesting)

zoid.com (311775) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409922)

I'm pretty sure he said this two days ago. Yep... here it is:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2361029,00.asp [pcmag.com]

2 days ago...

I used to come here to get the lates tech news.

Re:Didn't he say this.. (2, Insightful)

zoid.com (311775) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409930)

Oh, and BTW: I bet it will tether to my G1.

Re:Didn't he say this.. (1)

errgh (744846) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410008)

depends if it connects to adhoc networks or not. if it does connect to ad hoc networks then IT WILL tether to iphones (jailbroken ones only in the US) and other mobiles.

Re:Didn't he say this.. (1)

peregrinebebop (1450485) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410336)

The Palm Pre out of the box can create a hotspot that the iPad will certainly connect too. I'd bet you can get an Android app that will do it for you on the G1.

It's getting ridiculous (4, Insightful)

linumax (910946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409936)

I'm expected to pay the service provider 30$ for home Internet, 30$ for phone and now 30$ for tablet?! Very soon our cars will be connected devices and not long after that glasses, watches, etc. Are we supposed to keep paying up per device? It's highly unreasonable, specially since most people don't use two devices at the same time.

Re:It's getting ridiculous (5, Insightful)

zoid.com (311775) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409974)

It's easy, don't buy it.

Re:It's getting ridiculous (1)

QuoteMstr (55051) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410352)

It's easy, don't buy it.

Err, so anything that people do buy, by definition, is good? I don't think so. Try joining the real world.

Re:It's getting ridiculous (1)

NiteRiderXP (750309) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409998)

Well eventually it will probably be narrowed down to two pipes.
You will have a fixed wired connection and a wireless connection, two simply due to bandwidth differences.
You will probably carry something like a MiFi that intelligently acts as a gateway for all of your gadgets.
That's the hope anyway...

Re:It's getting ridiculous (1)

jgreco (1542031) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410140)

It's all about that growth number. As cell phone penetration is slowly reaching the saturation point, the choices for pushing growth are decreasing.

Since the number of potential subscribers in the country is growing fairly slowly, and since corporations cannot (yet?) manufacture new consumers on a production line, the only real option is to find a way to increase the revenue per subscriber.

That used to mean selling minutes. Then it was texting. Then data. Then additional wireless devices. There always has to be a new gimmick, and of course many people will pay up.

The problem is that eventually the charges become outrageous and people stop buying. Growth will hit this wall eventually.

I don't see it as viable to pay for a $60 data plan for the laptop, a $30 data plan for the iPhone, and then another $30 for iPad. As you say, most people don't use two devices at the same time, and in fact the availability of more devices tends to mean each individual device gets used somewhat less than it would otherwise.

Re:It's getting ridiculous (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410158)

Stop buying apple products.

Problem solved. (mostly)

Re:It's getting ridiculous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410276)

*Very soon our cars will be connected devices*

Umm, yeah. See OnStar and XM radio.

Re:It's getting ridiculous (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410300)

Very soon our cars will be connected devices

Very soon? More like since 2005 or so. OnStar is $19 to $30 per month. It's tied in to the vehicle's systems: "We automatically run hundreds of diagnostic and maintenance checks on your vehicle's key operating systems and deliver a summary report right to your inbox every month." And, of course, they can stop your car remotely.

With the Chevy Volt, OnStar will allow remote phone access to some car functions.

Another reason not to buy an Ipad (1)

thinktech (1278026) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409960)

Just another in a long and growing list of reasons not to buy a larger Iphone screen with less functionality than your phone and not even close to the functionality of a laptop, but more expensive.

Forged Headers? (5, Insightful)

NiteRiderXP (750309) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409968)

This is Slashdot, wake up people.
How hard is it to forge headers, it's not like his email was signed with a cert?
Maybe I should send a story in with fake headers and see if it gets posted...

Re:Forged Headers? (2, Interesting)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31409994)

Yeah, but why? It's not like anyone would be offended if he had a secretary answer his emails, there is no reason to forge them. And if he did sign it with a cert, he could have just as easily given the cert to the secretary.

Re:Forged Headers? (4, Insightful)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410024)

The point is we have no reason to believe those emails came from jobs, anyone representing jobs, or even anyone sharing a point of view with jobs. It could have been some 12 year old eating cheetos and hotpockets while trolling mac forums in his mother's basement using a 15 year old PC running netbsd.

Is that likely? Probably not, but acting like headers tell you anything is idiotic.

Re:Forged Headers? (2, Insightful)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410110)

Faking email headers is trivial. Getting Steve Jobs personal email so that you can fake a reply is slightly harder.

Re:Forged Headers? (5, Informative)

Mistlefoot (636417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410164)

Not to mention, to ask Steve Jobs a question via his direct email address and then get a reply means either:

1) someone is hacking Steve Jobs incoming email and read the question and replied
2) someone guessed that Steve Jobs was asked this questions and then coincidentally spoofed an answer to person they correctly guessed asked it
3) Steve Jobs replied.

number 1 is big news - Steve Jobs email is not secure!!!!
number 2 is conspiracy theory material
number 3 confirms what Steve Jobs said in a pcmag article 2 days ago and seems the logically obvious choice.

Re:Forged Headers? (2, Insightful)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410284)

4) someone faked the entire exchange so they could get links to their website spread around the internet.
5) any number of other possibilities, limited only by your imagination.

We don't know what happened because email headers do not provide authentication.

number 1 is big news - Steve Jobs email is not secure!!!!

Newsflash, if you are not using GPG/PGP, which apparently Steve Jobs is not, then your email most certainly is not secure. This is only big news to anyone that doesn't know how email works.

Now personally, I'm going to go with "Steve Jobs actually said this", mainly because it sounds dickish enough to be something he'd actually say, but this is a completely seperate issue.

Re:Forged Headers? (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410340)

Not to mention, to ask Steve Jobs a question via his direct email address and then get a reply means either:

1) someone is hacking Steve Jobs incoming email and read the question and replied
2) someone guessed that Steve Jobs was asked this questions and then coincidentally spoofed an answer to person they correctly guessed asked it
3) Steve Jobs replied.

number 1 is big news - Steve Jobs email is not secure!!!!
number 2 is conspiracy theory material
number 3 confirms what Steve Jobs said in a pcmag article 2 days ago and seems the logically obvious choice.

What is this? Logic? I'll have none of it Sir!

Re:Forged Headers? (1)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410310)

If nobody knows Steve Job's email, then how can we confirm that the headers indicate it was sent by him?

Re:Forged Headers? (1)

yuhong (1378501) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410068)

it's not like his email was signed with a cert?

Yea, I was thinking that CEOs like Steve Jobs and other famous people should sign their emails and USENET postings with a cert or a PGP signature, so that the authenticity of their emails can be verified. Anyone know of any CEOs or other famous people that does that?

Re:Forged Headers? (1)

yuhong (1378501) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410092)

And login using their account if possible (OpenID should help a lot) when commenting on blogs and forums, too, for the same reason.

Re:Forged Headers? (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410112)

Had it been the real Steve Jobs, he would have bricked the iPhone of the guy who asked the question, just to remind him whose house they are in....

yet another bad iPad-related choice... (1)

Ruvim (889012) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410022)

Starting with the name, following with the luck of functionality, awkward ports and now that... Am I the only one who thinks that this paticular Apple product is going the way of Newtons [wikipedia.org]?

Re:yet another bad iPad-related choice... (2, Interesting)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410104)

I'm not so sure, because this is exactly the type of device we've been looking for to give to our sales reps. We have a web-app product we like to demo to people. Potential customers usually don't like playing with the app when it's on a sales rep laptop or netbook. Many of the people I think have a fear of using somebody elses computer and they'll "screw something up". Plus it costs us $60 per month per sales rep for the wireless cards. We tried using iPod Touches/iPhones for demos, but the screens are too small.

These devices seem to be perfect. Its a lot easier and I'm going to say less intimidating for reps to carry into demos, especially initial calls, and $30 per month is cheaper than $60 per month.

People often have a fear of computers. We noticed that when we handed over an iPod Touch with the demo, people were more willing to pick it up and play around with it. It was perfect for demoing the Mobile version of the application, but horrible to show the full browser version.

I think it will play well out in the general market. You just have to realize that the general market is not the slashdot crowd.

Re:yet another bad iPad-related choice... (3, Insightful)

Al Dimond (792444) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410268)

A couple other people have pointed out niche business uses for the iPad. The general market may not be the /. crowd, but it's not your niche, either.

And if the iPad browser doesn't support your web app just the way you want it you can't install a browser that does. Which kinda sucks. Apple's control over the device, to me, makes it poorly suited to any business use.

Re:yet another bad iPad-related choice... (1)

EastCoastSurfer (310758) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410142)

I keep wondering the same thing, but you can't ignore the Apple marketing machine and the people who love all their shiny toys (even I enjoy my MBP and iPhone). The problem is if someone already has an iPhone and a MB/MBP I don't see what the iPad brings to the equation. I guess it could simply take the e-reader market?

I've read a lot of people saying that the iPad will replace their laptop of some sort. That might work if they only consume content, but even my non-techie friends seem to do a lot of typing on IM, email, FB, etc.. and the iPad seems horrible for any sort of typing (and awkward when typing then touching the screen and typing again). I'm sure someone will point me to the keyboard accessory, but if you're going to carry around an iPad and the attachable keyboard why not just get a proper laptop to begin with?

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

Re:yet another bad iPad-related choice... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410282)

Am I the only one who thinks that this paticular Apple product is going the way of Newtons [wikipedia.org]?

If you mean a product that launches a whole new paradigm of computing devices, then yes.

This is 90% likely to be FUD... (1)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410050)

...because it will most likely get hacked just like the Kindle and iPhone were. Unless by some miracle the iPad becomes un-'jailbreakable.'

It's a shame (3, Insightful)

toastliscio (1729734) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410246)

It's a shame that in the 21st century you buy a device like that and then you have to ask permission to the company that made it for doing something obvious. The iPad can do that, but they prevent you from doing it via software, just because if you want to do something like that, they want you to spend even more money on another of their devices. So actually they don't make money on what they give you, but on what they take away from you. The EU has much more articulated antitrust laws than US (see MS Windows browser case), let's hope they'll do something, sooner or later. BTW, I'm a Linux and GNU and FLOSS supporter, so from my point of view Microsoft is nothing more than a company that tries to do its business, but before MS came along all kinds of computers where closed like Apples. Microsoft opened up the market and spurred strong competition between hardware producers so that now we have better tecnology at lower prices, now with Apple we can see again what the closed world was like. Will the apple hype ever deflate in front of such things?

Email Headers? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31410262)

According to the report, the email headers made it plausible that the reply had come from Jobs's iPhone.

Perhaps his reply [slashat.se] gave it away:

No.

Sent from my iPhone

iPad limitation? (1)

Grizzley9 (1407005) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410334)

Cant you just turn your JB'd iPhone into a WiFi hotspot using one of the many apps out there?
Connect iPad to iPhone wifi network,
done.

Re:iPad limitation? (1)

Totenglocke (1291680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410414)

Well you can do that, but the easier way is that the iPad will do bluetooth tethering and a jailbroken iPhone can also do bluetooth tethering.

Why so much Apple hate? (1)

Trolan (42526) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410380)

So we have a simple question: Can I tether an iPad to the iPhone? Let's break this down.

Within US:
Non-issue, you can't tether anything to your iPhone. Who's fault? AT&T.

Outside US:
If you've got a provider which permits tethering of devices to your iPhone, you can start to have a case to be miffed at Apple. However... iPhone tethering is available over USB (isn't one on the iPad), and BlueTooth. While you can tether your devices to your iPhone over BT, you've never been able to do it the other way. So why are people surprised that the iPad is the same?

There's an app for that... (2, Informative)

spmkk (528421) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410442)

http://www.rockyourphone.com/index.php/mywi.html [rockyourphone.com]

Handy little utility to turn your iPhone into a wi-fi hotspot so you can tether any wi-fi enabled device, including the iPad.

(Disclaimer: I haven't used it personally, but it comes highly recommended.)

Re:There's an app for that... (1)

grub (11606) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410470)

I was going to mention MyWi but you beat me to it, so I'll second it.
MyWi is a great app.

MyWi on Jailbroken iPhones (1)

EmotionToilet (1083453) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410448)

I haven't had a reason to jailbreak my own iPhone, but I understand there's a tethering app on Cydia called MyWi that creates a wifi hotspot from your iPhone and routs traffic through the 3G connection. The iPad could just connect to the iPhone this way and it would treat it as a normal wireless network. The app looks super easy to use. I imagine this would be the simplest way to tether the iPad to the iPhone.

Steve Jobs was my homeboy (1)

trouser (149900) | more than 4 years ago | (#31410464)

I was hanging out at Steve's place the other day, he used to jokingly call it his iPad but after the announcement of the new tablet he got a letter from Apple's legal team, now he calls it the iHouse. I told him that was pretty lame but he says what the hell would I know anyway.

We had a few beers, ordered pizza, watched some sport on TV, we we're going to play some games but his XBox 360 is in for repair and there aren't any games for the Mac so instead we got to talking about the new tablet. He says, you gonna buy one? And I'm like can I tether it to my iPhone? And he's like hell no. So I punched him in the face as hard as I could and went home to play some serious PC games and shit.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...