Hacking Boot2 Wii or not...?

[G0dLiKe]

Well, was on teh bay recently and found out that the older Wii systems had different packaging then the newer ones, what I mean is 2007 and till middle 2008 Wiis should be Boot2 Wiis as we know, can one say this for sure by the packaging of the system if its a Boot2 Wii or not?

Anyone knows?

 

[FenrirWolf]

There's no real way to tell by the packaging or serial number if the Wii has a vulnerable boot1 or not. You just have to find the oldest console you can.

 

[G0dLiKe]

Yeah, well the auction text says bought on 28.04.2008 but that doesnt mean it was produced in 2008? What I gonna find out is I heard somewhere here that till middle 2008 Wiis had the vulnerable Boot1...

 

[FenrirWolf]

That's about right.

 

[Thomas83Lin]

bought two broken dvd drive wiis off of Ebay that was very cheap, guess i got lucky both was easy to fix and both had a Old boot1. Still no guarantee but buying used/broken Wiis worked for me.

 

[ziddey]

ask the seller for the start of the serial.

 

[wolffangalchemist]

LU63 and under is a safe bet that it's hackable.

 

[G0dLiKe]

I bought a like new Wii bought in december 2007, played about 70 hours, very nice. Costed 250 Euros, comes with 6 games too.

 

[nabster92]

LU63 and under is a safe bet that it's hackable.

Any Wii is hackable, serial numbers are terrible indications of anything, since they don't even say whether or not it is a boot2v4 Wii with any certainty much less whether or not it has a vulnerable boot1.

 

[wolffangalchemist]

LU63 and under is a safe bet that it's hackable.

Any Wii is hackable, serial numbers are terrible indications of anything, since they don't even say whether or not it is a boot2v4 Wii with any certainty much less whether or not it has a vulnerable boot1.

been out the wii scene for a while thanks for the refresher course, but i was refuting to a hackable boot2 as in bootmii will install to it.
LU64 and up for the most part lack this feature my LU 57 has hackable boot2 or vulnerable what ever you want to call it.

 

[BlackEnigma]

While serial numbers have been said to not be a good indicator of whether a Wii has a vulnerable boot, I was under the impression that at least the LU10 ones were early Wiis regardless. Don't know how true that is. Does anyone have a LU10 that was bought after mid to late 2007?

And there might yet be a correlation somewhere that we just haven't figured out.

Is it not unreasonable to half way assume that even if LU50s were made before LU30s that the serial numbers still do go in order within the 30 range or the 50 range and even if people claim that some LU36s are compatible and some aren't that it's because LU36005 is compatible while LU36893 isn't? (fake serial numbers by the way, I don't even know off the top of my head how many numbers they have)

Maybe a certain range is while another range isn't. I think it's hard to know and maybe not worth the effort.

 

[G0dLiKe]

Well, I always thought that Nintendo sticked the serials in order on their systems but obviously they put them in some random order on the systems...

 

[BlackEnigma]

Maybe there is more order than what it seems like.
Maybe there is no order but if there is, it could explain why one LU34 is compatible while one isn't.
Why there are compatible LU57s and incompatible LU38s.

But it takes effort and right now people are pretty content to say that there is no correlation and to just find an old one.

 

[subrosian]

Please look at this thead: http://gbatemp.net/index.php?showtopic=205...=0#entry2550041

 

[FenrirWolf]

Please don't bump topics from four months ago.