The iPhone 13 Screen Is a Repair Nightmare That Could Destroy Repair Shops Forever (vice.com) 215
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: A tweak to the iPhone's repairability that has been long prophesied and feared has finally come to pass, giving staggering new urgency for legislation that makes repair more accessible: The iPhone 13's screen cannot be replaced without special software controlled by Apple. This is a devastating blow to independent repair shops, who make the vast majority of their money doing screen replacements, and, specifically, make the vast majority of their money doing iPhone screen replacements. According to iFixit, replacing the screen on an iPhone 13 disables Face ID functionality. That's because the screen itself is paired to a small microcontroller attached to the display. Replacing a cracked screen with a new screen will disable this pairing, thus breaking a core piece of functionality in the phone. An authorized Apple repair tech can pair a new screen to an iPhone with the click of a few buttons using proprietary Apple tech. Everyone else will have a much harder time. "It is still possible to change a screen on an iPhone 13," notes Motherboard. "The difference is that in order to do so now, this microcontroller needs to be removed from the broken screen and resoldered onto the new screen (after the existing microcontroller on that screen is removed). Doing this requires microsoldering, which requires the use of a microscope and a highly skilled technician."
In an email to Motherboard, iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens said: "This is a clear case of a manufacturer using their power to prevent competition and monopolize an industry. Society loses: small repair shops will wither and fade away and consumers will be left with no choice but to pay top dollar for repairs or replace their device."
In an email to Motherboard, iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens said: "This is a clear case of a manufacturer using their power to prevent competition and monopolize an industry. Society loses: small repair shops will wither and fade away and consumers will be left with no choice but to pay top dollar for repairs or replace their device."
For security reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
If you compromise the screen you could compromise FaceID. It's apparently something the iFixit and reporters refuse to understand.
Apple's biometric security (FaceID) requires a guarantee that components in the path are not tampered with.
Re:For security reasons (Score:4)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
This. Why is the phone's electronics tied to the piece of glass on the front in the first place?
Re:For security reasons (Score:4, Insightful)
Clearly it doesn't work, because if you micro-solder, then you can still replace the screen.
Re: (Score:3)
Or you could try to move the chip, after buying yourself a microscope or high-resolution webcam, a hot air rework station, a fine-tip soldering iron, and the necessary BGA stencils, flux, and other supplies.
I should point out there are a significant group savvy with electronics that do such work. They don't necessarily do it for Apple, or these shops, but they do do it. And as already pointed out...
One experienced repair shop told me they’ve been swapping screen chips since the iPhone X to avoid touch calibration issues and “genuine” part warnings; they’ve got the process down to about 15 minutes. They’ve been slowly building an inventory of refurbished and third-party replacement screens with their chip slots empty, using CNC machines and screen-holding jigs to carve them out.
15 Minutes is pretty good for the work done.
Re:For security reasons (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: For security reasons (Score:3)
Exactly, the chip could have been on the main board with the ribbon cable from the screen going straight into it.
Re: (Score:2)
That requires changing engineering decisions, and while yeah, it could done, there may be reasons (other than lock in) that it is done the way it is (even though they probably don't deserve it, I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt here).
But to me that's beside the point. You don't actually need to change anything in the hardware design. Face ID unlock is always secondary to the PIN, correct? Meaning if you know the PIN to unlock it, then you don't need to "hack" the face ID sensor at all. You've alr
Re: (Score:2)
The screen doesn't read your face, the camera does. Why would replacing the screen jeopardize face-id?
You just proved you don't know how it works. This site is supposed to be for nerds!
FaceID uses its own set of sensors, not the camera. Apple's goal is to make sure that some fake FaceID sensors at your local police station/FBI/mafia/cartel can't send fake data to the secure enclave and unlock your phone.
force the software to offered to all repair shops (Score:4, Insightful)
force the software to offered to all repair shops
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you compromise the screen you could compromise FaceID. It's apparently something the iFixit and reporters refuse to understand.
Apple's biometric security (FaceID) requires a guarantee that components in the path are not tampered with.
Define "could". You're talking about finding a way to build a custom camera and LIDAR system that has extra storage and some remote way to trigger that storage at just the right time while the owner is looking at the screen and doing Face ID, and later replay the data. And it would be effective only against someone both valuable enough to target with such a costly scheme *and* cheap enough to use a third-party service. This is one of those "yeah, that's theoretically possible, but nobody in their right m
Re:For security reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
The danger will be in the time between when a phone is stolen and when the owner disables the phone. During this time, if one can bypass the security then they can use Apple Pay to rack up dept / fraudulent purchases. So time will be of the essence. If a quick parts swap is all that is required then you can bet that groups will optimize the process of stealing an iPhone, swapping some parts, and then making purchases.
I do not know if security is the reason for this Apple design. But for their long term business model to work out, having a secure platform for making digital purchases appears to be necessary. Users must have confidence in the security of the system if they are going to adopt it. I seriously doubt Apple cares about lost revenue due to someone else doing screen repairs. They will be looking at a bigger picture.
I do not mind Apple making some repairs hard due to security requirements. That's fine, but as others have noted - Apple should have made the screen independent of system security. It should always be possible to repair screens and batteries at independent shops.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't forget that people have a lot of HIPAA-sensitive data on their phones now since many people funnel info into the Health app. Plus bypassing FaceID allows you access to all of the storage media, including the Keychain (which also authenticates through FaceID), so the information in every app on the device is compromised. Stock apps. Travel info. Photos. Crypto apps. Work-related ID authentication apps. Skipping past FaceID opens up a HUGE security nightmare for the end user.
Re: (Score:2)
You're entirely missing the point, which is that using a different camera provides approximately zero benefit in bypassing Face ID, and that whatever almost nonexistent, almost purely theoretical benefit might exist would require the backing of the sort of three-letter agency that has much, much easier ways of bypassing Face ID without modifying the hardware and without the high risk of tipping off the victim by stealing the phone more than once.
Re: (Score:2)
The danger will be in the time between when a phone is stolen and when the owner disables the phone. During this time, if one can bypass the security then they can use Apple Pay to rack up dept / fraudulent purchases. So time will be of the essence. If a quick parts swap is all that is required then you can bet that groups will optimize the process of stealing an iPhone, swapping some parts, and then making purchases.
No, that simply isn't possible.
First, Face ID and similar do not work when you first turn on the device, so if you have to do a part swap, which pretty much requires shutting the device off, you've already failed.
Second, even if you could manage to hot-swap the camera, the camera is just a camera. It just gives you pictures, period. And the LIDAR just gives you a depth map, period. The decision about whether those pictures and depth maps corresponds with the owner's face is done in entirely separate hard
Due to unnecesarry design decisions (Score:5, Insightful)
From a security perspective it makes perfect sense that the FaceID illuminator (and possibly camera) needs to be paired to the processor. However there is no reason for the display to be involved in that. The only reason this is necessary is because they chose to route the illuminator communications through the same chip as the display controller. Apple could have chosen a different design that doesn't make replacing the most fragile and frequently broken part of the phone a security sensitive operation. They did that in the past for the iPhoneX, iPhone11 and iPhone12 which all had FaceID and which could all have their screens replaced without Apples approval.
So, no security isn't an excuse here. This is at best a poor design decision, and at worst a deliberate move to shutout third-party repair shops.
Uh, security is a reason (Score:2, Troll)
That would have increased the cost and complexity of the device. Why would Apple bother to do that?
Re:Uh, security is a reason (Score:4, Insightful)
The face ID could be on the main PCB looking through a "hole" in the display. (the hole could be invisible)
That would actually be cheaper.
Re:Due to unnecesarry design decisions (Score:5, Insightful)
From a security perspective it makes perfect sense that the FaceID illuminator (and possibly camera) needs to be paired to the processor.
Wrong way round: the camera could be used to feed in a fake image, but the illuminator is pretty much a dumb dot projector.
and at worst a deliberate move to shutout third-party repair shops.
Most likely really. Apple have a lucrative repair arm and charge a lot more than competitors.
that's intentional sabotage of customer (Score:3, Insightful)
Car manufacturers have been doing the very same thing for a few decades. They seal a bunch of unrelated pieces together as a "block", combining a fragile (and thus likely to require replacement) component with something expensive. Thus, in order to use "genuine" parts (without which you lose warranty), you need to purchase the whole block, and even after the warranty period, replacing the broken piece with a third-party part requires tricky and arduous work.
Re: Due to unnecesarry design decisions (Score:2)
FaceID illuminati... ...sorry. X{
Re:For security reasons (Score:4, Informative)
You would have had an excellent point, if only there were parts of the FaceID integral to the screen, of which there are not.
FaceID projector and sensor are located in the main chassis; the screen merely has "windows" for the said projector and sensor.
Reasonably skilled rework technicians won't have a problem moving the chip between screens, it's more of a time waster than anything else and lends nothing to the actual security of the phone.
Re: (Score:3)
EU Anti-competitive case will come up forcing Apple to abandon the behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
EU anti-competitive cases take years to a decade to finish. By that time, Apple will have accomplished it's goal of destroying competition in the repair market.
Re: (Score:2)
which makes absolutely no sense, as the screen is NOT in any way, shape or form involved in the face id recognition system.
changing the camera / dot projector / light sensor assembly would, though.
Re: (Score:2)
If you compromise the screen you could compromise FaceID. It's apparently something the iFixit and reporters refuse to understand.
Apple's biometric security (FaceID) requires a guarantee that components in the path are not tampered with.
Mods, Mods, Mods
Troll?!?
He stated a systems-integrity reason for this packaging decision, and all you won't even consider it to be a valid Discussion Point?!?
Wow.
Re:For security reasons (Score:4, Insightful)
A bit harsh with the name calling, but yes there's a point buried in all that. Why are Apple owners getting their repairs from somewhere other than Apple? Couldn't be because they perceive it to cost too much. Also we must not lose sight that the issue at hand isn't just an Apple thing, but a right-to repair thing. Otherwise we all are "iAddicts" to all of our respective hardware with no alternatives to go to.
Re:For security reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
A bit harsh with the name calling, but yes there's a point buried in all that. Why are Apple owners getting their repairs from somewhere other than Apple? Couldn't be because they perceive it to cost too much. Also we must not lose sight that the issue at hand isn't just an Apple thing, but a right-to repair thing. Otherwise we all are "iAddicts" to all of our respective hardware with no alternatives to go to.
Devices are becoming obscenely complex and specialized. Should we expect to be able to take a Ferrari to Mercedes and have their mechanics know all of the technical troubleshooting involved? No, each and every luxury car manufacturer likes to "certify" their own mechanics, with their own training, and for the obvious reason; complexity.
Perhaps our electronic devices, are becoming exactly that. We're here complaining about the lack of repair-ability on a screen, while conveniently ignoring the REAL reason why that is (security and FaceID). Perhaps "iAddicts" of all flavors and colors should learn to stop bitching about repair costs and simply take it up the tailpipe instead, because complexity.
To highlight that argument, let's assume Right To Repair wins over BIG TIME eventually. Do you really think manufacturers are going to make repairs any easier for 3rd parties? Think they'll still be successful in repairing devices for "cheap" 10 years from now? I highly doubt it.
You can't turn a wrench on your Ferrari now. That problem, is making it's way towards your Ford. Not sure why we're surprised.
Re: For security reasons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, you can expect to take your car to a specialized shop fixing your air conditioning. All this without voiding your car warranty (regardless of what it stipulates) and without your car refusing to enable air conditioning.
Your air conditioner, is NOT the device directly tied to your vehicles electronic security, so let's now make this a valid argument. You really think every locksmith has the hardware and skills, to replace and encode a luxury keyfob?
No, it's not quite that easy. Kind of like replacing a screen that is directly tied to the security of the device.
And an iPhone isn't merely a Lexus among Toyotas. The hardware vendor is obviously becoming more akin to you attempting to turn a wrench on your Ferrari or Bugatt
Re: (Score:2)
Re: For security reasons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The hardware vendor is obviously becoming more akin to you attempting to turn a wrench on your Ferrari or Bugatti. Yes, you are going to void the warranty.
No you aren't: Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act [wikipedia.org]
Re: For security reasons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nice try, but no. Complexity is not a good enough reason to create roadblocks for repair. For every level of complexity there will be people smart enough to understand and fix the problem. Car manufacturers don't create these roadblocks because their cars are too complex to fix without specific training. The many independent repair shops that still exist today prove that.
So that leaves the obvious reason: to create lock-in, and protect their dealers are the expense of the customer.
BTW, this type of lock-in
Re: For security reasons (Score:3)
Nice try, but no. Complexity is not a good enough reason to create roadblocks for repair. For every level of complexity there will be people smart enough to understand and fix the problem.
You mean like the ones who can, as suggested in TFS, FFS, simply swap the "Secure Enclave" Microcontroller from the old display to the new one using common SMT repair techniques now long practiced by many repair shops for other repairs, using tools readily available, even on Amazon?
Doesn't sound particularly onerous to me.
Apple seems to be overreaching here with their claim that replacing the display is a security issue.
How?
For packaging and design reasons, Apple moved the FaceID controller to the Display Subassembly. Too bad. If they really did it to thwart third-party repair (kind of doubtful for a prod
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You can't turn a wrench on your Ferrari now.
\
Horseshit. The over whelming majority of problems as well as common maintenance can be carried out on Ferraris in any workshop.
Stop excusing shitty behaviour. It is neither complex nor difficult to swap an iPhone screen. A kid can do it, and I say that in the most literal way, not facetiously, not hyperbolically, an actual kid possesses 100% of the skills needed to swap an iPhone screen. The only thing they are missing is the magic software button on the iPhone 13 which Apple locked away.
Stop excusing shit
Re: (Score:3)
You can't turn a wrench on your Ferrari now.
\
Horseshit. The over whelming majority of problems as well as common maintenance can be carried out on Ferraris in any workshop.
Stop excusing shitty behaviour. It is neither complex nor difficult to swap an iPhone screen. A kid can do it, and I say that in the most literal way, not facetiously, not hyperbolically, an actual kid possesses 100% of the skills needed to swap an iPhone screen. The only thing they are missing is the magic software button on the iPhone 13 which Apple locked away.
Stop excusing shitty behaviour. Normally I'd call a post like yours shilling, but geekmux in your case it's just dumb ignorance.
Claiming ANY "kid" could perform micro soldering, highlights a level of stupidity that only an actual child could hold. And I say that literally. Do your parents know you're here? I doubt it.
Provide proof of your Ferrari ownership before trying to know what the "overwhelming majority of problems" with Ferrari's are. You sure do have a hell of a way of demonstrating dumb ignorance while ignorantly attacking others. There's a fucking reason Ferrari maintenance doesn't cost $49.95 and sold on QVC. If a "k
Re: (Score:3)
You are not bringing your car to a mechanic who can write code or build parts to fix a problem. You are bringing it to a mechanic who swaps out parts and fills in a configuration. There is nothing magical about it. The thing is that you don't own the product you purchased. You don't have the keys. The complexity that you speak of is not in making the repair but in the DRM. This is the equivalent of your car having nuts that are not standard and it's illegal to own the wrench. You can't change a flat, it's j
Re: (Score:2)
Re: For security reasons (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
, it is well worth it to those who can afford it.
I could easily afford it.
I choose not to, by choice.
Re: For security reasons (Score:2)
Re: For security reasons (Score:2)
You think people who do not buy iShit have only affordability consideration?
No dumbass. That is not what I said. Since you are one of the low IQ people who you believe should get off the internet, let me explain it a little easier for you to understand, dumb ass. I said people value their security and privacy. This is why Apple advertises privacy on iPhone. What happens on iPhone stays on iPhone, was a tagline they used. Why? Because people value their privacy. To trust the device, Apple made the components authenticate to each other. That way, when the CPU asks the sensor Is this
Re: For security reasons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> a device that is already well overpriced
Look at competing phones that offer top of the range hardware and 5 years of updates. There are not many competitors, and they are not much cheaper, if at all.
An iPhone may cost more than just the parts, but that is because it is part of an ecosystem, and a pretty good one, too.
Re: (Score:2)
A market place doesn't know the difference between form and function. The price is what it is no matter whether you think it deserves that price.
Fuck Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Fuck Apple (Score:3)
Kind of like a large portion of their user base. :-\
Though the blame for this largely goes to all of the helicoptor parenting, and parents loading up on the advice from qwacks on daytime TV who were really there to sell books. They ended up raising a generation of wimps.
Re: (Score:3)
While selling $20 cloths to morons. If you've ever dealt with their support, enterprise and otherwise, their contempt for you is palpable. The "you need me I don't need you" attitude pervades their entire, massive, gov't level bureaucracy.
Protection (Score:5, Informative)
Two words; Otterbox Defender.
Every iPhone I've owned since my 6 has been wrapped in these cases. I still throw my phone around, letting it hit the ground. Done it at least a dozen times to prove how durable they are. I don't even know what it's like to get lint in a charging port, let alone a crack on a screen.
Amazing how people will pay "top dollar" for a $1000+ device that they use and rely on every day, but fail to see the value of even spending $40 to properly protect it. Oh well. Live and never learn. Now it's going to cost the average tech-addicted luddite a lot more to enjoy the luxury of that ignorance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I refuse to use a case *because* I spent $800 on a phone that's slim and easily pushed around. But I also don't bitch about the cost to replace a screen, if it should happen that it breaks.
Unless you're also wealthy enough to be walking around with a hot spare phone on standby, I refuse to believe you "don't bitch" when your smartphone screen breaks.
You're gonna bitch. It's your smartphone. Also known as that reason the majority of the human race, is technically considered cyborgs now.
Re: Protection (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Protection (Score:2)
I've seen countless people treat their phones like they were a rental car. And I have seen screens broken to the point parts of the circuitry are peeking out around the LCD part, and rows of pixels are flashing like the neon sign at a sleazy motel where you can rent by the hour.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Heidi Klum wearing a fat suit
Hnnggg!
Re: (Score:2)
Steve Jobs thought that putting your iPhone in a case is like Heidi Klum wearing a fat suit.
Steve Jobs had a fetish for form over function. That influence continues at Apple to this day - that's why Tim Cook exercised "courage" in removing the audio jack.
Re: (Score:2)
There's Something About Mary (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Steve Jobs thought that putting your iPhone in a case is like Heidi Klum wearing a fat suit.
Steve Jobs also never had license plates on his car, and avoiding having to do it legally by leasing a new car every six months.
He didn't give a shit about cases because he could afford that luxury. The other 99% of society can't, which is why his perspective, isn't worth a shit.
Re:Protection (Score:5, Funny)
Amazing how people will pay "top dollar" for a $1000+ device that they use and rely on every day, but fail to see the value of even spending $40 to properly protect it. Oh well. Live and never learn.
Why you uncouth savage! You need to have a slim fragile form in polite company. Do your eyes not avert themselves from such an ungangly bulge in your pocket? How do you live with yourself?!1?!??
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I see many auto shops that are successful even though they have to buy specialized software to fix my car. I have even had family members who had to give up their classic cars because the technician had to actually know something to repair the car and
Re: (Score:2)
Micro soldering is not hugely difficult.
There's an obvious reason micro soldering is still considered a skilled profession.
Tell your (sober) friends to hold their hands out steady. You'll quickly see the difference between micro soldering, and someone capable of slapping wet metal on a board like fucking play dough.
Re: Protection (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I thought a non-skilled technician was reliably able to replace my screen, I'd do it myself or pay bottom dollar at some random cornor shop. 3rd party repair shops shouldn't have any problems doing the replacements if they employ skilled technicians.
And to employ skilled technicians, you pay skilled rates.
It's rather obvious the overwhelming majority of society either can't, or doesn't want to do micro soldering. Ever. The question becomes, is Apple's rate reasonable or not. The question is NOT even remotely related to the perceived complexity of micro soldering, which is what the parent was suggesting.
Re: (Score:2)
The whole point of the pretty slim device is that it is pretty and slim. If it can't also be durable then it's shit. (Most all phones are shit.)
MagSafe? (Score:2)
But it doesn't support MagSafe. :(
Re: (Score:2)
Those cases still leave the screen exposed. They have to, it's the only way you can interact with the phone.
I use a smaller case than that, still offers good protection, and a glass screen protector. I also use a very small "lanyard" type thing that I put my fingers through when I'm extracting it from a pocket or using it, because I'm a klutz.
Re: (Score:2)
Those cases still leave the screen exposed. They have to, it's the only way you can interact with the phone.
An Otterbox case, creates a significant bumper raised well above the surface of the screen, and since phones are practically infamous for taking a face plant when they hit the ground and cracking/shattering, this is the main and obvious reason your statement is wrong, and why I've never even cracked one of my screens, even when throwing my phone to demonstrate the strength of the case.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Being able to throw a phone onto the ground is not a normal scenario, so doing it to show people you can matters little and just comes off weird.
Re: Protection (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can't anyone engineer an all plastic based display that won't shatter or crack from shocks, with just an easily replaceable glass screen protector on top to provide a hard scratch resistant surface?
Yes, they can. It's just today, you have to go to two different vendors to create that solution yourself; your phone vendor, and Otterbox (or similar).
The question becomes, why would they actually want to do that, when "Repair and Replace" is a profit stream that even the Board wants to track? Could they make more money selling cases with the phone? Perhaps. But right now they make even MORE repairing and replacing purposely fragile devices.
Never underestimate Greed.
Broken? Or a feature? (Score:4, Interesting)
If I was ever forced to use a fruitphone I'd consider it a blessing that FaceID didn't function and couldn't be made to function without going to extraordinary lengths.
Re: (Score:2)
Definitely a feature. I would pay extra for a phone or tablet without any biometrics, or at least with the biometrics disabled at a hardware level.
A good alphanumeric password in your head that you type in beats any biometric authentication which you may be compelled to provide.
Forced service and repair by forced dealer (Score:2)
No problem for me (Score:2)
There's a fairly simple answer for this (Score:2)
Don't buy any iPhone after the 12. Crater their sales.
To insure this, though, more people at the Apple end of the cell phone market need to be made aware that they're really, really screwing up if they buy one of these things. Don't focus on the screen. Focus on how they're being played for suckers, and how even if this slap in the face doesn't bother them, the next step might be one they don't want to live with...and they'll still have to live with their overpriced pocket toy.
By the way, I actually own
Unlikely to kill repair shops (Score:4, Interesting)
Almost every time a new product comes out, there's the headlines of "[Near] Impossible to repair, likely to kill repair shop industry", and it does not.
It does usually mean new tooling, new skills, and some waiting, but so far it's not a death of the industry. When we started seeing surface mount parts many were "Oh no! we can't solder those!" ( Fine tip irons and more flux ), when we moved to ever smaller parts (01005) "Oh no, we can't see those properly" (Microscopes), when we moved to BGA "Oh no, impossible to solder those" (Stencils and solder paste), and so on.
Yes, Apple makes it troublesome in many ways but for all the areas/options they close off, there's still a lot of repairable devices and areas on their devices.
I do, like most people, wish that Apple would cease with these excessive moves masked as security improvements but it is what we have and you can either choose to cry and close up, or you can be realistic and see that there's still a lot of work available and simply redirect today's clients back to Apple until a work-around/solution becomes available. Still repairing iPhone 4 and 2010 Macbooks here, so there's a long life in these products and a lot of work.
I see a lot of knee jerk responses here (Score:2)
But I don't see anybody asking the question how does the screen work with face ID?
I think there is the perception that it just lights up (with infrared light) for the camera to sense the face but I suspect that it's a lot more more sophisticated than that. I'm guessing that different sections/rows/columns of the display lights up at different times to create a 3D rendering of the person's face with the light source moving and the camera acting as a fixed point.
If that's the case, then it seems wholly a
Disabling FaceID is a feature (Score:2)
replacing the screen on an iPhone 13 disables Face ID functionality
Sounds like a feature.
What are you guys doing with a $1000 phone anyway? (Score:4, Insightful)
OnePlus Nord with 5g is under $300, camera seems great. If it breaks, I'll just order a new one and still be ahead vs iPhone. What are you getting that is so special for 3-4 times the money? If you are not price conscious, why the surprise at repair bills?
Re: (Score:2)
OnePlus Nord with 5g is under $300, camera seems great. If it breaks, I'll just order a new one and still be ahead vs iPhone. What are you getting that is so special for 3-4 times the money? If you are not price conscious, why the surprise at repair bills?
This! I do the same thing, except with Motorola phones. You can spend around $200 for an unlocked phone with a battery that lasts two days or more, and if it dies, it dies. It's an appliance, not a lifestyle.
Re: (Score:3)
At least partly, the assurance that I'm getting a phone that will last 4 years, which has been my replacement cycle. If you start with a $1000 iPhone and you keep it 4 years, that's $250/year. So, not so expensive. Also, I'll maybe get a couple hundred bucks for it when I'm done with it. We'll say that I get $100 for it, so that's $225/year.
During those 4 years, I get OS updates. When I sell the phone (or give it away to my Mom), it still gets updates. The iPhone 6s still got an update this year, I think. S
It's all part of a general trend in electronics (Score:5, Interesting)
When I started designing electronic circuits, most ICs were socketed, for easy replacement. This would apply particularly to microcontrollers, which had to be erased and programmed using specialist kit. Later, microcontrollers provided in-circuit programming, so you could solder chips directly to the PCB, and still update firmware, without needing to remove the chip for reprogramming. The microcontrollers I use nowadays are replaceable with minimal surface mount rework kit, but they would now be considered fairly low end in performance by modern standards, e.g. 16 bit, with 32 MHz max clock speed.
The chips that give real trouble for rework are ball grid arrays (BGAs). I once designed a board with an ARM chip in a BGA package, but it never got to prototype stage, because our own manufacturing can't cope, or at least, not to an acceptable quality level. In the early days of my present job, I worked on a custom board that had a big BGA chip on it. Apparently, the wrong type of RAM had been fitted, so they had a sub-contract manufacturer replace it. Reheating the board knackered the BGA connections, and the board never worked again. In order to do a good manufacturing job with BGAs, you need X-ray inspection kit, and that is expensive. A local sub-contract assembler I have known for years can't justify the expense.
FaceID isn't always needed (Score:2)
FaceID uses a depth detection system to essentially roughly get a 3d shape of your face along with the picture. A vast vast majority of consumers mostly use it because they can't be inconvenienced to use a 6 digit passcode to access their phone. While the right to repair is an issue, at the end of the day that's like complaining about the loss of a cup holder in your car. Overall it doesn't stop the use of the phone considering most older phones don't have FaceID.
iMdone (Score:2)
It will get to the point that iOS users will get sick and tired of Apple and their crap and switch over to Android, or somebody new who will offer the quality and benefits iDevices used to offer without the iBullshit.
Apple is no longer innovative. Apple is no longer quality. And more and more Apple users are waking up to this.
$$ APPPLE $$ (Score:2)
Sounds like (Score:2)
Sounds like I want to crack that screen so I can permanently disable that FaceID system. Win win!
Another damn /. Story claiming Apple owns the worl (Score:2)
Repair shops unable to repair Apple products just *might* have some non Apple business here and there. "Wither away" is Appleslaveboi bullshit.
Free market != laissez faire (Score:2)
A free market, like the one in economic theory, is a competitive one. That's one of the features that makes it desirable as a policy goal.
Adam Smith, who had the "invisible hand" insight, also observed "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publick, or in some contrivance to raise prices".
If you want a free market, you want vigorous anti-trust enforcement and also policy to keep competition happening.
Re:No obligation (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe you are right, but in some litigations Apple may have to do the pairing for free or at cost, because else they have created a monopole on repairing their phones.
Re: No obligation (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:No obligation (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to make money, no, but right to repair legislation would obligate Apple to not disable unrelated functionality when a discrete component is replaced. Face ID may depend on the camera, but it certainly does not depend on the screen, so disabling FaceID when a screen is replaced by a third party could run afoul of such legislation unless Apple were willing to license the process of allowing such replacement to third parties.
It doesn't necessarily have to be easy or cheap but it *does* have to at least be possible.
Re: (Score:2)
spend 30-40 minutes googling the candidates
Take a quick look on their social media, if you don’t smell crazy in 5 min it’s probably not there.