Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs
-
@Donahue said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@scottalanmiller said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@Donahue said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@scottalanmiller said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@Donahue said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
I am fine with the idea that apple would not honor warranties when third party attempted repairs, but the consumer should still have that right to get the service done without fear of triggering booby traps.
That's a huge violation of warranty law. You can't make warranties dependent in that way, or you can effectively use that, like the false security concerns, as an effective end run around the right to repair law.
I wont disagree, but that is still much better than actually taking steps to brick the device with unauthorized repair. One is a legal issue, the other is a functional issue.
Both are legal, actually.
you're being pedantic. They both have legal components, but the latter also has functional issues. Do you disagree that shady warranty practices are less bad than purposely and actively bricking devices?
Agree, one is worse than the other, but that's missing the point that there are supposed to be laws that protect us from both. It's equally a legal issue in both ways.
-
@Dashrender said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
I suppose what you want apple to do instead is put a huge warning on the screen - There is a non verified device attached to this phone - you have been warned that your security may have bee compromised.
I guess I'd be equally OK with that.
Yes, warnings are fine. Intentionally destroying something belonging to someone else to try to extort money is a crime.
-
Now if it was a setting that you could turn on and off, that would be fine. Options for this stuff is no problem, it's forcing it that is a problem.
And it's not like this is something in the end user's favour, this directly puts a lot of money in Apple's pockets.
-
puts on tinfoil hat... adds extra foil just to be sure
I have a serious problem when a device cannot be audited by a customer. If you want a sticker fine, but sabotaging the device is insane and should be illegal.
Could you imagine a car that stops running as soon as the oil is changed? Ok maybe the oil is ridiculous example, but what about an alternator or a steering column?
**tightens tinfoil hat even tighter **
So 10 years from now when we have hundreds of iot devices on a single home network, you cannot even do hardware audits of your devices to make sure there isn't extra hardware performing functions it shouldn't aka spying.
But hey corporations would never do shitty things. I can't think of a single corporation that's got caught doing something it shouldn't
-
This article from 2002 about printer companies chipping their cartridge seems strangely relevant.
EU bans printer cartridge chips
Here's an exerpt :hp claims that the chips used in their printer cartridges don't prohibit reuse. they say that only 10% of their cartridges include chips that monitor the level of ink in the cartridge. thus, the only negative effect from refilling an hp ink cartridge with an embedded chip should be loss of the features of that chip, and not loss of use of the cartridge itself.
We can say HP is a big evil corporation or we can look at it from a business perspective and see how the incentive to screw you is there.
Eliminating competition on an extremely high profit item is brilliant. Not to mention that the item is a consumable for the device you already sold the customer. It will 100% fail. With a mac or iPhone battery, it may not fail on you if you buy a new device every 2 years. The guy that buys your old device eventually replaces the battery.
Oh and if you get stopped , it's a slap on the wrist with no money lost. Only money gained for as long as the scheme works.
-
@IRJ said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
I have a serious problem when a device cannot be audited by a customer. If you want a sticker fine, but sabotaging the device is insane and should be illegal.
AFAIK it is illegal. Just in the US, giant companies are mostly immune to prosecution.
-
Thank goodness Apple has their hardware made in China so we can be sure that nothing nefarious could ever happen to it before we get it.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
Thank goodness Apple has their hardware made in China so we can be sure that nothing nefarious could ever happen to it before we get it.
But even apple is hedging against that - They have plants in Texas so I read.
-
@Dashrender said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@scottalanmiller said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
Thank goodness Apple has their hardware made in China so we can be sure that nothing nefarious could ever happen to it before we get it.
But even apple is hedging against that - They have plants in Texas so I read.
So because it's in the US, it's free from tampering?
-
@IRJ said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@Dashrender said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@scottalanmiller said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
Thank goodness Apple has their hardware made in China so we can be sure that nothing nefarious could ever happen to it before we get it.
But even apple is hedging against that - They have plants in Texas so I read.
So because it's in the US, it's free from tampering?
:smiling_face_with_open_mouth_cold_sweat: Let me introduce you to your friendly national government, who only wants what's best for you!
-
Yeah I kind of have an issue with this. . .
It's my device, if I want Joe from the mall kiosk to replace whatever in my device, that is my right to do, and I'd be the responsible person who risk the device being broken further or compromised with non-oem parts.
On the other side of the conversation I understand Apple's reasoning for this and it's sounds like they simply want users to use OEM only parts, but they use this guise of "for security".
Which also kind of irks me. . .
-
@DustinB3403 said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
On the other side of the conversation I understand Apple's reasoning for this and it's sounds like they simply want users to use OEM only parts, but they use this guise of "for security".
When was the last time Apple made legitimate repair parts available, even internally? It's been quite a while from my knowledge.
-
@travisdh1 said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@DustinB3403 said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
On the other side of the conversation I understand Apple's reasoning for this and it's sounds like they simply want users to use OEM only parts, but they use this guise of "for security".
When was the last time Apple made legitimate repair parts available, even internally? It's been quite a while from my knowledge.
Who honestly knows, every time we have to take one of these bricks in for service they just ship it out. And that's only because these things break down within the first year and are covered under warranty a lot of the time.
Other things like spilled coffee etc, cost upwards of $400 to replace if using Apples' Repair Service. It would cost maybe $100 using a third party. .
-
@Dashrender said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@scottalanmiller said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
Thank goodness Apple has their hardware made in China so we can be sure that nothing nefarious could ever happen to it before we get it.
But even apple is hedging against that - They have plants in Texas so I read.
That probably makes things worse.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
On the other side of the conversation I understand Apple's reasoning for this and it's sounds like they simply want users to use OEM only parts, but they use this guise of "for security".
Read: I understand greed and a desire to break the law to make a quick buck and using dishonesty to try to cover it up because they don't respect their customers.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
Other things like spilled coffee etc, cost upwards of $400 to replace if using Apples' Repair Service. It would cost maybe $100 using a third party. .
I did a full finger print reader replacement in Panama (where Apple doesn't offer service at all) and screen replacement for $100. Now, the device would be bricked just from cracking the screen.
Since Apple doesn't have a supply chain into many of their markets, this is simply going to force people to buy new devices rather than to repair at all. There is a LOT more greed and dishonesty going on here than it would seem at first glance to a mostly American or European audience.
-
Basically, if you are not in a first world country, this should effectively take Apple products off of the table for you.
-
Or if you just travel to a non-first world country. If you ever need your device to be repairable and aren't near an Apple Store. Even if you just live in the half of the US that doesn't have reasonable access to an Apple Store.
And to make things worse, outside of the US, there are big box mall stores that look very similar to the Apple Store that pretend to be the official store, and without any official Apple competitors, locals have no means of differentiating as Apple totally snubs them.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
Yeah I kind of have an issue with this. . .
It's my device, if I want Joe from the mall kiosk to replace whatever in my device, that is my right to do, and I'd be the responsible person who risk the device being broken further or compromised with non-oem parts.
On the other side of the conversation I understand Apple's reasoning for this and it's sounds like they simply want users to use OEM only parts, but they use this guise of "for security".
Which also kind of irks me. . .
Why do you call it a guise? If Apple doesn't make the interconnect APIs available, who knows what those knockoff people are making.
I'm back to the point where the device should likely just hit you with a warning every 24 hours that you might have compromised shit installed - but I'm guessing that Scott and others will be against that level of frequency.
I'm against a one time notice of there being a perceived security issue in the device.
-
@Dashrender said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
@DustinB3403 said in Some New Macs Risk Bricking from Third Party Repairs:
Yeah I kind of have an issue with this. . .
It's my device, if I want Joe from the mall kiosk to replace whatever in my device, that is my right to do, and I'd be the responsible person who risk the device being broken further or compromised with non-oem parts.
On the other side of the conversation I understand Apple's reasoning for this and it's sounds like they simply want users to use OEM only parts, but they use this guise of "for security".
Which also kind of irks me. . .
Why do you call it a guise? If Apple doesn't make the interconnect APIs available, who knows what those knockoff people are making.
I'm back to the point where the device should likely just hit you with a warning every 24 hours that you might have compromised shit installed - but I'm guessing that Scott and others will be against that level of frequency.
I'm against a one time notice of there being a perceived security issue in the device.
I'm not against a notification -- but every 24 hours seems excessive. Maybe a 30 second notification every reboot -- something that doesn't require any action other than waiting the 30 seconds.
