• The most attention probably comes from John Lilly, CEO of Mozilla, who unequivocally calls the decision "wrong," and says that doing something other than "updating" with an "updater" betrays the public trust.
• Darby Lines at The Angry Drunk says that the whole matter is just plain "whining" and that Apple is hardly forcing the software on anyone, especially considering that there's a checkbox right next to the name of it. And it's not like, as many people have said, installing Safari on a PC is actually a bad move.
• The Inquirer actually makes a worthwhile joke: "Some iTunes users report that the box to sign up for Safari appears pre-ticked." At least we think that's a joke -- you'd only say Apple was "targeting" and "hijacking" Windows users if you were joking, right?
• Microsoft Watch calls the program a "rogue updater," while Paul Mison fisks them pretty completely and shows that even if Apple did somehow hurt the computers by installing a reasonable, standards-compliant browser, Microsoft has done much, much worse.

Wow. Good thing that DoubleTwist is waiting in the OS X wings for anyone who wants to rip DRM from their iTunes purchases. Apple just issued a C&D off to the ISP hosting the Hymn-inspired Requiem software. DrmBytes, a hymn moderator, posted that hymn-project.org will no longer allow links to DRM-stripping software, writing "We've complied with the C&D and removed all DRM breaking software from the site."

The Hymn Project was established to allow people to use the music they'd purchased on the device of their choice. DrmBytes suggests you avoid purchasing your music from vendors who mandate DRM. You should still be able to use burn-and-rip solutions like MyTunes and DRM Dumpster for now.

Did you upgrade your iPod touch? I did. But I presumed it was optional. TUAW readers who have chosen not to upgrade report they're being hounded. By iTunes. They say that every time they connect their iPod to iTunes for syncing, they're getting hit with a "buy the upgrade" page that only has an OK button. Once clicked, it transports you to the iTunes page for buying the software. Is this happening to you? Are you feeling strong-armed into buying the upgrade? Let us know in the comments.

Website iPhone Atlas reports that unlocked French iPhones may not actually be as unlocked as you'd initially guess. They write that these €649 devices will only work with French SIM cards. If you buy the "unlocked" iPhone in France, head over to Spain or Canada or wherever, and stick in a foreign SIM, you'll end up paying mucho-euros in roaming fees to a French carrier. Head over to iPhone Atlas to read the entire story.

So is this not-entirely-unlocked thing for real or FUD? Let us know in the comments.

This situation will probably not affect most iPod owners but there is a 5 account limit in place for iPod song syncs. Although iTunes seems to be able to handle songs from an unlimited number of accounts, you can sync music from up to 5 accounts to any one iPod and not more. Bad news for large families with multiple accounts, but good news for the RIAA I suppose.

Update: So Mike and I ended up in a discussion about this. My point was that it made sense to create accounts for your kids so that they were licensed to their own music and could take their music with them when they went off to college. Mike answered that people should just buy DRM-free music at Amazon or Amie Street or wherever. My question to any lawyers out there is whether it's legal to gift un-DRMed MP3s to your kids and let them "take' the music with them. Thoughts?

Of particular interest (at least to me) is Joswiak's mention of iPhone application development and sales. He talks about his excitement in bringing "legitimate" developers into the iPhone application space (heh) and promises digital application signatures. Although he spins this as a way to ensure the application on your iPhone is the correct application that the developers intended to ship, it's also pretty obviously a way to ensure that the application on your iPhone has been vetted by Apple. The apps will conform to a development environment that maintains "security and reliability" while offering "some really cool things", i.e. no unlocks and a possibly limited subset of the development space.

One thing the article makes clear is that the SDK will not be invitation only. Joswiak says the SDK will bring in grassroots small developers as well as "legitimate" developers, a move he sees as "awesome".

Late last night, we got word that Dan over at Uneasy Silence had discovered a URL embedded into two iPhone programs. The URL, which is formatted to include your iPhone's equipment ID (IMEI), apparently contacts Apple when you use the weather and stocks programs.

TUAW took a look at these programs and can confirm that the URL appears in both. When we tried connecting to Apple, the URLs did not return any data, further supporting Dan's concern that these were used for tracking purposes. We tried with both valid IMEI numbers and spoofed ones.

So is Apple using this data for nefarious tracking purposes? That point remains less clear. It's possible that Apple added this URL for future use to restrict data access to those iPhones with valid AT&T accounts--your IMEI gets registered with your phone number. It's also possible that Apple uses this URL to track activity, i.e. how much use per account for internal auditing.

One thing that is very clear, as Dan points out, is that active iPhone users have consented to data collection in the end user agreement. Beyond that, what data is collected, and how it is used remains fuzzy. Perhaps Apple will now issue a statement clarifying the situation and put user fears to rest.

Update; Gizmodo reports that sniffers detect no actual IMEI data being sent at this time. If you'd like to personally confirm the two URLs we found, you can easily do so by copying the two executables to your computer and issuing the strings command.

If you buy an iPhone and don't have AT&T service, it looks like Apple will be treating your iPhone as an iPod--with no 2 year service guarantee or even, for that matter, a 90-day service plan. Jake Dugard cancelled his iPhone account receiving poor AT&T reception. When his phone stopped working properly shortly after, he was told that Apple would not service his phone. Repairs depend on an active agreement.

It makes sense to me that Apple offers a much longer service time for under-contract iPhones than it does for iPods, but it doesn't make any sense that a no-contract iPhone isn't covered at least under the iPod's one complimentary support incident within the first 90 days of product ownership.

Dugard and/or his friends apparently recorded his service calls but, as an update, has now removed them for the time being from public view. If you followed the earlier link and cannot find them, that is why.

Thanks to iPhoned Home

Update: Quoting the relevant text: "iPhone comes with one year of hardware repair service coverage and up to two years of technical support during the time your wireless agreement remains active with AT&T."

Update 2: Apple 1 Year Limited AT&T warranty here. Have at it. (Thanks to Kai Cherry)

Update 3: An anonymous iPhone Product Special writes in: "During the first 90 days of ownership, iPhone customers experience unlimited support. For all active AT&T account holders, iPhone customers continue to receive unlimited support for the duration of their iPhone's 2 year service agreement. If a customer discontinues their AT&T service before the 90 days of complimentary support, they are still provided with support, and then covered by the 1 year hardware warranty, during which, if they call for support, have a pay-per-incident charge." /p>

Full disclosure: Arik consulted with me during the writing of his article.