iPhone firmware hints at major hardware revision

Advertisement (Why?)

Code discovered by MacRumors in the recently released 2.1.1 iPhone update suggests the release of a new iPhone may be imminent.

Although these hidden strings may seem insignificant to the untrained eye, they are used by Apple to differentiate between hardware iterations. The original iPhone, which launched in 2007, is branded "iPhone 1,1" whilst the 3G iPhone is known as "iPhone 1,2".

Such a significant rise in the product string number points towards a major product revision. Numerous reports have been circulating in the past few weeks indicating that work is already well under way on the next generation iPhone, which could feature a quad-core processor.

When Apple refreshed the iPod Touch in September last year, the popular device became labelled "iPod 2,1" (previously iPod 1,1) in the firmware code. The update was a noteworthy hardware revision that included a significant CPU speed increase, as well as the additions of external volume controls, a built-in speaker and microphone support.

(1 reply) #1 lylesback2 on 29 Jan 2009 - 18:41

It will be interesting to see the quad-core iPhone if made, how responsive it will be

#1.1 Tikitiki on 29 Jan 2009 - 18:49

lylesback2 said,

It's not going to happen unless you want it to burn your pocket and run out of juice in 10 minutes

(1 reply) #2 Ali Koubeissi on 29 Jan 2009 - 18:43

Quad-core? yeah right ... they can't even squeeze a quad in their iMac line ...

#2.1 Raa on 30 Jan 2009 - 00:46

Thats because iMacs are based on mobile Intel cpus, which aren't made with quad-cores... yet.

Oh, and before you say anything, yes, I own 2, and both consume no more than 90W of power. Now that's efficiency!

(4 replies) #3 Digitalfox on 29 Jan 2009 - 18:46

yeah screw iphone 3g users...

I can see now what's going happen to us..

No copy-paste, mms, push notification, etc until 3.0 in July..

And then only in 3.0 with new iphone hardware it will be available.. Also Apple official statement about it for iphone 2g and iphone 3g" Oh we are sorry only with new hardware you will be able to access those features "....

I'm sorry to look pessimistic, but Apple has keep breaking promises about new features, like for example push notification for months now..

- bmaher

Last edited by bmaher on 29 Jan 2009 - 22:16

#3.1 Tom W on 29 Jan 2009 - 18:46

Yeah lets just hope you can upgrade early...!

#3.2 Digitalfox on 29 Jan 2009 - 18:50

Tom W said,

My point is that I'm pessimistic about the support apple will be giving to iphone 2g and 3g on firmware 3.0

#3.3 NeoTrunks on 29 Jan 2009 - 19:01

Push notification is something that we've all been waiting for, and that's about the only thing that's been promised, when going by official press releases. As for a new update by now, it's to be expected, if you know Apple. The iPhone has only had 1 revision so far, making it just about its slowest advancing hardware line (second to the Mac Mini). I would say that a new model every year isn't something to complain about. Other manufacturers release many different models of phones way more often. Your existing iPhone won't become a brick. My old 2.5G iPhone is still working the same as the day I bought it, although its capabilities have expanded exponentially, thanks to firmware upgrades and the appstore. I don't think they're screwing over anyone (except for the first people that bought the phone at $600, maybe).

#3.4 bits on 29 Jan 2009 - 22:03

You bought a phone that lacks copy-paste, mms and push notification why do you now expect to have them supported?

Perhaps next time you should buy a phone that caters for your needs?

#4 Nestea_M@n on 29 Jan 2009 - 19:00

Yeah, But what the iPhone doesn't offer in official support is already supported by jailbreaking means

Also, Its not 2.1.1 but also 2.2.1 . This minor revision is also causing a clusterfrack with jailbroken phones and also with the soft unlock that we all know as yellowsn0w.

Edit, it is 2.2.1 but the article here written says its 2.1.1, in which that is the error

#5 qdave on 29 Jan 2009 - 20:11

maybe (hopefully) its more energy efficient model.

#6 gt2437 on 29 Jan 2009 - 22:51

maybe the coder transposed the numbers and meant 1,2. meh.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Neowin.net