Unless you put DDR4 inside and it blows up... Whelp I guess Apple kinda bricked your device.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Facing Class Action Lawsuit Over 'Error 53' iPhone 6 Bricking
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unless you put DDR4 inside and it blows up... Whelp I guess Apple kinda bricked your device.
You seem to be getting lost trying to get to where the car analogy makes sense. Bringing up leases just takes us further away from the analogy even trying to make sense.
For the sake of clarity, can we just go with phone ownership and car ownership. No matter what we go with the analogy will fall apart. The manufacturer can't make you do anything, even on a lease. Even if it rises to the level of safety, the manufacturer cannot compel you to do anything. They can issue a recall, which as a consumer, you can choose to ignore. Discussing recalls and reasons takes us even further from the analogy making sense. Suffice it to say, there's no way to make it work. Besides, the fact that outside of Tesla, manufacturers don't sell cars, really makes this an exercise in futility.
Apple's got a problem. They should have handled this differently. The phones are not theirs to brick. Disable Touch ID and give a notification for the reason. There would be no issue right now.
some of you are so desiolusial about apple, there is not hardware damage, is not like some of you are saying: If I buy a car. And change the immobilizer to an aftermarket one. And the car stops working. The car company isn't liable" that is something really different sir, the iphones are bricked because of the software, there was no hardware damage caused by the unofficial pieces,the damage was intentionally made by apple with the software, i can't believe yall can be so blind about it, it's amazing how some of you defend everything apple does, this is ********, i still love apple tho.
About 3 or 4. Some of them worked for the Law Firm now filling the suit. Cheap bastards didn't want to pay for an authorized repair lol...
-Mike
Jyby. What story are you talking about? Reverse engineered part? Not cool just making up stuff. You're wrong about the car too.
The software does its job, detecting potentionally dangerous components and shutting them down. The TouchIDs being installed are not the same TouchIDs Apple designed... So basically it's like installing a Ford starter in a Chevy... It might work but who knows...
Why would you installed a part that someone fabricated anyway? Yeah it's cheaper but do you trust it?
Do these customers even know what they are doing? Do these authorized guys even know what they are doing? Probably not... Not Apples fault.
[doublepost=1455244103][/doublepost]
So you're saying he TouchIDs are OEM? Straight off the Apple floor?
How am I wrong about the car? If you install something into your vehicle and you break it its your fault not the companies...
What I was saying is that when you are at the dealership and they are performing a service and they tell you that a software update has been issued to address some security and other issues and you agreed to install it, then something unexpected can potentially result if there is some part that is present that is identified as not being compatible for some reason. Of course not just any reasoning would apply, and of course what it is that ends up happening because of it is another thing to address, but those aren't the parts I was addressing, which is basically the flow of things leading up to it as can potentially happen.
When are people going to stop suing everybody because they feel entitled to something that is clearly laid out. You get a third party repair you void your warranty...That is clear. After knowing that, you take it to Apple for them to fix it to find that it is voided and now you want to play victim. You buy an Apple device (expensive) spend just a bit more and get the Applecare (not expensive) then don't worry about this problem.
Last edited:
Please, please, please read up on the issue. You are making up way too much stuff, and apologies, but seem to understand even less about the Error-53 issue. It's not about an oem part. Error-53 can be triggered by switching home buttons between iPhones. Please also stop with the car analogies. OEM parts are not required on cars, least of all starters. You can walk into any auto parts store and buy any number of starters made by companies other than Ford or Chevy.
You're wrong because that's not what happened in the Error-53 issue so the analogy is flawed from "How" to the ellipsis.
The replacement home button didn't break the guys phone, it fixed it. The update bricked the phone.
Last edited:
THIS. If a non-genuine touchID is used, simply deny access to all parts of the OS/hardware where touchID is needed. So no touchID to buy stuff in iTunes Store, or unlock the phone, but the rest of the phone should work as normal. Essentially it would be an iPhone without touchID. Very simple. All Apple had to do was deactivate all touchID features/options, not brick the entire phone. Their engineers can't be that stupid to only come to that option.
Isnt it illegal to force a consumer to use only parts manufactured by your own company? I don't even think you can void a warranty for doing so. And no it doesn't matter that its their company policy or that you agreed to the terms. The courts don't bother with company policy when the policy is against the laws policy.
Doesn't everything you wrote take us further from the car analogy being relevant to the topic of Error-53? None of those circumstances are comparable.
But to answer your dealership hypothetical. Dealerships have to warranty their work (this is separate from the warranty on your car). If you bring them a running car, they have to return a running car. 1. They can refuse to work on your car if there are aftermarket parts on it. 2. They can agree to work on your car with aftermarket parts but not have the work covered under your warranty. 3. They can cover it all under the warranty. They cannot force any work to be done.
Actually I think, and someone tell me if I'm off, I think I have a good car analogy:
Programmable car remote key: the remote is convenient but not required to access your car, since you can still use the physical key to open a door.
Touch-ID: touch-id is convenient but not required to access your phone, since you can still use the pin code to access it.
So if you try to get a car remote key via 3rd party and for whatever reason the pairing/programming doesn't work (it's actually happened to my brother), you'd still be able to access your car.
This makes sense since a 'convenient' access feature such as a remote shouldn't brick your car.
Similarly, Apple should still let you use your phone, you'd just not be able to access it via touch-id.
Programmable car remote key: the remote is convenient but not required to access your car, since you can still use the physical key to open a door.
Touch-ID: touch-id is convenient but not required to access your phone, since you can still use the pin code to access it.
So if you try to get a car remote key via 3rd party and for whatever reason the pairing/programming doesn't work (it's actually happened to my brother), you'd still be able to access your car.
This makes sense since a 'convenient' access feature such as a remote shouldn't brick your car.
Similarly, Apple should still let you use your phone, you'd just not be able to access it via touch-id.
Last edited:
You're right, this is the time that you go to Apple and say, sync my damn sensor and flash the phone so I can use it again.
I believe the guy who tried to get his iphone repaired passed his warranty time. Ethic wise, it's wrong to brick someone's phone just because this person needed to get his phone fix.
I have an iPhone 6 that had the bend issue. I didn't get it replaced before the year was up as there is no Apple Store here. The screen started coming off the phone so I tried to glue it down in those parts. Worked for a while but it started coming off again. When I made it to an Apple Store I was told they wouldn't replace the screen because I attempted to glue it and the guy recommended I take it to a place in the mall. I did that. They corrected the bend and replaced the screen but noticed my Touch ID wasn't working. He said not to update it because it could brick it. This was in December.
I understand disabling features because of a Touch ID feature but not bricking the phone.
I understand disabling features because of a Touch ID feature but not bricking the phone.
Apple is getting a lot of bad press from this.. Either way they come out looking like the bad guys on this..
The right thing to do is disable the touch ID, not brick the whole phone. Then offer a realistic replacement price. I think they will do something like this, only after a lot of bad press. Shame the only person who can make Tim move quickly on issues is taylor swift...
Taylor is Tim's executive coach!
The right thing to do is disable the touch ID, not brick the whole phone. Then offer a realistic replacement price. I think they will do something like this, only after a lot of bad press. Shame the only person who can make Tim move quickly on issues is taylor swift...
Taylor is Tim's executive coach!
In some cases, people don't live in areas with Apple service centers (including other countries) and they have little choice but to have a third-party repair center work on their phone. So it isn't as if everyone who has this problem is a mouth-breathing dolt who's trying to charge their phone in the microwave. Believe it or not, a lot of people repair other tech devices with "third parties"--it's great that Apple has Apple stores (and even better that there are like 5 within a few miles of where I live), but it's also not too fair that "authorized" repair places are causing this problem as well. And as a lot of people have been saying, even a specific warning about this would have been better than no warning at all--that's the part that comes off bad to me.
Seems fairly analogous--as in similar in concept, not similar in specifics/details: a replacement of an integral part of the car, a software update, an important incompatibility between what is addressed in the update and the replacement part, and some sort of a resulting consequence. Now, again, the importance and details of the incompatibility can certainly be questioned, just as the resulting consequence.
The most Apple should do is give people the option of having it officially repaired with proof of purchase by a certain time. Give people a opportunity to correct the issue and not lock people out when they really need their phones. This Error 53 was done on purpose with malicious intent to cause property damage.
What if Apple decided to send a silver bullet to phones if it detects a jailbroken device via blown e-fuse or replacement battery? Where do you draw the line? There should be some visibility that this can happen.
What if Apple decided to send a silver bullet to phones if it detects a jailbroken device via blown e-fuse or replacement battery? Where do you draw the line? There should be some visibility that this can happen.
What does that statement have to do with Touch ID bricking the phone? The only thing mentioned there is the inability to use Apple pay, which most people here agree would be necessary. And the last bit is talking about modifying the OS, which is not done whatsoever, with a third party home button.
If the programming of that key is also used to authenticate you to the car, let's say to start it, then you'd seemingly have issues with that too.