Yes and no. The Poles broke the commercial version of Enigma as these machines had been sold to businesses like banks that needed to secure their communications. This version had only 3 rotors. By the time Germany invaded Poland, they had started using a modified form which used 3 out of 5 rotors and a plugboard for the Luftwaffe and Army versions. The Naval version used 3 out 8 rotors and a plugboard and later in the war added a 4 rotor. These modifications greatly increased the encryption and while the Polish work was helpful, the daily and message settings for the machine was the main puzzle that the British had to solve.
I seem to remember that in the movie, Turing based the "bombe" after the Polish design which could break the commercial version and that it was the Poles that smuggled out a machine to the Allies. Both of these are true.
The last day to buy a brand-new iPhone 3G from Apple was June 2010.
What does the iPhone 3G have to do with his iPod Touch 3rd gen? He made a specific claim which appear not to be supported by facts.
I had a 3 Gen iPod Touch 'go out of support' for new iOS versions less than a year after I bought it. I shouldn't be penalized that way for buying an Apple product late in the period when it is being foisted off on the market as 'current.' Incidentally that iPod is probably the last Apple hardware I will ever buy. There were two iPods that I bought before it.
Let's look at your claim: You had a iPod Touch 3rd gen. It was released Sept 9, 2009 and discontinued Sept 1, 2010 when the iPod Touch 4th gen was released. It started out with iOS 3.1.1 (July 2009) and could be updated to 5.1.1 (May 2012). For only one year was your model "current". The OS was updated for almost 2 years after it was discontinued. I'd have to say your claim is shakyt. For your claim to make sense you would have to buy it after May 2011 in which the current model would be the 4th gen.
Refusing to sell a competitor's product in order to push their own is anti-competitive. After all, Microsoft was just packaging the browser with the OS; that's even more innocuous, isn't it?
If that's all they were doing, there wouldn't be much of a problem. But people forget all the other tactics that MS did. Against Netscape, MS specifically told OEMs that they would raise their license fees with them if they installed Netscape browsers. OEMs on thin margins couldn't afford it even though it helped their customers. Against, Sun's Java they hinted to Intel that if Intel released a JVM optimized for Intel x86 architecture, MS would "favor" AMD in their next version of Windows.
Compare this to Amazon: They are not going to sell competitor's products which they are under no obligation to sell. If Amazon interfered with Apple or Google selling to others then you might have more of an argument.
Well, in hindsight I imagine that I'd feel pretty dumb giving a piece of hardware intended to give developers a head start on producing software to a company best known for dismantling hardware...
I suppose Apple expected people will live up to their word.
But as for giving a competitor a head start... that doesn't matter much to me, and I doubt it matters much to Apple.
You don't think the same company that is suing Samsung would care about secrecy? This is Apple we are talking about, right? Jobs is no longer in charge but secrecy is still part of who they are.
Ideas are easy. Bringing an idea to market is the hard part. Apple's use of these NDA's (partcularly after the already announced the product) are more about controlling the marketing message around a product than about preventing competitors from seeing what they're doing.
I don't know for sure if the hardware in the AppleTV will be the final hardware. For example, Apple can release a different version of the A8 chip. There is some useful information a competitor in such changes.
Wherever you go...There you are. - Buckaroo Banzai