Apple: iPhone News and Discussion Thread
#4601
I hope this isn't hijacking the thread but I have a question. I've been searching and I haven't found for sure what the best route to go with my iphone is.
What parts are best to integrate audio/video from my iphone to my nav screen? I've seen nav2go, isimple, blitzsafe, PIE X3, and DOM's. Is DOMs the same as Nav2go? It seems as though they are different products. Thanks so much for your help!
What parts are best to integrate audio/video from my iphone to my nav screen? I've seen nav2go, isimple, blitzsafe, PIE X3, and DOM's. Is DOMs the same as Nav2go? It seems as though they are different products. Thanks so much for your help!
#4602
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
I have no crashing issues with my jailbroken 3GS on iOS4. I routinely kill apps with sbsettings or I get major lagging. If there was one thing I could remove from iOS4 it would be multitasking. Backgrounder is way better, and so was Kirikae (which wasn't compatible with iOS4)
When I begin to experience lag I swipe for sbsettings and my phone is creeping by at <10MB of available memory. Sure enough I see the apps I recently used being left suspended, leeching memory away from apps I'm trying to use.
When I begin to experience lag I swipe for sbsettings and my phone is creeping by at <10MB of available memory. Sure enough I see the apps I recently used being left suspended, leeching memory away from apps I'm trying to use.
http://www.iclarified.com/entry/index.php?enid=10810
says 3G only, but maybe it will work on your 3GS?
#4604
seizure force field!
iTrader: (1)
you may be in luck.
http://www.iclarified.com/entry/index.php?enid=10810
says 3G only, but maybe it will work on your 3GS?
http://www.iclarified.com/entry/index.php?enid=10810
says 3G only, but maybe it will work on your 3GS?
I've gotten into the habit of killing apps through SBSettings already,
#4605
The Dumb One
iTrader: (1)
for the front, no so much.. they give it a rubbery/soft texture that can be very annoying at times.
i would get a non-adhesive anti-glare shield for the front. the static type. you can remove and re-use them over and over.. and they give the easiest surface to use on the touchscreen.. and dont smudge up.
just my opinion though, some people like those zagg fronts..
#4607
The Dumb One
iTrader: (1)
but going from that to a slick screen protector was like heaven.
also, i noticed with the zagg's stretchy nature.. the bumper has a tendency to "push" it up around the edges.
#4608
Moderator
I ditched the zag. Web browsing was pretty annoying with how rubbery the zag felt. Although I love the anti-glare screen protector, it seems to distort the screen a little.
#4609
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
Yea I've used a protector like the zagg before. Do not like rubbery feel and resistance when doing multitouch.
I was going to go with power support. But front and back is like 26 bux with 6 bux shipping as well as tax. Fuck that.
http://www.powersupportusa.com/acces...-film-set.html
I think I'll try the marware protective film. They are static based as well and only 14.99 and comes with a set of 2.
http://www.marware.com/products/iPho...m-for-iPhone-4
i think that film would work great with the bumper because marware made their own version of the bumper for the 4.
http://www.marware.com/products/iPho...e-for-iPhone-4
I was going to go with power support. But front and back is like 26 bux with 6 bux shipping as well as tax. Fuck that.
http://www.powersupportusa.com/acces...-film-set.html
I think I'll try the marware protective film. They are static based as well and only 14.99 and comes with a set of 2.
http://www.marware.com/products/iPho...m-for-iPhone-4
i think that film would work great with the bumper because marware made their own version of the bumper for the 4.
http://www.marware.com/products/iPho...e-for-iPhone-4
#4610
Team Owner
You may be correct, but the ATT rep said that state discounts plans can retain the old data plan. So I'll see soon enough. As a last resort, I could always spoof the IMEI to a 1988 StarTAC.
At any rate, the ATT saleperson said if he could buy anyphone in the store, he'd take the Captivate over any including the iPhone. Of course, maybe he gets a better commission percentage on the Samsung.
I ordered online, so I won't get it until the first of the week. I'll put it through its paces and if I don't like it I return it in 30 days to get a iPhone, my second choice.
At any rate, the ATT saleperson said if he could buy anyphone in the store, he'd take the Captivate over any including the iPhone. Of course, maybe he gets a better commission percentage on the Samsung.
I ordered online, so I won't get it until the first of the week. I'll put it through its paces and if I don't like it I return it in 30 days to get a iPhone, my second choice.
#4611
The Dumb One
iTrader: (1)
i got this one from ATT miz..
it works/fits great. no bubbles or peeling corners.. if i can get a good shot of my phone with it on i'll post it.
its static, anti-glare, anti-fingerprint. you get two for $20 but you only need one, i just sold one to a friend for 10$.
http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-pho...el=prod4600271
it works/fits great. no bubbles or peeling corners.. if i can get a good shot of my phone with it on i'll post it.
its static, anti-glare, anti-fingerprint. you get two for $20 but you only need one, i just sold one to a friend for 10$.
http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-pho...el=prod4600271
#4612
Go Giants
Well, I successfully scratched the glass Damn beach sand....
#4614
Go Giants
#4615
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/07/26/...-jailbreaking/
[ 4 comments ] [ Rate: Positive | Negative ]
U.S. Government to Explicitly Allow iPhone Jailbreaking [Updated x2]
Monday July 26, 2010 11:47 AM EST; Category: iPhone
Written by Eric Slivka
The Associated Press briefly reports that the U.S. government has defined new rules that will permit users to "jailbreak" their iPhone and skirt Apple's App Store ecosystem to add unapproved third-party applications.
Owners of the iPhone will be able to break electronic locks on their devices in order to download applications that have not been approved by Apple. The government is making that legal under new rules announced Monday.
The decision to allow the practice commonly known as "jailbreaking" is one of a handful of new exemptions from a federal law that prohibits the circumvention of technical measures that control access to copyrighted works.
While it is not uncommon for users to jailbreak their devices, the practice is officially unsanctioned by Apple. The company maintains a support document outlining some of the issues users of jailbroken iOS devices may experience while also disclosing that Apple reserves the right to deny service for any such device due to the "unauthorized modification" being a violation of the license agreement. Under the new federal policies, it would appear that Apple is no longer permitted to deny service for such reasons under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, although the company could likely still argue that the device's Terms of Use allow it to deny service.
Update: The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has posted a press release announcing the government's policy changes that came at the request of the EFF and has posted the full document (PDF) issued by the Copyright Office of the U.S. Library of Congress.
On balance, the Register concludes that when one jailbreaks a smartphone in order to make the operating system on that phone interoperable with an independently created application that has not been approved by the maker of the smartphone or the maker of its operating system, the modifications that are made purely for the purpose of such interoperability are fair uses. Case law and Congressional enactments reflect a judgment that interoperability is favored. The Register also finds that designating a class of works that would permit jailbreaking for purposes of interoperability will not adversely affect the market for or value of the copyrighted works to the copyright owner.
Update 2: Some observers have pointed out the the Library of Congress ruling today also addresses the issue of mobile phone unlocking, which involves moving a device to another wireless carrier for which support is not generally offered. Today's ruling only states, however, that copyright concerns can not be used to prohibit unlocking of mobile phones under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Carriers are still free to prevent unlocking in many circumstances and can pursue cases against individuals by citing breach of contract under the carriers' Terms of Service.
U.S. Government to Explicitly Allow iPhone Jailbreaking [Updated x2]
Monday July 26, 2010 11:47 AM EST; Category: iPhone
Written by Eric Slivka
The Associated Press briefly reports that the U.S. government has defined new rules that will permit users to "jailbreak" their iPhone and skirt Apple's App Store ecosystem to add unapproved third-party applications.
Owners of the iPhone will be able to break electronic locks on their devices in order to download applications that have not been approved by Apple. The government is making that legal under new rules announced Monday.
The decision to allow the practice commonly known as "jailbreaking" is one of a handful of new exemptions from a federal law that prohibits the circumvention of technical measures that control access to copyrighted works.
While it is not uncommon for users to jailbreak their devices, the practice is officially unsanctioned by Apple. The company maintains a support document outlining some of the issues users of jailbroken iOS devices may experience while also disclosing that Apple reserves the right to deny service for any such device due to the "unauthorized modification" being a violation of the license agreement. Under the new federal policies, it would appear that Apple is no longer permitted to deny service for such reasons under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, although the company could likely still argue that the device's Terms of Use allow it to deny service.
Update: The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has posted a press release announcing the government's policy changes that came at the request of the EFF and has posted the full document (PDF) issued by the Copyright Office of the U.S. Library of Congress.
On balance, the Register concludes that when one jailbreaks a smartphone in order to make the operating system on that phone interoperable with an independently created application that has not been approved by the maker of the smartphone or the maker of its operating system, the modifications that are made purely for the purpose of such interoperability are fair uses. Case law and Congressional enactments reflect a judgment that interoperability is favored. The Register also finds that designating a class of works that would permit jailbreaking for purposes of interoperability will not adversely affect the market for or value of the copyrighted works to the copyright owner.
Update 2: Some observers have pointed out the the Library of Congress ruling today also addresses the issue of mobile phone unlocking, which involves moving a device to another wireless carrier for which support is not generally offered. Today's ruling only states, however, that copyright concerns can not be used to prohibit unlocking of mobile phones under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Carriers are still free to prevent unlocking in many circumstances and can pursue cases against individuals by citing breach of contract under the carriers' Terms of Service.
#4616
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
#4620
Go Giants
Why would it be illegal?
#4623
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
I literally just posted that.
And afaik it wasn't illegal. Just violated the apple terms of service thus voiding your warranty.
From what I understand it's only legal or whatever if its used to install apps that apple did not approve for the app store.
And afaik it wasn't illegal. Just violated the apple terms of service thus voiding your warranty.
From what I understand it's only legal or whatever if its used to install apps that apple did not approve for the app store.
#4625
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
I'm guessing something like mywi wouldn't be allowed.
And maybe ultrasnow.
And maybe ultrasnow.
#4627
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
Or maybe that one app that let's you get all the paid apps for free?
#4629
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
Well if you jailbreak you can out android on the phone. So I'm guessing jailbreaking gives you more stuff you can do.
#4630
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
Hmmm... My guess is that jailbreaking will still violate your terms of use agreement. Thus voiding your waranty. Just now apple can't do any legal action against you now.
#4632
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
I was right about it voiding warranty.
Apple issued an official statement saying that jailbreaking will violate terms of use contract and this voiding your warranty.
Just now they can't do any legal action against you.
Apple issued an official statement saying that jailbreaking will violate terms of use contract and this voiding your warranty.
Just now they can't do any legal action against you.
#4634
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
Is she a klutz? Is she as dumb as rocks?
Ohh and
Ohh and
#4635
Moderator Alumnus
iPhone question for the experts.
I am about to get the new iPhone, and was thinking of giving my current 3g to my daughter as sort of a iPod Touch/basic phone. So my question is, do you know if AT&T has a plan where I could just sign her up/add her to my existing plan for one of the basic $9.99 or $19.99 deals or do I still need to sign up for a data plan too. The phone would only be for rare emergencies so I could get by with the most basic plan and don't want her to have any 3g access, just wifi?
Plan B & C would be T-Mobile or jail breaking, but adding her to the AT&T account would seem to be the simplest.
I am about to get the new iPhone, and was thinking of giving my current 3g to my daughter as sort of a iPod Touch/basic phone. So my question is, do you know if AT&T has a plan where I could just sign her up/add her to my existing plan for one of the basic $9.99 or $19.99 deals or do I still need to sign up for a data plan too. The phone would only be for rare emergencies so I could get by with the most basic plan and don't want her to have any 3g access, just wifi?
Plan B & C would be T-Mobile or jail breaking, but adding her to the AT&T account would seem to be the simplest.
#4636
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
Sign her up with a dumbphone and then just pop in the sim and disable data?
That's what's I did with my old original iPhone.
Just popped in the sim from my current phone and disabled data.
That's what's I did with my old original iPhone.
Just popped in the sim from my current phone and disabled data.
#4639
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,300
Received 2,797 Likes
on
1,990 Posts