Test Suggests Face ID on iPhone 13 Doesn't Work After Screen Replacement By Third Party

[Nuno Lopes]

As a customer I don’t mind choose Apple services to make repairs. But I do object being pushed and pushed not to fix what is malfunctioning and instead buy a new one or replaced by a refurb worth of hundreds and hundreds of dollars. The upsells practices being undertaken go beyond fare to customers.

That is what is at stake here.

 

[Bremse]

I wonder if this really would be an issue with a brand new replacement screen. They may have logic in place that prevents swapping components that have already been "sync'd" to a logic board. Still strange that the screen would impact FaceID when it is not related to it at all.

In general, this is not much of an issue when the phone is brand new. You can expect to pay more for a screen replacement on a high priced phone when it is still worth a lot and most people would be willing to shell out the cash for an Apple replacement. But once the phone gets older and less valuable it makes no sense to spend a ton of money on an official screen replacement.

 

[rp100]

Apple needs to get their image under control because, at this point, it’s turning into damage control. They boast privacy, but their hardware scans images and self-incriminates, but you can’t change your own screen because it might jeopardize the security of the device. Personal iCloud backups are opaque to the user but can easily be subpoenaed and summarized for use against you in a court of law. Who’s side are you on, Apple?

Here’s the hard truth: all the scary science fiction stories are coming true. Big brother, video surveillance, call screening, tracking of all internet activity, video cameras hidden in everyday objects, major tech companies and government suppressing speech (including private messages). This is not a conspiracy and not everyone thinks this is a new acceptable normal. If Apple wants to talk a big game on privacy and personal security then they are going to have to make some uncomfortable decisions which elevate those ideals.

 

[dk001]

 

[dk001]

I wonder if this really would be an issue with a brand new replacement screen. They may have logic in place that prevents swapping components that have already been "sync'd" to a logic board. Still strange that the screen would impact FaceID when it is not related to it at all.

In general, this is not much of an issue when the phone is brand new. You can expect to pay more for a screen replacement on a high priced phone when it is still worth a lot and most people would be willing to shell out the cash for an Apple replacement. But once the phone gets older and less valuable it makes no sense to spend a ton of money on an official screen replacement.

See above… ⬆️

 

[fmillion]

I know this forum has a lot of Apple fanatics, but I'm surprised just how many people are fully supporting this move. This is unfortunately nothing new from Apple, and I fearfully expect this to get even worse as time goes on. A phone that self-destructs fully by simply opening it doesn't actually sound all that farfetched.

The things people need to remember are that 1, the IRP is honestly bull - you're not allowed to stock parts (so your service will always be slower than Apple's service), you have to collect and submit customer data to Apple, and you have to allow Apple to inspect your store for what they deem as unauthorized materials, and 2, Apple tends to lead the industry, and anything Apple can get away with, others will copy.

The IRP was just a PR move to try to deflect possible R2R legislation. Sadly, a lot of people have been running around saying "just become an authorized IRP member and stop whining" without understanding not only the draconian requirements that program comes with, but also the reason many independent repair shops exist in the first place. Are there shady stores with shoddy or even malicious intent? Absolutely. But such behavior wouldn't go on for all that long without being noticed and ultimately outed.

Who remembers Samsung making commercials that taunt Apple for lack of a headphone jack? Who remembers those commercials that made fun of the iPad for not supporting a memory card? And yet today more and more devices are following Apple's lead, dropping headphone jacks and memory card slots and many other features that actually distinguished them. I seriously doubt this is because the customers of Apple's competitors demanded they be more like Apple - honestly, if you want Apple, buy Apple. I think it's because other companies saw the financial benefits to the company when copying Apple (for example, removing the memory card slot forces you to buy more storage up front, which can be upsold at far above value). It's easy to say "just don't buy Apple", and there's many who already don't, but it gets harder when everyone else follows Apple. It's like that kid who tried so hard to be "cool" by just imitating the "cool" kids and just ended up looking desperate... now imagine everyone acting like that.

We've all been there, looked at a secondhand iphone, thinking the screen looks a bit dull and not sharp (icons do not look crisp and clear), touch response is not as smooth as it should be, the battery do not appear to hold it's charge as long as it should do and then we say to ourselves, 'this is a rubbish iphone, what the hell is Apple doing'.

I've honestly never met anyone who's that dismissive. Anytime I've seen a person looking at a clearly substandard used secondhand device, their first impression is "the previous owner must have screwed this up". Give people a little more credit. If you see someone driving around a Chevrolet with a big dent in the right side door, do you think "what the hell is Chevrolet doing making such crappy cars" or do you think "wow, that person must have gotten in an accident"? If anyone is actually accusing Apple of doing something wrong with their devices, it might honestly be because they've admitted to deliberately crippling devices (the battery scandal), so people might make a false association. But the only time I could ever see a person genuinely believing Apple is making lower quality devices is if they were to see such a device on display in an Apple store.

 

[Apple_Robert]

I want to give Apple the benefit of the doubt on this one. Maybe there’s a fear that if an unauthorized party swapped the display, they could’ve somehow tampered with the Face ID module before hand, which would hamper security.

That is my thought as well. As important as Face ID is, I don’t have a problem with what Apple is doing.

 

[emulator]

Just blame it on piracy like MS did when replacing your own xbox dvd drives.

 

[filchermcurr]

Yes Apple charge more however their work is guaranteed and covered, unlike backyard bobs repairs. Why the hell would you want to go "el cheapo" to replace a screen externally to the manufacturer plus parts shipping plus your own time to repair it (further financial loss). Lay off the red cordial. I've never had to replace a screen on my iPhone ever in my life, that's what cases and glass screen protectors are for.

How exciting for you. Unfortunately, not everybody is fortune enough to have a brand new $1000 phone that never incurs damage. Some people have phones handed down to them. Some people buy "old" phones to save money. Some people gives phones to their kids when they upgrade. Some people may not have the luxury of an Apple store around the corner with friendly, smiling technicians waiting to service their devices that day for modest fees. These are the people who would benefit from third-party repairs. Not people like you.

 

[velocityg4]

Apple could allay security concerns. Yet still allow people to repair their own devices.

Device: Have FaceID automatically disabled. But give the user the option to manually override and authorize the part. Returning FaceID functionality.A message should remain of a non trusted part in "Face ID & Passcode" or in "About". So, people who used a service provider or buying a used iPhone will know a non trusted part is in the phone. A watermarked alert should also return after a factory reset during the device setup process screens.

Apple ID: When a device is added to your Apple ID with non trusted hardware. All other devices should receive a one time alert which may only be dismissed after logging on (ie not from notification screen). Plus an e-mail and SMS to the registered account and backup addresses. If a device currently a part of your Apple ID has a status change to a non-trusted part. There should be a similar broadcasted alert.

Both instances are to make users aware a non trusted component is in use. To prevent surreptitious changes in hardware.

IT Security: IT should be able to setup a block on non trusted hardware on company owned phones. So, employees can't repair, modify or use non-authorized providers.

iPhones should also broadcast a silent alert using a documented protocol. When connecting to any network. So, network security hardware and software may be designed to automatically recognize and block any device connected to their network with non trusted hardware installed. Really, this should be open source. So all device manufactures may use this protocol and speed up IT adoption. But that's another matter.

 

[TimmyP777]

The garden isnt just for software folks!

 

[rpmurray]

Have every company submit a list of all the components and their cost and force repairs to be the cost of (broken component) + labor, and nothing more.

You're forgetting taxes.

 

[PC_tech]

err.. this must be a US thing, as it 100% is NOT a thing in the EU. Yikes.

It’s not in the US either.

 

[dk001]

Apple could allay security concerns. Yet still allow people to repair their own devices.

Device: Have FaceID automatically disabled. But give the user the option to manually override and authorize the part. Returning FaceID functionality.A message should remain of a non trusted part in "Face ID & Passcode" or in "About". So, people who used a service provider or buying a used iPhone will know a non trusted part is in the phone. A watermarked alert should also return after a factory reset during the device setup process screens.

Apple ID: When a device is added to your Apple ID with non trusted hardware. All other devices should receive a one time alert which may only be dismissed after logging on (ie not from notification screen). Plus an e-mail and SMS to the registered account and backup addresses. If a device currently a part of your Apple ID has a status change to a non-trusted part. There should be a similar broadcasted alert.

Both instances are to make users aware a non trusted component is in use. To prevent surreptitious changes in hardware.

IT Security: IT should be able to setup a block on non trusted hardware on company owned phones. So, employees can't repair, modify or use non-authorized providers.

iPhones should also broadcast a silent alert using a documented protocol. When connecting to any network. So, network security hardware and software may be designed to automatically recognize and block any device connected to their network with non trusted hardware installed. Really, this should be open source. So all device manufactures may use this protocol and speed up IT adoption. But that's another matter.

Non Trusted?
So if I use a genuine Apple part but do it myself or 3rd party repair it suddenly becomes “non-trusted”?

 

[GuruZac]

I currently live in Johnson City, TN for medical school and we don’t have an Apple Store. We have a Simply Mac and both myself and wife have had our screens replaced by them on our 11 Pros. I assume they are not considered 3rd party (I mean they are technically) since their techs are trained by Apple? The closest Apple store is 1 1/2 hours away.

 

[dogslobber]

Does Finger ID still work? I assume so.

 

[jonblatho]

But they’re disabling a security feature (Face ID) likely because the new display could potentially have a malicious chip that attempts to sniff for facial geometry data. Or at least that will be their reasoning on a PR level.

If they attempted to claim this, it would be a flat lie and they’d get called on it. It’s not a secret how Face ID works in an iPhone, and it has nothing to do with the display assembly. There’s nowhere to put a “malicious chip” in the display assembly with respect to Face ID because it’s not party to anything related to Face ID in the first place.

 

[jonblatho]

Yep.

It was the same for replacing the home button — it could be an attempt to tamper with Touch ID.

But Face ID hardware isn’t connected to the display assembly, at all. Aside from the little cutouts in the black bezel so that the flood illuminator, dot projector and camera can work through it, I guess.

 

[BGM]

Most car manufacturers do require OEM parts to be used during warranty period or the warranty can be invalidated. Same with servicing at an authorized dealer. Ok not tyres but just about everything else.

I’m not saying that’s OK but it is absolutely true - even in “we love our consumer protection laws” Europe.

parts yes, and in that event only that part. i.e. if you put an aftermarket exhaust on your car, you do not void the warranty for the headlights for example.

OEM parts can also be installed by a third party, and your warranty is still perfectly fine.

 

[genovelle]

Shouldn’t be ok during any period. That’s like a car requiring OEM tires at all times. Nothing in the display is associated with the TrueDepth camera system.

It’s integrated into the display right?

 

[BGM]

I've mentioned this before in the past in here when similar threads have been made and in my opinion it has something to do with the second hand market. Apple have a brand name to protect and they want to make sure that people purchasing their products whether it be brand new or secondhand, are getting the best quality available. We all know that many iphone owners will get their iphones fixed at an independant repair shop using the cheapest parts possible. These iphones are then sold on through the secondhand market which has the potential to influence peoples opinion on the company based on the quality of the iphone.

We've all been there, looked at a secondhand iphone, thinking the screen looks a bit dull and not sharp (icons do not look crisp and clear), touch response is not as smooth as it should be, the battery do not appear to hold it's charge as long as it should do and then we say to ourselves, 'this is a rubbish iphone, what the hell is Apple doing'. we never stop to think what has the owner done to the phone to have it behave that way, for some reason we automatically blame Apple for the poor quality of that phone, not realising that it is actually the owners doing in having cheap quality parts fitted when it needed repairing. The seller is not going to tell the buyer what they have done to the phone because they know if they do it could drive the price down so instead, they keep quiet and give the impression that it is a genuine iphone.

This is the kind of thing that i think Apple are trying to prevent because they know it is part of human nature to be dishonest and deceitful and thus Apple get the blame for something that it the fault of the iphones original owner. If we are prepared to fix our phones with cheap quality parts, why should Apple take the flak for poor quality phones when their owners are not prepared to tell the truth about what they did to the iphone.

I see nothing wrong in Apple wanting to protect their brand name in the second hand market.

i think you're right, but the ways of them going about it are highly anti-consumer.

yes, they protect their brand image, they maintain a level of quality, but the trade-off are unrepairable devices, and grey non-OEM parts.

all they would need to do really is provide a genuine 'service centre' with competent engineers that could actually repair phones rather than run a bunch of diagnostics and then return with news that "sorry you need a new one"...

i mentioned in another reply that not all 3rd parties are shady, and i use one that is exceptionally skilled insofar that they did repair Face ID on one my devices by desoldering some of the parts, and moving them to a new donor part. why can't apple also provide this service? they choose not to, that's why.

in intermediary step would be to allow the purchase of high quality OEM parts, imagine being given the CHOICE to go to the apple store, pick up a new screen.. and then find your favourite 3rd party installer to install it even if apple didn't want to. You would know 100% that the parts were good, and you would be getting 'non-franchise' labour rates similar to how anyone sensible gets their car repaired/serviced.

 

[laptech]

.........

I've honestly never met anyone who's that dismissive. Anytime I've seen a person looking at a clearly substandard used secondhand device, their first impression is "the previous owner must have screwed this up". Give people a little more credit. If you see someone driving around a Chevrolet with a big dent in the right side door, do you think "what the hell is Chevrolet doing making such crappy cars" or do you think "wow, that person must have gotten in an accident"? If anyone is actually accusing Apple of doing something wrong with their devices, it might honestly be because they've admitted to deliberately crippling devices (the battery scandal), so people might make a false association. But the only time I could ever see a person genuinely believing Apple is making lower quality devices is if they were to see such a device on display in an Apple store.

You've never met anyone who's that dismissive??!!!! So your saying when it comes to iphones, in your opinion people are not dismissive. What about cars, same opinion?? You trust the seller so much that your not going to bring along a mechanic friend to check over the car before you buy it because you do not think the buyer would be dismissive??

As for you car analogy, it's totally wrong. A car dent on a car would be equivalent to a dent on the case of an iphone, not the way you have written it. Changing a screen for a cheap replacement would be the equivalent of changing the wheel discs and brake pads for cheap replacements that whilst able to do the job, will not last as long and give the same performance as the genuine parts.

Now is the seller of the car going to be honest and tell you that the wheel discs and brake pads are cheap replacements or are they going to be quiet and let the buyer believe the replaced parts are genuine? It's human nature to be dismissive and do not pretend otherwise. Just because it may not have happened to you does not mean it does not happen.

 

[BGM]

It’s integrated into the display right?

No it's not, there is a camera array that lives in the 'notch' behind the screen with a series of cameras, and sensors (proximity, ambient light, etc) that sits just behind it..

unless things are diff now on the iPhone 13, which is possible i guess.

 

[BaggieBoy]

I recall a similar situation with Touch ID when users were trying to fit black fascias to the product red iPhones. Turned out there was a valid reason on that occasion.

There was. I switched the screens on two iPhone 6s models, Touch ID wouldn't work on either phones. I had to remove the Home buttons on both and switch them to get it to work.

 

[Denzo]

Automotive industry has been doing this for eternity. 100% it’s ******** but they have a point. If I’m paying for your warranty repairs you use my parts in the meantime.
In saying that, if it’s out of warranty - no foul imho.