Thank god they didn't try to figuratively swap modules between two phones. 😁Did no one read to the third paragraph of this article? iFixit isn't using third party camera modules, they literally swapped modules between two iPhone 12s.
Thank god they didn't try to figuratively swap modules between two phones. 😁Did no one read to the third paragraph of this article? iFixit isn't using third party camera modules, they literally swapped modules between two iPhone 12s.
I was responding to someone calling them microscopic. That said, compare this:??!
By what definition of enormous?!
Yes, that is a wise thought. The current name identity in the EXIF can simply be deleted. But then who is interested in encrypted IDs on every photo? (...)If there is a serial number or any other unique identification in camera module, Apple can embed it in the photo and can track the owner of iPhone from the image.
The important issue is that the cameras would not work properly even when the camera module swap is between two identical, brand new iphones. This means that even the parts are genuine from Apple it is useless unless the repair is performed by Apple (at a substantially higher cost than fixing it yourself/ high street repair professionals).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?
While I too hate today's overuse of literally (I have started seeing it used twice in a sentence, particularly on social media) I used it for emphasis.Thank god they didn't try to figuratively swap modules between two phones. 😁
Perhaps an exam/ license is required before they are allowed to vote.....But you can look at it from a different angle as well. This could lower the number of iPhones being stolen for parts too.
As I get older I increasingly look for harware, of all kinds, that I can repair myself with a basic set of tools should they fail.
This is bad news.
Maybe there needs to be a calibration step to make it work.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.
I hate to question your youtuber’s genius, but I think neither you nor they have any idea how the technology here works.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.
They didn't say it was T2.I hate to question your youtuber’s genius, but I think neither you nor they have any idea how the technology here works.
Let me give you an analogy. When we finally develop the technology to do full eye transplants, we won’t be able to just swap eyes between people and expect them to work. Not because of some profit mongering god, but because our eyes are part of a sophisticated system. Every eye is different, and it operates in careful coordination with our brains. I wouldn’t be surprised if we weren’t even able to form an image with someone else’s eyes, let alone coordinate them with our ears and spatial awareness to navigate a room. When we start swapping eyes between people, I’m pretty sure we won’t let people leave the hospital before they’ve spent time adapting to their new components.
Every lens element has different characteristics, every lens assembly has different characteristics, every sensor/lens sub module has different characteristics, every focus and stabilization mechanism has different characteristics, every multi-camera assembly has different characteristics, and every camera-lidar assembly has different characteristics and all of those characteristics change with age and use. To get the most out of that package, its entirely possible that Apple is calibrating the heck out of that hardware set and then tracking those changes with age. When you abruptly swap the underlying hardware, the system may not perform as the user expects. The service requirements may simply be Apple’s way of ensuring that their authorized repair techs follow the proper procedure in mating the hardware together to ensure the user experience is consistent with Apple’s standards.
I’m not saying with certainty that this is why Apple’s procedure is what it is, I’m just saying there are alternative explanations in addition to privacy, security and greed.
Also, there is no T2 in an iPhone.
I’ve no idea why you would say this— the camera has a silicon sensor attached to every lens. So there is plenty of processing on each camera. But maybe your way of thinking better underlines my point: No processing onboard the camera would mean the calibration data isn’t carried with the module.There is no processing onboard the camera sensor. Plenty of X-ray images from teardowns prove this.
True this might be possible but Apple has access via iCloud and know who took the photo,so that’s pointless. Now Apple might have intel that Nefarious players might be replacing the camera modules with one that take video/photos without the owner knowing and for that matter bypasses software checks to send these on demand.If there is a serial number or any other unique identification in camera module, Apple can embed it in the photo and can track the owner of iPhone from the image.
There are many possibilities.You are talking about a hypothetical scenario. How can it be used as a security tool?
1. Same as iphone's camera module, Eyes are mass manufactured.I hate to question your youtuber’s genius, but I think neither you nor they have any idea how the technology here works.
Let me give you an analogy. When we finally develop the technology to do full eye transplants, we won’t be able to just swap eyes between people and expect them to work. Not because of some profit mongering god, but because our eyes are part of a sophisticated system. Every eye is different, and it operates in careful coordination with our brains. I wouldn’t be surprised if we weren’t even able to form an image with someone else’s eyes, let alone coordinate them with our ears and spatial awareness to navigate a room. When we start swapping eyes between people, I’m pretty sure we won’t let people leave the hospital before they’ve spent time adapting to their new components.
Every lens element has different characteristics, every lens assembly has different characteristics, every sensor/lens sub module has different characteristics, every focus and stabilization mechanism has different characteristics, every multi-camera assembly has different characteristics, and every camera-lidar assembly has different characteristics and all of those characteristics change with age and use. To get the most out of that package, its entirely possible that Apple is calibrating the heck out of that hardware set and then tracking those changes with age. When you abruptly swap the underlying hardware, the system may not perform as the user expects. The service requirements may simply be Apple’s way of ensuring that their authorized repair techs follow the proper procedure in mating the hardware together to ensure the user experience is consistent with Apple’s standards.
I’m not saying with certainty that this is why Apple’s procedure is what it is, I’m just saying there are alternative explanations in addition to privacy, security and greed.
Also, there is no T2 in an iPhone.
I don’t think “I want to replace a faulty custom built miniature lidar scanner, that was built into one of the most densely packed, precisely engineered mobile computing devices to ever exist” falls within what one could reasonably assume they’d do themselves, with a basic set of tools...As I get older I increasingly look for harware, of all kinds, that I can repair myself with a basic set of tools should they fail.
This is bad news.
While I too hate today's overuse of literally (I have started seeing it used twice in a sentence, particularly on social media) I used it for emphasis.
I’ve no idea why you would say this— the camera has a silicon sensor attached to every lens. So there is plenty of processing on each camera. But maybe your way of thinking better underlines my point: No processing onboard the camera would mean the calibration data isn’t carried with the module.
Next, Apple will embed chips into cables and chargers and make it tie to only one iphone for life. Try that, Apple's stock price be through the roof instead of just $110/share.Just buy a new phone bruh. And you can use the charger of your now totally broken iPhone 12. That's great for the environment and stuff.
8 years ago my Samsung TV broke down. I wanted to buy a different motherboard, but it turned out to be impossible, because all electronics are calibrated with the screen. It's the same here.It could be Apple is trying to address zombie phones and similar challenges. Is it possible Apple is calibrating each camera for color and/or brightness for HDR10 or Dolby Vision?
1) why shouldn't itI don’t think “I want to replace a faulty custom built miniature lidar scanner, that was built into one of the most densely packed, precisely engineered mobile computing devices to ever exist” falls within what one could reasonably assume they’d do themselves, with a basic set of tools...
All good points and I hear you!The important issue is that the cameras would not work properly even when the camera module swap is between two identical, brand new iphones. This means that even the parts are genuine from Apple it is useless unless the repair is performed by Apple (at a substantially higher cost than fixing it yourself/ high street repair professionals).
In that sense, Apple is technically forcing you to choose between 1. Buy Apple Care (valid for only 2 years) 2. Live with the risk of not having a usable device if you failed to contribute extra into Apple's share price.
To me it is almost like selling you a car while removing your rights and ability to swap out the tires.