I can guarantee that didnt happen. If so they can plead that case with Apple... Dont worry any authorized repair is in the history.
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 Releases Updated Version of iOS 9.2.1 to Fix Devices Bricked by 'Error 53'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sorry but that's not what had been reported. Doesn't 5. The OP was wrong on several accounts...
Because it's a lot cheaper?? And many of them are very good at what they do. Until this issue popped up, I'm sure there were lots of people asking the opposite question. Why would anybody pay Apple $XX when this other guy will fix it for way less?
Because you get what you pay for?
You do realize the actual modular repair service Apple provides is not profitable yes?
They are using actual official Apple parts.
There's a reason the repairs are cheaper ie. non-licensed techs and knockoff parts.
Why would you risk going to a repair shop?
At least at Apple if the repair is unsuccessful, they have the resources to replace your device if necessary...
I see it all the time...
The repair is unsuccessful and then for some reason the people go back to the genius bar and complain that their phone doesn't turn on.
That's like taking your BMW to Joe the mechanic to have work done and he messes it up... Then you go to BMW to complain that the car isn't working right.
As in a deeper investigation revealed a bug/issue that was fixed?
Where are all the apple apologists who defended the original stance at? 
Glad they got heat and reversed course hurray for owning your hardware.
[doublepost=1455910535][/doublepost]
it is low risk and doesn't hurt at all to get a second opinion.
Apple's repair markup is just not worth it for many.
Also you don't think the thousand's of repair shops that are owned and operated by people whose entire career is dedicated to understanding the ins and outs of iPhone repairs won't know how to repair your iPhone. If the business has shoddy reviews people simply stop going back to said shop. It is in the best interest of the said shop to offer a quality repair for a fair price.
Glad they got heat and reversed course hurray for owning your hardware.
[doublepost=1455910535][/doublepost]
Cost simply
it is low risk and doesn't hurt at all to get a second opinion.
Apple's repair markup is just not worth it for many.
Also you don't think the thousand's of repair shops that are owned and operated by people whose entire career is dedicated to understanding the ins and outs of iPhone repairs won't know how to repair your iPhone
. If the business has shoddy reviews people simply stop going back to said shop. It is in the best interest of the said shop to offer a quality repair for a fair price.
Last edited:
If Apple's repair service was not profitable, you would reasonably expect parts and labor costs would be roughly the same as third party repair shops rather than significantly higher, because while you can argue they use 'official' parts and have higher overheads, the difference in repair costs would not be quite as great as it is.
There is also no real evidence to say that third party repairers are not using the same parts as Apple themselves - there are not many sources for the specific parts in question here, and no reason the same production lines used to supply iPhone manufacturers could not also be supplying the third party servicing chain.
And, unfortunately, the reality is that even in Apple's home country, there are plenty of people who are considerable distance from an Apple store or authorized repair center, while third party repair shops with excellent reputations are far more accessible.
Not really, unless BMW had hidden a flaw into the design of the vehicle to ensure that if Joe the mechanic worked on the car it would then fail to start, and then failed to mention the fact this would be the case in any of the vehicle's documentation. In that instance, the owner has no way to know the hazard of using Joe the mechanic, thus BMW would still be at fault for not making this information available to the owner.
The phones worked after the repair. Apple then "broke" the phone. The fact is, the law doesn't allow for Apple to prevent 3rd party repair. Apple doesn't have to cover the 3rd party parts for warranty issues. They do, however, have to cover everything else.
[doublepost=1455929021][/doublepost]
Not at all. That's like taking your BMW to Joe the mechanic to have work done and he fixes it... Then you go to BMW and they break it because you had someone else do the work.
Well if your phone is bricked (and thats the only people this update is for) how on earth are you going to perform an over the air update? Engage brain before posting.
Most of the glass I've bought from various websites in China and sellers on eBay have all looked inferior, felt greasier, and attracted more fingerprints than the original glass. Some sellers have even quoted me a dollar more on original glass(the original LCDs are a lot more, but most factories use refurb original LCDs with cheap glass any way). You can sell cracked glass, copy LCD screens for $15 and cracked glass, original LCDs for around $35. This has been the case going all the way back to the 3G(never bought 1st gen screens due to price).
Apple doesn't have the capacity to service every broken iPhone, but they could hire thousands of new employees for that if 3rd-party shops didn't exist or couldn't do any repairs.
Apple doesn't have the capacity to service every broken iPhone, but they could hire thousands of new employees for that if 3rd-party shops didn't exist or couldn't do any repairs.
Nice going apple. I was surprised how many people supported them when it was obviously questionable.At least we all can all get over the car analogies now..........
Sure they could have said that then they would have lost their butts in court. Apple wasn't being "nice" to fix it... they know they would have been forced in court to do so if they didn't on their own. Don't be so naive
[doublepost=1456105175][/doublepost]
So you want the government to be able to tell a company to write software that will allow them to enter any iPhone..... Ok. I'm for apple telling the government to go F themselves but against apple bricking people's phone because they wanted to or couldn't pay the apple price to fix their phone. Apple shouldn't have the ability to tell me where I get my phone fixed and the government shouldn't have the ability to tell apple to write a program that allows them into any iPhone.....
Or they simply investigated and found a bug behind it all that they then fixed.
AAAHHHHH! The 13D20 version of 9.2.1 caused my touch ID to break!!!!!!
Is there a way to restore to the older version?
Article Link: Apple Releases Updated Version of iOS 9.2.1 to Fix Devices Bricked by 'Error 53'[/QUOTE]
Is there a way to restore to the older version?
Article Link: Apple Releases Updated Version of iOS 9.2.1 to Fix Devices Bricked by 'Error 53'[/QUOTE]
Apple is denying any reimbursement for my case. I had in September paid the out of warranty fee to replace my cousin's iPhone when he had a third party repair shop replace his screen and later updated the iPhone. Upon doing so, his iPhone was bricked with error 53.
After bringing this to AppleCare, they researched it, investigated it, and denied reimbursement. They are not familiar with the issue and are calling Apple Retailers for help. They called the Apple Retailer that I had taken my cousin's phone to which told AppleCare that the phone was in parts and that caused me to he denied.
The phone was in the box in 2 halves ready for have Apple to replace the front display. Only they didn't. They said because the phone was opened up by a third party, this voided the warranty and they could not touch it. They told AppleCare that the condition of the iPhone would not allow it to work even if it was reassembled.
I'm not about to fight Apple on this. But customers should beware, Apple is not reimbursing out of warranty fees without headache.
After bringing this to AppleCare, they researched it, investigated it, and denied reimbursement. They are not familiar with the issue and are calling Apple Retailers for help. They called the Apple Retailer that I had taken my cousin's phone to which told AppleCare that the phone was in parts and that caused me to he denied.
The phone was in the box in 2 halves ready for have Apple to replace the front display. Only they didn't. They said because the phone was opened up by a third party, this voided the warranty and they could not touch it. They told AppleCare that the condition of the iPhone would not allow it to work even if it was reassembled.
I'm not about to fight Apple on this. But customers should beware, Apple is not reimbursing out of warranty fees without headache.
Last edited:
Seems like that specific situation is somewhat different than those related to this. The phone was in pieces and it seems like this was done way before the latest issues related to this which was only introduced in iOS 9.2.1.
Error 53 has been around for a while. Only recently has it made the news. The phone was in 2 halves, not pieces. But I understand that it looks bad, however, I would never have had to go to Apple in the first place if Apple didn't leave that "factory test" code in place.
The difference is that error 53 actually disabled phones as of iOS 9.2.1 rather than doing something else (like just disabling TouchID) given that there was an inadvertent inclusion of a factory test only in that version and not before it. That's why something before that version would be different. As for halves, well, that's 2 pieces, and that's not a whole phone, and that's certainly different as well.
My cousin's phone was disabled. iTunes reported error 53. The phone had a connect to iTunes screen. So it was disabled.
But seemingly for different reasons than what was happening here that was due to something that was only introduced and then fixed in iOS 9.2.1 specifically. (In addition to it already not being all in one piece which could have indicated something more behind it, even if there might not have been.)
The main thing I'm trying to say is that the situation you are describing differs in various aspects from the particular one that what the article in this thread is about, which means that the particulars of what Apple might do or more specifically not do in that situation don't necessrily mean anything in particular for those that are dealing with the situation specially related to the article.
Last edited:
A 3rd party finger print scanner should have an embedded chip inside which could connect to wifi devices and do anything is decides.