I'm pretty sure if Apple doesn't do this, it requires a jailbreak because this sounds like an OS update specifically tailored for the target phone(s). I don't think you can hack a jailbreak into a phone and if you can, we're really, really far from it happening in practice.

So, basically the OS update would be for the target phone only?  Then what's the problem?

No.. Apple proposed 4 ways to unlock the phone without creating a special OS version but the FBI wants the special OS version with the backdoor.. There should be no need to build a special OS version with a FBI backdoor

http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnpaczkowski/apple-terrorists-appleid-passcode-changed-in-government-cust#.qmx66wveNK

The executives said the company had been in regular discussions with the government since early January, and that it proposed four different ways to recover the information the government is interested in without building a backdoor. One of those methods would have involved connecting the iPhone to a known Wi-Fi network.

Apple sent engineers to try that method, the executives said, but the experts were unable to do it. It was then that they discovered that the Apple ID password associated with the phone had been changed. (The FBI claims this was done by someone at the San Bernardino Health Department.)

Had that password not been changed, the executives said, the government would not need to demand the company create a “backdoor” to access the iPhone used by Syed Rizwan Farook

Ok, so I'm confused here.  Maybe I'm wrong, but it sounds like the Government tried to hack it themselves, did a hamfisted job and need Apple to make the backdoor?  Or...obviously, the alternative is that they knew this would fuck it up so badly that it would require Apple make the backdoor?  However, the latter theory is iffy.  If the FBI knew it'd do that, it means they have a pretty good understanding of the code/hardware, and would likely be able to build the backdoor themselves, wouldn't it?

I dunno, I can't blame the FBI for trying to hack it themselves, I mean, they'd probably want to go that route rather than having to go through a federal judge, get a warrant to force Apple to make the backdoor, right?  I dunno...either way, it's kind of irrelevant how it got to this point, I mean, if there's another option that doesn't require the backdoor, then explain that to the judge in the appeal (they can still appeal the decision), if there isn't another option...make the backdoor then do a patch to one of the bazillion updates that we get on electronics these days to edit it out.

Well that's kinda the info we are hoping to get; Why is the FBI pushing for the backdoor? Apple and other tech companies have given info to the law before but this is the first time they are asking for a special OS version with a backdoor.. Why? Will the FBI ask for special Windows 10 version, special Android version.. And the further: can the Police in England ask Apple for their own special version? Germany? North Korea? Iraq? A lot of people siding with Apple don't feel it's just about this one phone.. 

It won't stop there. Sooner or later it will be used for lesser crimes as well (and let's be honest, unlocking a phone is overkill for lesser crimes due to the amount of information it typically contains), and who knows when they'll just make it a backdoor for everyone. I'd also say it's pretty worrying if you don't get the security you expect when buying the product.

I'd also like to focus more on the reasoning behind this. The FBI doesn't really seem to have a good reason for this. No power should be granted to investigators without a good reason. They're always hungry for more power, but it's not good to give more than necessary.

Well, from what we're seeing, the FBI is asking for this backdoor, because the other options won't work?  Or, won't retrieve all the information they want?  I mean, this was discussed at length in front of a Judge, after all, so clearly they went over this.  We're simply not privy to the transcripts.  Which, happens.  It's unfortunate not to know all the details, but, we're often not privy to all the details of cases.   But, we're getting some stuff confused here.  First of all, Apple changed their software in 2014 to make it infinitely more difficult to breach.  So, any previous cases where they helped the Government are irrelevant, since they were done with phones that didn't employ this encryption.

"Apple specifically altered its software in 2014 to ensure that it would not be able to unlock customer phones and decrypt any of the most important data on them; but it turns out it overlooked a loophole in doing this that the government is now trying to exploit. The loophole is not about Apple unlocking the phone but about making it easier for the FBI to attempt to unlock it on its own. If the controversy over the San Bernardino phone causes Apple to take further steps to close that loophole so that it can’t assist the FBI in this way in the future, it could be seen as excessive obstinance and obstruction by Capitol Hill. And that could be the thing that causes lawmakers to finally step in with federal legislation that prevents Apple and other companies from locking the government out of devices."

Beyond that, everything else is pretty much guesswork.  We don't know the specifics of the case, and are probably not entitled to see them anyway (plenty of court documents get sealed).  What I do know, is nobody wants Capitol Hill stepping in and forcing tech companies to do anything via legislation.  We'll have to wait and see how this plays out in the appeal.  

As a side note, I could honestly give a shit what Apple, Google, or Microsoft have to say in the matter.  All 3 have, in the past, been guilty of collecting user data without their knowledge (Most recently Windows 10).  So, in my opinion, they only care about what becomes public, not their customers privacy.

Source: http://www.wired.com/2016/02/apples-fbi-battle-is-complicated-heres-whats-really-going-on/

Why wouldn't it stop there?  If Apple retains the OS, it would mean anytime a situation like this arose, the FBI would need to get a Federal Judge to issue the warrant, which would become public knowledge, and then everyone would know about it...exactly like this situation we're in now.  The only way it occurs w/ lesser crimes is if Apple doesn't fight it.  And if they're as gung-ho about consumer privacy as they claim (I call bullshit), they'll put up this much of a fight, for every single request.

Beyond that, I'd like to know more about the reasoning behind this as well, but I doubt we'll get access to the court transcripts anytime soon.  I think the FBI wants to analyze any and all data that's on this murderers device, which is standard procedure in murder investigations, and probably especially so when dealing with nefarious groups that work behind the scenes.  Sure, they'd probably love to have the OS update in their possession, but, that's not what they're asking and Apple is under no obligation to give it to them.

Because the investigators will come up with excuses to do this in other cases too. Once it's done, it's easier to do it next time. And once it's done, it'll be much, much harder to fight it next time. To be honest, I don't care what Apple's motive behind this is, I just agree with what they're doing here. I generally dislike Apple but not here.

This is a huge matter and shouldn't be decided in a court, I don't think. I don't mind warrants for electronics, but forcing the manufacturers to help in this manner... I'd say that's questionable at best.

so they work for CIA but not for FBI? i am not believing it