![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Gee, it seems like it was only two days ago that this bit of ugliness reared its head.
Oh, wait. It was two days ago.
Motorola claims that the post was, indeed, FUD. They say "If a device attempts to boot with unapproved software, it will go into recovery mode, and can re-boot once approved software is re-installed. ."
This seems reasonable to me. It will make it almost impossible to install custom chips into the phone, which isn't a problem for most users. But according to Big M, it won't permanently brick the phone.
I'm sure we'll see a lot of hacker reports as soon as this phone is in broad distribution trying to independently prove these assertions one way or another.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/16/motorola-responds-to-droid-x-bootloader-controversy-says-efuse/
http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/07/17/037259/Motorola-Says-eFuse-Doesnt-Permanently-Brick-Phones
Oh, wait. It was two days ago.
Motorola claims that the post was, indeed, FUD. They say "If a device attempts to boot with unapproved software, it will go into recovery mode, and can re-boot once approved software is re-installed. ."
This seems reasonable to me. It will make it almost impossible to install custom chips into the phone, which isn't a problem for most users. But according to Big M, it won't permanently brick the phone.
I'm sure we'll see a lot of hacker reports as soon as this phone is in broad distribution trying to independently prove these assertions one way or another.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/16/motorola-responds-to-droid-x-bootloader-controversy-says-efuse/
http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/07/17/037259/Motorola-Says-eFuse-Doesnt-Permanently-Brick-Phones
