6 ms·

Users can order cheap parts from china just fine. The problem is with manufacturers. Encrypting parts, so simple part swap does not work. Or replacement screen

Users can order cheap parts from china just fine. The problem is with manufacturers. Encrypting parts, so simple part swap does not work. Or replacement screen for $300... Apple is really really bad when it comes to repairability!

dogma1138 4y ago
Users can if there is a supply chain for them. Apple isn’t that bad, and being able to find parts for 10 year old devices and actually having nearly a decade of software support makes up for it. Ofc it would be better if they didn’t lock down parts further at least the screen and battery aren’t locked down yet. I replaced a screen on an iPhone XS not even a month ago with a £30 kit from Amazon that came with everything needed including a new liquid protection seal. Apple should definitely get flack what what they do but this pathetic attempt is just that pathetic this isn’t a way forward in any practical manner. If you really think you’ll be able to find parts for this phone in 5 years then well I got a bridge to sell you. And not for nothing it will turn into a paper weight after the 3 years of software support period will be over.
zamnos 4y ago
"Encrypting" parts also has to do with the black market for iPhones. If you steal someone's iPhone, they can brick it remotely, so you can't just resell it as a whole working device, so you part it out to a shady cell phone repair store who will reuse the parts and give you like fifty bucks so you can score your next bag of drugs. By embedding serial numbers on the parts, Apple stops this and makes the parts unusable, driving down the value of a stolen iPhone.
- qball 4y ago
  >driving down the value of a stolen iPhone And driving up the cost of repairs. If I want to turn off the thing that bricks the identification features, there's no technical reason why I shouldn't be able to do that- my device follows my orders, not the other way around.
  - paulmd 4y ago
    > And driving up the cost of repairs. Yes, but Apple provides low-cost replacement parts. Like the cost of an iphone battery via apple store or apple self-service is objectively reasonable, so yeah, you can't use amazon batteries and who cares? > If I want to turn off the thing that bricks the identification features, there's no technical reason why I shouldn't be able to do that The reason is because it encourages the resale of stolen goods, which encourages the theft of goods. "Why shouldn't my dollars do what I tell them to, they're paper in MY wallet" well if what you're telling them to do is buy a hot stereo out of the back of a truck, that's illegal and society is going to discourage that because we don't want our stereo to be stolen next. And stereos are going to be built with things (like serial numbers) that help prevent that. Even if you feel that infringes your privacy (serials are the root of all this tracking after all!) tough shit. That's always the problem, the people complaining pick out specific elements and whine about that one thing being unfair and ignore that they're specific elements of an overall system that includes elements to compensate the unfair parts. Yes, iphones will only accept signed parts because that discourages theft, because the phone can't be stripped and sold as parts. And then Apple provides subsidized services (their service division runs at a loss) for people who want repair service, and at-cost OEM parts to anyone who wants to service their own phone. That's also why you have to buy parts individually - because they have to be paired to the phone. Yes, this is inconvenient for third-party service vendors who can't just keep a backroom of parts, but it's not infeasible, they just have to have users order their own parts. This is not John Deere where nobody but techs can even order parts, everyone can, they just don't want to have to. The big-picture e-waste and service picture of iphones is completely fair overall for consumers. It's less fair for servicemen who have to deal with subsidized services and OEM parts being sold at-cost and losing revenue on selling those parts (rossman is not selling you a screen at-cost), but, that's what auto service centers had to learn to live with when RockAuto showed up in the picture too. And none of that is bad for consumers. If you're just making a moral stand that you have a god-given right to put a $20 battery in your phone every 6 months instead of a $40 battery every 2 years, and you think that justifies unwinding anti-theft provisions and increasing e-waste to do it... just use the repair/service chains from the vendor like a normal human being, buddy. In the meantime we can all enjoy not having our phones stolen and stripped. Or maybe a better analogy is removing immobilizers from cars. I have a god-given right to just have a normal metal key without needing to take it into the dealer to get it programmed, right? It's my car, why should I have to pay the manufacturer just to replace a $2 metal key? But in aggregate we're all better off not having well-developed criminal networks built around stealing and stripping cars... so people have just learned that they need to keep at least 2 spare keys at all times to program the immobilizer if they lose one, or else you'll have to take it in to a dealer and have the key programmed. It's just not that big a deal to most people, and actually the opposite is true - not having your car stolen is actually a huge deal to them. Could you build a car without an immobilizer? Sure. Would it be more expensive to insure? Yes. Does anybody actually want that, apart from a few weirdos? No.
- dogma1138 4y ago
  That’s not particularly effective since it seems that most repair shops even the none official ones have ways to rest the devices. Also the screen can be still easily reused and the rest of the parts can be salvaged for components that end up even in Apples own supply chain I suspect. If your iPhone is stolen it will be in an electronics chop shop in China within a week.

dogma1138 4y ago

Users can if there is a supply chain for them. Apple isn’t that bad, and being able to find parts for 10 year old devices and actually having nearly a decade of software support makes up for it. Ofc it would be better if they didn’t lock down parts further at least the screen and battery aren’t locked down yet. I replaced a screen on an iPhone XS not even a month ago with a £30 kit from Amazon that came with everything needed including a new liquid protection seal. Apple should definitely get flack what what they do but this pathetic attempt is just that pathetic this isn’t a way forward in any practical manner. If you really think you’ll be able to find parts for this phone in 5 years then well I got a bridge to sell you. And not for nothing it will turn into a paper weight after the 3 years of software support period will be over.

zamnos 4y ago

"Encrypting" parts also has to do with the black market for iPhones. If you steal someone's iPhone, they can brick it remotely, so you can't just resell it as a whole working device, so you part it out to a shady cell phone repair store who will reuse the parts and give you like fifty bucks so you can score your next bag of drugs. By embedding serial numbers on the parts, Apple stops this and makes the parts unusable, driving down the value of a stolen iPhone.

qball 4y ago
>driving down the value of a stolen iPhone And driving up the cost of repairs. If I want to turn off the thing that bricks the identification features, there's no technical reason why I shouldn't be able to do that- my device follows my orders, not the other way around.
- paulmd 4y ago
  > And driving up the cost of repairs. Yes, but Apple provides low-cost replacement parts. Like the cost of an iphone battery via apple store or apple self-service is objectively reasonable, so yeah, you can't use amazon batteries and who cares? > If I want to turn off the thing that bricks the identification features, there's no technical reason why I shouldn't be able to do that The reason is because it encourages the resale of stolen goods, which encourages the theft of goods. "Why shouldn't my dollars do what I tell them to, they're paper in MY wallet" well if what you're telling them to do is buy a hot stereo out of the back of a truck, that's illegal and society is going to discourage that because we don't want our stereo to be stolen next. And stereos are going to be built with things (like serial numbers) that help prevent that. Even if you feel that infringes your privacy (serials are the root of all this tracking after all!) tough shit. That's always the problem, the people complaining pick out specific elements and whine about that one thing being unfair and ignore that they're specific elements of an overall system that includes elements to compensate the unfair parts. Yes, iphones will only accept signed parts because that discourages theft, because the phone can't be stripped and sold as parts. And then Apple provides subsidized services (their service division runs at a loss) for people who want repair service, and at-cost OEM parts to anyone who wants to service their own phone. That's also why you have to buy parts individually - because they have to be paired to the phone. Yes, this is inconvenient for third-party service vendors who can't just keep a backroom of parts, but it's not infeasible, they just have to have users order their own parts. This is not John Deere where nobody but techs can even order parts, everyone can, they just don't want to have to. The big-picture e-waste and service picture of iphones is completely fair overall for consumers. It's less fair for servicemen who have to deal with subsidized services and OEM parts being sold at-cost and losing revenue on selling those parts (rossman is not selling you a screen at-cost), but, that's what auto service centers had to learn to live with when RockAuto showed up in the picture too. And none of that is bad for consumers. If you're just making a moral stand that you have a god-given right to put a $20 battery in your phone every 6 months instead of a $40 battery every 2 years, and you think that justifies unwinding anti-theft provisions and increasing e-waste to do it... just use the repair/service chains from the vendor like a normal human being, buddy. In the meantime we can all enjoy not having our phones stolen and stripped. Or maybe a better analogy is removing immobilizers from cars. I have a god-given right to just have a normal metal key without needing to take it into the dealer to get it programmed, right? It's my car, why should I have to pay the manufacturer just to replace a $2 metal key? But in aggregate we're all better off not having well-developed criminal networks built around stealing and stripping cars... so people have just learned that they need to keep at least 2 spare keys at all times to program the immobilizer if they lose one, or else you'll have to take it in to a dealer and have the key programmed. It's just not that big a deal to most people, and actually the opposite is true - not having your car stolen is actually a huge deal to them. Could you build a car without an immobilizer? Sure. Would it be more expensive to insure? Yes. Does anybody actually want that, apart from a few weirdos? No.
dogma1138 4y ago
That’s not particularly effective since it seems that most repair shops even the none official ones have ways to rest the devices. Also the screen can be still easily reused and the rest of the parts can be salvaged for components that end up even in Apples own supply chain I suspect. If your iPhone is stolen it will be in an electronics chop shop in China within a week.