Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
i dont understand this logic. Ebay maybe, but If you get your phone repaired anywhere BUT apple, its not going to be a genuine part....

also, acording to the article, its only going to show the message for 4 days on screen, then 15 days in settings. whats preventing a seller from just waiting 15 days to sell the phone? Apple shouldn't have to force feed its consumers information they are too ignorant to figure out. Buying phones off ebay is a risk regardless of how many pop ups apple throws at you.
The warning is permanent in the Settings app, it just leaves the lock screen and main Settings app page after four and fifteen days, respectively.
 
Stories like this really highlight how disingenuous some people are on these forums. This particular story is a complete win-win. It shows Apple acknowledging people will be able to have their phone repaired where they choose. And it gives customers of third-party repair facilities a way to know if that facility is using shoddy parts. The consumer has no downside at all with this. So seeing people here trying hard to spin this negatively really shows their motivation, and is pretty disappointing.
It’s just bored people trying to get a reaction. The internet is full of them. If Apple started a free repair program they would be here complaining LMAO
 
The report says the that Apple reduces functionality for using a genuine Apple part, but not installed by an Apple authorized service centers. That is pure BS and Apple should not be allowed to reduce the functionality. Report the issues, fine, there is value in that. But reducing the functionality just because an Apple idiot did not do the repair is not right.

No, read it again. It reduces functionality when it can't determine if the battery is correct and installed properly. And the only functionality reduced is the battery health feature, which makes sense, if it is not determined to be genuine and installed correctly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacNeb
Certification costs time and money. It also puts restrictions on what you can repair. For example, authorised repairers are banned from repairing logic boards and must either sell entire replacements or recommend buying a new device.

hmm, so you are complaining about someone selling services to consumers spending money and time learning how to repair phones correctly? sorry, I want my repairs done by someone who is willing to make sure it is done right.
 
No, read it again. It reduces functionality when it can't determine if the battery is correct and installed properly. And the only functionality reduced is the battery health feature, which makes sense, if it is not determined to be genuine and installed correctly.

No what it says is if it was not installed by an Apple certified person, then they reduce the functionality, period. It does not matter if the battery is a genuine Apple part or not. And the software has no way to determine if it was installed correctly. My guess is the only way to install in incorrectly is the reverse the connector, which is probably near impossible to do and would result in a dead phone if it was possible to do. Some people really soak up the Apple kool-aid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hardijs and H2SO4
Earlier today, Gruber posted that "The US has perfected English". Go find his tweet, if you're curious.

Yet here we have another instance of poor English from a company that cares about quality.

It should read:
"Unable to verify THAT this iPhone has a genuine Apple display."

Am I wrong? Is the word "that" optional in "modern" (US) English?


Edit: found my answer... it is optional in this case, but feels awkward, and lazy.
"that" would be optional in this instance because using "that" tells you what you are unable to verify and one can easily understand the subject without the "that" so it becomes redundant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StyxMaker
This is great. The price for a used iPhone drops tremendously if the screen and battery aren't Apple originals. And to be honest, if someone did a replacement on an iPhone I'd want to know, because the waterproofing probably doesn't work anymore.

For all the naysayers, there are all kinds of things that can go wrong when you pop open an iPhone, things that are hard to catch...like not being able to connect to BT/WiFi/certain cell bands.

More information is better.
 
If I were a user getting their phone repaired I would want to know what parts are going into it. This is an easy way to tell people and 2nd hand purchasers what they are getting.
 
If Apple really cared the warning message would say:

"Your current screen part number is XXXX. Official Apple screens have part number XXXX"

Not this vague BS "we have no evidence you paid an Authorised Apple Repairer so who knows what might happen maybe your house will burn down tonight we can't be sure"

Ridiculous. Show me the proof where a screen is identified by a part number that the software reads out, and that counterfeit display screens also use the same identification system but with a different number.

And if counterfeit screens also had a part number that can be read out, then why don't they simply pre-program it with the SAME NUMBER as an Apple screen?

It seems you really didn't think about this at all before posting.
 
Earlier today, Gruber posted that "The US has perfected English". Go find his tweet, if you're curious.

Yet here we have another instance of poor English from a company that cares about quality.

It should read:
"Unable to verify THAT this iPhone has a genuine Apple display."

Am I wrong? Is the word "that" optional in "modern" (US) English?


Edit: found my answer... it is optional in this case, but feels awkward, and lazy.

A that used in that way has always been optional.
 
I don’t understand the need to lie to users. If you are not actually verifying that it is a genuine Apple battery, then say what you are really verifying.

It also meanms third party repair shops won't be able to claim they use genuine parts for their repairs.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rjp1 and realtuner
Ridiculous. Show me the proof where a screen is identified by a part number that the software reads out, and that counterfeit display screens also use the same identification system but with a different number.

Actually, in previous releases of iOS Apple accidentally killed the screens that were third-party replacements. That was fixed by an iOS update.

In fact, Apple does keep a manifest of all the serial numbers of parts used to assemble a given iPhone, and it has the ability to check and disable things if it so desires. That's how they can trace back batches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hardijs
This irritates me. Apple needs to stop their BS, and let the consumers do whatever they want with the phones we OWN. They’re not verifying anything for our safety, just wanting to control the repair game as well.

The only people that would object are those into doing shady iPhone repairs for a living. Might you be one of those people?
 
  • Like
Reactions: realtuner
I like this. If I were buying a used device I'd want to know if it was a Trigger's Broom of third party components of unknown origin. Moreover, I bet Apple get millions of customers at the genius bars with hardware issues that turn out to be dodgy components fitted by some bloke down the market.

Our US brethren probably won't recognise the phrase trigger's broom...
 
Actually, in previous releases of iOS Apple accidentally killed the screens that were third-party replacements. That was fixed by an iOS update.

In fact, Apple does keep a manifest of all the serial numbers of parts used to assemble a given iPhone, and it has the ability to check and disable things if it so desires. That's how they can trace back batches.

I know how Apple does it. @Khedron doesn’t know, hence his ridiculous post.

Further, there’s no reason for Apple to tell the user EXACTLY how they know (serial number or otherwise). The fact they tell you it’s not OEM is good enough. Saying Apple is REQUIRED to provide explicit details is asinine. Just looking for another made-up “excuse” to bash Apple with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
Ridiculous. Show me the proof where a screen is identified by a part number that the software reads out, and that counterfeit display screens also use the same identification system but with a different number.

And if counterfeit screens also had a part number that can be read out, then why don't they simply pre-program it with the SAME NUMBER as an Apple screen?

It seems you really didn't think about this at all before posting.

Apple would love it if they tried that trick, then they would go from legal 3rd party alternatives to illegal police and border patrol seizable counterfeits.

YOU should think before posting.
 
No, read it again. It reduces functionality when it can't determine if the battery is correct and installed properly. And the only functionality reduced is the battery health feature, which makes sense, if it is not determined to be genuine and installed correctly.

Apple's goal is not to service your device at all. Apple and their authorised 3rd party repairers will flat refuse to fix your device out of warranty and recommend you buy a new one. That's why Apple quotes for repairs are always about the cost of a new device when only a new cable or chip is usually needed.
 
Apple would love it if they tried that trick, then they would go from legal 3rd party alternatives to illegal police and border patrol seizable counterfeits.

YOU should think before posting.
“Apple would love it if they tried that trick, then they would go from legal 3rd party alternatives to legal police and border patrol seizable counterfeits.”

That’s the way this should read.
 
This is great. Most third-party screens are much much worse spec than the genuine parts. I know because I have changed about 5 screens myself with an array of third-party parts. I never went on to sell any of those phones, but I would certainly like to know if one that I was buying was tainted by bad screens. Most of the time the glue on these screens gives up a few months down the road. They are cheap enough to just replace and replace, though and that will STILL be your choice. It will also still be a choice to purchase a phone that used third-party screens. This is all in the name of providing more information for the buyer. It is not forcing anything, except a fair retail price for inferior product.
 
What does this have to do with repairs using non Apple components?

Well...everything. The picture at the beginning shows them saying that the battery is not from Apple. That's fine. But it also says that health information is not available for this battery. I'm just wondering if that's because the battery is not talking to iOS, or iOS is not going to listen, because 'it wasn't made by us'?

Also, what does 'the device information has been updated' mean? Updated where?
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Hardijs
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.