Yesterday, we asked you if you thought Apple 'bricking' hacked iPhones (i.e. rendering them as useful as a chocolate teapot) was justified. 55% of you thought that this was a step too far by Apple, and only 25% of you thought Apple were acting within their rights. And the majority seem to be in tune with the blogosphere, since the backlash seems to now have begun in earnest - something that must be scaring the bejeezes out of the Apple marketing departments, who up until now, have enjoyed being the darling of the blogospheres.
Gizmodo has changed their iPhone status from 'wait' to 'don't buy', arguing that by allowing third party apps, the iPhone becomes a better proposition than before, especially when faced by competition from phones such as the N95. They also highlighted that 10% of iPhone users had downloaded the GPS app, which means apps had spread out of the hardcore geek world, into where us normal people hang out. You can read the full article here.
The Guardian argues that behaviour like this from Apple is going to be par for the course in future from Apple, as they move away from being a computer hardware company into a consumer electronics company. Historically, CE companies want to maintain full control of their products, and have no time for the fanboy-esque hacking antics that people get up to. You can read about that here.
CNET's gadget blog, Crave, goes some way to removing the blame from Apple, and placing it squarely on the shoulders of AT&T. They reason that because the bricking move was always going to make Apple unpopular, and ultimately risk harming their sales, a smooth operator like Steve Jobs would never have pushed for it. You can read that here.
In good news, those clever hackers have already found a way to revert to the older software version, which will not only allow you to download apps, but restore your bricked iPhone. You'll lose the WiFi iTunes store, but what price freedom?