Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 150 posts

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#141

Post by axoltl »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #140
axoltl wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The update is an all-or-nothing type of deal though. You either update the entire system or you don't. So now people with a third-party screen don't get new features and - more importantly - they don't get security fixes. If the update wasn't all-or-nothing, now you have to test interoperability between this generic driver and the rest of the system. That might be OK if it was just this one driver, but what if you su…

Even if it's all-or-nothing and no generic drivers are implemented, it's better to deny new features than to cripple a working device. Apple defines the third-party market with how much documentation it releases. This is not a technical or practical problem, it's Apple not easing its iron grip, as it always does.

Would you mind pointing me to the implementation spec for the Pixel 2's touchscreen controller?

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#142

Post by ASalazarMX »

axoltl wrote: post #141
ASalazarMX wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it's all-or-nothing and no generic drivers are implemented, it's better to deny new features than to cripple a working device. Apple defines the third-party market with how much documentation it releases. This is not a technical or practical problem, it's Apple not easing its iron grip, as it always does.

Would you mind pointing me to the implementation spec for the Pixel 2's touchscreen controller?

Sure, Download the source from https://source.android.com/setup/build/downloading. The driver is in kernel/drivers/input/touchscreen.

Unless the Pixel 2's touchscreen is so weird that it needs a new driver, this will work for everyone.

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#143

Post by axoltl »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #142
axoltl wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind pointing me to the implementation spec for the Pixel 2's touchscreen controller?

Sure, Download the source from https://source.android.com/setup/build/downloading . The driver is in kernel/drivers/input/touchscreen. Unless the Pixel 2's touchscreen is so weird that it needs a new driver, this will work for everyone.

I looked at it, but that doesn't actually tell me the touchscreen interface. It just tells me the bits they're currently using. If Apple had open sourced their driver it wouldn't have made a difference, as whatever they're doing differently wouldn't have been in it until now. In order for me to make a fully compatible touchscreen, I need the datasheet and programming manual for the touchscreen controller.

As much as open source is a thing for software, it is not for hardware and especially silicon.

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#144

Post by bdamm »

axoltl wrote: post #116
bdamm wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two other options also exist. OS performs a handshake with the target subcomponent and authenticates that the component really is manufactured by the manufacturer that is targeted by the pending firmware update. If the authentication completes successfully, then push the firmware. A flip-side alternative is for the component to only boot firmware that it recognizes as signed by the correct authority. In the first cas…

You've obviously never been involved in the design/manufacture of an ASIC. What you're proposing will take roughly 2 years, and be an organizational nightmare. 'Just' having an embedded identity is already complicated: 1. Where do you store the identity? Fuses in the ASIC? Now you need a fuse bank. Not every process node supports fuses, so you may now have to port you entire design to a new process node. 2. Using thi…

I most definitely have been involved in ASIC design. I appreciate how difficult it is. But, the time has come to recognize parts authentication via hardened identity to be a requirement in pretty much all ICs.

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#145

Post by ASalazarMX »

axoltl wrote: post #143
ASalazarMX wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, Download the source from https://source.android.com/setup/build/downloading . The driver is in kernel/drivers/input/touchscreen. Unless the Pixel 2's touchscreen is so weird that it needs a new driver, this will work for everyone.

I looked at it, but that doesn't actually tell me the touchscreen interface. It just tells me the bits they're currently using. If Apple had open sourced their driver it wouldn't have made a difference, as whatever they're doing differently wouldn't have been in it until now. In order for me to make a fully compatible touchscreen, I need the datasheet and programming manual for the touchscreen controller. As much as…

> I looked at it, but that doesn't actually tell me the touchscreen interface. It just tells me the bits they're currently using.

I have to agree with you on this. This is not a full hardware specification, it just tells how the hardware should behave up until the driver was released.

Modern open source hardware is still far in the future.

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#146

Post by axoltl »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #145
axoltl wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked at it, but that doesn't actually tell me the touchscreen interface. It just tells me the bits they're currently using. If Apple had open sourced their driver it wouldn't have made a difference, as whatever they're doing differently wouldn't have been in it until now. In order for me to make a fully compatible touchscreen, I need the datasheet and programming manual for the touchscreen controller. As much as…

> I looked at it, but that doesn't actually tell me the touchscreen interface. It just tells me the bits they're currently using. I have to agree with you on this. This is not a full hardware specification, it just tells how the hardware should behave up until the driver was released. Modern open source hardware is still far in the future.

Open source hardware's still far in the future, and I'm actively worried about open silicon. The RISC-V foundation is making steps in the right direction, but it'll be a long time coming before I have a document that isn't under several layers of NDA telling me how to configure the memory controller on the latest Snapdragon.

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#147

Post by [deleted] »

ekovarski wrote: post #136
axoltl wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the onus on Apple to ensure the third-party screens work, or is it on the third-party screens to ensure they're compatible?

I don't believe the onus is on Apple to /test/ for all possible permutations since they own and control every component of their hardware, but the onus should be on them to fix any phones rendered inoperable by another iOS update unless its to prevent a bigger issue, 3rd party batteries exploding, etc. This is also another good reminder to postpone the iOS updates as long as possible; I think it's been since v10 when…

[deleted]

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#148

Post by nomel »

mkhalil wrote: post #86
nomel wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my understanding, many Apple chips are custom, and I assume much of their firmware is too. What your asking is for Apple to support third party knock off chips in their firmware and drivers which were most likely reverse engineered to "get it close to functional". That's a bit silly. Imagine getting upset that an Occulus firmware update didn't work with a knock off HMD that lacked features of the original...

We are not talking about a small number of users though, millions of their users use third-party screens. They should have a test to make sure they don't get left in a dust with an update.

I find this stance very odd. How do you imagine them achieving this? Do they have someone constantly ordering screen from the hundreds of vendors on Alibaba, in some attempt to make sure they "find them all"?

If you could give one example of a company with a custom and proprietary system and chipset supporting third party knock offs I would be very interested. I've never witnessed this during my time in the hardware industry.

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#149

Post by nomel »

ekovarski wrote: post #136
axoltl wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the onus on Apple to ensure the third-party screens work, or is it on the third-party screens to ensure they're compatible?

I don't believe the onus is on Apple to /test/ for all possible permutations since they own and control every component of their hardware, but the onus should be on them to fix any phones rendered inoperable by another iOS update unless its to prevent a bigger issue, 3rd party batteries exploding, etc. This is also another good reminder to postpone the iOS updates as long as possible; I think it's been since v10 when…

> but the onus should be on them to fix any phones rendered inoperable by another iOS update

How is it their responsibility to support third party hardware? And, where's the line for support?

If I make a very poor knock off screen with a design issue that is made apparent with an iOS update (say, incorrect implementation of a required spec, interface, timing, etc), why should Apple have to support a flawed design?

What if Apple included a feature in the hardware that but the software wasn't ready at release, but would be made available as a standard feature in an upcoming iOS update? Should Apple have to continuously fragment their codebase, resulting in some tree of hacks to support each new half-baked chipset?

To someone in the hardware and software world, this perspective is absurd.

Re: iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens

#150

Post by nomel »

maltalex wrote: post #100
nomel wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my understanding, many Apple chips are custom, and I assume much of their firmware is too. What your asking is for Apple to support third party knock off chips in their firmware and drivers which were most likely reverse engineered to "get it close to functional". That's a bit silly. Imagine getting upset that an Occulus firmware update didn't work with a knock off HMD that lacked features of the original...

> What your asking is for Apple to support third party knock off chips in their firmware They're already doing that for some other things. For instance, some (mostly cheap) Wifi access points are known to have buggy implementations of 802.11 that require firmware workarounds in phones and laptops. Manufacturers have to support these devices for the benefit of the consumer and to maintain their own reputation. Custome…

My previous life was network hardware validation, so I have some perspective on this.

What your describing is "interoperability testing", and it's ubiquitous in the communication standards world.

Standards sometimes aren't clear, sometimes there are multiple implementations of a feature before a standard is ratified (and a big user base with the now non-standard implementation), and sometimes bugs end up in silicon and firmware.

One company I worked with had a very large lab with hundreds of ethernet cards. A column of robots would cycle through each one and plug a network cable in, make sure the link was up and solid, then move on to the next.

I think this is fundamentally different than Apple supporting third party hardware.

Communication standards are designed to allow chipset a to talk to chipset b. Both have an obligation to get a link up. A failure to get a link up is a failure for both, from the customer perspective.

A closed, proprietary, custom hardware system has no such obligation. Unlike the communication channel, the risk is completely unbalanced. A failure for the knock off hardware design is just directed to Apple (as you see in the comment section here).

Sure, you can't really blame the customer since the knock off parts aren't easily detected or may have been installed by the previous owner. You also can't blame Apple since you've made a custom iPhone with mystery parts, and I think it's unfair to make them stop updating firmware/software so they don't break these mystery parts.

Post reply on HN