7 ms·

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. Act

by 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.
  - bluGill 6y ago
    Because a source of parts is devices that are stolen and stripped for the parts. The parts are then laundered so you think your source is legal. By putting a serial number on each part it means you go after the supplier who you otherwise thought was honest and so this whole scheme shuts down.
    - simion314 6y ago
      I understand the issue with the stolen parts, cars also can have similar issues and we still can buy after market parts. I wonder if we can confirm this theory that is also financial extremely favorable to Apple or is just FUD and PR.
      - bluGill 6y ago
        Most car parts are not coded. However some of the important ones are, and that enough enough to slow down the steal car for parts scheme.
      - zepto 6y ago
        > I wonder if we can confirm this theory that is also financial extremely favorable to Apple As a metric, this is a useless gauge of what Apple does. Their whole aim is to do things that benefit customers, and profit from it.
    - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
      Well maybe i should not be allowed to buy used shoes, what if they are stolen? Why should my right of ownership be violated to help apple deal with 'stolen' parts?
      - zepto 6y ago
        > Why should my right of ownership be violated to help apple deal with 'stolen' parts? It isn’t. Apple’s products are designed to help consumers avoid the problems associated with stolen parts, including the very real threat of supply chain attacks. You always have the right not to choose that design. You seem to want to prevent other people from choosing it, which seems odd to me.

by lnsru 6y ago

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.
- bluGill 6y ago
  Because a source of parts is devices that are stolen and stripped for the parts. The parts are then laundered so you think your source is legal. By putting a serial number on each part it means you go after the supplier who you otherwise thought was honest and so this whole scheme shuts down.
  - simion314 6y ago
    I understand the issue with the stolen parts, cars also can have similar issues and we still can buy after market parts. I wonder if we can confirm this theory that is also financial extremely favorable to Apple or is just FUD and PR.
    - bluGill 6y ago
      Most car parts are not coded. However some of the important ones are, and that enough enough to slow down the steal car for parts scheme.
    - zepto 6y ago
      > I wonder if we can confirm this theory that is also financial extremely favorable to Apple As a metric, this is a useless gauge of what Apple does. Their whole aim is to do things that benefit customers, and profit from it.
  - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
    Well maybe i should not be allowed to buy used shoes, what if they are stolen? Why should my right of ownership be violated to help apple deal with 'stolen' parts?
    - zepto 6y ago
      > Why should my right of ownership be violated to help apple deal with 'stolen' parts? It isn’t. Apple’s products are designed to help consumers avoid the problems associated with stolen parts, including the very real threat of supply chain attacks. You always have the right not to choose that design. You seem to want to prevent other people from choosing it, which seems odd to me.