Apple on iPhone Battery Locking Issue: We Want to Make Sure Battery Replacement is Done Properly

[Defthand]

Don't lie about what I said. I never once stated OEM batteries could ONLY come from stolen devices.

You're correct. Nonetheless, you insisted no one would use a recycled battery unless it came from a stolen device...

Why? What reason could there be to take a battery from one iPhone and install it into another iPhone?

There is none. Except that the donor iPhone is a stolen iPhone being salvaged for parts. This identifies such a practice.

My question is this: Do you think thwarting stolen parts is reason enough to allow Apple's battery authentication feature? If not, then the concern about stolen parts is pointless. It detracts from the effort to determine Apple's actual motive.

 

[I7guy]

Sigh. Imagine this same repair shop changed out some of the expensive oem parts for identical expensive oem parts, and you suddenly see a strange alert that suggest that there is still a problem. All apple is doing is flagging a situation where the phone has been opened using an alert that any person would think meant that the parts are faulty when they aren’t.

Interestingly enough, Apple doesn’t own my iPhone, so something they can’t authorize or unauthorize people to fix my phone. Only I can. People don’t get authorized to build personal PCs because they don’t need to. They bought the hardware, they own the hardware.

But you’re right about potentially weakening the water resistance. I couldn’t bear to not be able to use my phone during my vigorous 2 hour swimming routine. I wouldn’t want to hurt my phone’s water resistance in exchange for replacing my broken battery so I can actually use my phone, and I certainly wouldn’t want at least the choice for a new battery in exchange for slightly worse water resistance. My water resistance is far too valuable to even dare touch my battery, and Apple is so nice that they will give me a scary alert for any replacement battery so that I won’t make the same mistake again. Damn those third party repair shops!

You’re right, I’m far too stupid to be able to make responsible choices and choose for myself if I want to replace my battery or not. How can Apple expect me to do research or understand the consequences of my actions?

You know what, I’ll just get a new iPhone. No need to think much about that decision if I have the money for it. Frankly the stress of my phone not having 100% stock water resistance is too much. Even if my phone now has a longer battery life, the battery didn’t come from Tim Cook himself so it might blow up my phone or make it run Android.
[doublepost=1565965695][/doublepost]

That suggests that the second a new iPhone is turned on, the battery becomes “used” and inadequate. Despite the battery working fine, you’re suggesting that if I take the battery out and put it in a different phone, it’s “already used” so I shouldn’t expect it to work.

That also suggests that anything that is not completely brand new is faulty.

Sigh. Nobody said it wasn't your phone. And if you decide to change out the battery, any side effect of doing that is one you. However, if you decide to sell your phone to a third party, is it your opinion the third party should be notified you opened up your phone and swapped out the battery. It is Apple's opinion.

 

[mi7chy]

You all remind me of BMW owners who complain when their cheap parts fail or don’t operate as factory. Or use shady mechanics because “it’s too expensive... I can only afford to floss, not maintain“

Mindless consumers automatically assume original equipment parts are the best you can get but that's not always the case. For example, BMW branded battery is crap. Since switching to Sears Diehard AGM my car no longer blows light bulbs. Smart consumers like the freedom of doing their own research, using their choice of parts and if you want something done right you DIY rather than relying on stealerships or even independent shops.

 

[Defthand]

Sigh. Imagine this same unscrupulous repair shop changed out some of the expensive oem parts for cheaper alternatives, would you want to know about it? All apple is doing is flagging a situation where the phone has been opened, potentially mitigating the water resistance and the battery changed by an unauthorized party.

Apple didn't inform customers that their aging batteries needing replacing. They tried to hide the fact instead. What makes you think they care now that your out-of-warranty hardware isn't compromised?

 

[YoYoBoBo]

Sigh. Nobody said it wasn't your phone. And if you decide to change out the battery, any side effect of doing that is one you. However, if you decide to sell your phone to a third party, is it your opinion the third party should be notified you opened up your phone and swapped out the battery. It is Apple's opinion.

Sure. That would be cool. Tell me when Apple implements that.

 

[I7guy]

Sure. That would be cool. Tell me when Apple implements that.

Think they are already doing that. However, you will get the "battery warning" no matter what.
[doublepost=1565969091][/doublepost]

Apple didn't inform customers that their aging batteries needing replacing. They tried to hide the fact instead. What makes you think they care now that your out-of-warranty hardware isn't compromised?

All we are all trying to do is read between lines on this one.

 

[Bawstun]

What on earth are you babbling on about? Apple's brand equity being the beating heart of their entire business is one of the most conspicuous facts in the known universe and ol' Timmy realises this just fine.

It doesn’t appear that way. Throttlegate was disastrous to general consumers / potential Android switchers. The butterfly keyboard recalls have ruined the image a bit of MacBooks, the flight recall of 2015 MacBooks being banned, the Siri transcription story of people listening in on drug deals and couples having sex, the loss of Ive and him basically confirming it is due to a lack of talent and creativity within the company, and a few more. It’s basically been one unmitigated public relations nightmare one after another after another. It’s one small reason sales of iPhones are down double digits, 3 consecutive quarters, and iOS marketshare has slipped domestically & abroad. It’s only the beginning if they don’t turn things around quick.

 

[Zeitkind]

So? Swapping a genuine OEM transmission from one BMW to another identical BMW not only presents a warning, but the vehicle won’t even drive.

Stupid comparison. In most newer cars the controllers are locked due to the anti-theft-device, patching the immobilizer is made impossible for a good reason. If you reuse the original mechatronics of the transmission, the new transmission works without any problems. Only if the mechatronics/controller is broken, you need a trusted repair shop.
Replacing a battery in a mobile phone has nothing to do with anti-theft-devices, only the main board / CPU-board is locked in Android phones. Apple adds some more parts, but well, there is no real technical necessity for this. That's why I have Android phones for years...

 

[realtuner]

Mindless consumers automatically assume original equipment parts are the best you can get but that's not always the case. For example, BMW branded battery is crap. Since switching to Sears Diehard AGM my car no longer blows light bulbs. Smart consumers like the freedom of doing their own research, using their choice of parts and if you want something done right you DIY rather than relying on stealerships or even independent shops.

As someone who works in automotive engineering (specifically on electrical systems) and have also worked with (and am extremely familiar with) BMW in the past, I don't believe you for a second.

Which specific model of BMW do you drive and which specific bulbs was it supposedly blowing?

 

[I7guy]

It doesn’t appear that way. Throttlegate was disastrous to general consumers / potential Android switchers.

I don't think this is necessarily the case and certainly nothing that can be proved or disproved.

The butterfly keyboard recalls have ruined the image a bit of MacBooks, the flight recall of 2015 MacBooks being banned,

The flight banning is just procedure and kudos to the gov't for having a procedure in place to deal with this.

the Siri transcription story of people listening in on drug deals and couples having sex,

From the get-go, this was a non-issue. However one can spin this any which way.

the loss of Ive and him basically confirming it is due to a lack of talent and creativity within the company, and a few more.

Again, something that could be spun any which way.

It’s basically been one unmitigated public relations nightmare one after another after another. It’s one small reason sales of iPhones are down double digits, 3 consecutive quarters, and iOS marketshare has slipped domestically & abroad. It’s only the beginning if they don’t turn things around quick.

IMO, it has been anything but an unmitigated pr disaster. Many people just use their iphones and enjoy them. A few MR posters out of the hundreds of millions of customers make a stink about it (rightfully or wrongfully). And with Apple pulling in $52B or so last quarter, it shows they are doing fine.

But all of that is not tied to the thread topic, which is something else that can be spun around in a circle.

 

[ahmede]

Until us apple fanboys stand firm together and hold off purchasing any 2019 model for at least a year, will Apple continue to exploit us with rediculous terms and conditions and repair costs.

The quality of their products has been sliding dramatically over the past few years.

Its time to show Apple the middle finger.

 

[Hanson Eigilson]

Apple doesn't want to report a battery health metric of a battery for which they don't know the exact specs and/or quality. Makes perfect sense to me. That being said, is there a technical reason the phone can't identify a genuine battery on its own without relying on a service status 'reset' using proprietary software?

yeah that's actually not how anyone make accurate battery metrics. But i'm sure marketing departments like it

 

[2010mini]

Mindless consumers automatically assume original equipment parts are the best you can get but that's not always the case. For example, BMW branded battery is crap. Since switching to Sears Diehard AGM my car no longer blows light bulbs. Smart consumers like the freedom of doing their own research, using their choice of parts and if you want something done right you DIY rather than relying on stealerships or even independent shops.

Real BMW enthusiasts use only OEM or upgraded parts. (When I say OEM I don’t mean dealer parts.) And use mechanics that are BMW trained and certified.

And those of us who wrench on our cars don’t expect BMW to certify it was done correctly.

People spend up to and over $1k for a phone but balk at a measly $79+ to replace the battery at a certified retailer?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Would you want the electronics in the car flagging up this for any future owners.

If I’m an honest person, then I absolutely would want them to know. Either by the electronics telling them OR, as a part of full disclosure, I’m just going to tell them. That way, they have the option of having it immediately replaced by an authorized shop if they like... and they’ll likely pay me less because they may not want to buy the car otherwise.

If I want to protect my profit margin on the sale of the car by any means, then I wouldn’t tell them about this, or how my catalytic converter doesn’t work anymore... or how the Air Conditioner fuse burns out all by itself every three months, but I have no idea why In your specific example, it seems as if Apple IS protecting consumers much in the same way that a vehicle history report does.



For anyone in that market regularly, how much is this likely to decrease the resell value of the phone? I mean, if you’re just going to resell the phone, you get it replaced by Apple or an authorized service location, and pass that cost along to the buyer. If you change the battery yourself though, is the new owner going to want to subtract the entire cost of replacing the battery by Apple themselves? Because, Apple’s not the only entity here hoping to maintain their profits.

 

[kingfish78]

Ok, they sued. But did they win against GM?
If they did then America has a problem. A big one.

Had they not been able to locate someone who could provide sworn testimony as to the condition of the vehicle when it was sold - they would have won. And you're right... it's a big problem in America. Tort lawsuits like these are countless and have tied up our litigation system terribly. Ever wonder why it takes months to get a case on the docket?

 

[Tech198]

Sigh. Imagine you had your car fixed by a roadside recovery service because you could not reach an authorised dealer. Would you want the electronics in the car flagging up this for any future owners even if the repair was done by a competent person using high-quality parts. Apple is not trying to protect consumers. It is trying to protect its very high profit margins.

Sigh. Imagine this same repair shop changed out some of the expensive oem parts for identical expensive oem parts, and you suddenly see a strange alert that suggest that there is still a problem. All apple is doing is flagging a situation where the phone has been opened using an alert that any person would think meant that the parts are faulty when they aren’t.

Interestingly enough, Apple doesn’t own my iPhone, so they can’t authorize or unauthorize people to fix my phone. Only I can. People don’t get authorized to build personal PCs because they don’t need to. They bought the hardware, they own the hardware..

Would you buy AppleCare from eBay and expect always to get coverage ?

Apple is just trying to keep things legit... Take out the 'high profit Apple makes, and you'd be saying the same thing..

It just used at as a foot hold when you mention 'profit It may be Apple wants to protects its profit, it may not be, but its a good reason to call it that.

Interestingly, once you mention "a company makes a lot of money" you can use that as a defense for just about anything that might crop up later. regardless.

 

[cosmichobo]

Apples ignorance when it comes to Apple Stores is a joke. Do they even realize that they DON'T HAVE STORES to support the majority of replacements?
In Austria for example we have only ONE Apple Store -and that is new. So you have to turn to "Apple authorized resellers" to take care of it. And they will just send the phone away for battery replacement.

Sending a phone away for battery replacement is beyond ridiculous. Not just has the customer to backup all his data, has no phone for 1-2 weeks but also is the shipping around all but green.

In the car industry we have the law here that the OEM must not refuse warranty if the maintenance has not been done in an OEM authorized service center. I think this also applies to computers as well since the "warranty void if opened" stickers are not necessarility relevant here.
Next law that is needed is FRAND for spare parts. I.e. the OEM has to make genuine spare parts available for a reasonable price to 3rd party repair facilities. Especially when they lock down the device to only properly work with genuine parts (which makes sense in some ways).

Australia sounds similar in some regards, @[AUT] Thomas.

There's actually a few Apple Stores here now, and we have a fair few authorised repairers, but they would only cover probably half the population. And I expect similarly - they probably just ship phones to a central location for repairs.

And with regard to the automotive industry - our "Australian Competition and Consumer Commission" has also passed laws to ensure that customers do not have to return to the manufacturer for repairs / service. I am sure they will have something to say about this!

 

[charlituna]

"We want to make sure we are remunerated correctly."

Seriously, the battery warning should not pop up with a genuine OEM battery salvaged from another iPhone.

but a salvaged battery is not necessarily a healthy one. so the warning still applies.
[doublepost=1566064213][/doublepost]

Except that the donor iPhone is a stolen iPhone being salvaged for parts. This identifies such a practice.

or it's a phone that was damaged and it's not worth fixing those parts. but one believes that even with a smashed to **** screen and a slightly bent body the battery might be fine

 

[JPack]

but a salvaged battery is not necessarily a healthy one. so the warning still applies.

Have you read the warning message? Your logic makes no sense.

 

[castlerock]

What of the countless unscrupulous dealers and repairs shops who put subpar wares in your device?

Caveat emptor. That's none of Apple's business. Some of the ****ery that Apple engages in would make an interesting class-action lawsuit on behalf of repair business. The way I see it, Apple engages in tortious interference in the repair shop's business with their customers by trying to brick Apple devices that aren't repaired by Apple.
[doublepost=1566070380][/doublepost]

So? Swapping a genuine OEM transmission from one BMW to another identical BMW not only presents a warning, but the vehicle won’t even drive.

Good lord, I knew BMW were evil (like making you subscribe so CarPlay works on their built-in radio- the code for which Apple provides to them for free!) but that really takes the cake. All the more reason I'm not going to buy a car that is, anyway, a well-known shorthand for "owner is a jerk."

 

[Zeitkind]

Good lord, I knew BMW were evil (like making you subscribe so CarPlay works on their built-in radio- the code for which Apple provides to them for free!) but that really takes the cake. All the more reason I'm not going to buy a car that is, anyway, a well-known shorthand for "owner is a jerk."

All car manufactures do this nowadays. Not for fun, it's part of an anti-theft-protection. The electric parts are kinda locked to prevent any easy bypassing of the immobilizer.

 

[curtvaughan]

Sigh. Nobody said it wasn't your phone. And if you decide to change out the battery, any side effect of doing that is one you. However, if you decide to sell your phone to a third party, is it your opinion the third party should be notified you opened up your phone and swapped out the battery. It is Apple's opinion.

I would have no problem adding that my used iPhone had had its battery replaced prior to selling it. If the replacement is working just fine, why would I be reluctant to say so? It's a used phone, and if the replacement battery is in better shape than the original that would actually be good for the buyer, who wouldn't be saddled with immediately needing to buy a new battery. If Apple wants to be above board in this warning "feature", it should be honest. Here's the actual warning:

“Unable to verify this iPhone has a genuine Apple battery. Health information not available for this battery.”

Let's dissect this a little:

1) Unable to verify this iPhone has a genuine Apple battery.

Is that the whole truth? No, it isn't, as that warning is given with _any_ non-original battery in the phone which doesn't have the battery detection software reset (which only Apple or its authorized repair tech's can do). Even Apple batteries will trip this warning otherwise. A better "warning" would be "This is not the original battery supplied with this phone, and it was replaced by a non-authorize Apple repair shop or technician." That would be true and not misleading.

2) Health information not available for this battery.

That is a bit vague and ambiguous, leading to multiple interpretations. Is it really true that the battery health of the replacement battery isn't measurable? Not really - what it means is that the battery health software supplied by Apple will not do the health measurements if the installed battery is non-original to the phone and the needed software "reset" was not performed (only doable by Apple authorized repair tech's). Again, a more accurate second sentence: "iPhone battery health software will not work with non-authorized Apple batteries."

The actual message provided would tend to alarm potential buyers of the used iPhone, and is an annoying chastisement of the iPhone owner who had the battery replaced. If I'm the iPhone owner who had the battery replaced, do I really need to be scolded by this Apple warning? Shouldn't I expect my $1000 phone to at least provide me with battery health information? Doesn't it have a side effect of making me regret having had the battery replaced by an independent repair shop? This is very disingenuous of Apple.

 

[I7guy]

I would have no problem adding that my used iPhone had had its battery replaced prior to selling it. If the replacement is working just fine, why would I be reluctant to say so? It's a used phone, and if the replacement battery is in better shape than the original that would actually be good for the buyer, who wouldn't be saddled with immediately needing to buy a new battery. If Apple wants to be above board in this warning "feature", it should be honest. Here's the actual warning:

“Unable to verify this iPhone has a genuine Apple battery. Health information not available for this battery.”

Let's dissect this a little:

1) Unable to verify this iPhone has a genuine Apple battery.

Is that the whole truth? No, it isn't, as that warning is given with _any_ non-original battery in the phone which doesn't have the battery detection software reset (which only Apple or its authorized repair tech's can do). Even Apple batteries will trip this warning otherwise. A better "warning" would be "This is not the original battery supplied with this phone, and it was replaced by a non-authorize Apple repair shop or technician." That would be true and not misleading.

2) Health information not available for this battery.

That is a bit vague and ambiguous, leading to multiple interpretations. Is it really true that the battery health of the replacement battery isn't measurable? Not really - what it means is that the battery health software supplied by Apple will not do the health measurements if the installed battery is non-original to the phone and the needed software "reset" was not performed (only doable by Apple authorized repair tech's). Again, a more accurate second sentence: "iPhone battery health software will not work with non-authorized Apple batteries."

The actual message provided would tend to alarm potential buyers of the used iPhone, and is an annoying chastisement of the iPhone owner who had the battery replaced. If I'm the iPhone owner who had the battery replaced, do I really need to be scolded by this Apple warning? Shouldn't I expect my $1000 phone to at least provide me with battery health information? Doesn't it have a side effect of making me regret having had the battery replaced by an independent repair shop? This is very disingenuous of Apple.

There are clearly all different sides to this message that was recently implemented by Apple. Whether or not the message stays as is when IOS 13 is finally released is anybodys' guess.

However, the error message is not misleading and I'm going to guess there will be a button that reads "learn more" on the screen when this message is displayed. The message is designed to alert the buyer the phone has been opened up by an unauthorized party and:
1. potentially breaking the ip rating
2. there is a potential non-apple approved battery installed

The phone will still work.

 

[macfacts]

As someone who works in automotive engineering (specifically on electrical systems) and have also worked with (and am extremely familiar with) BMW in the past, I don't believe you for a second.

Which specific model of BMW do you drive and which specific bulbs was it supposedly blowing?

 

[realtuner]

Next time you might want to read before posting completely irrelevant videos.

@mi7chy stated: For example, BMW branded battery is crap. Since switching to Sears Diehard AGM my car no longer blows light bulbs.

The implication is clear: The cheap BMW battery was responsible for his blowing bulbs and his bulbs stopped blowing when he switched to a better Sears battery.

• The vehicle in this video is an E53 X5. This vehicle did not use AGM batteries and did not come with an IBS cable (negative battery cable with embedded micro controller to monitor battery voltage/current). These two components are used together in BMWs. Whatever vehicle @mi7chy drives, it's not something as old as an E53 as he clearly mentioned needing an AGM battery.
• The issue with this vehicle is not bulbs blowing, but the plastic socket that holds the bulb melting from too much heat (a common occurrence not just on BMW, but many vehicles which use this type of bulb holder/socket). The picture you linked/highlighted clearly shows a heat damaged socket, not a blown light bulb.
• This video offers absolutely no proof that a bad or poor quality vehicle battery will cause bulbs to blow and that replacing that battery will somehow magically stop your bulbs from blowing.