12 ms·
Apple fucked us on right to repair (again)
- jiofj 3y agoThanks Apple for pairing more and more components thus making my phone a less desirable target for thieves. One of the reasons I will keep buying iphone.
- sschueller 3y ago[flagged]
- johnnyworker 3y agoScrew the future, just so you don't have to keep your phone in your pocket or in your hand? Are the other reasons equally shitty?
- devwastaken 3y agoPairing components doesn't make the device theft proof. Overwhelmingly phones are stolen and sold as-is, not chop shopped. Chop shopping is generally not a lucrative business because availability of 3rd party parts is a lower cost than the time required to disassemble. The availability of manufactured parts significantly out scales independent sales. Contrary to common thought, Apple has a particular issue wherein they are focused upon for repair because their vertical integration results in few models. Less models = more focus on methods to repair. This means that apples intentional methods to prevent repair are not for your benefit, they're for profits. You can have security and repair.
- jiofj 3y ago>Overwhelmingly phones are stolen and sold as-is, not chop shopped. That's not true. An icloud-locked iphone is a paperweight. Only the components are worth something. Well, were ;)
- devwastaken 3y agoYes, and they're stolen and sold as-is. It's known as fraud.
- e44858 3y agoWhich is why thieves will sometimes ask you to unlock your phone.
- Kirby64 3y agoMost phone thefts are snatch and run. No chance to rob you and demand your passcode. Every second they have to deal with you trying to give your passcode is one they might get caught. Also, it requires your apple ID passward to remove iCloud lock, not just the passcode.
- fiddlerwoaroof 3y agoYeah, approximately no one actually repairs their repairable devices, so making them smaller and more integrated might be better and less wasteful overall.
- gpvos 3y agoI've replaced the battery at least once in all the phones I've had, and two other parts in my last phone. On the other hand, none of my phones has ever been stolen. And it's not just me, my neighbourhood has several repair shops.
- fiddlerwoaroof 3y agoIt’s still an optimization problem, and the results might be surprising
- gpvos 3y agoFair enough. I'm open to data on that.
- 5350-uiop-1130 3y agoyou think losing the right to repair just so that some hypothetical thief can't hypothetically take and resell your phone is a reasonable trade....? absolute nonsense.
- BrainBacon 3y agoI think cheaply available replacement parts ready from the manufacturer would be a much more desirable deterrent for thieves. Louis Rossman's battle with calibrating the angle sensor on the MacBook Pro is a great indicator that these restrictions aren't always done for security reasons since the part in question is worth pennies.
- dpkonofa 3y agoLouis Rossman is also a dishonest person who makes money off the whole controversy. He purposely does things to make the situations seem worse and has even been called out for outright lying (I stopped following after he claimed there was an issue with MacBooks when he purposely used an unshielded cable to cause the issue he was claiming).
- arunabha 3y agoI didn't know that. Mind sharing the source?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ZeroGravitas 3y agoThis is much more in-depth and interisting than the sweary title might lead you to believe. The bit about ventilators in particular is tragic.
- brianpan 3y agoBut just as rant-y and opinionated as you might be lead to believe from the sweary title.
- ZeroGravitas 3y agoI'm not sure I'd use the word "opinionated" here, but yeah he's angry about something which he has a strong opinion on.
- dpkonofa 3y agoTragic and entirely misleading. Medical devices are regulated beyond belief. You don’t want some random repair tech cobbling together pirate boxes for them. How would anyone know if they’re compromised?
- dredmorbius 3y agoMark your sarcasm if that's your intent. DIY ventilators were in fact a vital lifesaving measure at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, a little over two years ago: <https://spectrum.ieee.org/diy-ventilators-for-covid19-could-be-a-vital-stopgap https://spectrum.ieee.org/diy-ventilators-for-covid19-could-...>
- jtode 3y agoWhy was that? Couldn't source enough. Why was that? Supply chains stretched so taut that a single disruption shut the whole world down. Why was that? Profit. Capitalism is the problem.
- dredmorbius 3y ago
- cmiller1 3y agoThe article claims that Tim Cook said a certain thing "Tim Cook laid it out for his investors: when people can repair their devices, they don't buy new ones. When people don't buy new devices, Apple doesn't sell them new devices" It also provides a link to a source... in which Tim Cook said something totally different "While macroeconomic challenges in some markets were a key contributor to this trend, we believe there are other factors broadly impacting our iPhone performance, including consumers adapting to a world with fewer carrier subsidies, US dollar strength-related price increases, and some customers taking advantage of significantly reduced pricing for iPhone battery replacements" It seems to be a pretty big jump from "one of the reasons we didn't perform as well as possible this quarter is because of customers taking advantage of our reduced price battery replacement program" which could impact their bottom line by just operating on thinner margins than normal battery replacements, to "repairs are stopping people from buying new phones"
- criddell 3y agoYeah, I looked at that too. Seems like a very bad faith interpretation of what Cook was saying.
- dpkonofa 3y agoThe whole article is bad faith. It links to a Vice article claiming that Apple is lying about its environmental stances because it doesn’t reuse old iPhones and MacBooks. Then, they breeze over the fact that Apple literally breaks these devices down into their core materials for use in new devices and falsely claims that they’re “shredded into immortal e-waste”. How is that not reuse? Are they suggesting that the parts from an iPhone 4 can somehow be reused more effectively? How many old iPhones are still out there that would even be able to use any of those parts?
- _aavaa_ 3y agoThat is in fact not reusing. That’s recycling. And what they could do instead is yes sell those parts, or extend their certified refurbished program. It currently only goes back to the iPhone 12, even though their newest OS supports much older phones. To say nothing of how far back security updates are still (selectively) being released.
- zuminator 3y agoI was unfamiliar with the practice of "parts pairing" in Apple devices, which it seems can even prevent you from cannibalizing functional parts from an old iPhone to replace damaged parts in your current device. Does Apple even have some kind of consumer friendly justification for this practice, or is it just unabashed fuckery?
- criddell 3y agoSome parts need to be cryptographically linked for security reasons. For example, when the phone used to have a fingerprint sensor I believe all communication between that module and the rest of the phone used public key cryptography so that you couldn't replace the sensor with something less secure. A second reason for doing this is to make theft of devices less lucrative. If you can't sell a stolen phone for parts, then there's less incentive to steal the phone. I think there's more that Apple could do to make third party repairs easier without sacrificing security or theft disincentives. Maybe there could be a setting where I, as the owner, can authorize parts salvage of the phone before I sell it.
- JoshTko 3y agoI love that Apple is doing this. Making thieves not want to steal my phone is 50x more valuable to me than having a slightly easier time repairing my phone.
- pixl97 3y agoThis is a case of conflicting needs of users. If security is your primary need, it is great. If sustainability is your primary need then it sucks.
- bzzzt 3y agoApple supports and repairs phones for a long time. It's not about sustainability, it's about the price Apple charges for repairs. What is so sustainable about having and using the right to mount a cheap, bad battery that will have to be replaced again in a year or so?
- Bud 3y ago[dead]
- JCharante 3y ago> There are so many tactics Apple gets to use to sabotage repair. For example, Apple engraves microscopic Apple logos on the subassemblies in its devices. This allows the company to enlist US Customs to seize and destroy refurbished parts that are harvested from dead phones by workers in the Pacific Rim: Dead phones that were potentially stolen? A major reason I choose to buy iPhones is for their VIN-locking. I would rather my phone, if stolen, explode in the theif's hand, than allow for any 3rd party repair, even a battery swap. I want as close to 100% of the phone components to be serialized.
- stalfosknight 3y agoVIN?
- gpvos 3y agoThat's explained at length about a dozen paragraphs into the article.
- stalfosknight 3y agoI'm familiar with Activation Lock but there are no VINs involved.
- anakaine 3y agoIt's a reference to the article, and the way the article talks about what's happening here.
- ThePowerOfFuet 3y agoThe practice came from the automotive sector originally. RTFM, or quit arguing with those who have.
- gpvos 3y agoThat, uh, seems unnecessarily violent and vindictive.
- Kirby64 3y agoMan this article sure does seem to claim some specific ill intent or malice from Apple. I don't really know why there's so much focus on permitting scrapping of parts that are deemed unsalvageable. From Apple's perspective there is no guarantee the parts are any good, or the cost of salvaging exceeds the benefit of just scrapping them for raw materials as is. Frankly, the prices that Apple seems to be charging for common repairs seems quite reasonable nowadays. I'm not sure what the profit motive is at the prices they list. The new 15 series batteries can be replaced by Apple for $99... Which seems like a bargain for a first party battery that you know is going to be done properly.
- gameoverhumans 3y ago99$ isn't really a "bargain" in the absolute sense. I encourage you to look at eBay buy it now listings for used/refurbished Lenovo ThinkCentre NUCs, for example. You can get an entire computer with 8GB RAM, 128GB SSD and a Skylake+ CPU for that kind of money.
- Kirby64 3y agoA Skylake CPU is an 8 year old CPU. Why are you even comparing old desktop-class CPUs to the cost of a battery replacement on a brand new device? I can buy an ancient server that consumes hundreds of watts for $100 too, it doesn't mean it's a good value. I can also buy an entire iPhone SE 2020 or something, for $100 as well.
- gameoverhumans 3y agoWhat does age have to do with the value proposition I put forward? Has the battery chemistry in a iPhone 15 advanced significantly in the last 8 years? I don't think so. > I can also buy an entire iPhone SE 2020 or something, for $100 as well. Exactly, thanks for reinforcing my point.
- Kirby64 3y agoI honestly don't know what you're even saying. The value proposition of an 8 year old piece of hardware that doesn't even have a battery in it is essentially unrelated to the cost or value of replacing a battery in a brand new phone. Likewise, the used cost of a device that is functional today (iPhone SE 2020 in my example) is almost unrelated to the cost of the battery replacement. I think you'd find that attempting to repair the NUC you highlighted would soon exceed the $100 if you needed to do anything more than very basic repairs.
- mig39 3y agoWhen you sell an old iPhone, the first thing you do is turn off the iCloud bound feature, so someone else can activate it. There should be a method to do the same for parts. ie: I broke my phone, it's not functional at all. I should be able to sell it for parts. But I can't. Because the parts are tied to a particular device ID?
- bzzzt 3y agoIt's the other way around: the phone only wants to talk to the parts it shipped with. Not with some knock-off battery that will also be dead in 6 months or TFT replacement screen for an OLED phone.
- b112 3y agoThat's a false equivalency. Phones are also rejecting perfectly good parts, not the parts you cited. That's the whole problem here, and you try to make it seem as if it's about crappy parts not working. It's not. At all. Never has been.
- dpkonofa 3y agoIn nearly every case this has been claimed, it’s a part that has some security functionality or a part like a display or battery that requires some kind of calibration. Maybe they should put more effort into making that calibration easier but I don’t think anyone that currently uses their devices would trade that if it means the quality of the calibration or the security of the device goes down.
- b112 3y agoThis presumes Apple isn't lying through their teeth, claiming it is about security, or calibration, when it isn't.
- dpkonofa 3y agoExcept it is. What part on the phone can't be replaced? What is Apple lying about? Even if you don't calibrate the parts, the phone is still usable, you just don't get the features of the calibration - battery status/level, Touch ID, Face ID, etc. Can you give me an example of what you're referring to? A part that prevents use and doesn't require calibration or a part that Apple is lying about - either works.
- alwa 3y agoSeveral years back, before Apple clamped down on this kind of commercial behavior, I made the mistake of taking my iPhone to a third-party repair firm for a screen replacement. They claimed to be “Apple-authorized,” but it’s unclear for what. The knockoff part they used to replace the screen was palpably awful-dim, purple-tinted, discolored around the edges, somehow flickering like a CRT, and a millimeter or two thicker than the real deal so that it stuck out from the body of the phone. The guy said “it’s fine, it looks great, it’s working perfectly, there’s no problem with it.” Basically “a screen is a screen.” I suppose in some situations and some parts of the market that may be true, and I’m glad that part of the market is adequately served by commodity Android manufacturers. But part of the small premium I pay to Apple for my low-end model iPhone, I pay specifically to avoid having to look my repairman in the eye and attempt to divine his judgment and trustworthiness before he makes off with my money. Consistency and trust in the repair ecosystem is a feature, to me. There’s a balance to be struck, sure, but I’d hate to think of somebody doing the equivalent “what, it’s fine!” type of repair to a safety- or life-critical device and claiming it’s just as good as new. Even if somebody were to track such repairers down and prosecute them after their repairs injure somebody, we’d be moving from a high-trust to a low-trust kind of environment in exactly the areas where I least want to have to worry about trust. Anyway, as to phones, I’ve since been very happy to pay Apple the $4/month to cover quality, authentic repairs should I damage my device—and I take them up on that coverage fairly often. $48/year plus the $29 deductible per incident works out even cheaper for me than that unacceptably poor third-party repair cost me years ago.
- dpkonofa 3y agoThis is only slightly comical to me because the article actually mentions ventilators and how evil they were that they could only be serviced by the OEM due to the “VIN” on the parts. I would not want to be the person strapped to a medical device where “it looks fine, it works great” guy was the one that fixed it on the cheap so he could make an extra few dollars.
- itishappy 3y agoIf first party repairs are an option, my choice is clear. If my choice is between a third-party repair and death, I'm less principled.
- stuaxo 3y ago[flagged]
- nemothekid 3y agoI think it's unfair to call anyone who has a differing opinion than you an astroturfer.
- fragmede 3y agoThe guidelines specifically calls this out, even. > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- QVVRP4nYz 3y agoI am not sure if it is astroturfing but I sure remember people apeshit when car manufactures tried to do same thing (including John Deere that AFAIR still uses DRM for parts.)
- stouset 3y agoHow often are people grabbing tractors out of people’s hands while walking down the street?
- spacecase-25 3y ago[flagged]
- stouset 3y agoPeople have been complaining about Apple cultists since at least the original iPod, 20+ years ago. Probably before then too. In the intervening decades, Apple has managed to grow their “cult” following exponentially, by hundreds or even thousands of times the size that it used to be. Do you ever stop and wonder why that might be exactly?
- pzo 3y agoI don't understand some people here that are clapping apple for DRM their devices as kind of protection from thefts. There is a way to have a cookie and eat it too in this case if they would allow user easily to remove DRM via iCloud or even better when disconnecting from iCloud. In the last 10 years I never had any electronics stolen from me but almost every smartphone got broken in some way: worn out USB/lightning port, broken battery, broken screen, shattered glass, broken Face Id. Imagine if we would apply the same scenario for human organ transplants. Let's enforce (using similar logic) that after someone dies we throw such body straight to oven to burn it because there exist in the world illegal human organs trade - no even if you want to be an organ donor after your death you can't because we want to remove incentive for illegal human organs trade! /s
- fragmede 3y agoGiven that human organs can currently only be created inside humans, and not mechanically in factories like iphone components can be, I'm not sure that scenario really tells us anything. I can imagine reading a dystopian scifi novel about it though. (making organs the human body can use, instead of harvesting them from a donor body is a fascinating area of research! https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/bladder-grown-from-3d-bioprinted-tissue-continues-to-function-after-14-years-139631/ https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/bladder-grown-from-3d-bi...)
- pzo 3y agoThen imagine future were we made progress and can make organs the human use in some biolab. Would you still prefer to enforce burning human body after death just to (supposed to) avoid illegal human organ trade? What if the company that create such human body organs biolab has monopoly on it, can charge anything they want and force you to use their own privately owned hospitals and their certified doctors for transplant operation? I definitely wouldn't want to live in such a world.
- itishappy 3y agoIt's for your own good! Our manufactured organs are designed and tested to ensure consistant quality, you don't want to know what Dave's been doing to his liver these past 20 years. There's probably a point I could be trying to make, but I have yet to figure out what it is.
- EPWN3D 3y agoR2R activists and open source activists have this insane view that giant corporations are making decisions for the sole purpose of thwarting their movement's goals. These people just can't see past their own agendas and have to portray every mundane decision about hardware and software design as specifically calibrated to inflict maximum harm to them personally. Like the engineers, managers, and executives at Apple literally have nothing else to do all day but contemplate how every decision they make harms R2R and open source advocacy. These people are just exasperating.
- spacecase-25 3y agoFeel free to vote yourself off the island or, perhaps, simply choose not to engage in topics that you don't care about.
- onewheeltom 3y agoDo google and samsung have similar practices (parts pairing, serialization)?
- gameoverhumans 3y agoIf Apple gets away with this awful practice for long enough, I'm sure the other manufacturers will follow suit if they haven't already. Remind me who it was to remove the headphone jack first, again? ;)
- dotnet00 3y agohttps://youtu.be/Lxo6l_whDeE https://youtu.be/Lxo6l_whDeE So much for "we need to do this for security!" lol
- lordfrito 3y agoTime was when a person could build and program their own computer using any parts they wanted. Tech types valued their ability to build, diagnose, repair, and optimize their own equipment. From the responses here, I can only surmise that's attitude is considered old fashioned now. I lost interest in Apple product after going go through a Kafkian experience trying to use the standard serial port on the early iPod/iPhone connectors. Was trying to build a prototype of a handheld compass app, using a magnetometer board we designed that plugged into the connector and drew power from the phone. Everything worked fine, except I couldn't get the serial port software working in the phone app. Apple wouldn't let me use the serial port without a special MFI chip, requiring me to fill out tons of financial paperwork (Dun and Broadstreet etc), business plans, sales estimates, target markets, etc. They were not interested in helping me out at all. Not sure why Apple decided that serial ports were off limits. This is about the oldest comm technology out there. sigh Anyhow, I read that hobbyists were working around the limitations by using the microphone port as a modem. Basically modulate the serial data, send as a waveform into microphone port, then demodulate the audio stream in software. Clever. So I went and built this. Only to find that Apple had recently decided to close the "audio hole", forcing me to use an MFI chip to get access to the microphone port. The more I dug, the more I found everything locked down. I realized Apple didn't want me actually using any of the standard interfaces I'd come accustomed to using in my decades long career in tech. Beautiful phone, I just couldn't use it outside of the curated experience. Not without their permission (read: tax). It was the most anti-consumer piece of electronics I'd ever enountered. I'm assuming it's much much worse now. If Apple dared, they'd consider locking down WiFi access as well. I'm sure they've toyed with the idea of forcing all WiFi router manufacturers to purchase an MFI chip to interoperate with Apple product. What the kids here seem to want is a curated experience, and they're willing to pay $$$ every month for a device they can't open, repair, modify, etc. Good luck to you and your leased phone experience, you only compute at Apple's pleasure. I fear for the subsequent generations raised in a market where this exploitive behavior has become normalized. /old-timer-rant
- Clamchop 3y ago> forcing me to use an MFI chip to get access to the microphone port. How does this work? We are talking about the now-deceased analogue minijack, right?
- khaki54 3y agoThey ship you 79 lb. Pelican case to do self service battery swap? And a technician needs to login to review your work!