Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

craig1410

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2007
1,127
899
Scotland
I'm an electronic engineer and used to work as senior process engineer at a company who did repairs to LCD displays for, amongst other people, Apple. I'm also qualified to military standards in soldering, including the hand soldering of quad flat pack ICs by hand using a microscope. Just giving this background to show some competency in this area before I comment.

1. Yes, the board she is criticising is indeed in poor condition and has clearly been reworked by someone to a relatively poor standard.

2. We can't say, and neither can she with any certainty, that this board was untouched by anyone other than Apple. Customers don't always tell the whole story in situations like this, especially when they have caused some accidental damage themselves. We'd need a lot more rigorous evidence on how this device got from original manufacture to be on her workbench before I would feel comfortable casting doubts on Apple's quality standards.

3. Toward the end of the video she clearly shows that she has an agenda to defend her 3rd party repair industry and this comes across as something of a sore point ('fanboys' mentioned). It would be a bit ironic if it turned out that this device had indeed been repaired by a 3rd party repair shop as this would refute the very point she is trying to make. I'm not saying this is the case but I think it is much more likely to be the case than for Apple to be selling badly reworked devices. I say this with some knowledge of how stringent Apple's 3rd party repair quality standards used to be when I worked in the repair industry. They were very tough to please compared to other manufacturers.

4. I wasn't very clear at all on what she was pointing at when she described the alleged water damage. She just seemed to state that it was water damaged with little evidence that this was the case. Same story for the heat damage to the various capacitors. Those looked more to me as if they had been reflowed (badly) with a solder iron.

So, unless there is evidence of systemic incidents like this where we can be certain that the device came directly from Apple then I think it's a bit of a stretch to believe Apple are allowing poorly reworked devices like this into the supply chain. I certainly hope they aren't.
 

ZeDog

macrumors member
Original poster
Nov 29, 2016
45
18
Germany
I'm an electronic engineer and used to work as senior process engineer at a company who did repairs to LCD displays for, amongst other people, Apple. I'm also qualified to military standards in soldering, including the hand soldering of quad flat pack ICs by hand using a microscope. Just giving this background to show some competency in this area before I comment.

1. Yes, the board she is criticising is indeed in poor condition and has clearly been reworked by someone to a relatively poor standard.

2. We can't say, and neither can she with any certainty, that this board was untouched by anyone other than Apple. Customers don't always tell the whole story in situations like this, especially when they have caused some accidental damage themselves. We'd need a lot more rigorous evidence on how this device got from original manufacture to be on her workbench before I would feel comfortable casting doubts on Apple's quality standards.

3. Toward the end of the video she clearly shows that she has an agenda to defend her 3rd party repair industry and this comes across as something of a sore point ('fanboys' mentioned). It would be a bit ironic if it turned out that this device had indeed been repaired by a 3rd party repair shop as this would refute the very point she is trying to make. I'm not saying this is the case but I think it is much more likely to be the case than for Apple to be selling badly reworked devices. I say this with some knowledge of how stringent Apple's 3rd party repair quality standards used to be when I worked in the repair industry. They were very tough to please compared to other manufacturers.

4. I wasn't very clear at all on what she was pointing at when she described the alleged water damage. She just seemed to state that it was water damaged with little evidence that this was the case. Same story for the heat damage to the various capacitors. Those looked more to me as if they had been reflowed (badly) with a solder iron.

So, unless there is evidence of systemic incidents like this where we can be certain that the device came directly from Apple then I think it's a bit of a stretch to believe Apple are allowing poorly reworked devices like this into the supply chain. I certainly hope they aren't.

Very well stated! Thank you for your professional input! I agree with you, that the proof that this board has been repaired by Apple is vague...
 

therealseebs

macrumors 65816
Apr 14, 2010
1,057
312
Well, yeah, she has an agenda to defend her industry... But then, Apple's clearly had an agenda of trying to squash the competition for Apple repairs for quite some time. Since the third-party repair people mostly focus on doing good work, and Apple focuses on trying to intentionally sabotage their own hardware to make it harder to repair, I am inclined to trust the repair people more than Apple. The repair people have to do good work to keep their reputations. Apple doesn't have to care, because they can make it prohibitively difficult to get repairs from anyone else.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were using water-damaged parts. I would, however, be surprised if it were consistently resulting in trouble, because they've historically been pretty good about making sure refurbished stuff checks out.
 

tubeexperience

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2016
3,192
3,895
Well, yeah, she has an agenda to defend her industry... But then, Apple's clearly had an agenda of trying to squash the competition for Apple repairs for quite some time. Since the third-party repair people mostly focus on doing good work, and Apple focuses on trying to intentionally sabotage their own hardware to make it harder to repair, I am inclined to trust the repair people more than Apple. The repair people have to do good work to keep their reputations. Apple doesn't have to care, because they can make it prohibitively difficult to get repairs from anyone else.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were using water-damaged parts. I would, however, be surprised if it were consistently resulting in trouble, because they've historically been pretty good about making sure refurbished stuff checks out.


She's also the one that outed Apple for the "Touch Disease" that Apple didn't formally recognize until recently.

Had she not gone public about the issue, Apple probably still wouldn't have admit (somewhat) to the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZeDog

WhiteWhaleHolyGrail

macrumors 6502a
Nov 14, 2016
620
426
I'm no engineer but given the wealth of legal advice at Apple's disposal and the huge implications for law suits if this is true, I find this claim hard to believe.
 

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,534
25,295
Well, yeah, she has an agenda to defend her industry... But then, Apple's clearly had an agenda of trying to squash the competition for Apple repairs for quite some time. Since the third-party repair people mostly focus on doing good work, and Apple focuses on trying to intentionally sabotage their own hardware to make it harder to repair, I am inclined to trust the repair people more than Apple.

There's nothing to stop a third-party repair centre becoming an AASP — other than a stringent process and very strict KPIs to adhere to.

I would also take issue with non-official repair centres doing a good job, as more often than not you're going to get a bodged repair by visiting any old shop in town. Unless you were referring to this specific repairer, in which case you're absolutely right. :)
 

therealseebs

macrumors 65816
Apr 14, 2010
1,057
312
There's nothing to stop a third-party repair centre becoming an AASP — other than a stringent process and very strict KPIs to adhere to.

I would also take issue with non-official repair centres doing a good job, as more often than not you're going to get a bodged repair by visiting any old shop in town. Unless you were referring to this specific repairer, in which case you're absolutely right. :)

I've used third-party apple-authorized service places, in the past, but all the ones I used to know are dead now. I don't know why.
[doublepost=1481132625][/doublepost]
I'm no engineer but given the wealth of legal advice at Apple's disposal and the huge implications for law suits if this is true, I find this claim hard to believe.

What implications, exactly, would those be? Also, given the wealth of legal advice Apple has available, what makes you think they would be worried about lawsuits? They're big enough to squash most people just by having way more lawyers, and even if they were ordered to pay something, so what? They can make billions and pay millions and be happy.
 

craig1410

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2007
1,127
899
Scotland
Well, yeah, she has an agenda to defend her industry... But then, Apple's clearly had an agenda of trying to squash the competition for Apple repairs for quite some time. Since the third-party repair people mostly focus on doing good work, and Apple focuses on trying to intentionally sabotage their own hardware to make it harder to repair, I am inclined to trust the repair people more than Apple. The repair people have to do good work to keep their reputations. Apple doesn't have to care, because they can make it prohibitively difficult to get repairs from anyone else.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were using water-damaged parts. I would, however, be surprised if it were consistently resulting in trouble, because they've historically been pretty good about making sure refurbished stuff checks out.

Apple don't intentionally 'sabotage' their hardware to make it harder to repair, they are simply making it less likely to need repair in the first place while at the same time making it easier to assemble. Adhesives are much faster to assemble than lots of screws and tend to spread the load better. Things like glued in batteries actually contribute to the structural strength of the devices without increasing weight.
 

WhiteWhaleHolyGrail

macrumors 6502a
Nov 14, 2016
620
426
I've used third-party apple-authorized service places, in the past, but all the ones I used to know are dead now. I don't know why.
[doublepost=1481132625][/doublepost]

What implications, exactly, would those be? Also, given the wealth of legal advice Apple has available, what makes you think they would be worried about lawsuits? They're big enough to squash most people just by having way more lawyers, and even if they were ordered to pay something, so what? They can make billions and pay millions and be happy.

The implications from not accurately representing that they sell logic boards affected by water damage. Lawyers and multinationals are always worried about lawsuits as they can easily cripple a company's earnings - think class actions here, particularly if the logic boards caused actual damage. Not to mention the damage to Apple's reputation any official court finding of deceit would have.
[doublepost=1481133294][/doublepost]
Apple already said in the Terms and Conditions that the parts it uses are refurbished.

Apple terms also state that they swap out damaged components.
 

tubeexperience

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2016
3,192
3,895
The implications from not accurately representing that they sell logic boards affected by water damage. Lawyers and multinationals are always worried about lawsuits as they can easily cripple a company's earnings - think class actions here, particularly if the logic boards caused actual damage. Not to mention the damage to Apple's reputation any official court finding of deceit would have.
[doublepost=1481133294][/doublepost]

Apple terms also state that they swap out damaged components.

It said right here under "Terms & Conditions":

Apple may use parts or products that are new or equivalent to new in reliability and performance. Apple will retain the replaced part or product that is exchanged as its property, and the replacement part will become your property. Replaced parts are generally repairable and are exchanged or repaired by Apple for value. If applicable law requires Apple to return a replaced part to you, you agree to pay Apple the additional cost of the replacement item.

I am not saying that it's right or wrong for Apple to repair liquid damaged components and use them as refurbished parts. I am merely saying that Apple's "Terms & Conditions" give it the right to do so.
 
Last edited:

WhiteWhaleHolyGrail

macrumors 6502a
Nov 14, 2016
620
426
'New or equivalent to new in reliability and performance' -I wonder what an engineer would say about a water damaged logic board as to whether it could be deemed as new in reliability *and* performance.
 

therealseebs

macrumors 65816
Apr 14, 2010
1,057
312
Apple don't intentionally 'sabotage' their hardware to make it harder to repair, they are simply making it less likely to need repair in the first place while at the same time making it easier to assemble.

No.

The sliding latches holding the bottom of the 2016 MBP on do not make it easier to assemble, and do not make it less likely to need repair in the first place. They do nothing but create a barrier to other people opening the machine.

Same goes for a lot of the other changes, the switch to pentalobe screws. None of these changes make it easier to assemble or less likely to need repair. They just create barriers to entry.
 

tubeexperience

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2016
3,192
3,895
'New or equivalent to new in reliability and performance' -I wonder what an engineer would say about a water damaged logic board as to whether it could be deemed as new in reliability *and* performance.

I highly doubt that the lawyers who wrote the Terms and Conditions were consulting the engineers when writing that.
 

tubeexperience

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2016
3,192
3,895
The internet is a wonderful place. Automatically believe the negatives and question the positives.

Who is this lady and why should she be credible?

So let see...

She it the one that brought the issue of the "Touch Disease" to the attention of the public while Apple refused to admit that the issue even exist.
 

aristobrat

macrumors G5
Oct 14, 2005
12,288
1,394
But then, Apple's clearly had an agenda of trying to squash the competition for Apple repairs for quite some time.
The last time I made an online reservation for the Genius Bar, Apple's system showed me all of the local authorized service providers on a map (in addition to the two Apple stores). That was surprising to me.
 

tubeexperience

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2016
3,192
3,895
The last time I made an online reservation for the Genius Bar, Apple's system showed me all of the local authorized service providers on a map (in addition to the two Apple stores). That was surprising to me.

Apple want to prevent third parties (ie. not Apple Store nor AASP) from performing repairs.
 

aristobrat

macrumors G5
Oct 14, 2005
12,288
1,394
Apple want to prevent third parties (ie. not Apple Store nor AASP) from performing repairs.
Here's AppleInsider's coverage of the change:

Apple adds ability to schedule third-party service appointments online for Mac, iPhone, iPad
Apple has recently made changes to its service scheduling process, and is now allowing users to make appointments with certified third parties and the remaining Apple Specialists for repair and support.

Besides some long-time Apple Specialists, repair venues include some iPhone service centers, Best Buy, Microcenter, and Computercare, among others. Third-party shops can also offer services that Apple Stores don't, like drive capacity increases in compatible models, service on older devices no longer officially supported by Apple, or other upgrades as available for a particular computer.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/16...rvice-appointments-online-for-mac-iphone-ipad
 
  • Like
Reactions: deadworlds

craig1410

macrumors 65816
Mar 22, 2007
1,127
899
Scotland
No.

The sliding latches holding the bottom of the 2016 MBP on do not make it easier to assemble, and do not make it less likely to need repair in the first place. They do nothing but create a barrier to other people opening the machine.

Same goes for a lot of the other changes, the switch to pentalobe screws. None of these changes make it easier to assemble or less likely to need repair. They just create barriers to entry.

Yes.

In the words of ifixit here:
"All of the extra clips and hooks help the lower case serve as case-stiffener, in lieu of the normal amount of screws."

Pentalobe screws are hardly a barrier to anyone with the competence to actually open a MBP. Even my toaster has triangular screws which required me to spend 5 minutes in the garage one day with an old screwdriver and a metal file before I could retrieve the piece of potato scone which was causing the RCDs in the house to trip every time someone toasted some bread!

If you see these things as a barrier then I suggest you leave dismantling your MBP to the pros...:rolleyes:
 

brock2621

macrumors 65816
Jun 8, 2007
1,006
524
Kentucky
I'm an electronic engineer and used to work as senior process engineer at a company who did repairs to LCD displays for, amongst other people, Apple. I'm also qualified to military standards in soldering, including the hand soldering of quad flat pack ICs by hand using a microscope. Just giving this background to show some competency in this area before I comment.

1. Yes, the board she is criticising is indeed in poor condition and has clearly been reworked by someone to a relatively poor standard.

2. We can't say, and neither can she with any certainty, that this board was untouched by anyone other than Apple. Customers don't always tell the whole story in situations like this, especially when they have caused some accidental damage themselves. We'd need a lot more rigorous evidence on how this device got from original manufacture to be on her workbench before I would feel comfortable casting doubts on Apple's quality standards.

3. Toward the end of the video she clearly shows that she has an agenda to defend her 3rd party repair industry and this comes across as something of a sore point ('fanboys' mentioned). It would be a bit ironic if it turned out that this device had indeed been repaired by a 3rd party repair shop as this would refute the very point she is trying to make. I'm not saying this is the case but I think it is much more likely to be the case than for Apple to be selling badly reworked devices. I say this with some knowledge of how stringent Apple's 3rd party repair quality standards used to be when I worked in the repair industry. They were very tough to please compared to other manufacturers.

4. I wasn't very clear at all on what she was pointing at when she described the alleged water damage. She just seemed to state that it was water damaged with little evidence that this was the case. Same story for the heat damage to the various capacitors. Those looked more to me as if they had been reflowed (badly) with a solder iron.

So, unless there is evidence of systemic incidents like this where we can be certain that the device came directly from Apple then I think it's a bit of a stretch to believe Apple are allowing poorly reworked devices like this into the supply chain. I certainly hope they aren't.

QFA. Kudos
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.