France Investigating Apple Over Alleged 'Planned Obsolescence' Arising From Serialized Repair Parts

[Ctrlos]

Actually, although I support free trade this is beginning to look like Europens taking aim at a US company. Perhaps Apple should ask the US government for retaliatory measures like tariffs.

Given the EU's strict food standards laws tariffs on Chlorine-washed chicken isn't going to bother them too much. The EU would just do everything internally. European food is divine!

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I think it's quite ironic that all you people are asking for is making the problem many times worse.

You have to ask why do people steel a thousand dollar phone to sell 1$ parts? Is it perhaps because you can literally not get these parts in any other way.

The best solution would be if repair shops and individuals actually could buy it legitimateely.

The serialisation of the parts helps prevent device theft for parts
if any checks are removed, the only real benefits will be to those selling stolen phones for parts

apples solution may not be ideal, but I’d rather live with it than having the hell it was before

And if that is allowed the next time there is a problem with the device is that problem due to another issue with the device or with the third party part? The new problem then becomes a shoving contest between Apple and the third party supplier. In that case the owner of the device will almost always loose.

Replacing a complicated piece of electronics in a complicated electronic device is not the same a replacing shocks on a 2021 Subaru.

The serialization of the parts also helps to stop the stolen phone racket. If just any part is allowed the profit on stolen devices just went up making the devices more desirable targets. People scream at Apple to reduce the stolen phone market, yet when Apple does so by requiring validated parts, people scream Apple is uncompetitive. It doesn't work both ways.

Why do you think that VIN numbers are stamped on engines, transmissions, differentials and other critical parts of vehicles? It prevents, or helps reduce thefts. Catalytic converters are not serialized and the theft of those parts is rampant. Cars are routinely stolen for parts, with serialize parts more difficult to sell.

I personally would have no issue with a transmission, or any other part of a vehicle that has intelligence, to report it's VIN number back to the control unit and the control unit disabling the vehicle from being started if the VIN numbers do not match.

Rather than reduce functionality on mismatched serial numbers on unauthorized parts, Apple should just refuse to let the part function. Or better yet, brick the phone entirely until it can be resolved and restored by Apple.

If anyone can just grab my phone and use it's parts to repair other phones, by shady operatives, my phone just became much more valuable. My phone may be worth $500.00 to some thief in just the parts.

Or that third parties could manufacture and replace the most commonly destroyed things such as the screen, camera and battery.

The serial number requirement would make sense if it was tied to the warranty period, and once the warranty expires then anything goes.

No that doesn't make sence, a warranty job can take a week while a local shop could do it in 10min.

Serialized repair could be a service for those who need that security.

 

[lkrupp]

Yes, a malware infested camera lens. If they can achieve that level of miniaturization, complexity, and cost, Apple should turn to them instead of Sony for camera modules. 😄

Next thing you'll hear is, don't use third-party MagSafe accessories. Some malware could jump over!

Well, the FBI is recommending user not use public charging ports now. And there’s far more to a camera replacement than a lens you know.

 

[dk001]

Actually that does happen with some vehicle components. Radios in high end cars will refuse to operate if the serial numbers do not match. Designed to prevent theft. In fact, BMW will disable the radio if the power is ever lost completely in the vehicle.



So it is not just Apple that is taking steps to require serial numbers, or codes, for parts to work properly.

Yes and no. Deters theft of the radio, not the vehicle.
Have a similar item on my cars (not BMW) and I can upgrade them via a third party or have it serviced via 3rd party and any activation can be done via the code I received with my cars purchase.

Now if Apple gave us a “security” to use to activate 3rd party repairs … that would be a step in the right direction.

 

[dk001]

Absolutely. Using a third party part has risks. If something does not work in the device is it the third party part? Or is it something else in the device. Having three parties involved, the repair facility, the part manufacturer, and the device manufacturer, where does the blame fall? Each entity is going to blame the other with no one taking responsibility. The consumer loses.

It’s your money.
Penny wise … pound foolish. But that’s cool.

 

[Ctrlos]

This is why I don't spend more than £400 on a phone. If it breaks I can normally afford a new one and then have the old one recycled.

In terms of quality a user is better off not having all their eggs in one basket. An iPhone 14 Pro might do it all but I can buy a Pixel 6a, a Switch and a DSLR for the same cost. All those products are well built (well, they are once I replaced the Joycon sticks with hall effect ones) and I get much better images from a 300mm lens than any camera phone. I don't think I have ever had a DSLR break on me.

 

[raythompsontn]

Well, the FBI is recommending user not use public charging ports now.

The FBI can read the license plate of a vehicle from VGA level black and white camera in a dimly in a dimly lit alley reflected off the hubcap of a ‘57 DeSoto. According to the TV show. We certainly should trust their judgement on public charging ports.

 

[dk001]

Reminds me of the printer industry. More and more DRM with every generation of hardware. They asked consumers to ship empty cartridges back, just to destroy them and reduce the availability of third-party and re-manufactured parts. Current HP printers now need a constant Internet connection to accept a print job.

I am using an HP laser (color) and I can definitely print off line.
And yes, it accepts 3rd party ink, parts, and works just fine.
Yes, and I still get HP updates and it connects to my HP Smart system.
I use it to frequently print OTA from my iDevices and Androids.

I print from my pad direct (line). With the loss of wifi, I printed several items.
How I found out the non-wifi printing is just fine.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I guess you have never heard of "Juice Jacking".

Juice jacking: Why you should avoid public phone charging stations

Hackers can load malware into charging stations at place like airports and malls, allowing them to steal the data of unsuspecting users, experts warn.

www.nbcnews.com

There is firmware in the MagSafe cable. I just recently did an update. So it may be technically possible. I also think the NBC News article was sprinkled with a lot of sensationalism. The UEFI boot BIOS was thought to be very secure. Yet is has been compromised on some MSI motherboards.

If only apple could offer this Serialized verification service for those who really fears the part they bought is fake.

Shocker there's better solution than this anti consumer action. And let the rest of us who don't need apple to hold our hand when we fix our own property.

 

[Wildkraut]

That Apple serial tracking is exaggerating.
It should be something to optionally activate/deactivate by the user, tied to FindMy, and by default set to off.
Just like the Absolute Persistance Module in EFI Bios of Laptop Manufacturers like HP,Dell, etc. that can be activated/deactivated solely by the owner.

It's fine to serialize and track, but bad to block and tie replacement parts to them by default.

 

[dk001]

Is Car Window Etching Effective As Anti-Theft Protection?

Wondering If Car Window Etching is Effective As Anti-Theft Protection? Learn about the benefits of etching your car windows and how it can prevent theft. The car window etching process is quick, easy, and affordable. You will also learn about other ways you can prevent car theft in your...

www.insurancenavy.com

Multiple sources on the web indicating the serializing car parts reduces theft. The same analogy will apply to electronic devices.

This is more of a psychological deterrent.
My insurance stopped giving discounts for this ages ago.
The winner here is usually the dealer who charges you a grand or two for this service.

 

[subjonas]

Good.

While serialized parts allows a record of the repairs and replacement parts on a device, which is especially nice when buying used and refurbished, the hijacking of functionality is the real crime. Screen replacements, for example, on the iPhone 14 series, even when using genuine Apple parts and without "re-pairing" by a certified technician or through SSR, results in the loss of True Tone, auto-brightness, and other critical functionality.

Here's an (incomplete) list of some of the functionality lost when doing a replacement of said part, even when parts are genuine, off of the top of my head:

1. Battery -> loss of battery health metrics
2. Display -> loss of auto-brightness, True Tone, and Face ID
3. Camera -> loss of portrait mode, buggy Camera app functionality, and loss of optical zoom

There is no technical reason why this should be the case - based on teardowns and hardware analysis even -
other than to make non-

EDIT: Some posts below mention the "theft deterrence" argument, where serialized parts may discourage iPhone thefts by making their parts less valuable by inhibiting functionality. There is no evidence to suggest that this is an effective theft "deterrent". In fact, iPhone thefts are up and parts are still being sent to China in record numbers, even with these "deterrents".

Didn’t the repair program just start relatively recently? Not a lot of time for evidence.
Apple doing this to force upgrades or prevent thefts—it’s all pretty speculative at this point.

 

[TheOldChevy]

In general I support all actions (legal or less legal) that go towards repair-ability. But complaining for the serial number tracking is not something that I would complain against. One may consider that these devices are not sufficiently modular to be repaired, that replacement parts are too expensive or that repair requires too complicated tools. But why complain against the serialisation ???

 

[dk001]

Yep, otherwise you get crappy sub standard third party parts that don’t work right. If this is a big deal to you, go android and learn to love malware. (Not making this up, read hackernews,lots and lots of bad software, even comes preonstalled for your convenience)

I guess it is who you use.
We have a 3rd party in our local mall (yes it still exists) who does a great job and is significantly cheaper than the Apple Store.
Does first rate work and have had no issues with several repairs (kids).

 

[JPack]

I am using an HP laser (color) and I can definitely print off line.
And yes, it accepts 3rd party ink, parts, and works just fine.
Yes, and I still get HP updates and it connects to my HP Smart system.
I use it to frequently print OTA from my iDevices and Androids.

I print from my pad direct (line). With the loss of wifi, I printed several items.
How I found out the non-wifi printing is just fine.

Better hang on to your old printer. Many of the current models requires HP account and Internet connection.

 

[fernelius]

Good.

While serialized parts allows a record of the repairs and replacement parts on a device, which is especially nice when buying used and refurbished, the hijacking of functionality is the real crime. Screen replacements, for example, on the iPhone 14 series, even when using genuine Apple parts and without "re-pairing" by a certified technician or through SSR, results in the loss of True Tone, auto-brightness, and other critical functionality.

Here's an (incomplete) list of some of the functionality lost when doing a replacement of said part, even when parts are genuine, off of the top of my head:

1. Battery -> loss of battery health metrics
2. Display -> loss of auto-brightness, True Tone, and Face ID
3. Camera -> loss of portrait mode, buggy Camera app functionality, and loss of optical zoom

There is no technical reason why this should be the case - based on teardowns and hardware analysis even -
other than to make non-genuine parts so crippled to discourage self repair, third party repair or to encourage a device upgrade.

EDIT: Some posts below mention the "theft deterrence" argument, where serialized parts may discourage iPhone thefts by making their parts less valuable by inhibiting functionality. There is no evidence to suggest that this is an effective theft "deterrent". In fact, iPhone thefts are up and parts are still being sent to China in record numbers, even with these "deterrents".

I won’t address your mentions above on Face ID in #2 and the camera in #3 as I don’t have technical experience in those areas.

I will address the battery and loss of health metrics. The discharge curve of lithium batteries makes estimating remaining life and health very difficult. Such batteries retain their voltage rather steadily until they are nearly exhausted and their voltage drops off very severely. Traditionally, voltage is used to estimate remaining capacity, which make that estimate very difficult when you know the manufactured capacity, estimated impurities, etc… For most of the discharge, it appears the battery is near 100% until it nears the end of its capacity and it very quickly drops to 0%. When someone places a battery into the system that may or may not be new and may not meet the OEM tolerances, it becomes impossible to estimate. I do think Apple uses a more complex method to estimate remaining capacity. I don’t have access to their software, but what I’ve observed indicates they’re using number of cycles the battery has experienced, estimated consumption from charged, estimated completion of last charge, and some feedback for the case the battery dies before they estimated it would. A wise (or even mildly wise) engineer would use OEM tolerances and design information to calculate battery life and health. A random battery placed in the system could be noticeably different. If Apple used their calculations for OEM batteries on other batteries, systems would start experiencing unexpected and uncontrolled shut-downs as well as shutdown before they noted to the user shutdown was imminent.

The battery challenge is greatly exacerbated in today’s mobile products because instantaneous power draw can vary incredibly. The processors have very complex and extensive power-saving modes and a number of peripherals that can be shutdown. For Apple’s processors, we don’t have the details; however, I suspect they are at least as complex as TI’s OMAP processors with which I have worked. If the battery is near the end of its capacity, a power spike can easily cause the product to shut down unexpectedly as the system draws more power than the battery can reliably support, the voltage on the battery drops below the allowed (safe) threshold, and the system shuts down with no chance to save unsaved work, close files, close connections, etc… Preventing this on an unknown battery is impossible.

Regarding autobrightness and truetone on the display, displays from different manufacturers and even from a given manufacturer can vary significantly in brightness and color. If Apple used parameters for their OEM display on a random display, it could easily be a poor user experience as the random display would likely not have the same characteristics.

Your comments suggest that Apple is using commodity (widely available parts). Apple is known for working very closely with their suppliers to create a very specific user experience. For the significant parts (outside of popcorn parts/basic resistors, capacitors, etc…) they use custom parts. This doesn’t allow a person to grab a part off the shelf and expect the same user-experience or functionality with the software — even when the part works electrically in the system.

Edit: I meant to add note of your comment of use of genuine parts… First, Apple has to have a way of identifying “genuine”; making sure the part has the “code” or serial number when installed no a given device is one way of doing that. Further, there has been suspicion published on MacRumors before that Apple calibrates some displays to a device to provide some of the capabilities they offer. This could be particularly likely for Reference Mode, which you don’t mention. It could be true of Truetone.

Finally, I do agree with those that note theft deterrence as a further reason Apple does this. You are right that incidents of chopping phones for parts have been going up. That doesn’t necessarily mean Apple’s approach in this space doesn’t hold back this increase. At the insistence of the NYPD and other law enforcement agencies, Apple developed the Find My lock, which reduced the number of stolen phones dramatically. Some time ago, they started seeing a rise of parts being sold from phones that were locked. Requiring serial number matches will decrease the attractiveness of parts that don’t match making those who buy stolen parts (intentionally or unintentionally) less satisfied (as you note your dissatisfaction with Apple’s disabling of some functions for mismatched parts above). Apple’s relatively high repair prices are probably (and the discovery by some that they can take parts out of stolen phones and sell them) the reason the number of stolen devices has risen again.

 

[Wildkraut]

Is Car Window Etching Effective As Anti-Theft Protection?

Wondering If Car Window Etching is Effective As Anti-Theft Protection? Learn about the benefits of etching your car windows and how it can prevent theft. The car window etching process is quick, easy, and affordable. You will also learn about other ways you can prevent car theft in your...

www.insurancenavy.com

Multiple sources on the web indicating the serializing car parts reduces theft. The same analogy will apply to electronic devices.

Yeah, serializing is okay, but what Apple is doing is more like: Not allowing you to change your wheels without making an appointment in an official Apple Garage to approve the Wheels replacement for a fee.

This is not Apples business it's the user business, good that France is investigating.
I hope EU Right-To-Repair Act get an update soon.

 

[canadianreader]

So you are ok with your phones being stolen and shipped to China to be parted out?

Reuse the stolen parts or landfill 🤔 A true ethical and moral conundrum.

 

[dk001]

Better hang on to your old printer. Many of the current models requires HP account and Internet connection.

Mine is around 5-6 years old.
I have an account with them but don't do anything with it.

Didn't realize the new ones require all that.
Bugger.

 

[Wildkraut]

Better hang on to your old printer. Many of the current models requires HP account and Internet connection.

They got fined once, and it's now boiling up again, just a matter of time until HP & Co. get another but much stronger slap.

 

[fernelius]

Reuse the stolen parts or landfill 🤔 A true ethical and moral conundrum.

… or recover/reuse the raw materials (e.g. page 31+ at https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/Apple_Environmental_Progress_Report_2023.pdf). I recommend not sending your phone to the landfill (or its parts).

 

[jimbobb24]

So you are ok with your phones being stolen and shipped to China to be parted out?

Second comment nails it.

IFixit only sees their interests. I what it as hard as possible for phones to be seen as easy money for modern chop shops.

 

[Wanted797]

The serialisation of the parts helps prevent device theft for parts
if any checks are removed, the only real benefits will be to those selling stolen phones for parts

apples solution may not be ideal, but I’d rather live with it than having the hell it was before

What hell it was before are you talking about?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I won’t address your mentions above on Face ID in #2 and the camera in #3 as I don’t have technical experience in those areas.

I will address the battery and loss of health metrics. The discharge curve of lithium batteries makes estimating remaining life and health very difficult. Such batteries retain their voltage rather steadily until they are nearly exhausted and their voltage drops off very severely. Traditionally, voltage is used to estimate remaining capacity, which make that estimate very difficult when you know the manufactured capacity, estimated impurities, etc… For most of the discharge, it appears the battery is near 100% until it nears the end of its capacity and it very quickly drops to 0%. When someone places a battery into the system that may or may not be new and may not meet the OEM tolerances, it becomes impossible to estimate. I do think Apple uses a more complex method to estimate remaining capacity. I don’t have access to their software, but what I’ve observed indicates they’re using number of cycles the battery has experienced, estimated consumption from charged, estimated completion of last charge, and some feedback for the case the battery dies before they estimated it would. A wise (or even mildly wise) engineer would use OEM tolerances and design information to calculate battery life and health. A random battery placed in the system could be noticeably different. If Apple used their calculations for OEM batteries on other batteries, systems would start experiencing unexpected and uncontrolled shut-downs as well as shutdown before they noted to the user shutdown was imminent.

The battery challenge is greatly exacerbated in today’s mobile products because instantaneous power draw can vary incredibly. The processors have very complex and extensive power-saving modes and a number of peripherals that can be shutdown. For Apple’s processors, we don’t have the details; however, I suspect they are at least as complex as TI’s OMAP processors with which I have worked. If the battery is near the end of its capacity, a power spike can easily cause the product to shut down unexpectedly as the system draws more power than the battery can reliably support, the voltage on the battery drops below the allowed (safe) threshold, and the system shuts down with no chance to save unsaved work, close files, close connections, etc… Preventing this on an unknown battery is impossible.

Regarding autobrightness and truetone on the display, displays from different manufacturers and even from a given manufacturer can vary significantly in brightness and color. If Apple used parameters for their OEM display on a random display, it could easily be a poor user experience as the random display would likely not have the same characteristics.

Your comments suggest that Apple is using commodity (widely available parts). Apple is known for working very closely with their suppliers to create a very specific user experience. For the significant parts (outside of popcorn parts/basic resistors, capacitors, etc…) they use custom parts. This doesn’t allow a person to grab a part off the shelf and expect the same user-experience or functionality with the software — even when the part works electrically in the system.

Edit: I meant to add note of your comment of use of genuine parts… First, Apple has to have a way of identifying “genuine”; making sure the part has the “code” or serial number when installed no a given device is one way of doing that. Further, there has been suspicion published on MacRumors before that Apple calibrates some displays to a device to provide some of the capabilities they offer. This could be particularly likely for Reference Mode, which you don’t mention. It could be true of Truetone.

Finally, I do agree with those that note theft deterrence as a further reason Apple does this. You are right that incidents of chopping phones for parts have been going up. That doesn’t necessarily mean Apple’s approach in this space doesn’t hold back this increase. At the insistence of the NYPD and other law enforcement agencies, Apple developed the Find My lock, which reduced the number of stolen phones dramatically. Some time ago, they started seeing a rise of parts being sold from phones that were locked. Requiring serial number matches will decrease the attractiveness of parts that don’t match making those who buy stolen parts (intentionally or unintentionally) less satisfied (as you note your dissatisfaction with Apple’s disabling of some functions for mismatched parts above). Apple’s relatively high repair prices are probably (and the discovery by some that they can take parts out of stolen phones and sell them) the reason the number of stolen devices has risen again.

The problem is nothing yous aid make sence if you actually think about it for two seconds.

Nothing of this needed to be done before. The iphone don't need to know anything but the information given by the chips on the part is correct. You say that users might have a bad experience with a fake art, while missing the giant elephant known as having an unusable part that gives the worst experience possible.

The i ly reason why people can't grab it of the shelf is because it's illegal to sell them off the shelves as spare parts.

 

[Wanted797]

I'm not happy about the serial number requirement, but this part is crazy. Apple has been criticized for years for not giving customers the ability to repair their own phones, but now they're being criticized for giving customers the tools they need to repair them? They can't win.

Because it was a bull**** farce to pretend they care about self repair to keep legislators off their backs.

You don’t need the tools they ship you. You can do it with 3 tools ifixit send you.

People buy their phones and they become their property. They should be allowed to repair their own property. Apple is pretending to care about the environment while preventing people from being able to make small repairs to keep using their current phone or forcing them to pay Apple their repair/replacement rate. Which is usually so close to a new phone people don’t bother.