4 ms·

Your problem is that Apple is not Microsoft. Microsoft effectively has to support literally any combination of things someone might try to do to their Windows

Your problem is that Apple is not Microsoft. Microsoft effectively has to support literally any combination of things someone might try to do to their Windows PC, because they know nobody will blame the author of the crappy driver or the manufacturer of the peripheral. They'll blame Microsoft. Apple, by tightly controlling its hardware ecosystem, avoids a lot of that. But also gets to build software that's tested for far fewer configurations, meaning that if you do step outside that configuration, you have to accept that they're not testing for it and aren't guaranteeing the next version of their software will continue to work for you. But rather than understand this, you attribute it to Tim Cook twirling his mustache and cackling over how he's going to deliberately brick all those phones that people repaired themselves! Soon, he will rule the world! BWAHAHAHA! Except you know as soon as you think about it that you have no evidence of this and that the kind of "Apple bricks your phone to punish you for repairing it" narrative you're pushing here is completely false. Apple might not like losing out on some more of your money, but figuring out ways to push updates that will break your phone while not breaking someone else's is just not worth the time and money for them. So the simplest explanation -- that they don't have staff thoroughly test every type of repair you might do to your phone with every update they push -- is the likeliest, and you know that too. This, for the record, is my problem with the "right to repair" people. You ignore real problems to peddle conspiracies.

ksk 9y ago
What in the world are you on about? Sorry dude, I can make no sense of anything in your rambling comment.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  You appear to be claiming that Apple deliberately develops software updates to break user- or third-party-repaired devices. This requires Apple to have a team studying how third parties repair their devices, and working on ways to modify their software to break such devices while leaving all others unaffected. That's a not-insignificant challenge. The likelier explanation is that Apple does not invest in developing updates that will deliberately break your phone as retaliation for you repairing it in ways they don't like. The likelier explanation is that Apple simply doesn't test the interaction between their updates and your repairs, and doesn't much care if your phone breaks as a result. They test for the interaction with their stock devices, and devices repaired through their advocated channels, and don't seem to want the "absolutely everything everybody might do must be supported" approach Microsoft historically took (with good reason -- one of the advantages of tight ecosystem control is getting to avoid Microsoft's nightmare).
  - ksk 9y ago
    https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/11/iphone-replacement-display-ambient-light-sensor-issue/ https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/11/iphone-replacement-displ... Can you explain this?
    - ubernostrum 9y ago
      If you mean "can I provide you the exact reason why it happened", no. But I still think it's much more likely that Apple just doesn't test for third-party repairs than that they deliberately work to come up with ways to break a third-party repair without breaking their own repairs. I believe this because I've worked on software teams that developed things that would only be used in-house in controlled ways, and I've seen how fragile those usually end up being and how poorly tested they usually are. But I also see that there's no possible evidence someone could present, or argument someone could make, that would change your mind, because as the quote says: you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason their way into.
      - ksk 9y ago
        We're clearly operating on seperate planes here. Your reasoning as far as I can tell, is your own belief, and not based on evidence that anyone can verify. My reasoning is based on Apples actions, their own comments, experiences of third party repair shops who are being threatened by Apple, and my own experience with third party repair shops. I can never understand why people want to stop others from choosing where they repair their products. If you (not you specifically) think third party repairs are shady, well great ! you already have a choice and you can get yours serviced at Apple. We should be free to make decisions about things we own. Apple fighting to block our right is disspointing. >But I still think it's much more likely that Apple just doesn't test for third-party repairs than that they deliberately work to come up with ways to break a third-party repair without breaking their own repairs. There is no "testing for repair". When you replace a component on a logic board, it either works or if its sabotaged (like inkjet cartriges, kurig kcups, iphone screens), it doesn't. And thats if you're doing a component level repair. For parts replacement, it should be way easier. I get the feeling you're not very familiar with how electronics repair works. It is really nothing like software.

ksk 9y ago

What in the world are you on about? Sorry dude, I can make no sense of anything in your rambling comment.

ubernostrum 9y ago
You appear to be claiming that Apple deliberately develops software updates to break user- or third-party-repaired devices. This requires Apple to have a team studying how third parties repair their devices, and working on ways to modify their software to break such devices while leaving all others unaffected. That's a not-insignificant challenge. The likelier explanation is that Apple does not invest in developing updates that will deliberately break your phone as retaliation for you repairing it in ways they don't like. The likelier explanation is that Apple simply doesn't test the interaction between their updates and your repairs, and doesn't much care if your phone breaks as a result. They test for the interaction with their stock devices, and devices repaired through their advocated channels, and don't seem to want the "absolutely everything everybody might do must be supported" approach Microsoft historically took (with good reason -- one of the advantages of tight ecosystem control is getting to avoid Microsoft's nightmare).
- ksk 9y ago
  https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/11/iphone-replacement-display-ambient-light-sensor-issue/ https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/11/iphone-replacement-displ... Can you explain this?
  - ubernostrum 9y ago
    If you mean "can I provide you the exact reason why it happened", no. But I still think it's much more likely that Apple just doesn't test for third-party repairs than that they deliberately work to come up with ways to break a third-party repair without breaking their own repairs. I believe this because I've worked on software teams that developed things that would only be used in-house in controlled ways, and I've seen how fragile those usually end up being and how poorly tested they usually are. But I also see that there's no possible evidence someone could present, or argument someone could make, that would change your mind, because as the quote says: you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason their way into.
    - ksk 9y ago
      We're clearly operating on seperate planes here. Your reasoning as far as I can tell, is your own belief, and not based on evidence that anyone can verify. My reasoning is based on Apples actions, their own comments, experiences of third party repair shops who are being threatened by Apple, and my own experience with third party repair shops. I can never understand why people want to stop others from choosing where they repair their products. If you (not you specifically) think third party repairs are shady, well great ! you already have a choice and you can get yours serviced at Apple. We should be free to make decisions about things we own. Apple fighting to block our right is disspointing. >But I still think it's much more likely that Apple just doesn't test for third-party repairs than that they deliberately work to come up with ways to break a third-party repair without breaking their own repairs. There is no "testing for repair". When you replace a component on a logic board, it either works or if its sabotaged (like inkjet cartriges, kurig kcups, iphone screens), it doesn't. And thats if you're doing a component level repair. For parts replacement, it should be way easier. I get the feeling you're not very familiar with how electronics repair works. It is really nothing like software.