281–290 of 307 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apples 'price gouging' is just smart business. Hooray Apple and its stockholders, but the consumer keeps on getting thoroughly screwed over and over again.
"dont hate the player, hate the game" Capitalistic tendencies in capitalist companies is not shocking.
Otherwise that's merely another form of 'just following orders'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you look at The current situation with ThinkPads it's obvious why no OEM would want to end up where Lenovo is now. ThinkPads built a decade ago are so durable and well-built with readily available replacement parts that they will most likely never go away entirely. CPUs haven't improved enough to make them a compelling argument for upgrading, and the end result is that modern day Lenovo is stuck competing with its…
Those Thinkpads were built by IBM. Lenovo took a stallion of a brand and drove it face down into the ground. I tried to stay with Lenovo, but after the endless waves of shitware, spyware and low quality hardware (!) I had to give up. Thinkpad’s great name is thanks to IBM, and perhaps , maybe, a bit of early Lenovo. Maybe. If Lenovo is competing with anything, it’s with IBM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So, there's labor, etc. But you're going to tell me that to repair something, that by your own diagnostics, is fine except for this one part costs 70% of the new purchase price? That's what a highly integrated machine gets you. Charge circuit defective => replace entire main board, including CPU, probably memory and storage too nowadays. No one is doing component-level repairs any more.
If you look at The current situation with ThinkPads it's obvious why no OEM would want to end up where Lenovo is now. ThinkPads built a decade ago are so durable and well-built with readily available replacement parts that they will most likely never go away entirely. CPUs haven't improved enough to make them a compelling argument for upgrading, and the end result is that modern day Lenovo is stuck competing with its…
This way I can upgrade to a new model when I feel it's time to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, but they are making it very difficult for anyone to use, for example, non-Apple-branded cloud storage. And they are making it nearly impossible for anyone to use non-Apple-approved apps.
Isn't it nearly impossible to so much as download a file from the Internet on an Apple device, or have they changed that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think they want to squeeze every cent. I think they just care about the brand. They want people who bought iphone to have the best experience they prepared for them. Even if you buy some used iphone. If somebody buys some used iphone and it acts weird or the build quality seems imperfect because some parts were replaced, then this person may spread opinion that iphones suck. I'd guess that's their reasoning.…
Possibly, but there's an obvious planned obsolescence angle here for Apple too. Perhaps people wouldn't so readily buy new iPhones if they could replace their old phone's battery, screen, buttons, etc for a more reasonable price from a "non-authorised" repairer. Perhaps they wouldn't get a new one like clockwork every 1-3 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Considering Apple intentionally slows older phones with firmware updates post new phone release Source, please?
Here you go: https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/28/16827248/apple-iphone-ba... I’m sure they do it all the time, but this one incident actually caused worldwide news-coverage, even in tabloids read by normal people (that is, not just techies).
That’s the phone slowing the CPU when the battery gets old to prevent unexpected shutdowns. If you think this is “planned obselence” you misunderstand the issue.
iOS 11.3 now lets you disable this, so you can have full performance at the cost of unexpected shutdowns. Or you can just get an official battery replacement for $29 and your phone will be like new.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is incorrect and a complete oversimplification of what actually happened. In every single one of the cases you mention, the device was bricked because having the part displayed broke the chain of encryption from the secure enclave to the device in question - Touch ID or Face ID. If you can't verify the chain of trust, there's no way for the device to accurately tell that the security measures that are in place…
>It's not incorrect just incomplete because even genuine parts would fail validation and result in a bricked device. Genuine parts would only fail if they were installed without rekeying Touch ID. It didn't matter that the parts were genuine Apple parts or not. It mattered that Touch ID and the secure enclave were no longer paired after the hardware keys no longer matched between the 2.
Or in the case of the iPhone 7, disabling the home button?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Possibly, but there's an obvious planned obsolescence angle here for Apple too. Perhaps people wouldn't so readily buy new iPhones if they could replace their old phone's battery, screen, buttons, etc for a more reasonable price from a "non-authorised" repairer. Perhaps they wouldn't get a new one like clockwork every 1-3 years.
Battery replacements are $29 at Apple stores
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's not incorrect just incomplete because even genuine parts would fail validation and result in a bricked device. Genuine parts would only fail if they were installed without rekeying Touch ID. It didn't matter that the parts were genuine Apple parts or not. It mattered that Touch ID and the secure enclave were no longer paired after the hardware keys no longer matched between the 2.
Right, why does that warrant bricking the phone? Or in the case of the iPhone 7, disabling the home button?
Disabling Touch ID is necessary to support the security of the phone. I don’t want a state actor installing a crocked module and use it to break the phone’s security.