5 ms·

I do laud the effort here, but personally I will not buy apple again, even with linux. The software is not the only problem with apple's closed system - the har

I do laud the effort here, but personally I will not buy apple again, even with linux. The software is not the only problem with apple's closed system - the hardware is all but irreparable, locked to approved parts and so on.

thebruce87m 2y ago
> locked to approved parts And this is why I only buy Apple phones. Since I buy pre-owned I want as many guarantees as possible that the insides are genuine. My hope is that one day I can check that every single component is genuine.
- jacknews 2y ago
  It would be fine, and also serve your purpose, if apple merely flagged non-apple parts as such, with warnings and so on. Rather than refusing to use them, or to even boot, or degrading the quality with software, or otherwise f*ing around with the experience in a user-hostile way. Maybe that sums up my aversion to apple; they've become user-hostile, the moment you try to step beyond their gilded cage.
  - thebruce87m 2y ago
    Apple have the same obligation as any other company to be compatible with third party parts, which is legally no obligation as far as I can tell. Expecting them to spend engineering time and effort to ensure compatibility with other peoples parts isn’t reasonable in my opinion when other companies aren’t held to the same standard. That said, I agree with you - if there was the option to use third party parts but also tell then that’s fine with me, but it would have to be a law to ensure that other manufacturers are forced to spend the engineering effort too. They should also force all manufacturers to support devices for minimum periods too. I have seen no user-hostile moves from apple in my 20 years of using their devices. I’ve seen lots of people misunderstand some of their moves and wrongly attribute it to hostility however.
    - jacknews 2y ago
      Other companies are quite willing to expend the effort to make apple-compatible parts, which are in any case often just off-the-shelf parts, sometimes with a few mods. That's exactly why apply are tagging their parts crypto-graphically - to ensure that those other parts cannot in fact be compatible, however hard they try. And indeed, if you've spent 20 years being a good user and obeying apple's proscribed usage patterns, hardware lifetimes, etc, you've probably never experienced user hostility.
      - thebruce87m 2y ago
        I’m sure other companies want a share of the pie. Whether they offer identical performance or some degraded version (or better) is neither here nor there. I want genuine. People will knee-jerk on any bad news so I can understand Apples concern that third-party components get conflated with their users product experience. If a third party battery burns a house down the headline will still be “iPhone burns down a house”. You’re right that I have enjoyed the extended lifetimes that apple products afford. For iPhones this has allowed me to move to the second hand market safe in the knowledge of many more years of excellent support. Repairability is great - only if the product is still supported.

thebruce87m 2y ago

> locked to approved parts And this is why I only buy Apple phones. Since I buy pre-owned I want as many guarantees as possible that the insides are genuine. My hope is that one day I can check that every single component is genuine.

jacknews 2y ago
It would be fine, and also serve your purpose, if apple merely flagged non-apple parts as such, with warnings and so on. Rather than refusing to use them, or to even boot, or degrading the quality with software, or otherwise f*ing around with the experience in a user-hostile way. Maybe that sums up my aversion to apple; they've become user-hostile, the moment you try to step beyond their gilded cage.
- thebruce87m 2y ago
  Apple have the same obligation as any other company to be compatible with third party parts, which is legally no obligation as far as I can tell. Expecting them to spend engineering time and effort to ensure compatibility with other peoples parts isn’t reasonable in my opinion when other companies aren’t held to the same standard. That said, I agree with you - if there was the option to use third party parts but also tell then that’s fine with me, but it would have to be a law to ensure that other manufacturers are forced to spend the engineering effort too. They should also force all manufacturers to support devices for minimum periods too. I have seen no user-hostile moves from apple in my 20 years of using their devices. I’ve seen lots of people misunderstand some of their moves and wrongly attribute it to hostility however.
  - jacknews 2y ago
    Other companies are quite willing to expend the effort to make apple-compatible parts, which are in any case often just off-the-shelf parts, sometimes with a few mods. That's exactly why apply are tagging their parts crypto-graphically - to ensure that those other parts cannot in fact be compatible, however hard they try. And indeed, if you've spent 20 years being a good user and obeying apple's proscribed usage patterns, hardware lifetimes, etc, you've probably never experienced user hostility.
    - thebruce87m 2y ago
      I’m sure other companies want a share of the pie. Whether they offer identical performance or some degraded version (or better) is neither here nor there. I want genuine. People will knee-jerk on any bad news so I can understand Apples concern that third-party components get conflated with their users product experience. If a third party battery burns a house down the headline will still be “iPhone burns down a house”. You’re right that I have enjoyed the extended lifetimes that apple products afford. For iPhones this has allowed me to move to the second hand market safe in the knowledge of many more years of excellent support. Repairability is great - only if the product is still supported.