Apple 'Error 53' Sting Operation Caught Staff Misleading Customers, Court Documents Allege (theguardian.com) 191
AmiMoJo writes: "Australia's consumer watchdog carried out a sting operation against Apple which it says caught staff repeatedly misleading iPhone customers about their legal rights to a free repair or replacement after a so-called 'error 53' malfunction, court documents reveal," reports The Guardian. Error 53 refers to an error message that renders iPhones useless if third-party repairs are made. From the report: "The case, set to go to trial in mid-December, accuses Apple of wrongly telling customers they were not entitled to free replacements or repair if they had taken their devices to an unauthorized third-party repairer. That advice was allegedly given even where the repair -- a screen replacement, for example -- was not related to the fault. Apple has so far chosen to remain silent about the case brought by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). But court documents obtained by Guardian Australia show the company has denied the ACCC's allegations, saying it did not mislead or cause any harm to its Australian customers. The documents also show how the ACCC used undercover methods to investigate Apple. Investigators, posing as iPhone customers, called all 13 Apple retailers across Australia in June last year. They told Apple staff their iPhone speakers had stopped working after screens were replaced by a third party. Apple's response was the same in each of the 13 calls, the ACCC alleges."
They're all the same (Score:2)
Error 53, order 66... in the end, you lose.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite the contrary. I win!
And BTW I find your lack of faith disturbing.
How did that happen (Score:2)
We're handcuffed when it comes to phones. How did that happen. How did things become so sketchy and crooked with that specific segment of the tech industry. Why do we accept that.
Apple is a bunch of fuckers, no doubt about it, but this scam is probably somewhat similar with Android vendors.
Re: (Score:1)
People keep buying them.
simple solution (Score:1)
Apple should offr the phones for two prices. Regular price, and at a $25 discount. With the discount you trade back your right to repair. It's a contract so it's legal. And it respects that apple does take on risks when fumble fingered "professionals" damage phones. Yet it's not a burden for people who care about the restriction will not be willing to pay.
Re: (Score:2)
The Australian consumer Law cannot be signed away. Same in the EU. More than one company has tried this and it never, ever holds up.
Re: simple solution (Score:1)
The law states only that unrelated repairs are not invalidated.
Re: (Score:2)
It respects what now?
Your first two sentences clearly state you gave up the right to repair from 3rd parties. And of course if their in house repair breaks something they fix it. That's how it's been. You can't get error 53 from Apple, that's the whole point of error 53.
Sigh.
Wrong.
The whole point of Error 53 is So someone can't take your phone (think "traffic stop"), swap the Home Button/Touch ID Sensor encoded with their fingerprint, and gain FULL ACCESS to your Phone.
It isn't about 3rd party repairs.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Only thief who was even more stupid than you (quite the feat) would go to the trouble of swapping the sensor, and then instead of accessing all the juicy details, update and brick the phone.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be retarded to think disabling the phone only after doing an ios update is in any way a security measure.
Only thief who was even more stupid than you (quite the feat) would go to the trouble of swapping the sensor, and then instead of accessing all the juicy details, update and brick the phone.
Well, I do stand corrected (but not by you).
Apparently, this was a mistake, and has been fixed by Apple since February, 2016.
https://techcrunch.com/2016/02... [techcrunch.com]
Re: (Score:3)
It's a contract so it's legal.
There are plenty of reasons that a contract can not be enforceable or even legal.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a contract so it's legal.
As a consequence of which it has to comply with all the legal stuff such as for example s64(1)(c) of the The Australian Consumer Law
64 (1) A term of a contract (including a term that is not set out in the contract but is incorporated in the contract by another term of the contract) is void to the extent that the term purports to exclude, restrict or modify, or has the effect of excluding, restricting or modifying:
...
(c) any liability of a person for a failure to comply with a guarantee that applies under this Division to a supply of goods or services.
Re: (Score:1)
Apple should offr the phones for two prices. Regular price, and at a $25 discount. With the discount you trade back your right to repair. It's a contract so it's legal. And it respects that apple does take on risks when fumble fingered "professionals" damage phones. Yet it's not a burden for people who care about the restriction will not be willing to pay.
you dumb fuck it doesn't make it legal because it's a "contract". what apple has done is said that the contract you make when buying an iphone already states that you lose support if you use 3rd party repairers. the 25 bucks change wouldn't change anything, not legally, not consumer protection perspective.
what your proposal would be, it would be just GIVING UP CONSUMER RIGHTS FOR A PETTY DISCOUNT - you can't do that! if it was possible to do that then your washing machine would have two prices, one that has
Re: (Score:1)
this scam is probably somewhat similar with Android vendors.
The fuck are you talking about? There's no evidence of that at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck you and all, mod.
Re: (Score:1)
Well it *is* called a walled garden for a reason. You are either inside the wall or outside the wall. Tim Cook and company are always adding more mortar, barbed wire and bricks to the wall. Sadly there are more sheep than wolves in the Apple camp.
This isn't much different than the current printer ink cartridge sue-fest. Each company wants to make sure you only purchase from them.. and you always re-supply/fix from them. It is a guaranteed revenue stream that makes the shareholders sing with glee.
Peace.
Re: (Score:2)
You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.
The problem is once you are inside the wall you constantly being brainwashed and despite being free to walk through the exit any time you have to give up all the apps you have paid for along with icloud for backups of your precious memories and your dependency on itunes to easily manage your music (yes you can use itunes with other devices but it is a lot more manual work) and even simple things like moving contacts and browser bookmarks etc are f
Re: (Score:1)
We're handcuffed when it comes to phones.
You should work on speaking from the 1st person and owning your statements. Nobody forced you to try to speak for me.
How did that happen.
You sold your soul to Brandybrand(TM)
Why do we accept that.
You accept it because you're an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
I just replaced the battery in my 6, and it works fine. What triggers this?
Re: (Score:3)
I just replaced the battery in my 6, and it works fine. What triggers this?
Error 53 is invoked by Replacing the Display Assembly, but failing to TRANSFER the ORIGINAL Home Button/Touch ID Sensor (which is PAIRED with the SystemOn[a]Chip soldered to YOUR iP6's logic board) to the NEW Display Assembly, then Booting the Unit.
It's an anti-theft/anti-confiscation measure, not an anti-repair gotcha. C
(Rolls eyes)
Re: (Score:2)
they reversed already
besides, it could just revert back to asking the code onscreen. or letting you reset the device.
Re: (Score:1)
they reversed already
besides, it could just revert back to asking the code onscreen. or letting you reset the device.
But it actually seems that Apple accidentally left some Production Testing code in an iOS9 build, causing the Error 53.
They released a patched version of iOS 9 last February to both fix the problem, AND "unbrick" phones that had inadvertently been "caught" by the test-code.
http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er... [ifixit.org]
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't stop there! Farmers are being hit the same way by John Deer and other manufactures of farm and similar equipment. Manufactures are denying farmers the right to repair their tractors. The poor farmer has to pay exorbitant repair costs because it has been deemed illegal for them to repair their own equipment.
Re: (Score:2)
Manufactures are denying farmers the right to repair their tractors.
There is a movement to change that, but alas, they have been repeatedly out lobbied and out donationed by the manufacturers. The farmers are too diffuse and disorganized to be an effective special interest group.
Re: How did that happen (Score:2)
The poor farmer that has a multi-million dollar model? The John Deere you buy sub-100k doesn't have those issues, it's the factory-on-wheels and they have a shit ton more moving parts and electronics than even a high end car and you can still repair them with after market parts, as long as you get a competent technician, you just can't expect Deere to continue supporting the system.
The outrage is that third party repairs void warranty and support contracts, if you've ever fixed your family's computer, you c
Re: (Score:2)
Every company sometimes ships things that don't work. It's just too bad that the Apple stores try to give you a refurbished product as a replacement when you bought new.
I hate that too; but everyone does it, especially with mobile devices.
The truth is, even with a very low failure rate, the sheer numbers of cellphones means that there is a pretty damn long queue for repairs. So, if someone wanted THEIR phone back, not only would it become a tracking nightmare during the repair process; but the owner would be LIVID by the time, MONTHS LATER, when they actually got THEIR original device back!
I know the actual repair doesn't take that long; but it takes that long to get throu
Re: (Score:3)
If the queue is long, the solution is for Apple to scale up the repair operation. Hire more technicians, have more repair functions going on concurrently.
That costs money, but they're charging money for services, so they should be spending it to deliver services.
Re: (Score:2)
If the queue is long, the solution is for Apple to scale up the repair operation. Hire more technicians, have more repair functions going on concurrently.
That costs money, but they're charging money for services, so they should be spending it to deliver services.
You can only scale things so far.
Re: I've owned seven PowerBooks or MacBooks... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I've owned seven PowerBooks or MacBooks... (Score:1)
10 out of 10 stars. Gave me problems for years. Great product! Have already bought another one.
Re: I've owned seven PowerBooks or MacBooks... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Paid by the word by Apple. Or just a volunteer evangelist.
It's almost like Scientology for some of the truest believers.
Re: (Score:1)
Amazing.
Another Apple horror story, yet another AC.
What a coincidence!
Re: (Score:1)
Amazing.
Another Apple horror story, another AC.
What a coincidence!
NOT.
Re: (Score:2)
All the pretty little AC postings, all in a row.
Amazing.
Another Apple horror story, another AC.
What a coincidence!
Re: (Score:2)
Amazing.
Another Apple horror story, another AC.
What a coincidence!
You must think WE'RE retarded.
Re: (Score:2)
You must think WE'RE retarded.
Well, not to put too fine a point on it... but yes.
Re: (Score:2)
and four of them had problems out of the box. Three either had keys that didn't work or keycaps that weren't attached to the scissors (I think that's the right word). The fourth simply wouldn't boot. In every case, the Apple Store at first refused to replace the laptop. They claimed they could only send them back for depot repairs. The first time was a 17" PowerBook that I think was $3,300 in December 2003. I let them send it back for repairs, and it was fourteen weeks before I got it back. After that experience, I argued like hell and threatened chargebacks. It's amazing how Apple typically make such high quality stuff, but their customer service is just garbage.
Of course. That's why they keep being at the top of independent customer satisfaction surveys, year after year.
You can say a lot of things about Apple; but "bad customer service" ain't one of them.
You're a fucking liar and an Anonymous Coward to boot.
Re: (Score:2)
You are just as anonymous. Unless you'd care to post your email address. And then you're just as anonymous behind said email address.
But you're angry at this whole fever swamp of bullshit, aren't you? They are picking on your fav company.
Re: (Score:1)
Amazing.
Another Apple horror story, another AC.
What a coincidence!
Who's "We"? You and all your doppelgänger ACs?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The ACs have gotten bad in the past week or so. One almost has to wonder if 4chan just recently discovered Slashdot.
They're ALWAYS bad; and they are a cancer upon Slashdot.
Seriously, like two dozen nearly-identical AC posts IN A ROW?!?
Re: (Score:2)
The ACs have gotten bad in the past week or so. One almost has to wonder if 4chan just recently discovered Slashdot
Nah, not enough Pepe the frog. It is most likely some astroturf shills trying to earn a buck.
Re: (Score:2)
Where the heck do you get that? Silicon Pirate Valley is sitting on $2 Trillion in offshore accounts.
Re: (Score:2)
The Pirates of Silicon Valley was a great movie, but I think it only grossed $27.
Re: (Score:2)
Compared to Wall Street sitting on a couple hundred trillion in bullshit derivatives?
Re: (Score:2)
There's a law in the US that should cover Error 53 too. They just don't have anything to lose by waiting for a class action lawsuit, settling, and admitting no wrongdoing in the process.
Re: (Score:1)
Here it protects the consumers.
Still a pain to claim and the ACCC is kinda weak, laws are good but for apple the punishments are a slap on the wrist.
For further entertainment. Youtube: "the checkout apple" or "the checkout australian consumer law"
Re: (Score:2)
Even if their repair shop rates are clearly posted [graphics20.com]?
Another Lie about Error 53 (Score:1)
Yet another breathless article about iOS's "Error 53".
Yet another bald-faced LIE about it's meaning.
"Error 53" happens when a STUPID PERSON replaces the Display Assembly in an iPhone/iPad with Touch ID, BUT FAILS TO DO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:
1. TRANSFER the ORIGINAL Home Button/Touch ID Sensor from the ORIGINAL Display assembly to the NEW Display Assembly. There are many tutorials available on HOW to do this, as well as the IMPORTANCE of doing so.
2. Take their iOS Device to the Apple Store, where they can det
Re: (Score:2)
That required step is well and truly "anti-third-party-repair".
Re: (Score:1)
That required step is well and truly "anti-third-party-repair".
If taken out of context, like you have.
Re: (Score:2)
We went through this shit with cars a few years ago. The product is supposed to be owned not leased and the owner should be able to do anything legal they want to with the thing they own - including taking it to whatever mechanic or technician they want to.
Re: (Score:1)
Not out of context. It's an absolute.
We went through this shit with cars a few years ago. The product is supposed to be owned not leased and the owner should be able to do anything legal they want to with the thing they own - including taking it to whatever mechanic or technician they want to.
But in this case, it actually seems that Apple accidentally left some Production Testing code in an iOS9 build, causing the Error 53.
They released a patched version of iOS 9 last February to both fix the problem, AND "unbrick" phones that had inadvertently been "caught" by the test-code.
http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er... [ifixit.org]
Re: (Score:2)
1. TRANSFER the ORIGINAL Home Button/Touch ID Sensor from the ORIGINAL Display assembly to the NEW Display Assembly. There are many tutorials available on HOW to do this, as well as the IMPORTANCE of doing so.
So is that documented in the 'third-party repair' support documents that Apple publishes? Do they even publish any guidance to third-party repair operations? Or do they stonewall about everything and refuse to acknowledge that any third-party repair should be allowed?
It simply isn't enough to force third-party repair technicians to rely on YouTube videos about repair issues.
Slashdot is a nerd site, where we're the people who the first thing we do with new tech is take it apart to figure it out. You're no
Re: (Score:1)
1. TRANSFER the ORIGINAL Home Button/Touch ID Sensor from the ORIGINAL Display assembly to the NEW Display Assembly. There are many tutorials available on HOW to do this, as well as the IMPORTANCE of doing so.
So is that documented in the 'third-party repair' support documents that Apple publishes? Do they even publish any guidance to third-party repair operations? Or do they stonewall about everything and refuse to acknowledge that any third-party repair should be allowed?
It simply isn't enough to force third-party repair technicians to rely on YouTube videos about repair issues.
Slashdot is a nerd site, where we're the people who the first thing we do with new tech is take it apart to figure it out. You're not going to get away with expecting us to pray at the altar of the Company Store.
Show me one cellphone mfg. that publishers full repair manuals for 3rd parties (individuals) and offers OEM parts to same.
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that error 53 doesn't pop up until a software update after the repair, right? How does soft-bricking the phone with error 53 that stop someone from swapping the home button and gaining access?
It doesn't.
The new home button not being paired and, thereby, only functioning as a button and not a fingerprint scanner is what prevents a button swap from bypassing the security of
Re: (Score:2)
We go back and forth between agreeing and disagreeing with each other, so I hope I can get your attention with this.
You do realize that error 53 doesn't pop up until a software update after the repair, right? How does soft-bricking the phone with error 53 that stop someone from swapping the home button and gaining access?
It doesn't.
The new home button not being paired and, thereby, only functioning as a button and not a fingerprint scanner is what prevents a button swap from bypassing the security of the device. In fact, since you would have to unlock the phone to access the settings menu in the first place, there's little reason they can't give end users a "pair home button" option in system settings.
I thought that error 53 happened upon Restart. Are you sure about that?
Re:Another Lie about Error 53 (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Everything I've read or heard about it is that it happens upon update. Louis Rossmann of Rossmann Group (3rd party Mac repair facility) and Jessa Jones of iPad Rehab (3rd party iPhone and iPad repair facility) are my primary sources on this. One iPhone/iPad repair neither of them will do is a home button replacement, after the first batch of such repairs on fingerprint-enabled devices resulted in Error 53 weeks after the repairs. Given that the phone must be shut down for the repair, a reboot is part of that process and the error would have been evident before the phones were returned to their owners if it happened after a reboot.
Ok, I understand.
But it actually seems that Apple accidentally left some Production Testing code in an iOS9 build, causing the Error 53.
They released a patched version of iOS 9 last February to both fix the problem, AND "unbrick" phones that had inadvertently been "caught" by the test-code.
http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er... [ifixit.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Huh... interesting. Then why are we still talking about Error 53 today? I actually didn't know it had been "fixed" given the amount of time it still spends in the news.
I assume we are still talking about Error 53 more than a YEAR after a Fix because:
1. Apple Hate
2. Moneygrubbing Litigious Assholes
3. Willful Blindness by those trying to MISREPRESENT Error 53 for their own Porpoises
4. People don't HAVE to install an OS Update. Even one that fixes something...
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking of #1, I'd like to once again voice my hate, not of Apple, but of their current leadership and the direction they are taking the company.
I feel that they purposely set the iMac Pro up for failure with its baseline price tag being so high and the fact that the only user-upgradeable component is RAM (and I'm not positive they haven't soldered that onto the board at this point). It's like they want out of the pro market altogether and are trying to get professional users to dr
Re: (Score:1)
True on all accounts.
Speaking of #1, I'd like to once again voice my hate, not of Apple, but of their current leadership and the direction they are taking the company.
I feel that they purposely set the iMac Pro up for failure with its baseline price tag being so high and the fact that the only user-upgradeable component is RAM (and I'm not positive they haven't soldered that onto the board at this point). It's like they want out of the pro market altogether and are trying to get professional users to drop them like a hot rock.
I saw it coming and jumped back to Windows once Microsoft got Bash on Windows (e.g. a full Ubuntu chroot on Windows) functional enough to run my IDE and testing environment. I need a POSIX or POSIX-like environment, and I need the ability to run a few industry-related applications that don't run on Linux (or that's where I'd be), but I also need to hitch my horse to a carriage that I know is going to be around in a capacity that is useful to me year after year.
Apple keeps making it clear to me that, unless I'm willing to spend $5k+ per workstation per year, I can't have the latest and greatest with them. With a PC workstation, I can upgrade my GPU when that becomes the bottleneck ($400-600), upgrade my CPU when that becomes the bottleneck ($250-500), upgrade my RAM when that becomes the bottleneck ($100-800), upgrade my storage when that becomes the bottleneck ($80-infinity), and maybe replace workstations every 5-10 years at a cost of $2000-4000 apiece.
As I grow my business (and I already see the ACs furiously typing away to tell me I don't have a business to grow), while I could likely weather the $5k/yr cost per employee, I'd rather reduce that as much as possible and provide more tangible benefits and pay to my employees. If that means my offices are filled with PCs, then that's what will happen.
And workplaces are becoming more and more competitive; a company that can afford better health plans or $4000/yr more in pay is going to attract better talent than a company that gives new hires a shiny new Mac rather than a PC.
The interviews I've done recently have borne that out, as well. The guy I ultimately ended up extending a job offer to is a big-time Mac fan, but he voiced that he's more than happy working on a $600 PC laptop if it means his medical benefits and paid time off package are that much better.
Apple still thrives in VC-funded startups, because it's not the CTO's money being spent. There's a reason so many of them fail. In businesses spending their own funds, Apple's footprint has been so rapidly shrinking, over the past 5 years or so, that they're largely nonexistent outside of iPhones for on-call employees and iPads and MacBooks as executive toys.
That's what I hate about Apple
They could own the business segment and we'd all be better for it. They were on track to do it back in 2010, but they've since repositioned themselves as a fashion brand. If they reverse course on that (and hopefully I'm wrong about the iMac Pro and that's actually what they're doing), I don't think it's too late for them to fix things. However, if people don't speak up about the problem, Apple won't hear us and, well, it may take years for their cash reserves to run out but, ultimately, Apple will fail.
Fashion brands rarely completely disappear, as they'll always find an audience; but they do fall out of favor and lose 99% of their market. It's usually a 5-10 year cycle and Apple's about half way through 5 years as a fashion brand. That should give some indication of how long they have to once again become a computer company if they want to still be relevant in 2037.
I completely disagree about the iMac Pro. Have you seen the pricing for the i9 CPUs? And 27" 5k Monitors aren't so cheap, neither!
And remember, I believe the MINIMUM config. is 8 Cores and 32 GB RAM and 1TB SSD, with a Radeo Pro Vega 56 with 8 GB of fancy-dancy HBM2 VRAM. It all adds-up.
If you crank up the highest-end (non-Pro) iMac as close to the BASE iMac Pro ((slower) 4.2 GHz quad i7, 32 GB of (slower) RAM, (slower) Radeon Pro 580 w 8GB VRAM, 1 TB SSD), it comes to $3699. So, for $1300 more, the iMac Pr
Re: (Score:2)
Past that, I wouldn't really say 4 years to turn around from the trash can, which people complained about from day one (while they still had production lines in place for the old Mac Pro model and could have reverted course
Re: (Score:1)
I'll admit I didn't sit and do a breakdown of the iMac Pro, I've been too busy lately. If the base model is truly a pro-level machine, unlike what the MacBook Pro has become recently, then $5000 might, indeed, be a fair price tag. Thank you for taking the time to break that out for me.
Past that, I wouldn't really say 4 years to turn around from the trash can, which people complained about from day one (while they still had production lines in place for the old Mac Pro model and could have reverted course in months rather than years), is "quick". If they were truly listening to users, the trash can would have been killed off and the 1st gen Mac Pro would have lived on. What they did eventually listen to was the abysmal sales of the trash can.
While the eventual outcome is the same, actually listening to users gets us there faster. You just need someone like Jobs around to know what to listen to and what to ignore; that's what's missing today.
No problem. Everyone makes the same mistake when complaining about Mac prices being "so high".
We actually don't know how "abysmal" the sales of the Trash Can were. I think Craig Federici (sp?) was right in April when he said that "For a certain class of creative Professional, the 2013 Mac Pro worked great."
I have always contended that the only miscalculation that Apple made regarding the Mac Pro, was betting the farm on the rapid adoption of Thunderbolt; which, thanks to Intel's moneygrubbing and controllin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Well, then, hopefully this is the start of a massive rectal craniectomy for Apple's leadership. If it is, my next round of hardware upgrades (years out as everything was either just bought or just upgraded in the past 7 months) might just be from Apple again.
I'll be VERY interested to see what Apple's idea of a "Modular Mac Pro" is; and whether there is any hope for the Mac mini, which is pretty-much the PERFECT "front-offices" business machine, and could be EASILY turned into a decent "Home Hub", if only...
Re: (Score:2)
There's plenty of room in there for socketed CPU and RAM, a pair of m.2 slots, and space to mount a 2.5" drive, which would open up configuration options to allow Apple to offer everything from a $300 bare-bones model on up to a $several-thousand ultraportable workstation.
They could literally own the school, office, and home desktop space. I'd love to see that
Re: (Score:1)
Ugh... the Mac Mini... The machine with so much wasted potential that I literally block its existence out of my memory until someone brings it up.
There's plenty of room in there for socketed CPU and RAM, a pair of m.2 slots, and space to mount a 2.5" drive, which would open up configuration options to allow Apple to offer everything from a $300 bare-bones model on up to a $several-thousand ultraportable workstation.
They could literally own the school, office, and home desktop space. I'd love to see that happen.
And yes, I think it would make an excellent "home hub"; they could even release a $100-200 ARM based version specifically for that purpose, with AC in, ethernet, and as many USB-C/TB3 ports on the back (and nothing else) as they can fit. Throw in wi-fi and sell a TB3 ethernet switch module and an option and it could replace the Time Capsule and AirPort Extreme as well, using all those USB-3/TB3 ports to support a multitude of external disks.
Hell, maybe only provide a pair of USB-C/TB3 ports in the $100 model, 4 in the $200 model, and sell a $500 Pro model with, say, 8 of them. It would make a hell of a NAS and, with the optional ethernet switch module, a decent SOHO router as well.
Ah, well, we can dream, right?
I agree with every bit of that.
Re: (Score:2)
Only thief who was even more stupid than you (quite the feat) would go to the trouble of swapping the sensor, and then instead of accessing all the juicy details, update and brick the phone.
Re:Another Lie about Error 53 (Score:4, Insightful)
If only you had read TFA, you wouldn't look like an idiot now.
Take their iOS Device to the Apple Store, where they can determine whether you are likely the ACTUAL OWNER of the iPhone, and will "Pair" the NEW Home Button/Touch ID to the Device.
That's what they tried to do. And the staff told them that they had to pay, when it was supposed to be free. That's the problem here.
Nice try Tim.
Re: (Score:2)
1. TRANSFER the ORIGINAL Home Button/Touch ID Sensor from the ORIGINAL Display assembly to the NEW Display Assembly. There are many tutorials available on HOW to do this, as well as the IMPORTANCE of doing so.
I do like how you capitalised all the words that become completely irrelevant when the ID sensor has failed. You know ... one of the reasons you would take such a device to a repairer.
But that's why you're just a fake. The Real Tim Cook would put a lot more thought into user blaming.
Re: (Score:1)
1. TRANSFER the ORIGINAL Home Button/Touch ID Sensor from the ORIGINAL Display assembly to the NEW Display Assembly. There are many tutorials available on HOW to do this, as well as the IMPORTANCE of doing so.
I do like how you capitalised all the words that become completely irrelevant when the ID sensor has failed. You know ... one of the reasons you would take such a device to a repairer.
But that's why you're just a fake. The Real Tim Cook would put a lot more thought into user blaming.
Doesn't matter. We are ALL wrong.
It actually seems that Apple accidentally left some Production Testing code in an iOS9 build, causing the Error 53.
They released a patched version of iOS 9 last February to both fix the problem, AND "unbrick" phones that had inadvertently been "caught" by the test-code.
http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er... [ifixit.org]
By the way, BLOW ME for using Caps to Emphasize. As soon as Slashdot gets into the 20th (let alone 21st) Century and grows a Rich-Text Editor, I will continue to use the equall
Re: (Score:2)
If you need to emphasise a portion of your text to make a point then you are a really poor communicator.
Re: (Score:1)
If you need to emphasise a portion of your text to make a point then you are a really poor communicator.
That's why there have been italics and boldface typography for literally, CENTURIES.
You are an insufferable moron. Please die immediately.
Not completely wrong (Score:1)
they were not entitled to free replacements or repair if they had taken their devices to an unauthorized third-party repairer
Well, yeah. "Warranty void if opened" is pretty much standard on any electronics I've ever known except for actual computers. If someone brings their phone to some bozo like me and I screw it up, why should Apple have to clean up after me for free? ( Suppose i
Re: (Score:1)
The point is that 'warranty void if opened' isn't actually something they can enforce under Australian consumer law.
I partially agree with your third point, if and only if the communication was that the speakers stopped working when the phone was repaired rather that at some later time. Even in the former case, unless the speaker issue was actually caused by the third party repair, then it should still be covered under warranty. Having said that, I suspect (but IANAL) that Apple could charge a (reasonable -
That's not misleading, that's lying (Score:2)
Telling a customer that the iPhone is faster than Android phones - which is true for some tests for some configurations - is "misleading" them.
Telling them that a repair isn't covered under warranty when it is, is lying. Which in this case makes it fraud.
car manufacturers can't do this so why should appl (Score:4, Insightful)
car manufacturers can't do this so why should apple?
Ford can't say you went to jiffy lube for oil change so your warranty on the transmission is voided or you put an 3rd party radio in so your engine warranty is voided
Re: (Score:3)
It's probably not true anymore, but there was a period in time when the 'Engine computer' on certain models of car was embedded in the Radio. Swap out the radio?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
maybe but doing you own oil change does not void the key system or forces you to mess with the lock meck to get to the oil plug.
Wait? (Score:2)
So they actually said "my phone broke after I had some dude replace the screen" and expected them to go "ok we'll fix some else's mistake'.
What's worse than .... (Score:1)
... finding a worm in an Apple.
Finding half a worm.
The IRS is the new Apple (Score:1)
I hope the Australians don't interfere with our beloved friends in the IRS.
I cringed when Trump became president because, what if the government has to start doing what they say? They can't be burdened with that !
Btw, when you ask someone you are going into a business transaction with what your legal rights are, that is ALSO super cool.