10 ms·

I think the problem with unofficial repairs right now is where the parts come from. If you buy an iphone camera, where does that camera actually come from. I do

I think the problem with unofficial repairs right now is where the parts come from. If you buy an iphone camera, where does that camera actually come from. I doubt there is an unoffical iphone camera factory. So those parts only have 2 sources, broken and stolen iphones. What ideally would happen is each part on the iphone has a serial number and is registered with icloud. If a phone gets stolen, you get a message when you install the camera telling you this. And if the original user deregisters their phone on the icloud web ui, the camera works again. Then Apple should be forced to publicly sell this part for a reasonable price for x years. Just these small steps would move us a long way to repairability.

lnsru 6y ago
Would you pay additional 5% for the traceability of the parts? Serial numbers must be stored somewhere. We print now them on the enclosure of the component. Actually be print batch number, individual parts cannot be identified. Putting numbers into silicon wouldn’t make things cheaper.
- foobar33333 6y ago
  They already work this way. If you swap almost any part on the iphone it either refuses to work or shows a warning about a unofficial part. My suggestion is simply to make this functionality only target stolen parts instead of just refusing to work at all if the apple store hasn't used their software to bless the new serial number.
  - simion314 6y ago
    Why should Apple decide what part I put in the phone? If the phone is out of warranty then I should be able to use batteries, screens, chargers or software that is not blessed by Apple's grace. When I was a kid we were "repairing" our cheap watches by using parts from broken ones, at most what Apple could do is print a giant warning on the boot screen that the phone is no longer blessed by Apple so people that want their thing repaired will not be "tricked".
    - zepto 6y ago
      > Why should Apple decide what part I put in the phone? If the phone is out of warranty then I should be able to use batteries, screens, chargers or software that is not blessed by Apple's grace. For a lot of people, this is a feature, not a bug. It prevents repair shops using substandard components, or even replacing good components with cheaper ones and then re-selling them. Edit: another much more serious issue, is security. 3rd party components are an obvious target for supply chain attacks.
      - simion314 6y ago
        That is also the risk with computers and cars, there might be "a lot" of people that would like DRM cars and computers but there are a lot more lots of people that would like to repair the car then buy a new one each year, or even the rich guys that buy a new car yearly they would like to be able to sell the old car and you can't sell an old car if it does not run because it needs a new memory stick in the main computer and the main computer costs 50% of the car.
        zepto 6y ago
        > there might be "a lot" of people that would like DRM cars and computers but there are a lot more lots of people that would like to repair the car then buy a new one each year, This isn’t a valid comparison - nobody is forced to buy a new car or phone every year. I strongly doubt you are right about the numbers in general. Very few people want to risk fraudulent parts. But, I do agree that at some point the user should be able to unlock the DRM and take their own risks. E.g. at the end of the manufacturers support of the software.
        simion314 6y ago
        Sorry I do not understand your point, nobody is forced to buy a phone or car each year, the difference is that I can change the lights on my car with an "unofficial" part if I want without Ford complaining that I am a pirate and trying to void my engine warranty. I have all the possible options with my car: - go to a Ford shop and have them do it for me - go to a reputable website and browse all compatible parts and decide if I want something more e pensive or something more cheap - when I have the part I can install it myself, a friend or a professional that is not a "Ford" genius. Ford would love to force me to buy only from them parts, oils, fuel and only repair or do maintenance on their shops but fortunately they can't force us. (but you have the choice to use only Ford blessed products and people). For stolen cars there are serial numbers printed on the car engine and body parts to make it more difficult for thieves but sure it still happens and I am for doing more to prevent crime and finding the criminals but doing exactly what Ford would like and is bad for society and environment is clearly a bad thing IMO.
Mauricebranagh 6y ago
Actually it has been known for factories to run a shadow shift on the low down producing grey market parts
zepto 6y ago
> Apple should be forced to publicly sell this part for a reasonable price for x years. This means generating a vast amount of e-waste and increasing the cost of units. Since Apple doesn’t make the components themselves, they would have to warehouse a supply of spares.
- avianlyric 6y ago
  Apple must have access to these parts already because they’ll happily do out of warranty repairs, even on products that they no long sell. Asking them to make that supply publicly available does not strike me as a huge ask. Hell they could derive the supply from their recycling efforts they’re always showing off as WWDC. Also how does providing spare parts result in huge amounts of e-waste, that’s a bit of a non-sequitur. The whole point of spares is to remove the need to throw away a device that’s 90% fine 10% broken.
  - zepto 6y ago
    > Apple must have access to these parts already because they’ll happily do out of warranty repairs, even on products that they no long sell. This is not relevant. Nobody is forcing them to do these repairs. When the parts are no longer available, they stop doing them. > The whole point of spares is to remove the need to throw away a device that’s 90% fine 10% broken. Yes, and it may well be a counterproductive scheme that doesn’t work as intended. 1. You need to warehouse components to comply with the law, or continue to make otherwise redundant components, which means maintaining outdated industrial plant. 2. Devices with replaceable components have to be made in a more complex way that is more liable to break, costing more up front, and more in repairs. There is no real problem with some hugh pile of slightly broken iPhones that are being wasted. The real problem is the huge number of working iPhones that are too outdated to run modern software. If we need a law, it is one that requires manufacturers to make a bootcamp equivalent for devices at the end of their software support cycle, so all the still working devices can continue to be useful.
- ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  What absurdity? By this logic we wouldn't repair cars either 'to reduce waste'

lnsru 6y ago

Would you pay additional 5% for the traceability of the parts? Serial numbers must be stored somewhere. We print now them on the enclosure of the component. Actually be print batch number, individual parts cannot be identified. Putting numbers into silicon wouldn’t make things cheaper.

foobar33333 6y ago
They already work this way. If you swap almost any part on the iphone it either refuses to work or shows a warning about a unofficial part. My suggestion is simply to make this functionality only target stolen parts instead of just refusing to work at all if the apple store hasn't used their software to bless the new serial number.
- simion314 6y ago
  Why should Apple decide what part I put in the phone? If the phone is out of warranty then I should be able to use batteries, screens, chargers or software that is not blessed by Apple's grace. When I was a kid we were "repairing" our cheap watches by using parts from broken ones, at most what Apple could do is print a giant warning on the boot screen that the phone is no longer blessed by Apple so people that want their thing repaired will not be "tricked".
  - zepto 6y ago
    > Why should Apple decide what part I put in the phone? If the phone is out of warranty then I should be able to use batteries, screens, chargers or software that is not blessed by Apple's grace. For a lot of people, this is a feature, not a bug. It prevents repair shops using substandard components, or even replacing good components with cheaper ones and then re-selling them. Edit: another much more serious issue, is security. 3rd party components are an obvious target for supply chain attacks.
    - simion314 6y ago
      That is also the risk with computers and cars, there might be "a lot" of people that would like DRM cars and computers but there are a lot more lots of people that would like to repair the car then buy a new one each year, or even the rich guys that buy a new car yearly they would like to be able to sell the old car and you can't sell an old car if it does not run because it needs a new memory stick in the main computer and the main computer costs 50% of the car.
      - zepto 6y ago
        > there might be "a lot" of people that would like DRM cars and computers but there are a lot more lots of people that would like to repair the car then buy a new one each year, This isn’t a valid comparison - nobody is forced to buy a new car or phone every year. I strongly doubt you are right about the numbers in general. Very few people want to risk fraudulent parts. But, I do agree that at some point the user should be able to unlock the DRM and take their own risks. E.g. at the end of the manufacturers support of the software.
        simion314 6y ago
        Sorry I do not understand your point, nobody is forced to buy a phone or car each year, the difference is that I can change the lights on my car with an "unofficial" part if I want without Ford complaining that I am a pirate and trying to void my engine warranty. I have all the possible options with my car: - go to a Ford shop and have them do it for me - go to a reputable website and browse all compatible parts and decide if I want something more e pensive or something more cheap - when I have the part I can install it myself, a friend or a professional that is not a "Ford" genius. Ford would love to force me to buy only from them parts, oils, fuel and only repair or do maintenance on their shops but fortunately they can't force us. (but you have the choice to use only Ford blessed products and people). For stolen cars there are serial numbers printed on the car engine and body parts to make it more difficult for thieves but sure it still happens and I am for doing more to prevent crime and finding the criminals but doing exactly what Ford would like and is bad for society and environment is clearly a bad thing IMO.

Mauricebranagh 6y ago

Actually it has been known for factories to run a shadow shift on the low down producing grey market parts

zepto 6y ago

> Apple should be forced to publicly sell this part for a reasonable price for x years. This means generating a vast amount of e-waste and increasing the cost of units. Since Apple doesn’t make the components themselves, they would have to warehouse a supply of spares.

avianlyric 6y ago
Apple must have access to these parts already because they’ll happily do out of warranty repairs, even on products that they no long sell. Asking them to make that supply publicly available does not strike me as a huge ask. Hell they could derive the supply from their recycling efforts they’re always showing off as WWDC. Also how does providing spare parts result in huge amounts of e-waste, that’s a bit of a non-sequitur. The whole point of spares is to remove the need to throw away a device that’s 90% fine 10% broken.
- zepto 6y ago
  > Apple must have access to these parts already because they’ll happily do out of warranty repairs, even on products that they no long sell. This is not relevant. Nobody is forcing them to do these repairs. When the parts are no longer available, they stop doing them. > The whole point of spares is to remove the need to throw away a device that’s 90% fine 10% broken. Yes, and it may well be a counterproductive scheme that doesn’t work as intended. 1. You need to warehouse components to comply with the law, or continue to make otherwise redundant components, which means maintaining outdated industrial plant. 2. Devices with replaceable components have to be made in a more complex way that is more liable to break, costing more up front, and more in repairs. There is no real problem with some hugh pile of slightly broken iPhones that are being wasted. The real problem is the huge number of working iPhones that are too outdated to run modern software. If we need a law, it is one that requires manufacturers to make a bootcamp equivalent for devices at the end of their software support cycle, so all the still working devices can continue to be useful.
ClumsyPilot 6y ago
What absurdity? By this logic we wouldn't repair cars either 'to reduce waste'