Maybe we just have to disagree. I see the iPhone as an iPod, not a computer. You buy a computer and expect to modify it and add software. You don't buy an iPod and then expect Apple to back it fully if you go and mess with the OS and add stuff not suported by Apple. Particularly when Apple has said all along that they don't want you messing with it and users knew that there would be frequent software updates.

Do I agree with the strategy? Not at all. I think that they should have opened the device like the Treo. Let the developers come out with some great apps and let users add them as they want. I love my Treo because of the 3rd party apps, not because of what they built into it!

This being Apple – makes me think there's a bigger thought, or an incredible amount of money locked behind this whole thing…

Any insight?

To me, that's like Apple bricking every Macbook and iMac that users have loaded 3rd party apps on. It doesn't make sense.

Voiding someone's warranty for tinkering with equipment is one thing (and no one would have an argument with Apple for doing so). Completely bricking the device to non-functionality is over the line, though.

A company that seeks complete control over a system that I've bought and paid for and can voluntary "break it" at their own volition seems quite unethical and everything that the Fanboys believe Apple is against.

When you buy a closed phone (like just about every other phone on the market) you get what you buy. When Apple came out with their iPhone it was pretty well understood that they were not going to allow 3rd party applications or unlocking. Those who chose to fiddle with their phones knew fully well the risks they were taking.

While I feel for those who spent money on "bricks" I also can't go and put blame on Apple.

Moral of the story is you get fleas even when laying down with a totally liberal pink bisexual poodle.

I doubt the folks who bothered to get a special plan setup and then didn’t have a phone were saying “Cheers!”.