What's interesting about this case is, when it started, the sides were split 50/50 between Apple and the FBI. But as time went on, and Apple's PR, legal, and executive machine spoke and educated more people on the issue, the side tipped towards Apple.
Then the congressional hearing happened, where Issa (R - Calirfornia) knew more about the technical details of the phone than Commey. Given that Commey didn't bring a technical aide with him, and him saying things like 'this software would be obsolete because of newer iPhones, and wouldn't work on the 6 and 6S' were completely false and hard to imagine were made with merely negligence (i.e. He was very clearly lying).
And after all that, and the FBI and DOJ PR machine trying to fight back, it became clear that media was starting to side with Apple (Morning Joe on MSNBC is a perfect example of what a 2-3 week time span can do to an opinion).
I even suspect the Judge would have also sided with Apple and the FBI would be fighting for the appeal, and they would have known that. It's smart for the FBI to drop the case, but timing + intentions to bring up the case in the first place were scummy.
Let's remember that Commey, the director of the FBI, was a NY prosecutor. Given that the current NY prosecutor wanted to unlock phones with ease (as they don't have the resources of the FBI and access to the NSA), Commey was "simply" trying to help a friend by deceiving the public and forcing Apple to do something it didn't want to, that Apple knew it shouldn't. It simply wasn't worth the fight, and I do believe it put the FBI in their place, as even a terror attack couldn't even get them the mandate they sought. This is likely not the end, and the FBI knows that any company that has the reach they need will likely set a precedent against them, so it'll be interesting to see what they do next.
All in all, what the FBI got out of this mess: making a whole lot of devices and services more secure.
Then the congressional hearing happened, where Issa (R - Calirfornia) knew more about the technical details of the phone than Commey. Given that Commey didn't bring a technical aide with him, and him saying things like 'this software would be obsolete because of newer iPhones, and wouldn't work on the 6 and 6S' were completely false and hard to imagine were made with merely negligence (i.e. He was very clearly lying).
And after all that, and the FBI and DOJ PR machine trying to fight back, it became clear that media was starting to side with Apple (Morning Joe on MSNBC is a perfect example of what a 2-3 week time span can do to an opinion).
I even suspect the Judge would have also sided with Apple and the FBI would be fighting for the appeal, and they would have known that. It's smart for the FBI to drop the case, but timing + intentions to bring up the case in the first place were scummy.
Let's remember that Commey, the director of the FBI, was a NY prosecutor. Given that the current NY prosecutor wanted to unlock phones with ease (as they don't have the resources of the FBI and access to the NSA), Commey was "simply" trying to help a friend by deceiving the public and forcing Apple to do something it didn't want to, that Apple knew it shouldn't. It simply wasn't worth the fight, and I do believe it put the FBI in their place, as even a terror attack couldn't even get them the mandate they sought. This is likely not the end, and the FBI knows that any company that has the reach they need will likely set a precedent against them, so it'll be interesting to see what they do next.
All in all, what the FBI got out of this mess: making a whole lot of devices and services more secure.