Apple: iPhones Are Too 'Complex' To Allow Unauthorized Repair (vice.com) 305
Jason Koebler writes: Apple's top environmental officer made the company's most extensive statements about the repairability of Apple hardware on Tuesday: "Our first thought is, 'You don't need to repair this.' When you do, we want the repair to be fairly priced and accessible to you," Lisa Jackson, Apple's vice president of policy and social initiatives said at TechCrunch Disrupt in San Francisco. "To think about these very complex products and say the answer to all our problems is that you should have anybody to repair and have access to the parts is not looking at the whole problem."
Apple has lobbied against "Fair Repair" bills in 11 states that would require the company to make its repair guides available and to sell replacement parts to the general public. Instead, it has focused on an "authorized service provider" model that allows the company to control the price and availability of repair.
Apple has lobbied against "Fair Repair" bills in 11 states that would require the company to make its repair guides available and to sell replacement parts to the general public. Instead, it has focused on an "authorized service provider" model that allows the company to control the price and availability of repair.
Whaaaaaat? (Score:5, Informative)
And then there's this (Score:5, Informative)
I have a 2009 Mac Pro. It's a 12/24 core, 3 GHz-ish, 64 GB machine, lots of monitors. It's really pretty quick and there's certainly nothing wrong with it.
Apple, however, has made the next version of the OS unavailable to it, which in turn will make it slowly become incompatible with new software, etc.
I suspect that the whole "you aren't allowed to repair your iPhone" debacle is based on the same basic policy, which I would sum up as "screw you, customer, buy from us again or go without."
Particularly because the idea that no one but Apple's authorized money generators can repair an iPhone is patently absurd.
Re:And then there's this (Score:5, Informative)
This is, of course, the history of the Macintosh. From the very start, Jobs didn't want anyone opening the case, and he didn't even want it to have any expansion beyond serial ports. He explicitly wanted the user to have to buy a new computer if they wanted to upgrade, producing revenue for Apple.
This is literally only business as usual for Apple, ever since the Mac.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, no. Apple offered 512K logic board upgrades to purchasers of the original 128K Macs.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, no. Apple offered 512K logic board upgrades to purchasers of the original 128K Macs.
I'm talking about CPU upgrades, system expansion, that kind of thing. It didn't even have SCSI until the Plus, and it didn't have an expansion slot until the SE, which had a processor direct slot. (I just sold one with a Radius Accelerator SE 16, it's still in my room here behind me until the seller gets into town and I go drop it off.) So there was no user-accessible expansion until the third model, and no means of upgrading to a faster CPU until the fourth. PCs had standard motherboards so you could upgra
Re: (Score:2)
PCs didn't have upgradable processors, either. Every Mac came with networking support, Apple came out with external floppy and hard disks. And, although the official method of expansion was external, the lack of slots didn't stop third party expansion. I had a 128K Mac, upgraded to 512K, then added an internal 10 MB hard drive (Hyperdrive).
"...fancy-pants parallel port that could be used to
Re: (Score:2)
You could pop a V20 in the socket....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:And then there's this (Score:5, Informative)
Against Steve's wishes, though.
Steve Jobs objected, because he didn't like the idea of customers mucking with the innards of their computer. He would also rather have them buy a new 512K Mac instead of them buying more RAM from a third-party. But this time Burrell prevailed, because the change was so minimal. He just left it in there and no one bothered to mention it to Steve, much to the eventual benefit of customers, who didn't have to buy a whole new Mac to expand their memory. [folklore.org]
Steve had left by the time the Mac II came out, and it was Gassee's call to allow expansion slots.
I will say the Power Mac 7500 I bought in 1995 was supremely expandable, and easy to open the case and work inside it. I upgraded the RAM, hard drive, CPU (to a G3) and optical drive. I got a lot of miles out of that Mac!
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and Apple also offered 512Ke upgrades, which included a double-sided 800K driv
Re: (Score:2)
That is absolute bullshit.\
The original Macs were supposed to come in two packages 128K and 512K, and everyone knew that 128K was way too little. But Ram shortages made the 512K version very rare. Apple promised this by telling people that wehn the RAM became available they would offer them an upgrade option.
When the upgrade option became available though it was highly overpriced. Users were forced. into one of three options. Go without, pay a ton or go with third party upgrades that voided the warran
Re:And then there's this (Score:5, Insightful)
I was one of those people with enough dosh in my foolish youth to spring for the original fat Mac (something just shy of CDN $4000 with printer and external floppy as I dimly recall), which within less than two years became a decorative boat anchor after I priced an internal hard drive upgrade at CDN $1500, which instead I spent, as I now recall it, on an entire crappy 80286 clone, which was ugly and clunky, but far more useful to me as a software developer.
What first drove me absolutely ape-shit about my double-floppy fat Mac was that whenever it needed something from an unmounted floppy, it would by (some inscrutable logic) pop one of the two mounted floppies—almost always the disk it would seconds later request that I reinsert.
I knew my workflow, the machine didn't, yet it figured it should choose which disk to auto-eject, and I shouldn't even have my own button. I never had a development workflow that required less than three floppies.
Soon I had installed permanent paperclips in both floppies so I could override this outrageously unhelpful behaviour, whose mother was a sentient elevator servicing a hamster high rise, and whose father was a talking toaster who smelled of elderberries.
It drove me APE FUCKING SHIT.
And you're quite right. I've never gone back to the Apple fold.
Re:And then there's this (Score:5, Informative)
Now that wouldn't be so bad if they would not flat out refuse to repair your device.
I had a broken screen on my iPhone 5, which was otherwise just fine. I brought it in, the price would be about 150 euros which is a lot (you can easily get a replacement non-original screen for less than half the price) but I didn't want to risk getting an inferior screen, possibly even containing malware [theverge.com], so I went through the official channel. A bit later I got a call saying they had diagnosed my phone and found a problem with the battery as well. They "had to" repair that, too, and since it was going to be too expensive, I might as well get a replacement refurbished phone for more than 300 euros.
I insisted that my two year old battery was just fine (not quite lasting as long as when it was new, but sufficient for me) and only wanted a new screen, but no, they flat out refused. Apple only delivers devices in perfect working order with a three month warranty, so they could not just repair the screen, end of discussion.
I ended up getting a fake screen from some grubby repair shop after all. Works like a charm, by the way. And the battery still works just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
This is, of course, the history of the Macintosh. From the very start, Jobs didn't want anyone opening the case, and he didn't even want it to have any expansion beyond serial ports. He explicitly wanted the user to have to buy a new computer if they wanted to upgrade, producing revenue for Apple.
This is literally only business as usual for Apple, ever since the Mac.
For what it is worth, I've been opening and upgrading Macs since Toaster days. Even iMacs.
Re: And then there's this (Score:2)
As a side-note, the disk in that iMac ended up having a
Re:And then there's this (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, if that is Apple's market that is Apple's market. The real way the law needs to be updated is that customers need to be made fully aware at point of purchase, the abnormal limitation upon device repair and the costs involved, failure to make the customer demonstrably aware of those limitation else, the customer should be entitled to a refund at any time after purchase.
Re: (Score:2)
cant you find a "tool" that tricks the installer into doing its job and updating the OS anyhow? This is an artificial limit apple puts in and i thought easily defeated?
Re: (Score:2)
In theory it MAY be possible depending on what is causing the limitation. I know a lot of old (and to me iconic) models were able to upgrade one last time due to a software faking the existence of a "required" component. It was a way to allow the old Clamshell iBooks (and likely other models) to upgrade from 10.3 to 10.4. I'm sure Apple is a bit smarter than that now.
Re: (Score:2)
There are drivers for older Macs to allow the latest macOS to install on them. You have to turn off SIP and keep it off, since the kexts used are definitely not signed... but if you want that black MacBook from 2008 to run High Sierra, it is doable.
Re: And then there's this (Score:3)
This is 2017. How many years of support do you expect from Apple and what is this expectation based on when taking into account policies of all other hardware manufacturers?
Re: And then there's this (Score:5, Insightful)
But, to the point, the Win10 requirements:
The GP has a "a 2009 Mac Pro. It's a 12/24 core, 3 GHz-ish, 64 GB machine".
So, it looks like Windows is doing a better job of supporting Apple hardware than MacOS is.
Re: And then there's this (Score:4, Insightful)
With Apple, they block you. With Windows, you at least get to make that choice for yourself. Of course those specs are absurdly low, but Apple won't let you update really powerful hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This is 2017. How many years of support do you expect from Apple and what is this expectation based on when taking into account policies of all other hardware manufacturers?
It's Apple. They could hand out free blowjobs from Sophia Vergara with each Mac sold, and Slashdotters would bitch about it. What they don't understand is that this sort of thing will affect whatever they are using.
Re: And then there's this (Score:4, Insightful)
It's Apple. They could hand out free blowjobs from Sophia Vergara with each Mac sold, and Slashdotters would bitch about it.
Or Apple could force customers to get sodomized by a pony when they buy a Mac, and fanbois would still wait in line at the Apple Store, and they would defend Apple on Slashdot, talking about how this is helping ponies
Re: And then there's this (Score:4, Insightful)
It's Apple. They could hand out free blowjobs from Sophia Vergara with each Mac sold, and Slashdotters would bitch about it.
Or Apple could force customers to get sodomized by a pony when they buy a Mac, and fanbois would still wait in line at the Apple Store, and they would defend Apple on Slashdot, talking about how this is helping ponies
Having Apple devices since there have been Apple devices, I'd be fine with Lady Sophia's services, but your rabid hatred of Apple and your odd example might be looked at by some as both hatred and projection, there Bronie
Just sayin'. I have Apple, Windows, Linux, iPhone and Android devices at present. Youre hatred is misplaced and has a strange basis, each is just another device.
But Hey! Ponies!
Re: And then there's this (Score:4, Insightful)
your rabid hatred of Apple
I don't hate them (or their customers), I'm just trying to offer a bit of counterbalance to the endless fanboyism on Slashdot. Apple stories haven't been "news for nerds" for a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
OMG ponies!!!1
And Bronies too! https://singsintraffic.files.w... [wordpress.com]
Re: And then there's this (Score:2, Insightful)
There's a difference between support and letting us work on our own stuff.
My house is over 50 years old, and I can change an outlet any time I want without calling the guy who built it. I can buy a 100 year old car, and tear it right down to the frame and replace every single component. In fact, a lot of people make hobbies or businesses off that fact.
Then there's apple. "Oh, you couldn't possibly figure out the complexity of replacing a small circuit board on a ribbon cable!
Except that it's fully possible
It just works ... for the moment (Score:2)
One. After that the hardware will break [slashdot.org] anyway.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't eat your meat, you won't get any pudding.
Re: And then there's this (Score:5, Interesting)
Ubuntu Linux runs great on my old MacBook pro. All the drivers work, even for my Wacom graphics tablet. Linux seems to be a great way to extend the useful life of aging computers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: And then there's this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Particularly because the idea that no one but Apple's authorized money generators can repair an iPhone is patently absurd.
So you have the equipment to repair an iPhone? Or a Samsung for that matter? They are remarkably similar inside. I can repair them, and I am surprised at just how many Slashdotters have the skills, the steady hands and the equipment to repair these things.
Re: And then there's this (Score:2)
It is not that difficult. SMD soldering requires much steadier hands and yet people do it, even at home.
Re: And then there's this (Score:2)
So you have the equipment to repair an iPhone?
Aw fuck; how shall we ever afford a $2 spudger??
Re: (Score:2)
You can run that monster on Linux for the next 15 years probably.
Apple Have A Point (Score:2)
I have a 2009 Mac Pro.
The Mac Pro makes an excellent point in Apple's favour though because become so complex that Apple can't even figure out how to upgrade it. They had the same model for over 4 years with no updates so with complexity like that it's not even clear that they know how to repair it let alone anyone else.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple is lying and exaggerating about something to make more money? WHAAAAAAAT? This is my surprised face. The only thing that will stop them is laws, the end. We need right to repair laws and that's that.
So when Apple is forced to write a repair manual, and sell you the replacement parts, will they also be required to sell you the machinery to repair the phones?
Or do we change all components over to through hole from SMT? While Apple detractors find this amusing, it isn't like it won't affect Samsung or other manufacturers.
First thing we have to do is define repairable. Then we have to define the level of acumen needed on the part of the user. I've got the equipment to work on SMT boards, you need a m
Re: Whaaaaaat? (Score:2, Insightful)
You being someone facetious. Most of the major repairs that need to be done to an iPhone aren't surface mount devices, it's replacing screens, or replacing daughter boards containing ports or buttons.
There is an entire industry of stores whose only purpose is to fix cell phones. That's reality. And reality trumps rhetoric.
Re: Whaaaaaat? (Score:4, Interesting)
A lithium battery has a finite lifespan. It's guaranteed to eventually need replacement, and unless Apple is literally molding the lithium gel around the circuit board in a way that makes its replacement physically impossible, they should be required to sell replacement batteries at a fair price (or if they don't want to, then they shouldn't be allowed to prevent anyone ELSE from making compatible replacements).
A mechanical button or poorly-attached microUSB likewise has a finite life... a life that might very well be less than the reasonably-expected life of the phone.
Screens break and crack. It's just something that happens to glass when dropped.
A good step forward would be for the FTC to require manufactures to explicitly disclose the repair cost & minimum availability for key components at purchase. Ex:
Battery: 1 year free warranty, guaranteed availability for a maximum charge of $n until yyyy/MM/dd(*)
Screen: 1 year free warranty for defects, guaranteed availability for a maximum charge of $x until yyyy/MM/dd, and $y until YyYy/Mm/Dd
Electrolytic Capacitors: 10 year warranty, or replacement with newer model (not necessarily the newEST model) that's at least as good.
Buttons & connectors: 1 year warranty, 5 year guaranteed availability of repair with maximum charge of $k(*).
(*) And if they can't satisfy the repairability guarantee, they'll have to refund some fair fraction of the original purchase price based on age (say, 100% up to 18 months, 80% after 18-24 months, decreasing by another 10% per 6 months thereafter).
I'd even allow them to be assholes & enforce absurdly-short (or outrageously expensive) terms... as long as they were required to accurately & effectively communicate those terms to buyers at purchase, and really bend over backwards to make sure consumers know about terms the FTC deemed 'unreasonable'
concrete example: Consumer buys new iPhone 17 (or Samsung Galaxy S16, or Google VoxelQ). The manufacturer guarantees battery-availability only until 8/31/22, which is less than 60 months from the date of first sale. After opening the box, the phone is in another sealed box with prominent federally-mandated warning (in English & Spanish for US phones) that says something like, "Warning, the manufacturer of this phone has chosen to not guarantee the availability of replacement batteries after 8/31/22. The FTC has determined that 80% of batteries will have less than 50% of their original capacity after 8/31/21. By law, you have an absolute right to return this phone to the seller for 100% refund and full cancellation of all contractual obligations and shipping charges arising from its purchase without charge as long as this seal is not broken. This right can not be waived or limited, regardless of seller policy or conditions of sale."
ie, the Feds couldn't *stop* Apple (& others) from being assholes, but they could ensure that consumers KNOW Apple (& others) are being assholes & protect them from being victims unless they're absolutely HELLBENT on being victims. As long as the FTC's threshold for requiring the warning was reasonable enough for most vendors to avoid, its presence would be effective & would subject the mfr. to criticism & ridicule from magazines, reviewers, and probably late-night comedians. The key is to make sure it doesn't turn into a stupid, pointless warning, like "Warning: may contain peanuts" on a jar of peanuts or peanut butter.
Consumer protection laws with teeth can and do work. Just ask anyone who was given a hard time by underlings or junior staff about getting a warranty repair for a jailbroken iphone or rooted Android phone until they summoned the manager & invoked the magic phrase, "Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act"... at which point the manager, if he had any sense & valued his job, apologized *profusely* for the "misunderstanding" and *personally* made sure the phone got fixed, because anything else would risk a $50,000 per incident fine and mountain of subs
Re:Whaaaaaat? (Score:5, Insightful)
"The only thing that will stop them is laws, "
What???? How about people just stop buying products from companies that adopt anti-consumer policies? Apple doesn't have a monopoly on smart phones.
We don't need a law for everything.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, being that an informed consumer is considered necessary for optimal functioning of the free market [wikipedia.org], in lieu of such legislation, I guess maybe we could simply mandate that Apple broadly advertise this repair policy, and not in fine print, upon the purchase of every device. Would that satisfy you?
Re:Whaaaaaat? (Score:4, Insightful)
Obvious BS detected... (Score:5, Informative)
I can understand wanting only authorized techs working on their product, but it's a MASSIVE leap to go from that to lobbying in 11 states against "Fair Repair" bills.
Re:Obvious BS detected... (Score:5, Insightful)
I can understand wanting only authorized techs working on their product, but it's a MASSIVE leap to go from that to lobbying in 11 states against "Fair Repair" bills.
No, it really isn't. If those fair repair bills pass, then the law will explicitly prohibit only permitting authorized techs to work on their product. Lobbying against those bills is the only reasonable response for a company which doesn't want anyone repairing their products without their permission.
The root problem is that unrepairable products are literally destroying our biosphere. They're made intentionally unrepairable so that the user has to buy a new computer in order to expand it, like Jobs tried to do with the original Macintosh. In spite of his efforts, the engineers gave the machine some expansion capacity because they knew than an unexpandable computer was bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
But lobbying for monopolies is so anti-capitalist it hurts.
But I guess capitalism today means "whatever benefits the corporations".
Re: (Score:3)
I guess capitalism today means "whatever benefits the corporations".
That's what capitalism has meant since day 1. This is the definition: "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state."
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it was supposed to be that the production means are in private hands along with the purchasing power to buy those produced goods and services. It was never supposed to allow the producing side to determine what gets produced, the original idea required that the demand side chooses those products that deliver to the expectation, thus enabling those that produce what is in demand to continue producing while those whose products do not meet the demand will either have to change their products or peris
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. Capitalism is an economic system where the consumers are in control.
No. What you describe is consumerism. Capitalism means that people who put in the money needed for a business venture (the "capital") are the critical part of the system.
Re: (Score:2)
But lobbying for monopolies is so anti-capitalist it hurts.
No, it's so capitalist it couldn't be more capitalist if it were in the dictionary under capitalism. Capitalism is where capital controls the means of production. What could fit that description better than a monopoly? Monopolies aren't anti-capitalism, they're anti-free market. Most capitalism to date has not been in a free market; there is always some kind of manipulation, collusion, etc.
The typical corporate goal of producing profit directly supports the activity of becoming as close to a monopoly as pos
Re: (Score:2)
I can think of a couple of possible motivations (not a defense, but a potential explanation).
One, a lot of the "fair repair" movement sprung from the auto industry's use of proprietary diagnostic information. If you didn't have the factory diagnostics, which they only sold to dealers, you couldn't diagnose the problem. It's possible that the language in some state bills is generic enough to cover the auto case, but also cover the Apple case and cause Apple to make available a bunch of its proprietary soft
Re: (Score:2)
It's possible that the language in some state bills is generic enough to cover the auto case, but also cover the Apple case and cause Apple to make available a bunch of its proprietary software to third parties under the heading of "diagnostic equipment and software" that makes (more?) sense in an automotive context.
Can't see why it wouldn't make sense for devices other than automobiles, having to share tools they already have with others doesn't really seem any different. Why would electronics in a phone be any different to electronics in a car (which is what most of the auto stuff is really about)
Two, it may force them to open up supply chains of parts to all comers. Apple may be reluctant to create the side business of selling a lot of parts to third parties, either constraining their own production capacity or just plain being expensive in terms of overhead.
I can see this more, developing a fully fledged supply chain for lots of small value items is quite possibly a business apple don't want to be in, OTOH there are already suppliers of components who do just this, Apple being
Re: (Score:3)
If a garage even displays a BMW logo they'll get hammered for trademark infringement unless they're actually a BMW approved dealer.
So yes, they can do it. Once.
Then I guess they're too complex for me own (Score:5, Insightful)
And I'll just have to buy something else instead.
Problem solved.
Lovely (Score:2, Informative)
"Just when you thought we want to rob you once, we actually want to rob you twice."
-- Apple Care
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The hordes of brain dead zombies that march to their siren song
Owning an iPhone used to be a fashion statement. Now it's just a demonstration of poor judgment and a willingness to bend over and take it up the ass in order to gain acceptance from the Starbucks crowd.
Thankfully those idiots are easy to spot, it makes it easier to utilize them properly (ex: put them on United Way duty and keep them away from important servers or files).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: You don't need to repair this. (Score:4, Interesting)
Well repair of small electronics has been dying for 30 years, Apple isn't helping but the overall trend is much broader. But as long as Apple is making manuals and parts for themselves I have no problem with them being forced to offer it to the public. They can reject warranty cases they believe are due to botched repairs, make the phones less repairable if they want but not monopolize after-market services. If it was up to me monopolizing after-market accessories would be outlawed too, if you want to hook something up to lightning port the interface should be documented and free. Proprietary formats, protocols and interfaces are a pox on society.
Comment removed (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
I think they shouldn't.
I completely agree. I don't like Apple but I think people deserve the companies they vote for with their dollars. If this means that iPhone users must pay a fortune to get their idiotic device repaired by a member of the Apple crime family, so be it. Unlike what surfaces on Slashdot because of the biased editors and handful of fanbois, Apple has no longer any influence in the industry. Whatever the fuck they do to their customers has no global impact.
In the free world (aka Android), there's obviously a top
Bad service design is not the same as complexity (Score:5, Informative)
Look at the teardown videos of their competitors. For example the 2015 Blackberry Priv [youtube.com], has a curved screen with display to the edge, wireless Qi charging, magnetometer, gyro, gps, barometer, QWERTY slide-out keyboard.., The teardown to replace the battery takes about 1 minute. Pulling out the main board keyboard, and everything until you get to the screen, another 5. But then the tech mentions that it is also possible to replace the curved screen from the front in about 5 minutes. And compared to cars, appliances, commercial technology, home entertainment systems, sewing machings, my 1999 Pismo... the Priv isn't easily repairable.
Apple simply chooses planned obsolescence over serviceability. And so I've chosen not to buy into their environmentally wasteful products.
Well, it's the same with cars (Score:4, Insightful)
Take it to some backyard-workshop for repairs? Warranty is gone.
That's why you take it to an authorized dealer/repair shop.
Why are people so hell-bent on saving every cent on repairs for a device that (now) can cost well above 1k USD?
That's like people buying a Ferrari or a Rolls Royce Wraith and then complaining about the cost of ownership because an oil-change or break-pad exchange or fixing a ding costs a fortune.
Weird.
Re:Well, it's the same with cars (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's use a car analogy: Have you taken your car in and the mechanic has said that you've driven it for 2 years, you have to buy another car? No: Because car manufacturers promise to make parts for 10 years. Your phone manufacturer doesn't and it's obvious why: That increases warehousing expense and cannibalizes latest-model sales. Allowing authorized Apple 'mechanics' isn't just more expensive than do-it-yourself repairs, it allows Apple to stop manufacturing legacy parts. Apple is justifying their luxury-tax philosophy so that idiots like you don't notice the real problem.
If Apple really wanted to avoid burdensome legislation they would manufacture legacy parts for their authorized 'mechanics'. But they've decided fighting the government over (generous) consumer entitlements is cheaper than repairing old phones.
There are no authorized repair shops. (Score:2)
If you iDevice is damaged, an apple store will sell you a new one. If it is covered under warranty, they'll swap it for someone else's trade-in. If you have irreplaceable data on your phone, stiff cheese; you should have backed it up.
Meanwhile, a non-authorized repair shop will fix almost any problem you have, unless Apple has taken technological (and unnecessary) measures to prevent it, at least until those measures are worked around. And if the problem is serious and unrepairable, they'll still get your
Re: (Score:2)
Take it to some backyard-workshop for repairs? Warranty is gone.
If you had warranty you wouldn't take it to a backyard workshop, you'd just send it in and they'd send you a fixed device back.
Why are people so hell-bent on saving every cent on repairs for a device that (now) can cost well above 1k USD?
Because of the cost. Cracked screen on my mum's phone: Quote: $175 to replace. Actual cost: $11, and the ebay kit even included every tool I needed. But the repair takes time which is why companies will insist on replacing the entire display / touch assembly to fix a crack while a backyard shop will just replace the glass on the front of the screen for a very labour intensive job an
Re: (Score:2)
I don't disagree with you about mark-up for the Porsche parts. If they are the same parts as used on the VW, they should be the same price. You shouldn't be able to get a half-shaft labeled only "Porsche", as all of them should be labelled 'Porsche, VW'.... and probable half a dozen different manufacturers.
But the bracket welded on the side of the shocks could easily make the price $300 dearer. The $100 part is $100 because it is made identical in huge numbers. Re-setup to make a few hundred with a differ
Just like (Score:2)
i agree with those stating apple is lying (Score:4, Insightful)
I have repaired Samsung android and LG android phones. I have studied the guides. I have replaced screens.
I have also repaired by myself dell studio XPS and alienware laptops from replacement of the CPU, GPU, heatsink fan, and mobo, and more.
basically every device I've seen is self repairable, designed to open up like nothing, and each component is generally separate easy to remove and replace. this includes the screen, mobo, camera lense, camera itself, cases, bezel, glass on the screen, etc.
one can actually remove just the glass from the screen of most devices easy, and replace it when shattered, re-using the LCD/touch sensor.
on eBay or other site, one can order brand new or refurb every component of every phone.
basically you choose your difficulty level. either you want to replace a shattered screen entirely by ordering a whole new LCD/screen kit, or you attempt to remove the old glass and re-glue on new glass to save some bucks. or you order a new mobo/CPU combo. you just drop in the component removing the old. you re-assemble the phone and you're good. if you break anything during the process you just order a new one of those too.
Apple claims this is somehow too difficult for individual people to do..? why is that? what's it to Apple if you fuck up your phone or something or do low quality repair? the phone is already damaged and used up anyway!
it's so easy a cave man can do it.
https://www.obamasweapon.com/ [obamasweapon.com]
Re:i agree with those stating apple is lying (Score:4, Insightful)
I have replaced screens.
I have repaired screens. Where replacement screens can cost upwards of $150, on many OLED phones it's possible to actually separate the display from the glass front. I repaired a Galaxy S5 for $11 and those $11 included every tool except of the hot air gun. It not only included UV curing glue but even included the UV lamp needed to cure it.
The repair world quotes based on rip/replace prices. An intermittent problem with the heaphone jack? Replace the entire main circuit board, fixed for $250. No one "repairs" anything anymore except for the tinkerers.
Contradictory (Score:2)
"You don't need to repair this. When you do, we want the repair to be fairly priced and accessible to you,"
First sentence is contradictory with the next sentence. That next sentence is exactly why people want to look at alternatives to Apple.
Corporate speak (Score:3)
Obligatory viewing (Score:4, Informative)
Developing Country (Score:2)
I live in a developing country and there are plenty of repair options since a) nothing is regulated b) average wages are so low that it is economically viable to set up a repair shop. c) Close to China too, so parts are no problem.
It can be much cheaper than an official Apple repair. One ipad the LCD (not just the glass) was cracked. It looked like they replaced it with a 2nd tier part in terms of quality, but the device was basically bricked before they had at it. Its a good option when official repairs a
Is this for real? (Score:2)
Strip off the i and they won't be complex any more. Do I have to do all the thinking round here?
Just confirms my opnion (Score:3, Insightful)
Too complex for repair? (Score:2)
Sounds like you suck at designing sensible products, Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
allegedly "Smart" alleged "telephones" (Score:2)
You are not permitted to write software for your own computing devices. You are not permitted to control your own computing devices. You have no way of knowing what your computing devices are doing, even as they monitor your every movement, your every word.
And you have the unmitigated gall to expect to be able to repair your own computing devices?
What will it take, before folks realize anyone using a so-called "smart" so-called "telephone" is being played for a patsy, a mark, a victim? Or are the masses so
Re: (Score:2)
My smartphone has a native-running C compiler on it.
If I wanted to, I could replace it with a free, open-source version of the same OS that it's already running.
If my phone does something over Wifi, I guarantee you that I can know about it. Over 4G etc. is another matter, but to be honest, if you're running an OS you can audit pretty much you could just switch that off, use it only for GSM and isolate anything talking in or out.
Repair components are easy to come by.
My phone is just a mass-market Android sm
End of the cycle (Score:2)
Every technology goes through a cycle where the homebuilders and tinkerers are an important part of the ecosystem, and have a lot of fun doing so. Telegraph, electricity, radio, automobiles, airplanes all went through that cycle. Then the technology gets perfected, cleaned up, buttoned up, and ordinary human beings (non-tinkerers) just start using it for everyday. That leaves the hobbyists who come along at the end of the cycle and the greybeards who were there in the early days sad and unhappy, but that
"authorized service provider"= code for mail house (Score:2)
"authorized service provider" is ONLY allowed to package the thing and send it to Texas , wait a week and receive _completely another_ refurbished unit.
They arent even allowed to replace batteries!
Complexity is a red herring. Don't fall for it. (Score:2)
Complexity of the device is irrelevant, a distraction, and a red herring. The issue here is an owner's right to repair what they own, and this case should be fought and discussed on that basis. Any other argument (such as ones posted here like people saying they just won't buy Apple products) that even tacitly gives int
Re: (Score:2)
Amusing also after all the comments about 1984, how closely this fits to part of the story of Brazil. Shame they don't sell air conditioning.
Shame there isn't an Archibald Tuttle who would rappel in, fix your phone, give you a jaunty wink and then rappel away again.
Re:It doesn't go far enough. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Absolute Bull Shit.
Bullshit indeed. Silicon Valley is all about "diversity" but they're basically just about having the same type of hipster/fanboi/antitrump young people in various shades of colors and genders. That's not diversity, that's variations on the same model.
Re: (Score:2)
If anything, most phone makers would love to put iOS on their devices, and not so much iPhone users wanting to put Android on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You just described the most common license. (Score:2)
Re: Bollocks (Score:5, Funny)
It takes Courage (tm) and money -- lots of money -- for Apple to create innovations like edge-to-edge screens, splash resistance, HDR displays in a mobile form factor, and OLED screens in phones. It's only fair for Apple to charge more than Android devices to deliver the kind of inventions that they do.
Re: (Score:2)
Wasnt samsung the first to introduce edge-to-edge screens? Doesnt Apple use Samsung displays in its phones?
i think you mean "innovations" (in quotes).
Re: Bollocks (Score:2)
If it helps clarify, I should have also mentioned wireless charging among the expensive innovations that Apple charges so much for.
Re: (Score:3)
It takes Courage (tm) and money -- lots of money -- for Apple to steal competitor-developed innovations like edge-to-edge screens (Samsung 2014) [wikipedia.org], splash resistance (Sony 2006) [hoista.net], HDR displays in a mobile form factor [sonymobile.com] (Sony 2017), and OLED screens in phones [phonearena.com] (Nokia 2008)... not to mention wireless Qi charging [wikipedia.org] (Nokia 2012)
It's only fair for Apple to charge more than Android devices to deliver the kind of inventions that they umm, borrow.
Either Entrope's tongue is firmly in cheek or...
Re: Bollocks (Score:2)
Perhaps you misunderstood the antecedent of "they" at the end of my comment ;)
Re: (Score:2)
"and 20,000 silent iPhone readers rolling their eyes"
Which, by unit sales, means there'll be 200,000 silent Android readers rolling their eyes at them.
Sorry, but Apple is really nothing special, has never had a "first", doesn't understand that "design" doesn't mean pretty like "designer" does, and sells less than their competitors.
They're only business-positive advantage is that they make SO MUCH profit on every device that they are hugely rich. Which, I'm sorry, is not a criteria I desire in a manufacture