Recent iOS Update Kills Functionality On iPhone 8s Repaired With Aftermarket Screens (vice.com) 229
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Apple released iOS 11.3 at the end of March, and the update is killing touch functionality in iPhone 8s repaired with some aftermarket screens that worked prior to the update. That means people who broke their phone and had the audacity to get it repaired by anyone other than Apple is having a hard time using their phone. "This has caused my company over 2,000 reshipments," Aakshay Kripalani, CEO of Injured Gadgets, a Georgia-based retailer and repair shop, told me in a Facebook message. "Customers are annoyed and it seems like Apple is doing this to prevent customers from doing 3rd party repair." According to Michael Oberdick -- owner and operator of iOutlet, an Ohio-based pre-owned iPhone store and repair shop, every iPhone screen is powered by a small microchip, and that chip is what the repair community believes to be causing the issue. For the past six months, shops have been able to replace busted iPhone 8 screens with no problem, but something in the update killed touch functionality. According to several people I spoke to, third-party screen suppliers have already worked out the issue, but fixing the busted phones means re-opening up the phone and upgrading the chip. It remains to be seen whether Apple will issue a new software update that will suddenly fix these screens, but that is part of the problem: Many phones repaired by third parties are ticking timebombs; it's impossible for anyone to know if or when Apple will do something that breaks devices fixed with aftermarket parts. And every time a software update breaks repaired phones, Apple can say that third-party repair isn't safe, and the third-party repair world has to scramble for workarounds and fixes.
But hey, at least they're not selling your data. (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, who cares about this, or anything else Apple does that's shady? They're not harvesting or selling our data, at least. Surely that's well worth all the premiums and walled gardens.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They haven't been caught harvesting or selling our data, at least.
Fixed that for you.
Re:But hey, at least they're not selling your data (Score:5, Funny)
Seriously, who cares about this, or anything else Apple does that's shady? They're not harvesting or selling our data, at least.
I've heard of reality distortion but this is some next level shit right there. I'd much sooner have Samsung sell some data on me to advertisers than push out an update that bricked my phone.
Re: (Score:3)
Privacy for the rich isn't much of an achievement. It should be universal, not just for those who can afford to own and maintain an iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, who cares about this, or anything else Apple does that's shady? They're not harvesting or selling our data, at least. Surely that's well worth all the premiums and walled gardens.
Dude! That's like excusing the actions of an extortionist because he was so kind as to not tell the whole neighbourhood about your porn stash. Nice troll though...
Re: (Score:2)
Google isn't "selling your data" either; it's way too valuable to let out. They're both selling you instead.
No they're selling the ability to possibly show you something, where 'you' is a loosely defined demographic and if you have an ad blocker the thing they are selling is of no value whatsoever.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would they sell it once when they can rent it an infinite number of times?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not, but I think it's high time an open standards group works on creating standards for deviating from existing standards to ensure propriety.
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that all those things you plug into the wall are 5v power supplies (or higher with the new quick charge standards) . They have no charging circuitry in them at all. The actual charging circuit is in the phone.
And yet there are multiple reports of crappy iPhone and Android chargers burning up. Doesn’t really matter if the term charger is a misnomer the point remains.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Its one thing if the screen was confirming identity, its another thing if a new iOS update was - for free - upgraded and reasonably expecting to use some functionality present in factory chips that wasn't present in the knockoff to provide a better experience. The fact that they can be so easily fixed does seem to imply that the previous chips were just lucky in that the malfunctioning code wasn't being executed.
Aftermarket? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would anyone go for aftermarket repairs when the device is still under warranty? They arent even a year old!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would anyone go for aftermarket repairs when the device is still under warranty? They arent even a year old!
How much does warranty help if you break the screen yourself? Of course it would void the warranty, but I can imagine people would take that risk to save some money...
Re: (Score:2)
No it does not void the warranty, most jurisdictions have laws that make voiding the warranty if the product is repaired illegal.
Here is a link for the USA - https://motherboard.vice.com/e... [vice.com]
Re: Aftermarket? (Score:3)
Apple care coverage doesn't cover user broken. Screens , water damage or actually much at all. I've yet to get Apple to explain to me precisely what the warranty gives me not already covered under Australian mandatory lifetime warranties
Re: (Score:3)
Apple care coverage doesn't cover user broken. Screens , water damage or actually much at all. I've yet to get Apple to explain to me precisely what the warranty gives me not already covered under Australian mandatory lifetime warranties
The answer will be very little if not nothing. Like most big companies they will do they absolute minimum they are mandated by law to do but they will hope you don't know they're legally required and try to make out they're doing you a favour.
Re: (Score:2)
AppleCare might actually be worse than the minimum legal requirement in some cases.
For example, in the UK if the phone dies after say 3 years due to a manufacturing defect you can either have Apple fix it or give you a 50% refund. If you have AppleCare, they might give you a used one. What is worth more to you, a used 3 year old phone or 50% of the purchase price?
With Apple prices that 50% would more than cover a brand new, better spec Android replacement.
Re: (Score:2)
AppleCare+ provides repair or replacement coverage, both parts and labor, from Apple-authorized technicians. Service coverage includes the following:
Having AppleCare+ meant that I just had the battery replaced for free in my iPhone 7. In the 18 months I've had it, the battery went through >800 charge cycles and its total energy capacity had decreased by about 15%. When a friend of mine dropped the iPhone X he just paid north of $1,000 for, replacing the screen glass cost him $30. Sure he had spent an addition $200 up-front for the warranty but if he ha
Re: Aftermarket? (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, Apple (like any other manufacturer) tests updates with hardware they sell. They can't test every combination out there. I don't think they're doing it intentionaly, they just didn't test it, because they don't sell those screens
Re: (Score:2)
On the third hand, Apple (unlike many other manufacturers) controls the supply chain tightly enough to prevent people actually obtaining hardware to make the repair. If may not be bricking devices intentionally but they certainly aren't making it easy to prevent getting caught in that situation.
And of course not, because why offer screens for sale when you can charge a small fortune for their repair along with getting the opportuntity to guilt the owner into buying a new iShiny when they get into the store?
Re: Aftermarket? (Score:5, Insightful)
Car manufacturers are required to offer parts and the information necessary to make repairs to third parties. Apple only gives repair shops that if they agree to severe restrictions and high prices.
If it was just once or twice I could accept that it was just due to a lack of testing, but it's not. This is a regular problem with Apple, which they seem to have no interest in addressing.
Re: (Score:2)
Car manufacturers are required to offer parts and the information necessary to make repairs to third parties.
This is going to be a tricky area to balance as we increasingly rely on complicated, software-supported systems.
With a physical product like a car, a mechanical part can be observed, measured and reproduced by a third-party repair supplier. If they're accurate enough, it will work just like the original.
As you get into software systems, there are going to be legitimate and difficult questions about how much disclosure should be required. It's good to ensure fair competition and avoid lock-in effects. Howeve
Re: (Score:2)
If it needs software to fix it, you must provide that software. It will create some extra burden on the manufacturer, just like all the other consumer protection stuff like the warranty, safety approvals, standard charger (in the EU) etc.
The software doesn't have to be open source of anything, they just have to provide it. The same way that car manufacturers do if special software is needed to repair their vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
If it needs software to fix it, you must provide that software. It will create some extra burden on the manufacturer
One difficulty with that approach is that the software required for a third-party replacement component might be completely different to the software required for the component from the original manufacturer. What is really needed isn't necessarily like-for-like copycat products, it's modularity and compatibility. That means it's the specs and interfaces that really need to be standardised and disclosed, not so much the full set of code.
However, that supposes that the original manufacturer designed their co
Re: (Score:2)
And yet it worked before the upgrade. It's not proof, but it's cause for suspicion.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not proof, but it's cause for suspicion.
That's the key point. It could be something shady going on, that we might prefer to prevent. Or it could just be that the replacement part relied unwisely on undocumented behaviour that the third-party manufacturer didn't understand because they weren't the original manufacturer and made assumptions, in which case that's hardly the OEM's fault.
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell could be different? WHY would you make it different?
I don't know. Not working inside Apple, I have no special information to share on this subject. However, having worked inside various other places that make electronic devices of one kind of another, I am well aware that sometimes supposedly similar components turn out not to be as compatible as you might have expected.
Something could have been slightly out of spec in a certain production run. A special case might then have been added in the software to recognise that part and adjust accordingly, instead of
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, Apple (like any other manufacturer) tests updates with hardware they sell. They can't test every combination out there. I don't think they're doing it intentionaly, they just didn't test it, because they don't sell those screens
Yes, because you always hear of various android phones bricking after updates because they didn't test every possible combination except you don't because that's not what's happening, apple are telling it to look for a flag only they can set and if its not there then no iphone for you because even though you bought it, it's still theirs and they can and will fuck you over for not using their overpriced repair scheme, this isn't even the first time they've done this.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because you always hear of various android phones bricking after updates because they didn't test every possible combination except you don't because that's not what's happening, apple are telling it to look for a flag only they can set and if its not there then no iphone for you because even though you bought it, it's still theirs and they can and will fuck you over for not using their overpriced repair scheme, this isn't even the first time they've done this.
Is the code for hardware fingerprint sensors in the Android OS core code or is it written and supplied as moduled for each phone manufacturer? I suspect it is the latter, but I'm not sure. Also, I would imagine most android phones, especially not from the big 3 are using pretty standard/generic fingerprint sensors. I doubt the same is true from Apple. All of this complicates the picture and could lead to unintended consequences, especially involving part of the crypto scheme on the phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
apple are telling it to look for a flag only they can set
Which explains how it started working after the 3rd party upgraded their chips, I suppose?
More like the chips were supposed to support functionality that coincidentally wasn't being called prior to the update and was afterwards. The cheaper chips - as cheap chips often do - only supported what they thought the likely feature set was, or the current features used, not the full spec. It happens.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because when you have code that calls into a routine in a trusted, internal chip, and that code then crashes, bad things happen? Lots of software would stop working if the chips they're running against stopped supporting all of the instructions the compiler was built against. I'm somewhat amazed that all it did was stop working temporarily instead of corrupting data to be honest.
Re: Aftermarket? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't. But I don't live in the insurance hell that is the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
since when was dropping your phone and breaking the screen covered under warranty?
Since you have AppleCare+
Cracked screens are replaced for $29. Twice.
For 2 years (or 3. can't remember offhand).
Re:Aftermarket? (Score:5, Insightful)
The same AppleCare+ that costs $149 per iPhone 8 (or $199 for the iPhone X) at the point of sale?
Is that the AppleCare+ you're talking about?
Re: (Score:2)
The same AppleCare+ that costs $149 per iPhone 8 (or $199 for the iPhone X) at the point of sale?
Is that the AppleCare+ you're talking about?
Yes.
And since a rather significant percentage of smartphone screens get cracked at least once in their lifetimes, it's an insurance policy you are pretty likely to need to use at one point or another.
Perhaps Apple should structure AppleCare like Samsung does their similar policy: Instead of a lump sum up front, they charge something like 11 Dollars per month for their insurance. If you keep your phone for two years like a lot of people, that ends up being $269, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE money than even the iPhone
Re: (Score:2)
That plus the insurance premiums likely come close to the cost of the repair or exceed it on average. And if a phone is more than a few years old, Apple will call it obsolete and won't repair it even at full price.
Re: (Score:2)
That plus the insurance premiums likely come close to the cost of the repair or exceed it on average. And if a phone is more than a few years old, Apple will call it obsolete and won't repair it even at full price.
So, take that money and stick it a desk drawer in an envelope labeled "Screen repair". Then pray nothing more than a cracked screen happens to your smartphone. But, if you are one of the statistically-unlikely few to never even crack your phone's screen, you beat The Man.
But if not...
Re: (Score:3)
Insurance is based on statistics. You're statistically likely to save money or the insurance would not be offered or profitable.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. But the statistics only work in the company's favor. For the consumer, it's an all-or-nothing gamble.
For some people, it's an OK gamble. But a lot of people don't have the reserves to shell out hundreds of dollars on emergency repairs to a luxury item. (Leaving aside the argument about whether or not they should have purchased it in the first place.) For them, the insurance may well make sense. Their cash-flow may be such that an extra $10/month or a planned extra $140 at the time of purchase is doable
Re: (Score:2)
if you are one of the statistically-unlikely few to never even crack your phone's screen, you beat The Man.
I dunno. You disagree with yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
if you are one of the statistically-unlikely few to never even crack your phone's screen, you beat The Man.
I dunno. You disagree with yourself.
No.
There are two and only two choices:
1. Pay the money for AppleCare+ up front.
2. Don't.
With choice #1, you MAY spend more money than is necessary; if you manage to make it to 2 years without any damage to your phone. But if you do need it, it's there.
With choice #2, you may be inconvenienced at a financially-difficult time if you break your phone (or it breaks for you on its own), and you don't have the $150 dollars or more to fix it at that time. But then again, you might get lucky and not need your phone
Re: (Score:2)
And if a phone is more than a few years old, Apple will call it obsolete and won't repair it even at full price.
Is there any manufacturer that won't call a "more than a few years old" phone obsolete?
Re: (Score:2)
*Cough Cough*
The iPhone 4s is still eligible for service.
Wow! That's freakin' AMAZING!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anyone go for aftermarket repairs when the device is still under warranty?
You do know repairs and warranty repairs are two different things right?
Re: Aftermarket? (Score:2)
I should note your always better off with Apple authorised repair dudes than the Apple Genius Bar. The financial incentive for Apple is to not give free shit away so they are pretty ruthless with invalidating warranties. However the authorised repair centres don't get paid if they don't do a repair. So there's an incentive there to overlook the occasional problems pinked out liquid sensor (which can often just be a sign of humidity in some places) or overlooking a home installed memory stick or whatever
Obligatory (Score:2, Funny)
You're repairing it wrong.
Why should Apple QA your garbage screens? (Score:2)
These things have broken before, and apple fixes them (error 53). Unless you have a contract with Apple, why do you think they'd spend time doing the QA on your shady 3rd party screens?
Your customers want a lower price bracket, they get a lower support bracket. Wake me when Apple refuses to fix it.
Re: (Score:2)
What this really is, effectively, is DRM against repair. How is it "shady" to do everything imaginable to match non-standard specs created by Apple? This is the best that is possible, and Apple blocks it.
Re:Why should Apple QA your garbage screens? (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft breaks hardware all the time with Windows updates, and they are trying not to. Apple never pretends to offer any support for non-OEM hardware, especially for internals. Why would anyone expect things to always work?
Also, 11.2 was released in the timeframe discussed in the article, so if Apple was purposefully breaking anything, they could have done it a while ago.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Why should Apple QA your garbage screens? (Score:5, Interesting)
follow the specs that Apple releases
Sarcasm? They don't release any such thing.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't reason with people who think the definition of overpriced is "more than I want to pay".
Now we know how someone's breaking into iPhones (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, now we know that the touch chip is a vector for unauthorized access.
When you reverse engineer stuff you pay the price when things change. If it's only one vendor having the problem then you bought your stuff from the wrong vendor.
This one I don't get (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I really doubt this is even intentional on Apple's behalf, and I have never owned or wanted an iPhone...
The strength of their brand has always been reliability based on them making BOTH the software and the hardware which means their regression testing is infinitesimal compared to Microsoft or Google.
It also meant they could double down on aesthetics without too much concern about what the device might be required to run later, since they control all of that as well.
Take all that and replace a significant p
Are we sure the replacement chip is to spec? (Score:5, Insightful)
Possible explanation #1: they intentionally killed the functionality of third party chips.
Possible explanation #2: some third party chips were not actually up to spec in some subtle way, which wasn't an issue before.
Both seem fairly plausible. I didn't see anything in TFA that gave a solid reason to believe one or other.
Re: (Score:3)
Option 3:
The update tried to reprogram the chip, and it didn't update properly.
Re:Are we sure the replacement chip is to spec? (Score:4, Insightful)
Spec? What spec? Apple does not release specs. They will release OEM parts if you pay huge money to be an authorized repair center. That's it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to assume you're a smart dude, so I think it's fairly clear that you know that just because the spec is not released publicly does not mean that it does not exist.
Re: (Score:2)
There are still specs, even if they have to be reverse-engineered to be publicly available.
By that definition they were already following specs.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
A captive repair model is a moral hazard and always has been. The king is dead. Welcome to your new Detroit.
The Surprising Source Of Car Dealers' Profits [businessinsider.com]
Whatâ(TM)s the story? (Score:2)
So... there are two scenarios :
1) Apple has crafted an update to specifically disable some 3rd party components
2) The third party component designer has failed to make a properly compatible part.
Despite the story sounding like theyâ(TM)re spinning it as (1) Iâ(TM)d be very surprised if it wasnâ(TM)t (2) as thatâ(TM)s the most likely if they can fix it with an update as reported. Whatâ(TM)s the news? Why should a manufacturer go to the effort of testing badly made replacement parts t
This should affect anyone... (Score:2)
Since the 8s hasn't even been released yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Do not confuse incompetence with malice. (Score:3, Insightful)
Something I learned working in technology, "Do not confuse incompetence with malice."
Just because something breaks doesn't mean it is malicious move. It could be a lack of testing or just plain incompetence not realizing there existed thousands of 3rd party iPhone 8 screen repairs done. I don't think Apple intentionally wants to upset this many premium customers.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think Apple intentionally wants to upset this many premium customers.
There's a solution to that. They could actually offer legitimate parts for sale to repairers.
Personally given the cost of a screen replacement from Apple vs one from a repair shop, I actually think even if Apple unintentionally upset this many premium customers, they are probably still happy about it.
Re: (Score:2)
"Do not confuse incompetence with malice."
That implies that you should investigate first before reaching a conclusion. Always assuming incompetence is just as bad as always assuming malice.
I don't think Apple intentionally wants to upset this many premium customers.
Apple has been this way since the company was founded decades ago. They very much understand their customers and how much they will tolerate.
A long tradition (Score:5, Interesting)
Back when Apple introduced the first iMac they also introduced the "G3 Blue & White Tower". Some months later, when everyone knew a new machine from Apple with a G4 processor was planned, some aftermarket outfits began selling a G4 upgrade kit. You could buy & install the upgrade kit and have a G4 Mac without the wait and without having to buy a new machine from Apple.
Apple released a firmware update (remember the "programmer's button"?) disguised as something I can't remember. That update broke all of these G4 upgrade kits.
This is simply the way Apple does business.
You bought the iPhone... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you buy an iPhone then Apple is going to do everything in its power to ensure that all repairs (that are under warranty) will be done by authorized Apple repair shops. Why are people surprised when they push an update that invalidates third party repair? You're buying a product that bases its profit on the fact that it'll break just after warranty (or several months, whichever comes first) and you'll have to shell out for a new one. Apple doesn't give a shit whether or not they piss off a few people, they know that what the consumer is buying is their image. The only way they'll release a patch to allow third party screens is if they piss off enough people to affect their bottom line. Same thing happened with the fingerprint sensor.
Of course, Apple will say that they're protecting their "customers" by preventing those inferior third party parts from making their "product" unstable as a coverup, but that's just business right?
tl;dr: If you shell out the cash for the image product, why cheap out on repairs? Go whole hog with your bucks for the full user experience and feel the burn.
Re: (Score:2)
If you buy an iPhone then Apple is going to do everything in its power to ensure that all repairs (that are under warranty) will be done by authorized Apple repair shops. Why are people surprised when they push an update that invalidates third party repair?
Um... because it's immoral and potentially illegal?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple doesn't care, and that's why this update broke some phones. They don't have time to track down every 2-bit repair part and shop and devise some sort of code patch that'll break it. They just make updates and if it breaks your 3rd party shit, they don't care. They won't do anything to help you, and you're on your own.
Seriously, people have a really elevated sense of self importance here. Apple isn't out to get you: Apple couldn't care less who you are or what you've done.
Re: (Score:2)
Why I don't Do "i"-Anything (Score:5, Insightful)
Its just one thing after another with these guys. You'd think that a company would do everything that they could to make sure everything worked for the customer. That would include publishing specs so aftermarket manufacturers could provide alternative screens and then ensuring the software works with that spec. But when they don't, customers expectations are not met, and you get people like me, that long ago stopped doing anything "i".
Re: (Score:2)
"It seems like Apple's doing it because" (Score:2)
No. Apple IS doing it because they're trying to prevent customers from doing 3rd party repair.
Should a brand test on 3rd party hardware? (Score:3)
This being said, was the compatibility breakage done on purpose? I don't think they'd do that effort, since it can only piss off recurring customers, but even so it might be possible..
In any case this is a good example of the value of AppleCare+ for a mobile device. We used it to get my wife's Apple Watch screen replaced after our toddler threw it on the floor.
Let's not forget batteries too (Score:2)
Back when he battery slowdown fiasco was coming to a head, I elected to take my out-of-warranty iPhone 6+ and swap the battery (iFixit brand) myself.
This went well and good until Apple decided to announce their own program 2 weeks later.
iOS 11.3 with the new battery diagnostics is a new problem. While the phone is perfectly able to report the charge amount of the battery, and it dutifully reports low battery notifications, it does not apparently work the same when the battery is near exhaustion. Now when
Re: (Score:2)
3rd party repairs are safe (Score:2)
What ain't safe is iOS updates. They keep breaking functionality on phones that worked prior to the update.
Simple solution! (Score:2)
Typical (Score:2)
Apple just can't win (Score:2)
Consumers: All IPhones should be completely repairable with third party solutions!
Also Consumers: All IPhones should be completely unhackable even by the goverment!
My gut feeling is some of these updates by Apple are the result of closing security holes.
Such BS (Score:2)
> That means people who broke their phone and had the audacity to get it repaired by anyone other than Apple
Repair shops have access to Apple OEM screens. Even the one run out of a basement a couple of streets away from me has OEM.
The 3rd party screens are CRAP - I know because I got the "best one" and it was dead in 2 weeks.
So if your repair shop is using a 3rd party screen, that's the problem right there. I'm *sure* they didn't tell the customer they were being fleeced.
Re:True of every industry (Score:5, Insightful)
Right to repair, which should be the law. You can't get OEM parts because Apple won't sell them.
It's not a repair if isn't fully functional (Score:2)
Right to repair, which should be the law. You can't get OEM parts because Apple won't sell them.
Companies are not required to sell parts for complete systems.
But repair companies could still acquire the OEM parts. Just buy a bunch of iphones and part them out.
And if they choose non-OEM parts, then the people who repair them need to also patch the drivers for their screens not apple
Re: (Score:2)
That wouldn't have even worked for Error 53.
But with screens/digitizers, the cost would be outrageous to the consumer by the time you clean all the glue off the item.
Re: (Score:2)
Right to repair, which should be the law. You can't get OEM parts because Apple won't sell them.
It should. However, smartphones, whether they are made by Apple or anybody else, are not like build-it-yourself custom PC's that you can mod anyway you want with any hardware that catches your eye because there is such broad driver support for 3rd party hardware for smartphone OS'es. If you buy a highly tuned piece of kit like a smartphone which is specifically geared up to work only with a narrow set of manufacturer tested pieces of hardware, then those are the hardware that is guaranteed to work and you a
Re:True of every industry (Score:4, Insightful)
when the OEM has the 'audacity' to issue an update for the device that does not take your 3rd party hardware into account.
Oh, they take it into account. You really think they don't try to break this stuff with their updates? The same company that got caught slowing down old hardware to make you buy a new phone?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, they take it into account. You really think they don't try to break this stuff with their updates?
Do you really think I have time to write code to fix problems/bugs/features as part of my daily job *AND* evilly scheme to write extra code just to break random bits of hardware that may or may not be present in a phone?
The same company that got caught slowing down old hardware to make you buy a new phone?
You mean the company that didn't want their phone randomly shutting down with a battery meter at say 25%. They absolutely should have thrown up an alert that said - "Your battery needs replacement. Please call us or visit an Apple Store for more information. Your phone will now run in "en
Re: (Score:2)
One final thought from the article:
Apple released iOS 11.3 at the end of March, and the update is killing touch functionality in iPhone 8s repaired with some aftermarket screens that worked prior to the update. “Customers are annoyed and it seems like Apple is doing this to prevent customers from doing 3rd party repair.”
I added the emphasis on some. If you really thought Apple was doing this, because as the article also points out "they can", why wouldn't they just kill all third party parts? Would be more efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which they could easily have informed the user of or published it in the release notes of the update. The fact that they didn't is very telling. It's not like they don't offer battery replacement - it's just not as profitable.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a reason these repairs are cheap. They don't spend a bunch of money. I had my computer screen "repaired" once by one of these shops. Instead of replacing the entire clamshell, they bent it back into a somewhat straight form and placed the new LCD in it causing pressure on it which warps and discolors the screen image and any subsequent pressure snapped it again.