Beta

×

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!

cancel ×

212 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The Singularity... (0)

Singularity42 (1658297) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029202)

...is near!

Apple Is Great; Now They Can Rescue Their Users (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029474)

when they get the wrong NUMBER [youtube.com] .

Cheers.

Yours In Miami,
K. Trout

Re:The Singularity... (0)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029764)

As I understand it it has been ongoing from the first iPhone. This update doesn't work on those phones. Those phones are still tracking. There are still millions of people subject to tracking if this is correct. Where's their fix?

Re:The Singularity... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030262)

You're understanding is wrong. It's only been happening since iOS 4. Of course, some phones are EOL at 4.2.

bug? (3, Insightful)

Squeeonline (1323439) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029212)

I'm pretty sure it was a feature, not a bug.

Re:bug? (3, Interesting)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029402)

The data was held in a SQLLite database with a default size of 2MB. This obviously seemed like a small file but in reality it could hold a lot of data. So the file size has been reduced.

So when are Google going to fix their OS and also stop sending data with a unique identifier back to HQ? yes, iOS seemed like it was tracking you, but the data in the database file on the device is a cache of location assistance data received.

Re:bug? (5, Insightful)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029864)

Apple says they read your location data.

From the Apple FAQ http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html [apple.com] :

8. What other location data is Apple collecting from the iPhone besides crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?

Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database with the goal of providing iPhone users an improved traffic service in the next couple of years.

To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple. Claims that they only send location data and never pull it is clearly false. Of course, the database file on the phone was not the actual problem. It was sloppy to back it up, but it was more a tell tale sign Apples actual bad behavior. The bad behavior was in reading peoples location from their phone when they were told not to.

Google has allowed you to actually turn off tracking by Google. It is part of the setup procedure in every Android phone. They don't even stop you from using location services if you tell them not to collection our location data. If someone shows that Google reading that data when they have been told not to, I will agree that they have behaved badly.

At this point though Apple hasn't come out and said that they will stop secretly tracking iPhones. They have been specifically vauge about what they collect, but leave enough wiggle room so that they can claim they told you. As it stands, they claim that they are reading your location info. They worded it in a way that most people don't realize they are having their location info transmitted to Apple.

That is sketchy at best. The big question is, are they still reading location data when location services are turned off, or are they just hiding the fact that they are tracking you? Based on what they have said, and just as importantly, what they have not said, it sounds like they are still secretly tracking users.

Re:bug? (1)

webdog314 (960286) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030138)

The location of the nearest wi-fi hotspot or cell tower *is not* "your location", nor is it "tracking" you. If you look at the actual data in the file, you will find all sorts of entries for places you have never been, or areas you have been to, but at a completely different time. I agree that it was sloppy of Apple to leave the backed up data sitting unencrypted, but it is absolutely different than accurate GPS coordinates of your movements.

Re:bug? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030344)

The location of the nearest three cell towers and their distance from you = your location within a 1 meter radius, thats a circle around you which is approximately six feet across with you in the middle. They could tell with some decent accuracy what room in your house you are standing in for example with that data. Do they send your exact longitude and latitude? Probably not. Do they send enough information so that this can be really easily calculated? Probably. The big problem is the probably, the fact that they can extrapolate which paving stones you walk on regularly is just basic, every day privacy invasion.

Re:bug? (2)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030556)

Reread what I and APPLE wrote. They are creating a traffic database. This requires knowing where the phone is. You are focused on the file. The file isn't the problem. The file was just the evidence they left that got them caught in tracking users. The fact that you don't think they track your phone proves that they are intentionally being vaughe in their answers to try and trick people into thinking that they are not being tracked.

Again. The traffic database that Apple says they are creating REQUIRES knowing where the phones are.

Re:bug? (1)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030584)

The bad behavior was in reading peoples location from their phone when they were told not to.

To bad this never happened! Data was never transmitted.

At this point though Apple hasn't come out and said that they will stop secretly tracking iPhones.

Funny how something that's been public for years is somehow secret.

The big question is, are they still reading location data when location services are turned off

Once again they never were.

Re:bug? (1)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030662)

Google has allowed you to actually turn off tracking by Google. It is part of the setup procedure in every Android phone. They don't even stop you from using location services if you tell them not to collection our location data.

I know Android users aren't that smart but really? Do you even understand the concept of location services? When you use location services your phone can only determine it's GPS coordinates. That in and of itself is pretty useless. So then the APP SENDS THAT DATA TO A SERVER SOMEWHERE where it is logged and the server checks its database to send back a location. The reality is unless you only use location services to display GPS coordinates on your screen. YOUR STILL BEING TRACKED!

Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (0)

Darth Snowshoe (1434515) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029228)

My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot. But whatever, hurf durf, Steve wuz spying on us.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029250)

My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot. But whatever, hurf durf, Steve wuz spying on us.

OK, so you're justifying Apple tracking their users to within a few hundred yards.

What CAN'T you justify, fanboi?

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029296)

Apple's prices.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029380)

I love my Mac's, my iPhone is OK (I don't get smart phone wood like some), but I hate being tracked.

At least with Apple, you can opt out by not buying in. Not true with other well know tracking companies.

There, fanboi cred verified.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (5, Insightful)

dnahelicase (1594971) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029684)

My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot. But whatever, hurf durf, Steve wuz spying on us.

OK, so you're justifying Apple tracking their users to within a few hundred yards.

What CAN'T you justify, fanboi?

I might be called a fanboi, but they were caching location data in what seemed like a logical manner to speed up location services. Many users, myself included, enjoy speedier access.

Sure, they should have encrypted it by default, but it's not like their users had any expectation that they weren't being tracked. They were surprised by an unencrypted cache of location data, but ATT, Verizon, Sprint, ???, are already readily tracking user locations of all phones on the network. I would think someone silly if they expected the location services apps they are using aren't tracking them as well.

People that get upset and say "OMG! APPLE IS BIG BROTHER!" are the same people who get upset when very private information on facebook is seen by people they didn't realize could see it.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (-1, Flamebait)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029984)

My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot. But whatever, hurf durf, Steve wuz spying on us.

OK, so you're justifying Apple tracking their users to within a few hundred yards.

What CAN'T you justify, fanboi?

I might be called a fanboi, but they were caching location data in what seemed like a logical manner to speed up location services.

Yeah clearly that data needs to be synchronised to iTunes. I'm pretty sure Apple employees could start shooting people at will and there would still be fanboys defending it "They're thinning out the herd. It's good for the community" or that they could randomly start stabbing people in the eye with a fork and the response would be "They're providing a community service by increasing awareness of disability". Sound ridiculous? It's already the case that when slave labor practices are brought to light you have thousands of fanboys ranting about raising the standard of living in developing countries and it's better than starving (as if paying a living wage were simply not an option).

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (3, Informative)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030284)

Yeah clearly that data needs to be synchronised to iTunes

OK, one last time for the cheap seats: Apple syncs everything as part of an iPhone backup. They do this so that when you restore from backup you get the device back to its backed up state (kinda the point), temporary files included. When you actually look at a backup all manner of cache files are included. It is not only a backup of data, it's a backup of device state.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (1)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030516)

The data wasn't sync the users folder was the file just happened to be in it. HEY IDIOT THAT"S WHY ITS CALLED A BACKUP.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (0)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030308)

I guess you missed that whole part about consent and ethics, huh? Why don't we just sterilize people with known genetic defects while we're at it. I mean, how could you be in favor of crippled babies?

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (3, Informative)

kwiqsilver (585008) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029834)

The database is not of the nearest tower or hotspot. It is of many nearby ones, (e.g. within dozens of miles). By having this cache of local known positions, the GPS can resolve in seconds, rather than in minutes.

Look at any analysis of the actual data and you'll see that the points do a very poor job of tracking locations. Some of the points are predictions on where you might go. The point of a cache is to have the data at hand before it's needed, so that when it is needed, it's right there. It's possible he was somewhere near Las Vegas is not tracking.

Not what was happening Hater (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029840)

OK, so you're justifying Apple tracking their users to within a few hundred yards.

Nope, wherever you were it was downloading stuff from a mile or two around you, possibly more. Looking at my own data I could not have told where I lived or worked from it, because it was too widespread and of course not related to where I was specifically. Not even centering the range of data collected really told you anything...

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (4, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029502)

My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot.

Your understanding is flawed. It wasn't logging the nearest cell tower or wifi. It was, based on location, downloading to the phone a list of nearby cell towers and wifi networks (from a crowdsourced database run by Apple) so that when the user used an app that requested the location of the phone, this cache could be used to quickly generate a rough estimate and speed up the GPS location. This is a very useful optimization for most of us and the fact that it allowed people to generate a very rough log of our locations over time was simply an unintended side effect.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (1)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029794)

My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot.

Your understanding is flawed. It wasn't logging the nearest cell tower or wifi. It was, based on location, downloading to the phone a list of nearby cell towers and wifi networks (from a crowdsourced database run by Apple) so that when the user used an app that requested the location of the phone, this cache could be used to quickly generate a rough estimate and speed up the GPS location. This is a very useful optimization for most of us and the fact that it allowed people to generate a very rough log of our locations over time was simply an unintended side effect.

In order to get that data a third party would have to either steal your phone or steal your iPhone backups from your computer. Either way, you would have bigger problems than a log file with your locations.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029998)

My understanding was that what was being logged was not the users' locations but rather that of the nearest cell tower or hotspot.

Your understanding is flawed. It wasn't logging the nearest cell tower or wifi. It was, based on location, downloading to the phone a list of nearby cell towers and wifi networks (from a crowdsourced database run by Apple) so that when the user used an app that requested the location of the phone, this cache could be used to quickly generate a rough estimate and speed up the GPS location. This is a very useful optimization for most of us and the fact that it allowed people to generate a very rough log of our locations over time was simply an unintended side effect.

In order to get that data a third party would have to either steal your phone or steal your iPhone backups from your computer. Either way, you would have bigger problems than a log file with your locations.

Or obtain your phone by subpoena.

In some cases it may be the entire intent of the excercise is to determine what your location has been.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030018)

no, you would just have two problems.

1) Lost phone.
2) Lost log of years of location data.

#2 could be a much bigger problem.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (0)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029904)

Apple says they read your location data.

From the Apple FAQ http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html [apple.com] [apple.com]:

8. What other location data is Apple collecting from the iPhone besides crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?

Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database with the goal of providing iPhone users an improved traffic service in the next couple of years.

To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple. Claims that they only send location data and never pull it is clearly false.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029972)

To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple. Claims that they only send location data and never pull it is clearly false.

The issue we were discussing is the list of cell towers and wifi networks stored on iPhones and which Apple has changed in this update. As for logging user location data anonymously, I'm sure Apple is doing so, at least they said they were when I clicked through the location stuff on the maps application in my phone. But that is a significantly different from what we were discussing.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (1)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030602)

No actually your understanding is flawed. Data is from radio logs. The poster was Right.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029706)

Ha!
At first I thought you type Huff Duff, which would have been a clever pun.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (-1, Redundant)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029914)

Apple says they read your location data.

From the Apple FAQ http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html [apple.com] [apple.com]:

8. What other location data is Apple collecting from the iPhone besides crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?

Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database with the goal of providing iPhone users an improved traffic service in the next couple of years.

To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple. Claims that they only send location data and never pull it is clearly false.

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (2)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030452)

WHAT you mean that when I click the button that says use location services the the phone secretly uses location services!!! I'm shocked NOW SHUT UP!

Re:Fact checking not a requirement for posting? (2)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030594)

No, the problem is that when you say "Don't use location services", Apple continues to use if anyways.

in other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029234)

in other news, spotifys synching with your device may fail for unknown reasons.

That was a bug? Yeah right... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029242)

The only "bug" is that they needed to hide it better, oops. I'm sure they've implemented a better hidden and implemented version with this release.

Re:That was a bug? Yeah right... (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029422)

Like Google did with Android? hide it away and make it only accessible if you root the phone.

Not very helpful (2, Insightful)

warp_kez (711090) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029264)

The update does not help if you are using an older unsupported iPhone or iPod.

Re:Not very helpful (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029952)

My understanding was that this was a new "bug"/"feature". That would mean that any phone capable of having it implemented would also take the fix to remove it. Of course the file wasn't the real problem. The real problem was that Apple was instructing your phone to secretly transmit your location data to Apple even when location services was off. We don't know how long that has been going on, and can assume that the actual problem has only been hidden better based on Apples FAQ http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html [apple.com] [apple.com]:

8. What other location data is Apple collecting from the iPhone besides crowd-sourced Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data?

Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database with the goal of providing iPhone users an improved traffic service in the next couple of years.

To produce a traffic database, the location of the phones must be read and transmitted to Apple.

Re:Not very helpful (1)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030418)

Once again STOP MAKING SHIT UP!!! The phone did not transmit this data and does not and never has transmitted location data with location services off. There has never been any secret transmission of data! Everything sent to Apple has been known from day 1.

Re:Not very helpful (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030574)

Obviously not, given how many people right hear on Slashdot claim that no data was ever sent. Where does Apple outright say that they don't collect data when the services are off? They very clearly avoid answering that.

Re:Not very helpful (1)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030430)

Older phones used a different file that can not be accessed directly in any way. Not that this one could be without jail-breaking or the users authorization.

FIX (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029294)

FIX or hide somewhere else?

I'm bummed (1)

stokessd (89903) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029308)

I must be the only person who thought that feature was nice. Given that it's not shared with anybody, it is nothing but useful for me.

When I go on vacation or someplace interesting, I drag along a GPS logger so I know where I've been, and I can geolocate my pictures. I have to take another device in my backpack and keep it charged etc. If my phone did that, I'd be happy as hell. There are apps for that, but they suck serious battery. This low resolution database would be a nice compliment to to the GPS logger.

Sheldon

Re:I'm bummed (2, Insightful)

cobrausn (1915176) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029344)

Right, its a useful 'feature' if they tell you about it and let you turn it off. Otherwise it is covert tracking, even if by accident.

Re:I'm bummed (2)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029436)

You can't do something "covertly" "by accident", because covert implies it was done on purpose.

Re:I'm bummed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029634)

You can if you claim it was an accident... but it wasn't.

Except it was not useful for that (3, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029806)

Since it didn't actually track your location, only present a database of known network points around you, you actually couldn't use it to track anything. I had a look at my own data and you couldn't tell where I lived or worked from it, and those are places I go every day.

Re:I'm bummed (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030048)

I must be the only person who thought that feature was nice. Given that it's not shared with anybody, it is nothing but useful for me.

When I go on vacation or someplace interesting, I drag along a GPS logger so I know where I've been, and I can geolocate my pictures. I have to take another device in my backpack and keep it charged etc. If my phone did that, I'd be happy as hell. There are apps for that, but they suck serious battery. This low resolution database would be a nice compliment to to the GPS logger.

Sheldon

First of all most of the juice an app draws in that situation will be drawn running the GPS on the phone. It shouldn't make a difference which app does that. The only way it could is if some apps turned off the GPS, logged then turned it back off vs always on. An app could be written for that too.

Secondly a tracklog that's only accurate to within a kilometer or two is next to useless for geolocating pictures. If you've ever went geocaching you'd realise that relocating something with 30m accuracy can get frustrating. I suppose if you were really disorganised it could at least tell you what city/country a picture was taken, but I'd much rather carry around a dedicated GPS - better signal coverage etc. (I did this on honeymoon in New Zealand...and we took thousands of pictures....I can tell you exactly where on the side of the road we stopped in some cases....and the GPS I used was not as good as the one I own now).

Re:I'm bummed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030108)

There are apps for that, but they suck serious battery.

Maybe you've used it, but the (free) Google Latitude app does not suck much battery and would provide you with the data you want.

Implied Admission? (0)

Sooner Boomer (96864) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029340)

Isn't this (the update) an implied admission that the original software tracking was wrong? I don't see how it could have been coded in, and have had the behavior described to it, as an accident. What will become of the data already collected?

Re:Implied Admission? (2)

duk242 (1412949) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029550)

I think it's more an issue of them thinking that it wouldn't really bother anyone, especially that the point of it was to help the GPS function run better. So this update is probably going to increase GPS location speeds in certain cases (ie. if you're somewhere you haven't been for a while). Apple have said that the data will have its lifespan reduced (ie. it will only keep a short amount of time worth of updates), thus enabling it to still actually work. Also if you turn off Location Services, then the data file will get deleted.

Re:Implied Admission? (3, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029566)

Isn't this (the update) an implied admission that the original software tracking was wrong?

Well, wrong in that it kept a large cache instead of a small one. Most users probably care a lot more about rapidly finding their location all the time than they do about the possibility that someone with access to their phone or an unencrypted backup thereof could generate a very rough estimate of their locations over time.

I don't see how it could have been coded in, and have had the behavior described to it, as an accident.

Then you have no idea what the software was doing. Why don't you find out by doing something crazy like reading.

What will become of the data already collected?

Data wasn't collected. It was downloaded TO the phone and cached there. The "collected data" was collected on your phone and stored there as well as in any backups of your phone. What you do with it is up to you if you have an iPhone.

Re:Implied Admission? (4, Insightful)

kwerle (39371) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029682)

Isn't this (the update) an implied admission that the original software tracking was wrong? I don't see how it could have been coded in, and have had the behavior described to it, as an accident. What will become of the data already collected?

Good grief. Still want this to be an issue?

Design document:
We want to be able to determine location very very quickly. Much faster than GPS.

Developer: ...OK. I'll just keep a cache of visited towers/wifi and their GPS location cached. That'll be super fast!

That's it, folks. The whole thing. non-jailbroken apps can't read the cache, so nobody cares. The cache never gets sent to Apple, so nobody cares. But it turns out that the cache is backed up to the computer, so people freak out. OH NOES!

Design document:
Make people shut up about this file.

Developer: ...Good grief. OK, I won't back up the cache to iTunes. And while I'm in the code, I'll trim the cache size - looks like it was getting big for some people.

That's it. No story.

Re:Implied Admission? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029962)

That's disingenuous. It wasn't a cache with a size accidentally set too big. It was a log. It would record years worth of data, backing it up, even copying it to a new phone if you switched. Yes, the intentions were primarily innocent, to aid some functionality... but apple claiming it was a 'bug' is not at all correct.

Android's location cache is truly a cache; deleted in 24-48 hours, only kept on the phone. Apple should just copy that behavior.

Re:Implied Admission? (1)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030332)

Well duh! why cache data that's already on The Motherships (Google's) servers. And note the file did not keep years worth of data just years old data. Data for each tower was overwritten. Thus the further you went back the less data there was.

Re:Implied Admission? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030146)

Good grief? Who the fuck are you - Charlie Brown?

Re:Implied Admission? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030382)

Developer: ...OK. I'll just keep a cache of visited towers/wifi and their GPS location cached. That'll be super fast!

And why would anything other than the very last place the user was be required for such an application?
A "cache" is totally unnecessary when all you want is the user's last known position.

Re:Implied Admission? (1)

Poohsticks (921205) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030520)

Except that - "According to tests by independent security researcher Samy Kamkar, the iPhone was also collecting new data on cell tower and Wi-Fi networks when location services were off, and sending this data back to its servers. It's unclear whether the update stops these collections as well. According to Skyhook's Morgan, the collection of the data and the downloading of the cache to the phone typically work hand-in-hand." - From an article by the Reg. So - I'm sorry but they're collecting data when location services are off and they're transmitting that back to Apple. THAT'S SPYING!!!!

Re:Implied Admission? (1)

JesseDegenerate (936699) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029690)

Ah yes, and with your extensive knowledge of the apple software build process your going to she some light on it? You obviously don't write software... (or even widgets:D)

iPhone 3G? SOL (1, Informative)

ral (93840) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029352)

If you bought your iPhone between Jul 11, 2008 and Jun 7, 2009 (and perhaps after that date) you have an iPhone 3G and you're going to have this bug as long you own the phone. As of March 11, 2011, Apple stopped updating the iPhone 3G.

It look like after 2 years, you're no longer an Apple customer. You're a former customer until you prove otherwise with your wallet.

Disclaimer: I can't find any official statement from Apple about their current 3G support policy. But they did exclude th 3G from this update.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (3, Informative)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029462)

Two years is double or four times as long as other phone providers.

A Sony Ericsson phone is effectively abandonware as soon as you buy one. A HTC phone is released every 6-12 months and with such a large number of phones to support you won't see many or any updates after 12 months.

Apple's support for the iPhone is pretty exception in the mobile phone market. So unless you can provide an example of a mobile operator who provided support after two years I think you need to stop whining.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1, Troll)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029518)

Given how limited the phone choice is, and how 'special' iPhone users are, and the premium they pay, and the fact that this 'bug' got (or will get) apple into trouble...

You can hardly compare can you?

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029554)

And? I am neither a fan nor customer of apple, but I would say that if you last purchased something 2+ years ago... you're *not* a customer. You're a former customer.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (2)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029758)

regardless, this demonstrates the benefits of free software. A similar phone loaded with aosp would have lifetime updates thanks to cyanogenmod.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

arikol (728226) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030064)

sorry to burst your bubble (well, actually, not really) but is that what you have seen for Android phones? You know, the ones that can't upgrade from 1.6 to 2..

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030260)

agreed but savvy consumers will vote with their wallet and with the benefit of hindsight choose wisely next time. :-)

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

samriel (1456543) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030526)

"Don't expect the company to fix its mistakes, just spend more money!"

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

pz (113803) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030054)

Depends on the warranty, no?

Automobile emission control systems (and, broadly interpreted, that includes the drivetrain) have an EPA-mandated 10 year / 100,000 mile warranty in the USA. That would mean the car you bought 9 years 11 months and 30 days ago still makes you a current customer.

Owning something that will be supported or last for only 2 years? I try to avoid that if possible.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030130)

Please show me an android phone that is still officially supported 2 years later.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (2)

JesseDegenerate (936699) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029708)

First, it's 2011. Most OEM's support android phones for months, not years. Second, people like you are looking for something to qq about. you would complain if your water was wet. Shut up.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1, Insightful)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030092)

First, it's 2011. Most OEM's support android phones for months, not years.

Second, people like you are looking for something to qq about. you would complain if your water was wet.

Shut up.

I see so you arguments are:
1) Other manufacturers can be bad, so Apple should be too
2) People should never complain
3) You like to abuse and bully people

I bet you'd defend Apple if they went around with squads killing people and committing atrocities. Brand loyalty is for suckers.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

JesseDegenerate (936699) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030158)

No, i just think 2 years in today's market is fair. If they wanted to wow me they could do better. Apple's done it's share of shady stupid shit, but most companies have. (google, ms) I would throw them under a bus if android's UI was actually fully accelerated in 2.3. Maybe ice cream. Or maybe not. rows of icons is boring.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

JesseDegenerate (936699) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030164)

btw: if you feel abused a bullied, then you sir, have lead a sheltered life.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (2)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030404)

1) Other manufacturers can be bad, so Apple should be too

No but ragging on the one which actually comes out ahead of most, if not all, manufacturers in terms of official support is disingenuous. iPhone 3G was supported from july 2008 to march 2011, that's nearly 3 years worth of OS updates for that model of phone. Its successor, the iPhone 3GS, was released june 2009 at which time the writing was on the wall for the older hardware but it was supported well after that.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1, Interesting)

dnahelicase (1594971) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029716)

From my experience, the 3G barely ran iOS 4. I don't blame them for stopping support of it or the "classic". Those users should stay on 3.2.2 and jailbreak it.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029734)

If you live in the states and bought a phone 2+ years ago, you are probably eligible for a very cheap upgrade from your carrier, provided you're willing to re-up your contract.

Given the high-profile nature of this, even if you're not due for a re-up because you bought a refurb 3G 6 months ago, I'd suggest picking up your phone and calling customer service for your cell provider, and asking them what they can do to help you out. If you're willing to renew your contract, I'd bet they'd be willing to cut you a deal on a new phone (maybe a free 3GS, or a cheap iPhone 4), or a discount on some other Android-ish device if that's your fancy.

Yes, it would be nice if they supported all of these devices forever. No, they don't do so today. So you can gripe on Slashdot, or you can call your cell provider and see if they're willing to cut you a deal on an upgrade. They usually are if you say "I'll go to $some_other_carrier over this, but I'd be willing to renew my contract today for 2 years if you can make something happen."

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (3, Interesting)

ral (93840) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030114)

OK, so Apple's warranty is for only one year. As far as I know, they haven't violated any of the terms of their 25 page contract I never read. As far as I can tell, their support is as good as any cell phone company. (Not a high bar to get over.) So you're justified in calling me a whiner.

Still, after paying more for that phone than I've paid for some computers, I'm pretty unhappy with Apple. I've been using Apple computers continuously (but not exclusively) since 1985. I guess I'm pining for the days when a computer was still pretty useful and still getting updates 5 years after you bought it.

I really don't want to start another 2 year commitment on a smartphone. And the iPad I'm considering looks like less of a bargain if it is going to be made intentionally obsolete in 2 years.

Re:iPhone 3G? SOL (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030444)

If you bought your iPhone between Jul 11, 2008 and Jun 7, 2009 (and perhaps after that date) you have an iPhone 3G and you're going to have this bug as long you own the phone.

"'untrackerd' [modmyi.com] Cydia Tweak stops iOS Location Data Storing."

Actually it's June 2010 (1)

edxwelch (600979) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030678)

iPhone 3G stopped being sold in June 2010

666MB long download (1)

fasuin (532942) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029424)

wow! 666MB to delete a file? not that bad at all!!

Priorities (1, Insightful)

chemosh6969 (632048) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029428)

I like how there's more outrage over apple tracking users and then denying it than there is over all the suicides and anti-suicide pledges from the workers making these devices.

Re:Priorities (1)

JesseDegenerate (936699) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029740)

because only apple workers commit suicide http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-13/samsung-electronics-two-factory-workers-commit-suicide-korean-police-say.html [bloomberg.com]
oh wait, your just over-generalizing on topics you know nothing about, about cultures you obviously know nothing about. That's right.

Re:Priorities (1)

chemosh6969 (632048) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029800)

I like the part where you assume I don't know their culture. I guess marrying one of them and living over there doesn't count. Any more baseless assumptions you want to throw out?

Re:Priorities (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029860)

He was probably born over there and has married two of them.

Re:Priorities (1)

JesseDegenerate (936699) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030050)

you smell funny? umm.... you look fat in that shirt. (it's a nice shirt though) my real point wasn't that you know nothing, i was just feeling flamey. It was that that behavior is not exclusive to Foxconn employee's under the wield of steve job's righteous hammer.

Re:Priorities (1)

arikol (728226) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030174)

..let's not forget that Foxconn has a few workers(total number of employees is over 920.000). Even if working conditions were absolutely great and the suicide rate was the same as the USA average (around 11 per 100.000 inhabitants) then we should be expecting around 100 suicides per year from Foxconn workers. Chinese suicide numbers (official ones at least) are lower, or 6 per 100.000 people, so then we would be looking at 55 suicides per year by Foxconn workers.

The big suicide thing that came up around Foxconn was about 18 suicide attempts over the course of 10 months. That is not to say that there weren't any other suicides by Foxconn workers somewhere (the company is spread out over a few countries), but it isn't this amazing wave of suicides like the press whipped up.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying everything is hunky-dory over there. I don't know the full details though, but I know that Apple isn't the only company to buy from Foxconn. Hopefully some of those companies demand ethical sources of electronic components. That would be the biggest incentive to improve working conditions.

Re:Priorities (1)

frosty_tsm (933163) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030540)

Good statistics, but I wonder a bit about the demographics of the 6 per 100k people in China. For example, do these 6 tend to be out of the work force? Are they in lower quality jobs? What's the suicide rate for employed Chinese (or even Chinese employed in a factory; or electronics factory)? Chinese electronics factory workers might be statistically less likely to commit suicide due to quality of life (i.e. better pay) and other considerations. This would reinforce that the 18 suicide attempts are statistically high.

(just playing devil's advocate; your post was well thought out)

Re:Priorities (1)

chemosh6969 (632048) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030312)

Cool beans. It's been a long, hot, awful day over here.

Re:Priorities (1)

Draek (916851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030148)

We're just jaded. Companies in the past have made important gestures towards the privacy crowd when they've complained, but I can't remember any off the top of my head that's done something actually *effective* and not just a publicity stunt (see also: Apple) with regards to working conditions in China.

Re:Priorities (1)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030246)

Just shut the hell up with your made up issues. Foxconn workers are far less likely to commit suicide then the general population. The line should be making iPhones makes workers happy saving them from suicide.

Re:Priorities (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030424)

No shit, imagine if this was Microsoft doing this. All Apple fanboys would be all over it wouldn't they? Just remember...you're probably holding it wrong.

I am waiting for iOS 4.4.1 stable release (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029592)

Personally, I'm waiting for iOS 4.4.1 - it not only is a stable release, it also has anti-suicide factory-worker code in it.

(posted from my iPad2)

Apple Releases iOS 4.3.3 To HIDE Location Tracking (0, Troll)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36029616)

You're welcome...

Apple nomenclature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36029750)

iPhone and iPad secretly tracks users' locations

Am I the only person that's really annoyed by this piece of Apple marketing? Normal English would be: iPhones and iPads secretly track users' locations. Or, the iPhone and the iPad secretly track users' locations. Apple marketing refers to the damn things like they're people. John and Rick secretly track users' locations.

It's just a really strange way to talk about consumer electronics. They're product lines, not unique entities.

Give me a break (4, Informative)

TRRosen (720617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030202)

And People still can't stop making shit up! There is one file. (the Cache) its not hidden. It contains locations of cell towers and wi-fi APs. It does not contain the users location. The data for each tower was over written and only logged when towers came into range. As such the data never could be used to "trace some ones every move". The data would only show the general location of the user (being somewhere near a tower). The app that showed the locations sensationalized the whole thing by showing a week or mores worth of data by default putting in many more data points. Many days would actually contain few or no data points at all. And no one has shown this data being sent to Apple.

Re:Give me a break (3, Insightful)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030548)

Whenever they're reporting on Apple related news Slashdot turns into a sort of techie version of Fox News, ignoring basic established facts in favor of their own predetermined truth. It's mind boggling really. You don't have to like Apple but ignoring the facts is no way for a geek to behave.

Re:Give me a break (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030672)

"And People still can't stop making shit up!"

1) Who the fuck are you ? I've got $1000 that says you won't talk to me in
        person like you talk on this forum. That's right, fuck stick, in about 1.3 seconds
        you will be MY BITCH.

2) Where's the proof of your claims ?

You're just another loudmouth in the chorus, until you give some citations.

No fix for iPhone 3G (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36030542)

The iPhone 3G has this bug, but is not being fixed...

What "Bug" ? (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#36030580)

wasnt there an apple spokesman saying that apple NEEDED to know locations of its customers to provide them 'better service' ? just 1-2 days ago in a story we read here ?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

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>