iPhone 13 teardown and repair assessment [video](youtube.com)
youtube.com
iPhone 13 teardown and repair assessment [video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s7NmMl_-yg
167 comments
This would be a non-issue if you could just buy the replacement screen (or any other part) from Apple or their manufacturers directly, no? Sure, it's nice if the phone can tell you that a part is non-genuine in case you got scammed, but the fact that this is even a problem is because Apple refuses to sell parts and makes repair even using genuine parts as difficult as possible. They created a problem, then "solved" it in a way that just so happens to force users to spend even more money at the fruit store. What a convenient coincidence...
This x 1,000,000.
I have heard that Apple’s environmental concern is all talk until they empower people to get more life out of their devices to reduce electronic waste.
It’s a convincing argument when one notes that their highest priorities for ‘green’ initiatives align with improving their profit margins.
I have heard that Apple’s environmental concern is all talk until they empower people to get more life out of their devices to reduce electronic waste.
It’s a convincing argument when one notes that their highest priorities for ‘green’ initiatives align with improving their profit margins.
You can.
https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/service/screen-repla...
> The Apple Store and many of our Apple Authorized Service Providers offer same-day service for screen replacement.
The pricing available here (for guaranteed new, genuine parts and labor) is actually cheaper than the cost of genuine replacement screens available on ebay at first glance, the first genuine iphone 11 screen I found on ebay that wasn't a chinese offbrand or used assembly is $235 (https://www.ebay.com/itm/174952166934) whereas apple quotes $199 for a new 11 screen and replacement service.
https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/service/screen-repla...
> The Apple Store and many of our Apple Authorized Service Providers offer same-day service for screen replacement.
The pricing available here (for guaranteed new, genuine parts and labor) is actually cheaper than the cost of genuine replacement screens available on ebay at first glance, the first genuine iphone 11 screen I found on ebay that wasn't a chinese offbrand or used assembly is $235 (https://www.ebay.com/itm/174952166934) whereas apple quotes $199 for a new 11 screen and replacement service.
That's repair, not parts, and it's only screens, not any of the other many parts that often fail.
Of course the pricing is lower than buying an ebay screen, because apple won't sell you a screen, so sellers on ebay have to procure them illegally. Again, a problem that apple iself created.
Of course the pricing is lower than buying an ebay screen, because apple won't sell you a screen, so sellers on ebay have to procure them illegally. Again, a problem that apple iself created.
> That's repair, not parts
I'm aware. It doesn't really matter if the final repair service is cheaper than buying the part and doing it yourself and leaves a better, like new result rather than a repair job done by an amateur.
> and it's only screens, not any of the other many parts that often fail.
They repair any part of the phone that fails, screens were just the first example I found are trawling for a few seconds with google. Apple does cheap battery replacements and will swap motherboards too.
I'm aware. It doesn't really matter if the final repair service is cheaper than buying the part and doing it yourself and leaves a better, like new result rather than a repair job done by an amateur.
> and it's only screens, not any of the other many parts that often fail.
They repair any part of the phone that fails, screens were just the first example I found are trawling for a few seconds with google. Apple does cheap battery replacements and will swap motherboards too.
Look up Louis Rossman on YouTube. There are many repairs that are trivial for a trained professional that Apple just refuses to do, nor do they provide parts for. Replace a single resistor and an "unfixable" MacBook works like new again.
The characterisation of third party repair as "amateurs" is one of Apple's creation (obviously not just them but all tech companies). Apple will wipe your data, send your phone to China and replace your mainboard at best. An actual repair technician will fix what's actually wrong right then and there and not touch what isn't - including data.
I completely understand that you don't want to fix your own device or even if you only ever want to deal with Apple, but that shouldn't be the only option.
The characterisation of third party repair as "amateurs" is one of Apple's creation (obviously not just them but all tech companies). Apple will wipe your data, send your phone to China and replace your mainboard at best. An actual repair technician will fix what's actually wrong right then and there and not touch what isn't - including data.
I completely understand that you don't want to fix your own device or even if you only ever want to deal with Apple, but that shouldn't be the only option.
> Look up Louis Rossman on YouTube. There are many repairs that are trivial for a trained professional that Apple just refuses to do, nor do they provide parts for. Replace a single resistor and an "unfixable" MacBook works like new again.
I know who louis is, and contrary to your opinion replacing random surface mount components until the machine turns back on is not a repair. Generally most of his work is not even for machines that spontaneously failed, it's all stuff that's water/beer/soda damaged that Apple turned away. He charges more to do those repairs and they generally don't hold, because it's impossible to remove all latent moisture and corrosion once a board is significantly damaged like that.
> The characterisation of third party repair as "amateurs" is one of Apple's creation (obviously not just them but all tech companies).
The context was the end user buying parts and repairing their machine themselves. How is that not amateur?
> Apple will wipe your data, send your phone to China and replace your mainboard at best. An actual repair technician will fix what's actually wrong right then and there and not touch what isn't - including data.
Apple themselves say they do same-day repair, so I'm not sure why you're overtly lying about that here.
> I completely understand that you don't want to fix your own device or even if you only ever want to deal with Apple, but that shouldn't be the only option.
???
I'm 100% pro repair, I'm just not getting the hate on apple for their practices. They are by far the most pro-repair company in the smartphone space (definitely NOT in the laptop space however, though their in-store battery replacements for macbooks are still cheaper than buying genuine oem batteries for thinkpads, I wish they would go back to socketed ram and ssds but that clearly isn't happening), and are the only actual company that offers in person same day repairs and mail in repairs for reasonable prices. If you want to get a pixel repaired you have to go to shady third party chain stores that are contracted by google, and usually all they will do is replace the screen and see if it works (even if the fault is completely unrelated, you can search for people's experiences with pixel 3s spontaneously bricking and find thousands of horrors stories).
I know who louis is, and contrary to your opinion replacing random surface mount components until the machine turns back on is not a repair. Generally most of his work is not even for machines that spontaneously failed, it's all stuff that's water/beer/soda damaged that Apple turned away. He charges more to do those repairs and they generally don't hold, because it's impossible to remove all latent moisture and corrosion once a board is significantly damaged like that.
> The characterisation of third party repair as "amateurs" is one of Apple's creation (obviously not just them but all tech companies).
The context was the end user buying parts and repairing their machine themselves. How is that not amateur?
> Apple will wipe your data, send your phone to China and replace your mainboard at best. An actual repair technician will fix what's actually wrong right then and there and not touch what isn't - including data.
Apple themselves say they do same-day repair, so I'm not sure why you're overtly lying about that here.
> I completely understand that you don't want to fix your own device or even if you only ever want to deal with Apple, but that shouldn't be the only option.
???
I'm 100% pro repair, I'm just not getting the hate on apple for their practices. They are by far the most pro-repair company in the smartphone space (definitely NOT in the laptop space however, though their in-store battery replacements for macbooks are still cheaper than buying genuine oem batteries for thinkpads, I wish they would go back to socketed ram and ssds but that clearly isn't happening), and are the only actual company that offers in person same day repairs and mail in repairs for reasonable prices. If you want to get a pixel repaired you have to go to shady third party chain stores that are contracted by google, and usually all they will do is replace the screen and see if it works (even if the fault is completely unrelated, you can search for people's experiences with pixel 3s spontaneously bricking and find thousands of horrors stories).
> replacing random surface mount components until the machine turns back on is not a repair
Definition of repair, according to Merriam-Webster [1]:
> to restore by replacing a part or putting together what is torn or broken
It seems to me like Louis' repairs qualify. A customer walks in with a broken Mac or iPhone, he identifies the part that is broken, then he replaces it. Do you have an alternative definition by any chance?
> He charges more to do those repairs and they generally don't hold
Do you have any actual evidence that Louis' repairs are unreliable? Do his customers eventually complain about them?
> Apple themselves say they do same-day repair
Okay, but what about the data stored on the old mainboard that gets thrown out?
> They are by far the most pro-repair company in the smartphone space
Again, we seem to have different definitions here. My definition of "pro-repair" excludes any companies actively lobbying against right to repair and implementing unnecessary software features to detect replaced parts.
> If you want to get a pixel repaired you have to go to shady third party chain stores that are contracted by google
Maybe if you (and others like you) would stop shilling so hard for Apple, turning a blind eye to their anti right to repair lobbying, and encouraging others to do the same by tenaciously defending their anti-user practices on public forums, we might actually have a chance at getting right to repair legislation passed, and then you could easily get your Pixel fixed, and your iPhone, too.
Apple's lobbying and precedent-setting makes everything worse for everyone, not just for Apple users.
[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/repair
Definition of repair, according to Merriam-Webster [1]:
> to restore by replacing a part or putting together what is torn or broken
It seems to me like Louis' repairs qualify. A customer walks in with a broken Mac or iPhone, he identifies the part that is broken, then he replaces it. Do you have an alternative definition by any chance?
> He charges more to do those repairs and they generally don't hold
Do you have any actual evidence that Louis' repairs are unreliable? Do his customers eventually complain about them?
> Apple themselves say they do same-day repair
Okay, but what about the data stored on the old mainboard that gets thrown out?
> They are by far the most pro-repair company in the smartphone space
Again, we seem to have different definitions here. My definition of "pro-repair" excludes any companies actively lobbying against right to repair and implementing unnecessary software features to detect replaced parts.
> If you want to get a pixel repaired you have to go to shady third party chain stores that are contracted by google
Maybe if you (and others like you) would stop shilling so hard for Apple, turning a blind eye to their anti right to repair lobbying, and encouraging others to do the same by tenaciously defending their anti-user practices on public forums, we might actually have a chance at getting right to repair legislation passed, and then you could easily get your Pixel fixed, and your iPhone, too.
Apple's lobbying and precedent-setting makes everything worse for everyone, not just for Apple users.
[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/repair
What happens when Apple decides overnight to increase the price by a factor of 5? When you can't go anywhere but Apple for repair, whether or not you are overcharged is entirely Apple's decision. When you have actual choices, and actual competition to Apple's repair services, like you obviously should, it's not possible for Apple to do this.
> I support right to repair, but ONLY with genuine parts with warranty.
Why? Why can't I make that decision myself? If I'm fine with a cheaper display, why should apple disallow me from doing that?
If they sold their spare parts in their own store, everyone could make the decision whether they want genuine or 3rd party replacement parts themselves. The phone could tell you when the part is not genuine, so you could get your money back from everyone who sold you a non-grnuir parts as genuine. No reason to block the functionality of the phone.
Why? Why can't I make that decision myself? If I'm fine with a cheaper display, why should apple disallow me from doing that?
If they sold their spare parts in their own store, everyone could make the decision whether they want genuine or 3rd party replacement parts themselves. The phone could tell you when the part is not genuine, so you could get your money back from everyone who sold you a non-grnuir parts as genuine. No reason to block the functionality of the phone.
The much more likely outcome is people buying broken iPhones in bulk, putting cheap screens in them, and selling them as originals.
The number of people who (A, bought an iPhone as a high-end device. B, broke it. C, in a way that can be repaired, D, are capable and motivated to do the repair themselves, E, are unwilling to pay for a repair from Apple or have AppleCare, F, are willing to go from high-end device to cheap-discount parts, G, are apopleptic when they can't and didn't know about this in advance) is approximately nobody.
People who are happy with discount cheaper parts probably aren't buying Apple in the first place. People who are careful about repairs to extend the life of their property are likely more careful than average to avoid breaks in the first place. People who care about repairs likely know about Apple's repair policies before choosing to buy an iPhone. And people who splurged money on an iPhone for whatever reason are unlikely to be happy with cheaper parts, or they would have got a cheaper phone in the first place.
It's not literally nobody, but is it really enough people and a common enough situation to base national or international policy on, when crime and fraud and scams are very common? Isn't it really a very unlikely situation which tickles the geek dream of getting a broken iPhone cheap from a friend or dumpster, putting a cheap screen in it, and having used your skills to wrangle a bargain from the Universe, and therefore makes an easy internet upvote comment more than it makes a genuine objection?
You could still do almost all that if you could buy genuine replacement parts from Apple at not-extortionate prices, right?
The number of people who (A, bought an iPhone as a high-end device. B, broke it. C, in a way that can be repaired, D, are capable and motivated to do the repair themselves, E, are unwilling to pay for a repair from Apple or have AppleCare, F, are willing to go from high-end device to cheap-discount parts, G, are apopleptic when they can't and didn't know about this in advance) is approximately nobody.
People who are happy with discount cheaper parts probably aren't buying Apple in the first place. People who are careful about repairs to extend the life of their property are likely more careful than average to avoid breaks in the first place. People who care about repairs likely know about Apple's repair policies before choosing to buy an iPhone. And people who splurged money on an iPhone for whatever reason are unlikely to be happy with cheaper parts, or they would have got a cheaper phone in the first place.
It's not literally nobody, but is it really enough people and a common enough situation to base national or international policy on, when crime and fraud and scams are very common? Isn't it really a very unlikely situation which tickles the geek dream of getting a broken iPhone cheap from a friend or dumpster, putting a cheap screen in it, and having used your skills to wrangle a bargain from the Universe, and therefore makes an easy internet upvote comment more than it makes a genuine objection?
You could still do almost all that if you could buy genuine replacement parts from Apple at not-extortionate prices, right?
Because what is a personal optimum not always is a collective optimum.
One of the things that I like on iPhones is their high resale value. A lot of iPhone users trade their old phones for new ones.
I voluntarily choose for that by switching from Android to Apple.
Are you saying that your personal optimum for resale value primes over the collective optimum of having a replacement parts ecosystem ?
No. I am saying that given the size of the resale market of iPhones, I’d bet most people are more interested on that.
If it were otherwise we would see more people not buying iPhones because of that.
You see this phenomenon in cars, where brands with low reliability or repairability usually need more discounts to be sold.
That's is not all an argument for bricking phones with 3rd party parts, just for having a setting screen that shows which parts are original, replaced and from which source.
Except Apple also disables functionality if you replace the part with another genuine part from another iPhone.
The only excuse is money, money, money.
The only excuse is money, money, money.
I knew a guy who used to run one of these little repair stalls, almost all of his parts came from stripping down stolen devices he got from local scallys. These were all genuine parts, but it made stealing these phones more lucrative.
Seems like that market could also be hurt by apple just offering genuine replacement parts
I guess cost would be a factor. It seems like they could also offer some sort of service where phones can be reverified if the shop can evidence where it got parts.
or have them be one time programmable, so you can use new replacement parts from apple but can't transplant them. although in terms of e-waste that's still not ideal
Actually there is another good reason for this, and that is preventing theft.
What is the point of stealing an iPhone 13 if you can't just sell the phone on (because of iCloud lock) and you can't chop-shop any of the expensive parts because they're all cryptographically registered?
What is the point of stealing an iPhone 13 if you can't just sell the phone on (because of iCloud lock) and you can't chop-shop any of the expensive parts because they're all cryptographically registered?
This is true, but there is absolutely a solution here that Apple could implement: verification of users who want genuine replacement parts.
Apple could empower their customers to be good citizens of the earth who want to reduce electronic waste while simultaneously making the lives of thieves difficult.
Apple could empower their customers to be good citizens of the earth who want to reduce electronic waste while simultaneously making the lives of thieves difficult.
The most difficult aspect would be warranty, shipping damage, assembly damage and false claims arising under all three by less scrupulous individuals and criminal groups.
They likely considered the possibility and decided that it wasn’t worth the extra hassle.
They likely considered the possibility and decided that it wasn’t worth the extra hassle.
How would this prevent a shop from using stolen phones as parts for repairs?
> you can't chop-shop any of the expensive parts because they're all cryptographically registered
They're not cryptographically registered. iOS does a simple check to see if the serial numbers of the installed parts match the expected original values. Also, you can still sell them, and you would not have a hard time finding a buyer, because they're still intrinsically valuable parts and can still be used (with some annoyances). Anyhow, I'm sure someone will reverse engineer the system well enough to reprogram the serial numbers without Apple's assistance eventually. I can't wait -- the writeup will probably be a fascinating read, and it will provide users more control over their own devices, which is always a good thing. Same reason it made me very happy when it was discovered that Apple dun goofed and let an unpatchable bootrom bug slip into all iPhones from 5S through X, which means these phones are forever jailbreakable: https://checkra.in/
They're not cryptographically registered. iOS does a simple check to see if the serial numbers of the installed parts match the expected original values. Also, you can still sell them, and you would not have a hard time finding a buyer, because they're still intrinsically valuable parts and can still be used (with some annoyances). Anyhow, I'm sure someone will reverse engineer the system well enough to reprogram the serial numbers without Apple's assistance eventually. I can't wait -- the writeup will probably be a fascinating read, and it will provide users more control over their own devices, which is always a good thing. Same reason it made me very happy when it was discovered that Apple dun goofed and let an unpatchable bootrom bug slip into all iPhones from 5S through X, which means these phones are forever jailbreakable: https://checkra.in/
There is no way to verify the screen is genuine in a way that could not be copied. The current way works because there is nothing that can be copied. The main board asks for a serial number and only it knows what the correct one is. No 3rd party can fake that without tailoring it to the specific phone.
It’s a real shitty situation but it’s a little more complex.
It’s a real shitty situation but it’s a little more complex.
Presumably, the "security" does not come from the assumption that the serial numbers are private information -- it comes from the assumption that you can only reprogram the parts with top-secret Apple internal tools. There's no reason the serial numbers need to be paired per device; iOS should be able to check any serial number to see if it is genuine Apple. Much like you can go to https://checkcoverage.apple.com and check the warranty status of the whole iPhone based on its serial number.
It also presumably further discourages theft since it negatively impacts the ability to “part out” stolen devices to work around activation locks. Basically once the owner remotely locks the stolen device, it becomes almost worthless until it’s back in the owner’s possession.
This looks to me like a tradeoff we collectively haven’t agreed upon for any other device.
To take the perennial car analogy, car theft is a widespread enough phenomenon, but we haven’t settled on breaking central functionalities each time a repair is done outside network.
To push a bit further, steeply lowering phone price would also critically deter theft, why not go that option if it’s that important ?
To take the perennial car analogy, car theft is a widespread enough phenomenon, but we haven’t settled on breaking central functionalities each time a repair is done outside network.
To push a bit further, steeply lowering phone price would also critically deter theft, why not go that option if it’s that important ?
Well, imagine Tesla implements a feature to put a car in lost mode and it suddenly can't be driven, even with a key. At that point, the only thing the car thief could do is strip it for parts and sell them on ebay or the like.
To stay in the analogy, I see it more like being forbidden to open your car with the key fob because you had the door bumps straightened.
In our actual case, Apple isn't reacting to a lost mode request, and would be blocking any third party screen repair, under any circumstance.
In our actual case, Apple isn't reacting to a lost mode request, and would be blocking any third party screen repair, under any circumstance.
Actually its just an side advantage but deep down our heart we know apple is doing this for their own benefit not for consumers.
I agree with you that every parts must be substituted with genuine parts in case of component damage. I had tried to replace s6 battery and spent like $500 but alas I failed. After 4-5 month the battery gets swollen and the backcover gets damaged costing me more. So I had to dump it and I am never going to buy any Samsung shits.
I got k20 pro and I hope I can get genuine battery for it after few years.
Further such things prevents theft which is a huge problem imo. I think apple should provide user to switch these display but it should warn that the part is genuine or not, just in case.
I agree with you that every parts must be substituted with genuine parts in case of component damage. I had tried to replace s6 battery and spent like $500 but alas I failed. After 4-5 month the battery gets swollen and the backcover gets damaged costing me more. So I had to dump it and I am never going to buy any Samsung shits.
I got k20 pro and I hope I can get genuine battery for it after few years.
Further such things prevents theft which is a huge problem imo. I think apple should provide user to switch these display but it should warn that the part is genuine or not, just in case.
So you bought counterfeit battery and then blame it on Samsung?
I'm not sure if things have changed, but at least a few years ago, Apple prices for display replacements were really quite fair and far below Samsung, IIRC. Something like $ 150.
I'd also be interested in some statistics on the frequency of display damage. With waterproofing and these new types of glasses, I wouldn't be surprised if they had come down rather drastically. I remember every phone I having a cracked display after a year or so. But the last two generations, maybe 5 or six years, they've always survived.
Or maybe it's just my motor skills improving... But if I'm right and they are doing something like 70-80 % fewer display repairs, it becomes really hard to still assume they care very much about that revenue. There are plenty of reasons Apple would want to stop aftermarket parts, mostly of the sort you'll hear if the chef at a fancy restaurant sees the ketchup you brought from home.
I'd also be interested in some statistics on the frequency of display damage. With waterproofing and these new types of glasses, I wouldn't be surprised if they had come down rather drastically. I remember every phone I having a cracked display after a year or so. But the last two generations, maybe 5 or six years, they've always survived.
Or maybe it's just my motor skills improving... But if I'm right and they are doing something like 70-80 % fewer display repairs, it becomes really hard to still assume they care very much about that revenue. There are plenty of reasons Apple would want to stop aftermarket parts, mostly of the sort you'll hear if the chef at a fancy restaurant sees the ketchup you brought from home.
Apple prices for display replacements were really quite fair and far below Samsung, IIRC. Something like $ 150.
150 bucks for display is fair .welcome to the matrix!
150 bucks for display is fair .welcome to the matrix!
Yeah because LCD is generally cheaper than AMOLED and yes iphone screens were pretty common and replacing them is quite simple.
I've also had a similar experience and definitely support giving users the ability to tell genuine parts from knockoffs. Howewer this has to be done to empower users, to help get us closer to a perfect market by giving buyers accurate information. Right now, it's just an extension of Apple's "it's our iPhone" mindset.
That's more an issue with certain online market and monopolists. If there is a diversity of products and reliable reviews and reputation systems due to different markets competing in this regards, then you can trust to get the parts that you want.
There certainly is a way out of this: don't buy shitty replacements. You could still get your display replaced by a legit service before Apple introduced verifications. You might prefer that someone else takes care of your broken phone, but why'd you want to force that on everybody?
“Legit service” stores actually can get the genuine parts and software though. This mainly affects DIY repair.
If your definition of "legit service store" is "Apple Authorized Service Provider", then yes. If your definition of "legit service store" is "high-quality repair shop, even if not Apple-authorized (because obtaining this authorization would mean they're no longer able to perform many types of repairs and must abide by a long list of other ridiculous restrictions)", then no, not all legit service stores can do this.
See https://www.rossmanngroup.com/faq
> Are you Apple certified?
> Absolutely not. Being Apple certified would tie my hands to the point where even replacing a fuse would get me in trouble. I go over that in a tongue and cheek fashion in this video in response to the idea that unauthorized repair technicians are “idiots.” Being Apple authorized would tie my hands to the point where I have to charge you $750-$1250 to replace your motherboard because of that one component!
> Doesn’t a lack of certification mean you have no idea what you’re doing, or that my repair has a chance of premature failure?
> No. To be an Apple certified warranty repair center, to the point that repairs are 100% officially covered under an Apple warranty, the service center must buy their parts from Apple. This gives Apple bargaining power in setting prices of parts, which results in unnecessarily expensive repairs. In order to make a profit, a repair shop must set a very high price for any given service. I am sure some of you who have been to Tekserve have heard “your machine is in warranty, so it will be $600.”
See https://www.rossmanngroup.com/faq
> Are you Apple certified?
> Absolutely not. Being Apple certified would tie my hands to the point where even replacing a fuse would get me in trouble. I go over that in a tongue and cheek fashion in this video in response to the idea that unauthorized repair technicians are “idiots.” Being Apple authorized would tie my hands to the point where I have to charge you $750-$1250 to replace your motherboard because of that one component!
> Doesn’t a lack of certification mean you have no idea what you’re doing, or that my repair has a chance of premature failure?
> No. To be an Apple certified warranty repair center, to the point that repairs are 100% officially covered under an Apple warranty, the service center must buy their parts from Apple. This gives Apple bargaining power in setting prices of parts, which results in unnecessarily expensive repairs. In order to make a profit, a repair shop must set a very high price for any given service. I am sure some of you who have been to Tekserve have heard “your machine is in warranty, so it will be $600.”
So, the problem is that you cannot reliably obtain genuine spare parts, not that alternatives exist, right?
Also, there are more people taking their devices to "non-legit" stores than people attempting DIY screen repairs.
Also, how on earth is bricking my phone (that I paid for) a more desirable outcome than letting me use an inferior display (that I paid for)?
Also, what about all the cases where fake replacements are actually better (e.g. swapping out a 220Hz PWM ThinkPad display for a flicker-free one)?
I honestly believe people who defend such company policies are just more focused on staying positive than on making a good argument (can't blame them, either).
Also, there are more people taking their devices to "non-legit" stores than people attempting DIY screen repairs.
Also, how on earth is bricking my phone (that I paid for) a more desirable outcome than letting me use an inferior display (that I paid for)?
Also, what about all the cases where fake replacements are actually better (e.g. swapping out a 220Hz PWM ThinkPad display for a flicker-free one)?
I honestly believe people who defend such company policies are just more focused on staying positive than on making a good argument (can't blame them, either).
I get your perspective but I feel the situation is more complex than that. Replacement parts _never_ brick the phone. They can disable FaceID, TrueTone and show "non genuine" warnings. They also seem to bug out the cameras but this was fixed via an update on the 12 and seems likely to be fixed here too.
The FaceID one seems legitimate as a malicious faceid sensor could compromise security. The truetone one looks like total rubbish and should be fixed. And the non genuine messages are useful.
The problem is not you knowingly putting in a non genuine part. It's that a disappointing chunk of repair stalls and almost all online parts are non genuine and essentially fraud as they advertise as being genuine and better than the original parts. Often they are recycled parts from used / stolen devices which are worn out before you even get them. There are even stores in 3rd world countries which will remove genuine parts from your phone and replace them with fakes while doing something like a battery replacement.
The non genuine message protects the customer who gets their phone repaired. It also protects the second hand buyer so they can see that the whole phone is genuine and no bad parts are used. It also protects the phone owner by making theft less valuable as the parts can not be used to their fullest.
So I totally understand the issues with DIY repair here, but I also see all of the other issues at play. The main issue I see is that Apple does not do repairs on certain parts of the phone like the lightning port so if those parts break, they won't do anything for you. I'd like to see Apple and governments work together to find a solution that ensures users get maximum repairability while still being protected against part fraud. I'd like to see Apple have some open dialog with the public and governments about exactly _why_ each restriction is in place, what problems they face, and why they have to do things this way.
The FaceID one seems legitimate as a malicious faceid sensor could compromise security. The truetone one looks like total rubbish and should be fixed. And the non genuine messages are useful.
The problem is not you knowingly putting in a non genuine part. It's that a disappointing chunk of repair stalls and almost all online parts are non genuine and essentially fraud as they advertise as being genuine and better than the original parts. Often they are recycled parts from used / stolen devices which are worn out before you even get them. There are even stores in 3rd world countries which will remove genuine parts from your phone and replace them with fakes while doing something like a battery replacement.
The non genuine message protects the customer who gets their phone repaired. It also protects the second hand buyer so they can see that the whole phone is genuine and no bad parts are used. It also protects the phone owner by making theft less valuable as the parts can not be used to their fullest.
So I totally understand the issues with DIY repair here, but I also see all of the other issues at play. The main issue I see is that Apple does not do repairs on certain parts of the phone like the lightning port so if those parts break, they won't do anything for you. I'd like to see Apple and governments work together to find a solution that ensures users get maximum repairability while still being protected against part fraud. I'd like to see Apple have some open dialog with the public and governments about exactly _why_ each restriction is in place, what problems they face, and why they have to do things this way.
> Replacement parts _never_ brick the phone.
Bricking Face ID is essentially bricking the phone if it doesn't have fingerprint unlock. Everyone is accustomed to instant unlock these days (since the iPhone 5S of 2013). The camera "bugging out" is also absurd and clearly fabricated by iOS. There is absolutely no reason this should happen just because the serial number of the camera changed. iOS isn't open source so we can't track down their `fakeBugOutToScareUserAwayFromIndependentRepair()` function, but hopefully someone reverse engineers this eventually. It wouldn't be the first time someone found something "funny" hidden within iOS' codebase [1].
> The FaceID one seems legitimate as a malicious faceid sensor could compromise security
This is an irrational fear. Do not let Apple scare you into believing this.
> The problem is not you knowingly putting in a non genuine part. It's that a disappointing chunk of repair stalls and almost all online parts are non genuine and essentially fraud as they advertise as being genuine and better than the original parts.
This is not a problem Apple can solve. There will always be liars. You must place a little trust in the person you buy a used product from; it's that simple. It's how it always has been, and always will be. Besides, if solving this problem were their real goal, why not just display warnings rather than also disable features, and only do so if the parts really aren't Apple-genuine (not just if the serial number has changed)? I am certain it would not be hard to change the code from:
Before Apple introduced this "feature", things were mostly just fine. Android phones probably won't ever have this "feature", and things will probably still mostly be just fine long into the future. Of course there will be some instances of scams and whatnot. This is not news.
> It also protects the phone owner by making theft less valuable as the parts can not be used to their fullest.
Theft is another problem Apple cannot solve with software updates. iPhones will always be stolen, because the parts inside will always have intrinsic value. This "feature" is so vaguely connected to anti-theft that it's laughable, and I don't even know if Apple themselves claim this as a reason behind these changes; I've only heard it from Apple apologists. iCloud locks are already overkill and generate tons of e-waste, but this takes it even further and is just absurd.
> I'd like to see Apple and governments work together
Apple already does work with the government. They actively lobby against right to repair and report you to the police when your iPhone scans through your photos and finds something suspicious.
> I'd like to see Apple have some open dialog with the public and governments about exactly _why_ each restriction is in place
That might be a start, but you can be reasonably confident anything coming from Apple's PR team is total bullshit. If the real reason was that they just want to make a lot of money, do you really think they would tell you?
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/11/apple-settles-wi...
Bricking Face ID is essentially bricking the phone if it doesn't have fingerprint unlock. Everyone is accustomed to instant unlock these days (since the iPhone 5S of 2013). The camera "bugging out" is also absurd and clearly fabricated by iOS. There is absolutely no reason this should happen just because the serial number of the camera changed. iOS isn't open source so we can't track down their `fakeBugOutToScareUserAwayFromIndependentRepair()` function, but hopefully someone reverse engineers this eventually. It wouldn't be the first time someone found something "funny" hidden within iOS' codebase [1].
> The FaceID one seems legitimate as a malicious faceid sensor could compromise security
This is an irrational fear. Do not let Apple scare you into believing this.
> The problem is not you knowingly putting in a non genuine part. It's that a disappointing chunk of repair stalls and almost all online parts are non genuine and essentially fraud as they advertise as being genuine and better than the original parts.
This is not a problem Apple can solve. There will always be liars. You must place a little trust in the person you buy a used product from; it's that simple. It's how it always has been, and always will be. Besides, if solving this problem were their real goal, why not just display warnings rather than also disable features, and only do so if the parts really aren't Apple-genuine (not just if the serial number has changed)? I am certain it would not be hard to change the code from:
if (camera.serialNumber != mainboard.camera.serialNumber) {
displayAnnoyingWarnings();
fakeBugOutToScareUserAwayFromIndependentRepair();
}
if (!isGenuineApple(camera.serialNumber)) {
displayDismissableWarning();
}
Before Apple introduced this "feature", things were mostly just fine. Android phones probably won't ever have this "feature", and things will probably still mostly be just fine long into the future. Of course there will be some instances of scams and whatnot. This is not news.
> It also protects the phone owner by making theft less valuable as the parts can not be used to their fullest.
Theft is another problem Apple cannot solve with software updates. iPhones will always be stolen, because the parts inside will always have intrinsic value. This "feature" is so vaguely connected to anti-theft that it's laughable, and I don't even know if Apple themselves claim this as a reason behind these changes; I've only heard it from Apple apologists. iCloud locks are already overkill and generate tons of e-waste, but this takes it even further and is just absurd.
> I'd like to see Apple and governments work together
Apple already does work with the government. They actively lobby against right to repair and report you to the police when your iPhone scans through your photos and finds something suspicious.
> I'd like to see Apple have some open dialog with the public and governments about exactly _why_ each restriction is in place
That might be a start, but you can be reasonably confident anything coming from Apple's PR team is total bullshit. If the real reason was that they just want to make a lot of money, do you really think they would tell you?
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/11/apple-settles-wi...
It also massively reduces the value for thieves since even the parts become worthless.
This is news? Everything Apple makes is a repair nightmare, that is their gimmick. You have to buy Applecare and you have to buy parts from them. That is the only way they can “innovate” — or so they have always claimed.
> that is their gimmick
It's not.
> That is the only way they can “innovate” — or so they have always claimed.
They haven't.
It's not.
> That is the only way they can “innovate” — or so they have always claimed.
They haven't.
Uhm, I think they claim that it is the best way for them to innovate, not the only way… and if people who disagree twist their words, that doesn't make their stance less plausible.
Can you actually buy parts from them? Everyone I've heard from pretty much tells the same story that Apple only provides a handful of parts and even then only to people who basically hand over the keys to their business to Apple.
[deleted]
Every time an iphone is released we have to see this? I don't want to repair my phone. It's got a two year warranty, and after two years if it breaks I'll buy another.
Your own habits aren’t everyone’s habits. Not everyone is on a two-year upgrade cycle, especially when the iPhones are worth near or above $1000 now. Many people who own a smartphone only have it at all thanks to the affordable prices of refurbished (i.e. repaired) units on the second-hand market. It’s silly to say repair is unimportant when you consider how many tons of waste this creates - and how little is actually recovered through the recycling processes Apple and other retailers push hard to make you not feel bad about upgrading. It’s eventually someone’s problem to deal with how unrepairable your disused phone is, ultimately depleting the raw resources we all rely on, so yes, you should care.
iPhone SE are sold starting at $400, 11 at $500, 12 at $600. I used the original SE, which I also got well under $1,000, for 4 years before getting the new SE. And the original SE still works.
There has not been a need to update every two years for many years. And there is far more waste from lower quality products that last fewer years.
There has not been a need to update every two years for many years. And there is far more waste from lower quality products that last fewer years.
The average American produces 5 pounds of garbage per day. The rest of the world isn’t that far behind. Granted, the chemicals in an iPhone are probably much worse for the environment than the paper, plastics, and food waste that make up the bulk of that number, but virtually all of the most harmful chemicals do get recycled. Phone waste would be a rounding error even if people upgraded their phones every month, let alone every couple years.
When I see these “xx pounds of garbage per day” figures, I always wonder if it includes everything that went into producing my garbage, or just what’s in my garbage can. For example, when I throw out a pair of jeans, does this “xx pounds” figure include the fabric that the jeans manufacturer wasted.
Point being, given the enormous amount of raw materials it takes to make a phone, and the environmental damage that comes from extracting them, I wonder if it’s a good idea to be cavalier and see it as a “rounding error.”
Point being, given the enormous amount of raw materials it takes to make a phone, and the environmental damage that comes from extracting them, I wonder if it’s a good idea to be cavalier and see it as a “rounding error.”
[deleted]
People are voting with their wallets. They are voting they don't care.
Not caring at time of purchase doesn’t mean they don’t grumble and curse the brand later on after an experience where the phone breaks and the options are limited to a costly manufacturer repair. I consider myself an iPhone person, my current phone is an iPhone 12 Pro Max so I paid a pretty penny to Apple for it, it’s also insured, but it still doesn’t mean I won’t condemn Apple for making dubious decisions that hurt repair options. Not all that different from getting your car repaired at a mechanic rather than the dealer.
Right, but then, if you go and buy another iPhone, does it really matter that you "condemn Apple"? From their point of view, you're a happy customer, since you're coming back!
Now even if Apple hears people cursing them and grumbling on forums, the fact that they keep on buying their product means that it's not enough of an issue for them to stop buying it.
Now even if Apple hears people cursing them and grumbling on forums, the fact that they keep on buying their product means that it's not enough of an issue for them to stop buying it.
It's possible simultaneously for something to have a large societal cost, and for it to not affect any individual person enough to change their decisionmaking.
Any chance you'd consider the out there idea that some people:
1. don't want to fill up landfills with 90%-functional devices that they're too lazy to have repaired
2. can't afford to spend more than a month's salary on a brand new but functionally identical device every two years
3. might have data that's important to them on the device that they want recovered.
Just because you wish to be a careless consumer doesn't mean that that's what everyone is and that we shouldn't put pressure on Apple to allow those that don't to use their devices as they wish.
Just because you wish to be a careless consumer doesn't mean that that's what everyone is and that we shouldn't put pressure on Apple to allow those that don't to use their devices as they wish.
My phone is an appliance and I'm perfectly fine with that. I dread owning another computer I have the responsibility of maintaining. We are drowning in "computers" these days.
Every appliance in my home is significantly easier to repair/service than my iPhone 12.
Toasters and dishwashers can be fixed. Your phone is a service.
Household appliance is not the same thing.
A Juniper firewall is an appliance.
A NetApp SAN is an appliance.
An Ooma VOIP phone system is an appliance.
A Kindle is an appliance.
A Nest thermostat is an appliance.
These things are not general purpose computers. They are custom fabbed hardware with vendor supported software and are not user repairable. They do one job and they do it well. At the end of their service life you replace them.
My iPhone is an appliance and I prefer it that way.
A Juniper firewall is an appliance.
A NetApp SAN is an appliance.
An Ooma VOIP phone system is an appliance.
A Kindle is an appliance.
A Nest thermostat is an appliance.
These things are not general purpose computers. They are custom fabbed hardware with vendor supported software and are not user repairable. They do one job and they do it well. At the end of their service life you replace them.
My iPhone is an appliance and I prefer it that way.
so freaking weird, even if you change only the cable between the display and the motherboard the phone knows and stops working properly. how do they even do that ? I assumed the cable doesn't have any logic or chips in it.
There is no separate "cable" between the display and the motherboard. The "cable" is integral to the display. It's an extension of the flexible PCB on which other electronics is mounted as well.
The video is kind of vague about it, but when they are talking about "replacing the cable" they mean replacing the whole thing. The display obviously includes lots of logic that, among other things, stores display's serial number. Same with the sensors mounted on the display.
The video is kind of vague about it, but when they are talking about "replacing the cable" they mean replacing the whole thing. The display obviously includes lots of logic that, among other things, stores display's serial number. Same with the sensors mounted on the display.
I think the cable probably does have logic in it.
signal properties crafted in the cable ? (impedance..)
Meh, people will not get tired of this it seems. What did the eternal repeating of this ever net you? A tentative promise that they will support the right to repair movement, one they are not obligated to fulfill, and of course it’s always in the future.
That’s the best you could hope for with such naive activism.
Anecdotal evidence: out of 20+ people with iPhones I know, only one ever had to send it for repairs. In our backwater Eastern Europe this still took only two days: he got a brand new one without having to pay a penny.
I get it, devices we buy must be repairable. Lately I bought a laptop and I’m looking forward to upgrading its RAM and SSD by myself. And I’ll enjoy decommissioning my old gaming PC in a year or so by disassembling it and selling it in parts. I too want repair ability in my tech, and I enjoy practicing it.
But apparently Apple will not budge. It’s astonishing how people are under the illusion that talking is going to sway one of the biggest company entities on the planet. And it makes for pretty boring news.
“You heard it here first folks, the planet is still spinning today“.
That’s the best you could hope for with such naive activism.
Anecdotal evidence: out of 20+ people with iPhones I know, only one ever had to send it for repairs. In our backwater Eastern Europe this still took only two days: he got a brand new one without having to pay a penny.
I get it, devices we buy must be repairable. Lately I bought a laptop and I’m looking forward to upgrading its RAM and SSD by myself. And I’ll enjoy decommissioning my old gaming PC in a year or so by disassembling it and selling it in parts. I too want repair ability in my tech, and I enjoy practicing it.
But apparently Apple will not budge. It’s astonishing how people are under the illusion that talking is going to sway one of the biggest company entities on the planet. And it makes for pretty boring news.
“You heard it here first folks, the planet is still spinning today“.
The desired outcome here isn't "persuading Apple to budge." It's using the democratic process to arrive at legal changes that make businesses cease an abusive practice. The first step on that road is better public awareness.
And I am saying that the democratic process is overrated and is mostly an urban legend. Just look around the world (and even some places in USA as well).
But I don't want to derail this and move it to politics because there people don't react rationally, it's all just downvotes because somebody's sensibilities got offended. So we better stop here before it all goes to a flame fest.
But I don't want to derail this and move it to politics because there people don't react rationally, it's all just downvotes because somebody's sensibilities got offended. So we better stop here before it all goes to a flame fest.
Was this sent to Apple? No, it was posted to a public forum. This isn't about begging Apple to change, it's about informing people that Apple should change. The more people care about this, the more pressure it puts on both Apple and legislators to make this happen. We've seen it happen with car parts years ago.
Of course Apple doesn't care about what people say. They care about how much money people give them and how much politicians take away. And neither of those will change without talking about it first.
Of course Apple doesn't care about what people say. They care about how much money people give them and how much politicians take away. And neither of those will change without talking about it first.
Yeah, that's the legend I keep hearing about my entire life and still haven't seen it happen even once.
People being "informed" does not nullify the fact there's literally almost zero choice nowadays. Not like Samsung or many others are easy to repair either...
People being "informed" does not nullify the fact there's literally almost zero choice nowadays. Not like Samsung or many others are easy to repair either...
So - if I followed that correctly the parts you can’t change are the front-camera assembly that includes faceID sensor, and the screen that includes the touch panel (that you use to enter passwords and PINs).
I would assume Apple’s justification is that this is to meet security requirements, particularly given a phone is now commonly used for contactless payments.
I would assume Apple’s justification is that this is to meet security requirements, particularly given a phone is now commonly used for contactless payments.
iPhones since the iPhone X have the same repair requirement, however the screen and FaceID are separate so you can continue to use the original.
There's nothing special about the touch panels, the FaceID component is a TPM of sorts.
There's nothing special about the touch panels, the FaceID component is a TPM of sorts.
And the battery as it will report not genuine.
The actual authentication & crypto is happening inside the main SOC. The Face ID sensor is (or should be) just a dumb camera - there's no reason for it to be part of the chain of trust.
Of course there is. That’s how you avoid replay attacks.
Can't you "replay" that data physically by creating a face mask matching the captured data and then presenting it to a legitimate sensor?
IMO the security of the system is that the 3D face data is reasonably secret (you probably can't reconstruct it from a single picture, you'd need pictures from all angles) and the SOC only allows a few attempts before falling back to passcode.
If you have the face data, you don't need to tamper with the hardware, and if you don't have that data then tampering with the sensor won't get you anywhere.
IMO the security of the system is that the 3D face data is reasonably secret (you probably can't reconstruct it from a single picture, you'd need pictures from all angles) and the SOC only allows a few attempts before falling back to passcode.
If you have the face data, you don't need to tamper with the hardware, and if you don't have that data then tampering with the sensor won't get you anywhere.
Exactly because you could have a fake camera that could collect your info and make it accessible for an installed app that would upload it for an hostile server. The original camera doesn’t give you access to this data, a counterfeited one possibly could.
That is absurd. What data is to a face, other than its appearance from various angles? That can be obtained from photos of the person.
In that case, why not allow a camera replacement with a factory reset?
Yet more reasons why I won't give apple any of my money.
I can only see one benefit of this to the consumer. If you maybe happen to be a target of some spy agency who manage to get your phone and need to drop some component into it to spy on you, that isnt going to be easy now. /s
Genuinely no need for this other than making apple more money.
I can only see one benefit of this to the consumer. If you maybe happen to be a target of some spy agency who manage to get your phone and need to drop some component into it to spy on you, that isnt going to be easy now. /s
Genuinely no need for this other than making apple more money.
That’s a sane answer. I don’t care about that stuff and value other stuff more, so I buy from Apple.
You don’t, you don’t buy from Apple, but from another company.
And unless Apple starts paying me money to be an Apple evangelist, I have no reason to try to convince you wrong.
That is not sane. That is an irrational concern.
Would you rather give your money to Google, the company that is what it is today through turning their users' information into products to sell to the highest bidder?
Apple gives a shit about your privacy.
Why is that upsetting to you?
Apple gives a shit about your privacy.
Why is that upsetting to you?
I give my money to whatever company who provides devices I'm in control of. As it stands that is Google, like it or not.
I take care of my own privacy, no for profit company cares about your privacy, you're kidding yourself if you think they are.
I take care of my own privacy, no for profit company cares about your privacy, you're kidding yourself if you think they are.
You can be both against Apple's anti-repair practices and against Google.
> Apple gives a shit about your privacy.
Do they really give a shit about your privacy though? They mess with 3rd parties (eg: Facebook), but Apple itself seems to be happy to collect data about you and your devices, not use end-to-end encryption for many of their services, scan content on your device, etc.
Maybe they're better than Google, but I wouldn't say that they give a shit about my privacy.
Do they really give a shit about your privacy though? They mess with 3rd parties (eg: Facebook), but Apple itself seems to be happy to collect data about you and your devices, not use end-to-end encryption for many of their services, scan content on your device, etc.
Maybe they're better than Google, but I wouldn't say that they give a shit about my privacy.
Let's get real here. Apple (like Google) doesn't give a shit about your privacy - their only concern is profit.
I have another hypothesis also that this is done for security reasons. Imagine yo are at a risk of high-profile spying. You lose your phone and then it reappears somehow - you should no longer trust your phone if these security features weren't in place. Maybe, just maybe, it's one of the reasons Apple does this.
>I have another hypothesis also that this is done for security reasons.
It always boggled my mind how much mental gymnastics, the supposedly tech-savy HN userbase is willing to do, to defend their favorite computer brand's anti-repair and anti-consumer practices as "security".
Let me break down your argument:
Firstly, if you're at risk of high profile spying, you should know better than to use any Apple/Google/Microsoft products as all those megacorps are in bed with the US three letter alphabet agencies.
Secondly, if you're a high profile target for spying, but dumb enough to use an iPhone as your daily driver, then the alphabet boys or nation states worldwide are more likely to use some of the dozens of iOS RCE exploits they developed themselves or bought from some shady Israeli security company or off the black market to get to you rather than go through all the trouble of hoping you don't notice when they steal your phone and replace your screen.
Thirdly, say nation state actors do manage to steal your phone and swap the screen really quickly before you notice, but how will they make sure it has the same level of wear and tear (cracks, scratches) that you won't recognize it to be different?
There's just so many plot holes in this type of scenario that security cannot be justified as an argument here.
Plus, if Apple really cared about security, then their bug bounty program wouldn't be such a horrible mess full of unacknowledged vulnerabilities that researchers need to take public.
It always boggled my mind how much mental gymnastics, the supposedly tech-savy HN userbase is willing to do, to defend their favorite computer brand's anti-repair and anti-consumer practices as "security".
Let me break down your argument:
Firstly, if you're at risk of high profile spying, you should know better than to use any Apple/Google/Microsoft products as all those megacorps are in bed with the US three letter alphabet agencies.
Secondly, if you're a high profile target for spying, but dumb enough to use an iPhone as your daily driver, then the alphabet boys or nation states worldwide are more likely to use some of the dozens of iOS RCE exploits they developed themselves or bought from some shady Israeli security company or off the black market to get to you rather than go through all the trouble of hoping you don't notice when they steal your phone and replace your screen.
Thirdly, say nation state actors do manage to steal your phone and swap the screen really quickly before you notice, but how will they make sure it has the same level of wear and tear (cracks, scratches) that you won't recognize it to be different?
There's just so many plot holes in this type of scenario that security cannot be justified as an argument here.
Plus, if Apple really cared about security, then their bug bounty program wouldn't be such a horrible mess full of unacknowledged vulnerabilities that researchers need to take public.
I see your point, except the world doesn't end in the US and the country's three-letter agencies. There are countries outside of the US that might have their own goals and ways of achieving them (see the Pegasus scandal for example).
There isn't a practical scenario where using a device you suspect have been in the hands of an adversary isn't grounds for termination.
Game over.
It is not a relevant argument in this context.
Game over.
It is not a relevant argument in this context.
Paying a few hundred $ for a phone that lasts for just a couple of years never made sense in the first place. The amount of e-waste generated is insane, 'right to repair' and 'responsible use of capital and resources' go hand in hand.
Phones could easily last a decade.
Phones could easily last a decade.
They do last longer than a couple of years, and _are_ supported too: I have an iPhone 6s around the house that I use to play music over Bluetooth, and it just got the iOS 15 update. iPhone 6s was released in 2015.
The only problem with it is the battery. It could use a replacement, but since I don't use it as the main device, I don't much care. Otherwise, it works perfectly fine.
The only problem with it is the battery. It could use a replacement, but since I don't use it as the main device, I don't much care. Otherwise, it works perfectly fine.
Still using a 6s as my one and only, it’s a great phone.
Apple has topped the Greenpeace rankings for major tech companies for the last 4 years. One of the main reasons is the iphones industry leading service life. This is also why they retain such high resale values. They just last and last, and get more than double the software update support lifetime of even Google’s own phones.
If you primarily care about the environment when getting a phone, the iPhone is the clear choice.
If you primarily care about the environment when getting a phone, the iPhone is the clear choice.
I would strongly argue that Apple products last longer than any other products in the market.
> Paying a few hundred $ for a phone that lasts for just a couple of years never made sense in the first place
Except most people are not doing that.. I've seen quite a few iPhone 6, & 6s around and those devices are 7, 6 years old respectively. Its not too much different to the car industry, you will always have a class of people who like to chop and change, they may be more the enthusiast market, but many will just use it until it dies or becomes an issue and repairing it isn't worth it.
In my circles buying a new iPhone every 2 years is fast becoming a thing of the past
Except most people are not doing that.. I've seen quite a few iPhone 6, & 6s around and those devices are 7, 6 years old respectively. Its not too much different to the car industry, you will always have a class of people who like to chop and change, they may be more the enthusiast market, but many will just use it until it dies or becomes an issue and repairing it isn't worth it.
In my circles buying a new iPhone every 2 years is fast becoming a thing of the past
It’s been exactly 5 years since I bought my iPhone 7 and I don’t see myself upgrading to the 13 series either. There’s simply nothing wrong with this phone.
Realistically speaking 2 years for Android phones.
For iPhones unless you’re a gamer they work quite well some 5 to 6 years
An iphone can perfectly last six years.
Not without repairs.
The only thing I have ever had to have done is battery replacements and those are offered at a fair price from apple or authorised repair locations.
You can have it repaired using fake parts or parts salvaged from broken iPhones. If it breaks, that is.
If the phone doesn't break during the two year warranty period, I've found that it's unlikely to break later on. (you have to treat it well, of course...)
If the phone doesn't break during the two year warranty period, I've found that it's unlikely to break later on. (you have to treat it well, of course...)
The reason the parts are "fake" is because of Apple's stance on repair. There's no technical reason why Apple can't sell parts at a fair price.
'fake' parts aren't 'fake' they are just made by someone else than the OEM. Salvaged parts do not count because for every phone you can fix there is one that you can't. The only proper way is to mandate that phone manufacturers supply original parts to those that need them, but because they'd rather sell you a new phone they don't.
One important reason why you want that original part and not a salvaged or non-OEM one for the battery is safety, this is a device that you carry on your person and the batteries carry a lot of punch. But the car industry has shown the way here, I can buy OEM brake discs and pads for my vehicle, I can also buy them from brand name non-OEM suppliers aka the 'aftermarket'. A similar solution would work well for phones, as would some minor design changes to facilitate repair rather than the opposite: design changes that make it harder to repair a device.
One important reason why you want that original part and not a salvaged or non-OEM one for the battery is safety, this is a device that you carry on your person and the batteries carry a lot of punch. But the car industry has shown the way here, I can buy OEM brake discs and pads for my vehicle, I can also buy them from brand name non-OEM suppliers aka the 'aftermarket'. A similar solution would work well for phones, as would some minor design changes to facilitate repair rather than the opposite: design changes that make it harder to repair a device.
I call them fake because they are always of a lower quality, and on top of that sellers pretend that they are selling you an original part (check eBay, AliExpress...).
I see your point, but I don't like the idea of forcing companies to sell you things they don't want to.
I see your point, but I don't like the idea of forcing companies to sell you things they don't want to.
Exactly. If most people wanted that there will be a company somewhere gobbling market share by selling an easily repairable phone.
But most people think repair ability is nice to have not a priority
Battery needs replacing on my 6s+, but otherwise it's working well with zero repairs. And considering my use cases, I can put up with the battery as-is. I'll probably keep it as my main device until next year.
[deleted]
I (and my partner) have both been using the same iPhones for 7 & 8 years respectively. Not even a battery change.
I'm a bit torn about this. I think a good compromise is for Apple to offer selling "genuine parts" to anyone who practically wants it; and maybe, allow changing parts once the main owner release control.
Apple's devices are quite expensive. iCloud locking have made them worth less in the black-market, but the components are still worth something. This will make Apple's devices worth next to nothing in the black market and as a consequence less of a risk of being a target of petty theft.
Apple's devices are quite expensive. iCloud locking have made them worth less in the black-market, but the components are still worth something. This will make Apple's devices worth next to nothing in the black market and as a consequence less of a risk of being a target of petty theft.
You should not be torn. Apple is blatantly acting against your interests as a user, and you should be adamantly against this. You always need to place some level of trust in anyone you're allowing to repair your device -- even if they're using genuine Apple parts, they might not know how to properly work with them, for example. But this is why we have reviews. (By the way, they would be more likely to know how to do proper repairs if Apple freely published the top-secret internal repair documentation they already have, so they could just use that instead of random third-party guides, but that's another topic.) As a user, you should always have the choice of who to trust with your device's repair, just like you have a choice between mechanics working on your car. As a reminder, if you don't trust third party repair shops, right to repair laws don't force anyone to make use of them. You're free to be overcharged by Apple if you want. But it's important to have a choice.
Also, theft is not a problem that you can solve with software. People will always steal iPhones because there will always be at least some value to the components inside. I guarantee you that iCloud locking was not even a factor in the decision Apple made to implement this bullshit into iOS:
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/27/apple-q1-cash-hoard-heres-ho...
Also, theft is not a problem that you can solve with software. People will always steal iPhones because there will always be at least some value to the components inside. I guarantee you that iCloud locking was not even a factor in the decision Apple made to implement this bullshit into iOS:
if (camera.serialNumber != mainboard.camera.serialNumber) {
freakTheFuckOutForNoReason()
}
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/27/apple-q1-cash-hoard-heres-ho...
> I think a good compromise is for Apple to offer selling "genuine parts" to anyone who practically wants it; and maybe, allow changing parts once the main owner release control.
They sell hundreds of millions of devices each year. A problem I haven’t seen discussed much — could Apple’s suppliers actually deliver enough parts for new phones and spare parts?
Tesla supposedly has the same problem with spare parts being unavailable, as everything goes into new products.
They sell hundreds of millions of devices each year. A problem I haven’t seen discussed much — could Apple’s suppliers actually deliver enough parts for new phones and spare parts?
Tesla supposedly has the same problem with spare parts being unavailable, as everything goes into new products.
> They sell hundreds of millions of devices each year. A problem I haven’t seen discussed much — could Apple’s suppliers actually deliver enough parts for new phones and spare parts?
Since they already sell hundreds of millions of devices a year, I'd say yes.
Do you think that if demand for whole devices increased worldwide, Apple wouldn't be able to fulfill it?
Since they already sell hundreds of millions of devices a year, I'd say yes.
Do you think that if demand for whole devices increased worldwide, Apple wouldn't be able to fulfill it?
Well, the incentives are not that great - since the alternative is to sell a whole new phone and noone can use the old one.
> Do you think that if demand for whole devices increased worldwide, Apple wouldn't be able to fulfill it?
They aren’t able, as the current situation is living proof from that. Note the ongoing chip/semiconductor crisis.
They aren’t able, as the current situation is living proof from that. Note the ongoing chip/semiconductor crisis.
Sure, but this is recent and temporary, and caused in large part by a once-in-a-century pandemic.
It is not pandemic alone, otherwise we would have supply already. This problem has developed for years already[1].
And what about pandemic, because of it, supply chains were surprised with the demand of elecronics. So, they could not respond for the demand. And Apple would have had a limit anyway for chip manufacturing based on this.
[1] : https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58230388
And what about pandemic, because of it, supply chains were surprised with the demand of elecronics. So, they could not respond for the demand. And Apple would have had a limit anyway for chip manufacturing based on this.
[1] : https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58230388
Petty theft is more an issue of economic inequality. If the criminal had an incentive for being honorable citizens, then theft would not happen.
Not sure. If you add up damages from theft, by far the rich and powerful steal more in absolute terms.
But that's not petty theft
Not necessarily, insider trading steals a dollar from a few million people. It is petty theft at scale.
[deleted]
Have you so little respect for people that you think they are all thieves? In India and China, countries in which most of the top 10% by income would fall below the US poverty line most people never steal. Theft is not mostly about poverty.
Weird take. Petty theft (like the one being discussed here) can definitely be correlated with inequality.
I agree that most people will not steal. That's been my experience of growing up in a country with rampant poverty and inequality (and crime).
That said, the more people are in need, the more incentive for them to look for solutions outside of a system that has inherently failed them and the people they know.
I have myself been robbed and assaulted multiple times. I have had relatives kidnapped. Cars stolen leaving or entering their own garage, sometimes in nice areas of the city. I have been myself held at gunpoint by both criminals and police. The house I grew up in has been burglarised multiple times. I have not once, and don't know a single person who has been assaulted or robbed by a middle or upper class person.
There is probably also some correlation between white collar crime and corruption, and poverty, but I suspect the direction of causality goes the other way around in this case.
I agree that most people will not steal. That's been my experience of growing up in a country with rampant poverty and inequality (and crime).
That said, the more people are in need, the more incentive for them to look for solutions outside of a system that has inherently failed them and the people they know.
I have myself been robbed and assaulted multiple times. I have had relatives kidnapped. Cars stolen leaving or entering their own garage, sometimes in nice areas of the city. I have been myself held at gunpoint by both criminals and police. The house I grew up in has been burglarised multiple times. I have not once, and don't know a single person who has been assaulted or robbed by a middle or upper class person.
There is probably also some correlation between white collar crime and corruption, and poverty, but I suspect the direction of causality goes the other way around in this case.
> Weird take. Petty theft (like the one being discussed here) can definitely be correlated with inequality.
Source?
Source?
https://www.zippia.com/advice/crime-income-inequality/
http://www.ijsk.org/uploads/3/1/1/7/3117743/sociology_2.pdf
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z87w97h/revision/2
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJSE-04-...
https://journalofeconomicstructures.springeropen.com/article...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_correlations_of_cr...
https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/full-links-...
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2018/dec/7/brookings-in...
http://www.ecineq.org/ecineq_paris19/papers_EcineqPSE/paper_...
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/06/07/the-star...
http://www.ijsk.org/uploads/3/1/1/7/3117743/sociology_2.pdf
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z87w97h/revision/2
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJSE-04-...
https://journalofeconomicstructures.springeropen.com/article...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_correlations_of_cr...
https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/full-links-...
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2018/dec/7/brookings-in...
http://www.ecineq.org/ecineq_paris19/papers_EcineqPSE/paper_...
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/06/07/the-star...
True, but not relevant to whether Apple should make parts available or not. Apple’s repairability policy isnt going to alleviate income inequality, but it could have an effect on phone theft.
Pretty disingenuous for this guy not to mention the potential benefits of such measures, namely: iPhones become pretty much worthless on the black market, discouraging theft.
I'm more worried about someone stealing my phone (where the cost is the whole value of the device) than I am about breaking the phone (usually my fault) where the cost when repaired by Apple is fairly reasonable.
I'm more worried about someone stealing my phone (where the cost is the whole value of the device) than I am about breaking the phone (usually my fault) where the cost when repaired by Apple is fairly reasonable.
I can see your point in theory. But I find less "it's not repairable to protect you from thieves", and more in line with Apple wanting to sell you a new phone when you drop it, instead of repair it.
I'm wanna thing there are a lot of better ways to avoid a black market, than creating more e-waste with disposable devices impossible to repair.
I'm wanna thing there are a lot of better ways to avoid a black market, than creating more e-waste with disposable devices impossible to repair.
But Apple literally does repair my phone when I drop it?
You mean if you pay 10$ per month for AppleCare? I dont pay for it but I have helped friends file claims with Apple, and they usually just ship back a brand new device instead of actually repairing the device. Even for things like screen damage. You can tell because small scratches on the back screen from normal use are gone upon return.
It was my understanding that they do that so they can get you a fixed one back quickly, then they can stack them up at their large repair centres. The one you receive back is just one that someone else broke a while back.
Wait.
Do you seriously believe Apple is sending everyone new iPhones and not repairing them at all?
That would be a stupendously bad business decision.
Do you seriously believe Apple is sending everyone new iPhones and not repairing them at all?
That would be a stupendously bad business decision.
> where the cost when repaired by Apple is fairly reasonable.
Careful, if Louis Rossmann reads that you may give him a sudden case of apoplexy.
The only thing "fairly reasonable" about what Apple likes to charge is that you fairly reasonably may as well just buy a new phone.
Careful, if Louis Rossmann reads that you may give him a sudden case of apoplexy.
The only thing "fairly reasonable" about what Apple likes to charge is that you fairly reasonably may as well just buy a new phone.
I've broken iPhones around 10 times.
Not a single time was the cost of repair even close to the cost of a new phone.
Not a single time was the cost of repair even close to the cost of a new phone.
If I broke something 10 times in one decade, I'd probably be looking to replace it ASAP.
I think it's more disingenuous of Apple to hide behind that and use it as an excuse for everything they do. If they really care, they should allow owners to opt out of such features.
Why then does apple not offer to take these phones (without compensation) and refurb them to be resold, by Apple. This way there is no incentives for thieves as Apple will not give them a dime however these phones are not part of the huge trash pile that is being generated.
Not every trade is handled by Apple. A tiny minority outside of the US. And I dislike the idea that they can remotely make my phone unusable, like Samsung can.
They do, people trade in phones for credit towards an iphone all the time.
Doing it without the meagre compensation they give now would be deeply unethical, Tesla tried something like that recently when a story emerged that someone was quoted for full out of warranty battery replacement for a broken cooling hose fitting on their cars battery and they refused to give any core charge even though the battery itself was still fully functional (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8-OkfCcRAo).
Doing it without the meagre compensation they give now would be deeply unethical, Tesla tried something like that recently when a story emerged that someone was quoted for full out of warranty battery replacement for a broken cooling hose fitting on their cars battery and they refused to give any core charge even though the battery itself was still fully functional (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8-OkfCcRAo).
if apple offered replacement parts they would also dampen that black market a lot.
Am I the only one who is happy that Apple is taking away the right to repair?
From my experience, almost all third party iPhone repair shops are filled with untrustworthy people who disregards their ethics for such a little money.
From my experience, almost all third party iPhone repair shops are filled with untrustworthy people who disregards their ethics for such a little money.
How about places where there are no first party iPhone repair shops? There are aplenty of those.
You mean apple stores? They're everywhere that matter.
That said, I still won't buy an iphone until they at least get rid of lightning. It's extreme ridiculous that apple would keep a proprietary connector after migrating the rest of their product stack over to usbc. I have a pixel 3 currently and will certainly never buy another android phone again, the biggest issues I've had don't exist on iphones at all, namely apps being randomly killed or crashing on open due to running out of RAM and the battery degrading quickly (lost ~10% in 1 1/2 years of light use, not using the phone in any extremely cold or hot conditions and only trickle charging).
That said, I still won't buy an iphone until they at least get rid of lightning. It's extreme ridiculous that apple would keep a proprietary connector after migrating the rest of their product stack over to usbc. I have a pixel 3 currently and will certainly never buy another android phone again, the biggest issues I've had don't exist on iphones at all, namely apps being randomly killed or crashing on open due to running out of RAM and the battery degrading quickly (lost ~10% in 1 1/2 years of light use, not using the phone in any extremely cold or hot conditions and only trickle charging).
The closest Appstore to me is ~2500km and over the border. Dozens of Millions of people here don't matter, apparently.
Well.. yeah? That's what happens when you allow organized crime to attack foreign businesses with impunity, encourage your citizens to murder gay and trans people, and destabilize every neighboring country by instigating false flagged 'civil' wars in them.
Of course, there are also important factors like the average worker being dirt poor. Who is buying an iphone on a 300-400USD/mo equivalent salary? It would take years and years of saving to afford one, or a choice to put yourself into hard to repay debt for a status symbol? I would imagine the average person there buys the cheapest phones possible and not the highest end name brand phones every few years like working and middle class westerners do.
Of course, there are also important factors like the average worker being dirt poor. Who is buying an iphone on a 300-400USD/mo equivalent salary? It would take years and years of saving to afford one, or a choice to put yourself into hard to repay debt for a status symbol? I would imagine the average person there buys the cheapest phones possible and not the highest end name brand phones every few years like working and middle class westerners do.
You should probably seek professional help.
Were you expecting a different answer? Do you think anyone who tells you a hard truth should 'seek professional help'? I guess when you end up utterly defeated in your own country clinging to national fervor only to come and post snark on places like HN and still end up own-goaling yourself it must be hard to cope with, snark is all you have left :'(.
What you perceive to be 'hard truths' are nothing more but your personal delusuons.
Are you insinuating that Russia didn't cause the death of tens of thousands of civilians in east ukraine or that the anti-gay purges in chechnya didn't happen...? You're a real piece of shit if that's your belief.
Right to repair is also your right to repair your own device.
iPhones get used for longer period of time by multiple users and they carry high resale value, if they let devices with fake components they will eventually tank resale value as people will not trust used iPhone.
I support right to repair, but ONLY with genuine parts with warranty. I want Apple to provide cheaper display replacement just like they do with batteries. As long as Amazon, EBay, and small repair shops keep selling fake iPhone displays and batteries there is no way out of this problem.