They would give a toss if all the components were soldered together and the only way to 'repair' a consumed battery or failing lightning port or camera module or display was to replace the entire device (and pay the associated cost).
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.
iPhone 12 Camera Repairs Require Apple's Proprietary System Configuration Tool
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It’s also possible that this is a result of all the computational photography employed. These cameras are probably carefully calibrated and there may also be some learned parameters that need to be in agreement between the camera and neural engine.
Imagine your brand new $70k Tesla has its tires remotely locked by Elon Musk, and swapping the tires is going to cost you an arm and a leg.
Or, it could be an ungrounded “technician” handling delicate components with metal tweezers and fingers. As I said before, the chance they caused the issues themselves with their sloppy procedures (as documented by their very own videos) may well be the real issue here.
^^^This!
These days, iPhones are just stolen (or bought) for parts because they are too locked-down to root them.
Maybe Apple could somehow remove the need to authenticate the parts once the device has reached "vintage" status and they themselves are no longer interested in repairing it?
But then, they are interested in selling you a new one, so....
Nah, a youtuber tried swapping the cameras between two brand new iphone 12s, the camera simply won't work properly. This is essentially a variant of T2 security on the camera module and the motherboard.
Unethical is the word I would use, trying to nudge consumers to pay the Apple Care tax on top of the Apple Tax.
Services gross margin is almost 67%, it’s going to be tough to get that much higher. Overall gross profit margin has been almost unchanged for years and years, remarkably stable at around 38%.
"...but iFixit notes that the camera module is not a security component."
I assume that iFixit did not get the point here.
Part of the system is LIDAR, and this will certainly become a security relevant tool soon.
Everyone who has a deeper insight into the matter knows this.
I assume that iFixit did not get the point here.
Part of the system is LIDAR, and this will certainly become a security relevant tool soon.
Everyone who has a deeper insight into the matter knows this.
Last edited:
More consumer hostile practices for kool-aid chuggers to defend.
This comparison is a bit far-fetched! What are the chances you would need to swap your tires? Very high! What are the chances you would need your camera lens replaced? Almost none!
Apple Care. Everyone is buying it coz their device are unfixable, except Geniuses at Apple.
Sounds to me like the combination of the 3 separate cameras is characterized at the factory, and the data is stored with Apple.
What those 3 cameras do together, in concert, relies on the processing knowing a bit about the actual specific module attached to it. I.e., calibration. If the calibration has to be carried out by methods that aren’t practical to have in the phone itself, then you get what what we see here. Factory calibration, followed by cloud storage of the resulting cal data.
Not every design choice is some nefarious effort to lock somebody out. Hardware gets more complicated every year, because the market demands features. Its new. 3rd party will eventually get the ability, I’m sure, either from Apple or the module supplier.
What those 3 cameras do together, in concert, relies on the processing knowing a bit about the actual specific module attached to it. I.e., calibration. If the calibration has to be carried out by methods that aren’t practical to have in the phone itself, then you get what what we see here. Factory calibration, followed by cloud storage of the resulting cal data.
Not every design choice is some nefarious effort to lock somebody out. Hardware gets more complicated every year, because the market demands features. Its new. 3rd party will eventually get the ability, I’m sure, either from Apple or the module supplier.
Good, I want the iphone locked so tight so when it's stolen it's worthless even for parts. Even the battery should be encoded to the logic board along with the screen.
Not to be combative but that’s not an Apple to Apple comparison, you are referencing using a case on my iPhone to tires at best, but when comparing Tesla camera system that is a important integrated feature and function, yes Tesla DOES perform a test and verification for this. Many companies perform this level of best.
Now let’s discuss the security aspects of this, would it be possible that Apple might have intel that China or some other nefarious country has created camera components that stays on at all times and bypasses Apple’s internal Software checks and sends photos/videos on depend or randomly?
There is no processing onboard the camera sensor. Plenty of X-ray images from teardowns prove this.
Very good question!
Assuming, they are NOT a non-profit organisation any more, where does the money come from?
Its the idea of whether you have the right to repair your own device, should it break. Similar to people 3D printing spares parts for their old broken equipments.
I wonder if this means every camera has a unique ID tag that it embeds into images? Perhaps they also have it in the front-facing camera to ensure the camera image is really from the phone to prevent a hacked photo use to unlock it.
Last edited:
Sounds like printer ink cartridges and the embedded chip to stop you reusing them.
But you can look at it from a different angle as well. This could lower the number of iPhones being stolen for parts too.
You are talking about a hypothetical scenario. How can it be used as a security tool?
And how much BS is this? All of it. All the BS. To the folks wondering why this is a big deal, or defending Apple, imagine if Honda announced today that going forward all 2020 or later vehicles they sold could only have the batteries, bulbs and tires replaced at “authorized” repair facilities. If the vehicles computer detected a replacement headlight that wasn’t “calibrated” with proprietary software, the car would lock out the ignition entirely.
Physically the new part is fine, even genuine from the same brand your vehicle came with stock. Functionally the part works identically to that which it replaced, and the process of replacing it was 99% the same as with prior models.
But now, thanks to Honda, unless you pay three times as much to have the repair/replacement done by a “certified” facility than if you did the work yourself you no longer have the right to drive the vehicle you paid for and legally own.
That is what Apple is doing. That is why Right to Repair laws that prevent just this exact type of nonsense MATTER.
Many of you will hand gesture this away because you don’t change your own oil anyway, but the fact you prefer to pay extra for the convenience of having someone else do it for you does not justify preventing another owner from doing it themselves, either because it is cheaper or just because they enjoy being self sufficient and take pride in such things. Your case use doesn’t have to be anyone else’s, and vice versa. Try to understand that when people like me get frustrated with moves like this from companies we have been loyal to and given thousands of dollars to. This is about us, not iFixit or their business model, anymore than it would be about AutoZone or Pep Boys in the above analogy.
Things being more difficult to repair due to increased complexity is understandable, and we don’t care about that. I guarantee my 1985 F-150 was a thousand times easier to work on than my 2011. But when Apple INTENTIONALLY makes their product difficult to repair by glueing/soldering things in, or requiring proprietary silicon or software to “authorize” a functionally sound repair, that is absolute money grubbing profit margin pumping anti-consumer monopolistic BS!
Physically the new part is fine, even genuine from the same brand your vehicle came with stock. Functionally the part works identically to that which it replaced, and the process of replacing it was 99% the same as with prior models.
But now, thanks to Honda, unless you pay three times as much to have the repair/replacement done by a “certified” facility than if you did the work yourself you no longer have the right to drive the vehicle you paid for and legally own.
That is what Apple is doing. That is why Right to Repair laws that prevent just this exact type of nonsense MATTER.
Many of you will hand gesture this away because you don’t change your own oil anyway, but the fact you prefer to pay extra for the convenience of having someone else do it for you does not justify preventing another owner from doing it themselves, either because it is cheaper or just because they enjoy being self sufficient and take pride in such things. Your case use doesn’t have to be anyone else’s, and vice versa. Try to understand that when people like me get frustrated with moves like this from companies we have been loyal to and given thousands of dollars to. This is about us, not iFixit or their business model, anymore than it would be about AutoZone or Pep Boys in the above analogy.
Things being more difficult to repair due to increased complexity is understandable, and we don’t care about that. I guarantee my 1985 F-150 was a thousand times easier to work on than my 2011. But when Apple INTENTIONALLY makes their product difficult to repair by glueing/soldering things in, or requiring proprietary silicon or software to “authorize” a functionally sound repair, that is absolute money grubbing profit margin pumping anti-consumer monopolistic BS!