Oh man... Don't spoil it. For many that's not important. Love watching people get all frothed about what is likely not much. Apple has so much power over their lives.
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.
Law Firms Consider 'Error 53' Lawsuits Against Apple as Some Stores Authorized for Repairs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh man... Don't spoil it. For many that's not important. Love watching people get all frothed about what is likely not much. Apple has so much power over their lives.
Terms of Use is not a legally binding contract until it's been proven in a court of law. The real solution here is not to introduce artificially restricting practices in the name of security. It's a false dichotomy.
Oh really? Maybe you should learn a little more about security and hardware/software before saying that. If you'd read most manufacturers booklets, they'll say WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR FAILURE CAUSED BY USING THIS. Honestly, it's not that Apple purposely bricks the phone. It's that iTunes/iOS checks the integrity of the parts. If they're not secure, you'll see it try to back out of the repair/update. However, usually the OS is already gone by that time. Apple just needs to make the phone verify BEFORE resetting essential files. Maybe you should get your facts straight. When you get a DUAL degree in CS and ECE, and have been a senior technician at a repair shop for 4 years prior to that, then you can talk. But don't say things you don't have any clue about.
the phone and software can do all the authenticity checks they please but its either a calculated decision or a huge blunder for it to brick the phone.
this isnt like the bad cables or power supplies that can cause issues because of being inferior.
That's a whole lot of nonsense. Besides being out of context from the original conversation, there's waaaaay to much speculation and not enough real facts to warrant a constructive response. I'm more than happy to engage you in a factual discussion. But none of what you wrote qualifies. Btw, Apple can tell the difference between damaged components and unauthorized components. Heck, you and I can tell the difference.
because apple decides that is what happens. its not some law of nature because the part is worse or not authentic
Might not be possible. iPhones are complex devices. Even the original-issue, first-generation iPhone had five ARM cores sprinkled throughout it in its various subsystems. That's seen a significant multiplication today: for example, there's an ARM core in the Lightning connector (and another in every cable you attach to it), and undoubtedly there's one or more in the TouchID architecture.
So you're counting on the OS update engineers to anticipate and recognize inauthenticity and/or subtly non-standard behavior before the OS update proceeds, and devise a graceful exit if such a situation is detected.
And I'm here to tell you that the OS update engineers have a tough enough time getting their updates out without bricking entirely legitimate phones! Phones that have mysterious third-party stuff jammed into them are disasters waiting to happen. And now it has.
And you know what all the readers of all the click-bait articles--including these slavering lawyers--can walk away with and put into practice today with no delay at all? Here it is: Back up your damn phone. Apple even lets you do that to its cloud for free.
Well, except for the fact that the third-party parts don't function correctly.
Because it worked fine until Apple sent an update to break it. Perhaps your hypothetical BMW dealer should come to your house and bash in your car after you use the working non-OEM part. That's a more apt analogy.
I KNEW IT. It appears Tim Crook is really Senator Palpatine (imperial march theme). The real concern is not whether they have authorization to fix it...but do they have the ability to fix it? Maybe...or maybe not.
To APPLE: I find your lack of faith in consumers very disturbing.
To APPLE: I find your lack of faith in consumers very disturbing.
That's not how logic works. Logically, until at least one person has reported it, it has not been confirmed. It remains entirely possible, however. It's that possibility that lies at the crux of the issue.
If your bank left open the remote possibility that an unauthorized person could use an unauthorized pass key to get into the vault and safety deposit boxes, I imagine a lot of customers wouldn't wait for a confirmed case of someone actually doing so before they'd take their business to a different bank.
You missed out , in your opinion, bit!
Unfortunately, we live in a litigious age and Apple are only too happy to jump in and take people to court when they feel they have been wronged
This case is in the grey area as I have repeatedly said but in reponse all I get are ridiculous analogies and people saying that Apple have every right to do what they did
If someone's phone has been broken by this then they have every right to take Apple to court - whether in the US or in the EU (or elsewhere) to see if it was done lawfully.
If it was then Apple will surely have lots of evidence on what basis they have done this and they will win. If they don't then they may lose
My opinion is my opinion only and is actually pretty irrelevant - as is yours - as consumers anyone who feels wronged can take this to court as is their right.
The big loser though is Apple PR and their reputation - whatever the reasoning it was very clumsily done and I am sure they wish they had done it differently.....breaking someone's phone is a bit extreme isn't it?
What is it with car analogies we all use?
Anyway you are completely wrong, because in your story, you have a part replaced by a none BMW garage fitting a part not made by a BMW approved supplier but it works fine, you then take your car to an actual BMW garage say 6 months later for an issue, at the same time they update you cars software and it renders your nice BMW TOTALLY useless, it will never start again, BMW tell you it's because of the part you had fitted by a none BMW garage, they flat out refuse to repair it for you or remove their software update and tell, tough s*** buy a new BMW.
That is what Apple is doing.
Generally speaking, I am all for apple protecting their own, but I find this ridiculous. Apple has complete rights to disable "TouchID" capabilities from devices with third party home buttons, but how is it OK for them to block access to the entire device? That seriously sucks. No one wants to pay $150 for a new home button if it dies.
P.S. I never break my phone and personally haven't encountered this, but I can imagine how bad it feels for those who have. Talk about the cost of technology.
P.S. I never break my phone and personally haven't encountered this, but I can imagine how bad it feels for those who have. Talk about the cost of technology.
Where do you have this information from? Certainly not from this article.
Sure, it's your right to do so, but it's not your right to then require Apple to continue to support your hacked phone with functional further software updates.
Pretty much this. The BMW dealer can't refuse to fix the car on the grounds that the non-gen part caused the fault.
1. You don't know what I do or do not have a degree in. 2. You're right, I don't have either of those degrees. 3. Apple will lose this. 4. You use too many caps for such an educated person. You may want to LOOK INTO CURBING THAT BEHAVIOR.
Any very right it is to.
Otherwise they could force you to pay anything they like as you would have no choice.
Perhaps this should apply to phones?
Actually, if your third-party part caused damage they can certainly tell you that your warrantee is voided for that damage, but they can't refuse to to a warranted repair to anything else that was not damaged by the part.
There are other issues that make the auto repair analogies curious.
Many insurance companies will authorize aftermarket or reconditioned parts for insurance repairs. Owner has no recourse other than to pay for the new OEM parts out of pocket if the owner insists on new OEM parts. Insurance companies also partner with body shops that are not dealer affiliated.
I will try my own analogy - using everyones favourite firm- Microsoft
Windows XP will soon be losing its security updates so every single computer using it will now become vulnerable to having all the information on the computer stolen by various nefarious means. They thus spend millions advertising that this is going to happen and suggest people upgrade to their new OS (which costs of course)
The hardware belongs to the consumer but Windows is used under license from Microsoft
Microsoft then become worried that their good name (lol) will be compromised if XP is compromised so in order to defend said reputation, and also save their poor customers from being hacked, they release a final update will burn out the CPU on next reboot so to ensure that the computer running XP can never be hacked, despite the people using it perhaps having no need to change
I think we know what would be the response to such heavy-handed and nannying behaviour from Microsoft.....mind you at least everyone knows that XP will lose its updates soon
Windows XP will soon be losing its security updates so every single computer using it will now become vulnerable to having all the information on the computer stolen by various nefarious means. They thus spend millions advertising that this is going to happen and suggest people upgrade to their new OS (which costs of course)
The hardware belongs to the consumer but Windows is used under license from Microsoft
Microsoft then become worried that their good name (lol) will be compromised if XP is compromised so in order to defend said reputation, and also save their poor customers from being hacked, they release a final update will burn out the CPU on next reboot so to ensure that the computer running XP can never be hacked, despite the people using it perhaps having no need to change
I think we know what would be the response to such heavy-handed and nannying behaviour from Microsoft.....mind you at least everyone knows that XP will lose its updates soon
Correct, no part of the article even infers that the parts were unauthorized, that happened here in the comments.
Searching for a touchID sensor on ebay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Touch-ID-Se...333731?hash=item2346b83923:g:yBsAAOSw7ThUiQhv
This even says "Original part" and "touchID will be disabled if you install this". The unknowable "and your phone will be bricked when you next update the firmware, requiring an identical repair by Apple at Apple's more expensive rate" part is the reason the lawyers are interested.