Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I didn’t say it was right or wrong, I'm just saying I love how many self-appointed tech geniuses that have no idea what is or isn't a quality phone part or service center will save $30

For that difference indeed don’t see the point either. Apple display and service will always be more reliable at any point.

But there are indeed situations were Apple basically offers no solution but buy a replacement for half a thousand or so when the device is absolutely fixable. I went through that kind of thing and felt gutted that was pushed to go somewhere else to be taken care of farely as a customer. After depositing so much confidence in their work. They were asking 500 euros for refurb to replace my “broken” X when somewhere else got it fixed for 60 euros.

This is what Apple wants with this measure. It not about protecting the customer from saving $30 only to get a bad service. As you said, it makes no sense. But indeed It’s about upselling instead of fixing what is broken at a fair price.

Meanwhile the go after shops that are able to fix it at a fare price … go figure.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
Locking in users even for frequent and rather mundane repairs and upgrades will only serve to break that fenced garden approach.

Remember when you could still upgrade HD’s and RAM even on an Apple laptop with just two different screwdrivers…?

Where we less secure, less proud of an elegant ecosystem back then. Give that back to us, Apple!

For that I am willing sacrifice 3mm of hip extra sleekness any day…

Bring on that right to self repair legislation, please!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BGM and dk001
I love how many people want some random shady service center with unqualified people to be able to install the cheapest garbage Chinese parts attainable into their $1,000+ phone thinking that it’s exactly the same as Apple doing it but at a cost savings. BUT MUH RIGHTS
Exactly. Paying a fortune for the latest iPhone and want to cut back on costs when something fails - suddenly they become tight arses. If you cannot afford to have it repaired by the manufacturer don't buy it. This applies to any products. These people effectively want Apple to lessen their grip to allow dodgy dave to supply parts to they can "fix their device at a lower cost. Then if the fix fails you have no liability except for yourself and you effectively voided the warranty as well - great work. Then the "repairer" complains to Apple because of unauthorised repairs. You know what I would be saying if I was Apple - we don't want you as a customer.
 
I am not implying anything. I was quite clear and precise about what I said, which is that it‘s not entirely anti-consumer. I never claimed to know why this issue exists - I very specifically said “no idea what apple’s motivation here is, of course. For all we know it’s another bug.”

No. I quote you
There are some benefits to consumers, after all - not every iphone owner ever needs to replace a screen, but every iphone owner owns an iphone, which, if valuable when broken down for parts, becomes a good target for theft.

Looks to me that you are implying this move is anti-theft measure. But i fail to understand why now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech and BGM
Exactly. Paying a fortune for the latest iPhone and want to cut back on costs when something fails - suddenly they become tight arses. If you cannot afford to have it repaired by the manufacturer don't buy it. This applies to any products. These people effectively want Apple to lessen their grip to allow dodgy dave to supply parts to they can "fix their device at a lower cost. Then if the fix fails you have no liability except for yourself and you effectively voided the warranty as well - great work. Then the "repairer" complains to Apple because of unauthorised repairs. You know what I would be saying if I was Apple - we don't want you as a customer.

Can you tell me why I should ONLY let Apple repair my iPhone? And why you think if repair done by someone else, it must be dodgy?

I found this anti-consumer post is funny. Like I said, few years down the road, when iPhone 13 is not worth much. Your screen replacement will cost more than iPhone 13 worth by then. Why would I want Apple do screen replacement?
 
Exactly. Paying a fortune for the latest iPhone and want to cut back on costs when something fails - suddenly they become tight arses. If you cannot afford to have it repaired by the manufacturer don't buy it. This applies to any products. These people effectively want Apple to lessen their grip to allow dodgy dave to supply parts to they can "fix their device at a lower cost. Then if the fix fails you have no liability except for yourself and you effectively voided the warranty as well - great work. Then the "repairer" complains to Apple because of unauthorised repairs. You know what I would be saying if I was Apple - we don't want you as a customer.

I think you are not considering what if the device is out of warranty and 3,4,5 years old.. it’s not economically viable for an OEM repair at that point..

It creates eWaste too, as the devices sometimes are refused repair by apple in some situations (I.e. a spent battery but the screen has a small crack)
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech and dk001
The reason behind this issue is not specific to iPhone 13. If you install the display it needs to be calibrated to interact with the Face ID sensor that is built into the inside of the enclosure. That is connected directly to the logic board. If the logic board doesn't recognize the display this issue occurs. Likely whomever did the repair either didn't have access to the calibration software or skipped it altogether. I know this is a boring answer and doesn't fall into the "Apple and the illuminati are trying to sabotage my phone" category but it is the true reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fruit Stand
The reason behind this issue is not specific to iPhone 13. If you install the display it needs to be calibrated to interact with the Face ID sensor that is built into the inside of the enclosure. That is connected directly to the logic board. If the logic board doesn't recognize the display this issue occurs. Likely whomever did the repair either didn't have access to the calibration software or skipped it altogether. I know this is a boring answer and doesn't fall into the "Apple and the illuminati are trying to sabotage my phone" category but it is the true reason.
Why is that? Because you said so? Perhaps you missed this part of the article which disproves "the true reason" you gave:

As discovered in a repair video, the iPhone 13 screen includes no components for Face ID to function, as all the parts for the TrueDepth system are housed in the iPhone itself.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: BGM and PC_tech
The reason behind this issue is not specific to iPhone 13. If you install the display it needs to be calibrated to interact with the Face ID sensor that is built into the inside of the enclosure. That is connected directly to the logic board. If the logic board doesn't recognize the display this issue occurs. Likely whomever did the repair either didn't have access to the calibration software or skipped it altogether. I know this is a boring answer and doesn't fall into the "Apple and the illuminati are trying to sabotage my phone" category but it is the true reason.
This ^

From a former  Genius.
 
If you can replace your drive easily, so can anyone with physical access to your machine.

If someone has physical access to my machine, does it matter whether hard drive replaceable at this point? I fail to see how removable hard drive or ability to upgrade RAM is security risk?

We were able to replace hard drive for ages, why security wasn't issue back then?
 
If someone has physical access to my machine, does it matter whether hard drive replaceable at this point? I fail to see how removable hard drive or ability to upgrade RAM is security risk?

We were able to replace hard drive for ages, why security wasn't issue back then?

Security was an issue back then. Why do you think IT gave us disposable computers if we had to fly to china for work, and then threw them away when we returned?
 
Why is that? Because you said so? Perhaps you missed this part of the article which disproves "the true reason" you gave:

As discovered in a repair video, the iPhone 13 screen includes no components for Face ID to function, as all the parts for the TrueDepth system are housed in the iPhone itself.​
I think you will possibly find that the person who made the video is wrong in their assumption about the LCD and FaceID. Depending on the application, LCD screens can use what is know as EDID, which I believe has been replaced with DisplayID:

EDID - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Display_Identification_Data
DisplayID - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayID

This is data which is sent to the hardware logic of the device which gives it various information about the screen. Things like manufacturer, screen size, serial number and others. Not every LCD screen on the planet uses EDID or DisplayID but as I said, it depends on the application.

Now for those who do board level repairs, on the LCD connection on the logic board there are two data signals commonly refered to as IC2_SCL and IC2_SDA, meaning IC2 Serial Clock and IC2 Serial Data. These two data signals provide serial communication from the LCD and the iphones logic board and visa versa. Information from the LCD will be sent to and from those data signals. Now if Apple are using EDID or DisplayID, each LCD will be encoded with it's own unique set of information which upon first power on of the phone will be recorded by the iphones logic board. LCD's that use EDID or DisplayID can be calibrated for optimum apperance.

The method is a bit similar to how Microsoft Windows encodes it product key with that of the machines hardware which when you replace some of the machines hardware, it requires you to re-register the OS. Apple are in my opinion doing similar with it's LCD, it's uniqure idenfitiers are encoded to that of the iphones hardware thus when you replace some of the hardware, in this case the screen, various things stop working properly, therefore in a way you having to re-register the new screen with the iphones hardware. That is in my opinion how it is working.

I've not seen the hardware on an iphone 13 screen but I bet there is some tiny amount of electronics on it which holds the information about the screen. If you've ever watched videos of Chinese screen refurbishers, you will notice they desolder a flex cable off the broken LCD and resolder it onto the new LCD. Many times you will notice when in use, the screen appears darker and thats because the old broken screens calibration data is still inside the electronics that is on the flext cable, hence why is needs to be recalibrated for optimum apperance.

This could be why in my opinion changing iphone 13 screens from one iphone to another stops the FaceID from working because the data being sent from the LCD does not match what is in the iphones logic board thus as a security measure, it stops FaceID from working, because lets face it, people from all walks of life use an iphone if the iphone is being used by a person who's job requires them to have security measures (security professionals, politicians, lawyers, bankers, designers, researchers, to name a few), these people would want to know that the information inside their phone is secure if their iphone was every to be stolen (it does happen). If all it took the thief to do is to remove the original screen and replace it with another and for the iphone to accept the new screen and allow FaceID to be set up, just exactly how is that meant to be a security feature?

For example, an Intel researcher uses an iphone 13 which was issued to them through work, basically a works phone. That iphone contains $ millions worth of engineering data and other information and as per company security policy, is protected by FaceID. Now a few day's later, that Intel researcher has their iphone 13 stolen, the thief knowing what they have stolen (it was a targeted theft). The thief tries the phone and notices it is locked with FaceID. The thief gets hold of a replacement lcd thinking they can bypass the FaceID security by replacing the screen and setting it up so it works with their face. They replace the screen and low and behold, the iphone says FaceID is disabled, the thief is unable to use the replacement screen to fool the iphone into setting up FaceID to work with their face, result, they cannot get into the phone, the Intel researchers data is safe.

Is this how screen changing and FaceID should work? People need to look at the bigger picture here. Not everything is about 'me' and how it might inconvience 'me' if they change a broken screen and FaceID stops working.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cmaier
Security was an issue back then. Why do you think IT gave us disposable computers if we had to fly to china for work, and then threw them away when we returned?

For you maybe.
BTDT and work machines had limited content and was encrypted.
Personal machines I never had an issue with except 1x when coming back into the US. Probably because I was flying with my consultant who was from India.

So I am not seeing your point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
I think you will possibly find that the person who made the video is wrong in their assumption about the LCD and FaceID. Depending on the application, LCD screens can use what is know as EDID, which I believe has been replaced with DisplayID:

EDID - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Display_Identification_Data
DisplayID - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayID

This is data which is sent to the hardware logic of the device which gives it various information about the screen. Things like manufacturer, screen size, serial number and others. Not every LCD screen on the planet uses EDID or DisplayID but as I said, it depends on the application.

Now for those who do board level repairs, on the LCD connection on the logic board there are two data signals commonly refered to as IC2_SCL and IC2_SDA, meaning IC2 Serial Clock and IC2 Serial Data. These two data signals provide serial communication from the LCD and the iphones logic board and visa versa. Information from the LCD will be sent to and from those data signals. Now if Apple are using EDID or DisplayID, each LCD will be encoded with it's own unique set of information which upon first power on of the phone will be recorded by the iphones logic board. LCD's that use EDID or DisplayID can be calibrated for optimum apperance.

The method is a bit similar to how Microsoft Windows encodes it product key with that of the machines hardware which when you replace some of the machines hardware, it requires you to re-register the OS. Apple are in my opinion doing similar with it's LCD, it's uniqure idenfitiers are encoded to that of the iphones hardware thus when you replace some of the hardware, in this case the screen, various things stop working properly, therefore in a way you having to re-register the new screen with the iphones hardware. That is in my opinion how it is working.

I've not seen the hardware on an iphone 13 screen but I bet there is some tiny amount of electronics on it which holds the information about the screen. If you've ever watched videos of Chinese screen refurbishers, you will notice they desolder a flex cable off the broken LCD and resolder it onto the new LCD. Many times you will notice when in use, the screen appears darker and thats because the old broken screens calibration data is still inside the electronics that is on the flext cable, hence why is needs to be recalibrated for optimum apperance.

This could be why in my opinion changing iphone 13 screens from one iphone to another stops the FaceID from working because the data being sent from the LCD does not match what is in the iphones logic board thus as a security measure, it stops FaceID from working, because lets face it, people from all walks of life use an iphone if the iphone is being used by a person who's job requires them to have security measures (security professionals, politicians, lawyers, bankers, designers, researchers, to name a few), these people would want to know that the information inside their phone is secure if their iphone was every to be stolen (it does happen). If all it took the thief to do is to remove the original screen and replace it with another and for the iphone to accept the new screen and allow FaceID to be set up, just exactly how is that meant to be a security feature?

For example, an Intel researcher uses an iphone 13 which was issued to them through work, basically a works phone. That iphone contains $ millions worth of engineering data and other information and as per company security policy, is protected by FaceID. Now a few day's later, that Intel researcher has their iphone 13 stolen, the thief knowing what they have stolen (it was a targeted theft). The thief tries the phone and notices it is locked with FaceID. The thief gets hold of a replacement lcd thinking they can bypass the FaceID security by replacing the screen and setting it up so it works with their face. They replace the screen and low and behold, the iphone says FaceID is disabled, the thief is unable to use the replacement screen to fool the iphone into setting up FaceID to work with their face, result, they cannot get into the phone, the Intel researchers data is safe.

Is this how screen changing and FaceID should work? People need to look at the bigger picture here. Not everything is about 'me' and how it might inconvience 'me' if they change a broken screen and FaceID stops working.
I have no doubt that the screen contains unique information to identify it to the body it is attached to, otherwise there would be no way for the body to know about the swap.

That said I do not see how this behavior makes it any more secure. From what I am able to ascertain from the article the screen contains no FaceID components and therefore would not pose a security risk if the screen were to be replaced with a different one:

As discovered in a repair video, the iPhone 13 screen includes no components for Face ID to function, as all the parts for the TrueDepth system are housed in the iPhone itself.​

It's my understanding all of that is in the body of the phone, not the screen. If that's not the case I'm open to being corrected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
Can you tell me why I should ONLY let Apple repair my iPhone? And why you think if repair done by someone else, it must be dodgy?

I found this anti-consumer post is funny. Like I said, few years down the road, when iPhone 13 is not worth much. Your screen replacement will cost more than iPhone 13 worth by then. Why would I want Apple do screen replacement?

Honestly, because Apple knows how all the quirks about how to properly replace the screen. Other authorized repair shops would have immediate access to the documentation in case things change from model to model as well, but the non-authorized ones may just be guessing based on previous work and are using cannibalized parts. It is not a trade secret, so they may become aware and able to replicate the required steps eventually. But if you are an early adopter it isn't the best time for experimenting. (this would be a reason to want a mandate for manufacturers to make both parts and all documentation available from the start, but just commenting based on current conditions).
 
Security was an issue back then. Why do you think IT gave us disposable computers if we had to fly to china for work, and then threw them away when we returned?

Your IT department sucks then? They don’t know full disk encryption, like BitLocker? They don’t know to setup firmware password?

And your company is wasteful. See, when you have replaceable hard drive, you can still encrypting the hard drive, you can still put firmware lock, you can still require VPN access with security key.

I don’t see how soldiering SSD makes laptop more secure than have replaceable hard drive
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech and dk001
I have no doubt that the screen contains unique information to identify it to the body it is attached to, otherwise there would be no way for the body to know about the swap.

That said I do not see how this behavior makes it any more secure. From what I am able to ascertain from the article the screen contains no FaceID components and therefore would not pose a security risk if the screen were to be replaced with a different one:

As discovered in a repair video, the iPhone 13 screen includes no components for Face ID to function, as all the parts for the TrueDepth system are housed in the iPhone itself.​

It's my understanding all of that is in the body of the phone, not the screen. If that's not the case I'm open to being corrected.
The problem with the video is that the person has not properly investigated the lcd assembly and by using the iphone 12 as reference, incorrectly assessed that the iphone 13 lcd 'includes no components for Face ID to function'. Without a proper investigation of the LCD assembly to determine what actual electronic components are actually on the lcd assembly, it is very dangerous to go around making assumptions as to the electronic capability of the LCD assembly because it allows for missinformation to occur which can spread around with ease which results in people getting the wrong viewpoint and opinion about Face ID issues.

I do not have a iphone 13 lcd assembly here but looking at the video I can see what appears to be two small silver square BGA chips at the bottom of the LCD assembly. If these are infact BGA chips then these could relate to information about the LCD being sent back and forth from the phones logic unit. If that is the case then those 2 BGA chips, if they are BGA chips could be the reason why swapping the screens over does not work because the chips contain uniqure identifiers that tie in the LCD to the logic unit of the phone.

Which is why I stand by decsion that the guy in the video is wrong to make the assumption that he does about there being no components on the LCD for FaceID.

I repair phones, tablets and computer motherboards to component level thus I know what I am talking about. People need to investigate the LCD assembly in more detail before claiming it contains no compononts for FaceID to function.
 
The problem with the video is that the person has not properly investigated the lcd assembly and by using the iphone 12 as reference, incorrectly assessed that the iphone 13 lcd 'includes no components for Face ID to function'. Without a proper investigation of the LCD assembly to determine what actual electronic components are actually on the lcd assembly, it is very dangerous to go around making assumptions as to the electronic capability of the LCD assembly because it allows for missinformation to occur which can spread around with ease which results in people getting the wrong viewpoint and opinion about Face ID issues.
You state this as if it's a fact. Can you support this with fact? Or is it your supposition?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
You state this as if it's a fact. Can you support this with fact? Or is it your supposition?
Yes, the fact is in the video, the person opens up an iphone 12 and shows viewers what part, in his opinion, affects FaceID for that model of phone. He then proceeds to open an iphone 13 and shows viewers that the part which is on the iphone 12 LCD assembly is not on the iphone 13 LCD assembly but is on the mainboard, thus the iphone 13 does not have any components for FaceID to function. The person makes no mention of doing any in-depth check of the iphone 13 LCD assembly, he just refers to the difference between a specific part on the iphone 12 LCD assembly. Therefore the iphone 13 LCD assembly was not properly investigated.
 
Yes, the fact is in the video, the person opens up an iphone 12 and shows viewers what part, in his opinion, affects FaceID for that model of phone. He then proceeds to open an iphone 13 and shows viewers that the part which is on the iphone 12 LCD assembly is not on the iphone 13 LCD assembly but is on the mainboard, thus the iphone 13 does not have any components for FaceID to function. The person makes no mention of doing any in-depth check of the iphone 13 LCD assembly, he just refers to the difference between a specific part on the iphone 12 LCD assembly. Therefore the iphone 13 LCD assembly was not properly investigated.
So in other word’s, you’re just making assumptions about what happened…. Got it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.