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

Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

ifixit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 590 posts

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#321

Post by pb7 »

sennight wrote: post #223
phpisthebest wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dont worry I do, the problem is all the other companies play "Follow the Apple" The solution is never just "dont by apple if you do not like it" the solution is highlighting why it is bad, and getting people to pressure companies like Apple to change. Right to Repair is movement, and it is winning. Part of right to repair includes resistance to parts serialization, and/or ensuring that approving new parts that are se…

[flagged]

Your "solution" to people buying products they love is "unrestrained ridicule"? Who hurt you that you have such disdain for people choosing to live the way the want? Look inside yourself and seek help dude.

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#322

Post by heavyset_go »

pb7 wrote: post #279
phpisthebest wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dont worry I do, the problem is all the other companies play "Follow the Apple" The solution is never just "dont by apple if you do not like it" the solution is highlighting why it is bad, and getting people to pressure companies like Apple to change. Right to Repair is movement, and it is winning. Part of right to repair includes resistance to parts serialization, and/or ensuring that approving new parts that are se…

>the problem is all the other companies play "Follow the Apple" Then blame the companies you buy from. You are not an Apple customer so they don't owe you anything. Frankly I'm tired of people that don't even buy the products constantly trying to dictate what those products should be.

You don't have to be an Apple customer to be affected by Apple's anticompetitive business practices. Apple's actions affect the whole market and all consumers in that market, that's the point behind antitrust law and litigation.

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#323

Post by pb7 »

heavyset_go wrote: post #322
pb7 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the problem is all the other companies play "Follow the Apple" Then blame the companies you buy from. You are not an Apple customer so they don't owe you anything. Frankly I'm tired of people that don't even buy the products constantly trying to dictate what those products should be.

You don't have to be an Apple customer to be affected by Apple's anticompetitive business practices. Apple's actions affect the whole market and all consumers in that market, that's the point behind antitrust law and litigation.

How do their actions affect you as an Android user?

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#324

Post by heavyset_go »

pb7 wrote: post #262
shuntress wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort of. For now. How much higher do the walls need to become before it's no longer reasonable to live outside Apple's garden?

Slippery slope fallacy. Wake me up when it actually happens because it never does.

This is the fallacy fallacy. Just because you can identify a potential logical fallacy in a statement doesn't mean it isn't true.

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#325

Post by joshspankit »

jitl wrote: post #9

Apple started offering home repair kits for iPhone this year, but they’re super difficult to use: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/25/technology/personaltech/a... There’s speculation that offering the kits is an attempt to head off right-to-repair legislation. But seeing this redesign, I wonder to what degree the repair program is incentivizing repairability within apple’s corporate structure. Now that “profit/loss pe…

I suspect that the driving force behind Apple’s new desire to be repairable is legislative.

IMO:

Not profit of the “self-service” repairs, nor the improvement to the bottom line when they refurbish their own devices.

Not some future goal of selling people the parts and/or tools.

Not the goal of being ecologically sustainable (though IMO they do very well at this).

I think they are working very hard to steer the Right to Repair ship so that it avoids successfully docking.

If Right to Repair gets everything that it could in the interests of the public, Apple will lose a lot of things. They will lose exclusivity contracts that lock in the manufacturers (it will be almost impossible to stop 3rd party duplicates of parts). They will lose a portion of the income from users who would would repair instead of upgrading. They will lose the illusion of security that they enjoy currently (unrestricted repair communities uncover every tiny detail, especially those ones that are security holes). They will lose the ability to lock people in to the Apple cloud (Jailbreaking will be inevitably easier). And they might even lose the pristine brand image they have built.

If Apple continued on the path of unrepairable iPhones, at some point they would be one of the examples that got Right to Repair signed in to law. However, they might be banking on the idea of saying “we’re making steps” for long enough that legislators will have space to stand down and the public will lose momentum.

Then they can go full-throttle on control.

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#326

Post by [deleted] »

spogbiper wrote: post #189
thathndude wrote: post #157

Really happy to see this write up. I’m probably in the tank, but I genuinely believe that Apple strives to do right by its customers, and to be a good company. it’s not a nonprofit, and I don’t expect them to act like one. Sometimes I feel like people enjoy piling on because they are the big dog. Again, please don’t mistake this comment for a blindness to some of its operations. But it’s nice to see them get credit f…

They are one of the most profitable companies in the world.. basically the opposite of a non-profit, and they do generally act like it. It's not unexpected, but it isn't good for me as a consumer.

[deleted]

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#327

Post by oneplane »

smoldesu wrote: post #299
oneplane wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I think that is an acceptable risk And I think it is unacceptable. That doesn't mean that you also have to think the same thing, but I would rather not have that option taken away from me. I also don't think that you have made a case for any similar-security implementation for integrity protection. I think distributed trust is the only way to make trustworthy components, and the only known-good way to do that i…

> And I think it is unacceptable. If you're uncomfortable with the idea of buying potentially backdoored hardware, what makes you comfortable using backdoored software? I don't understand the "hardware matters but software doesn't" threat model. It certainly doesn't benefit you in any pragmatic sense, the best it will do is give you warm fuzzies while Apple adds your OCSP data to a running tab for your iCloud account…

Because unless you go collect some sand and make your own wafers etc. you have to put some trust somewhere. I trust a relationship between me and a manufacturer of choice more than an adversary. Keep in mind that trust does not equal blind trust. I trust an Apple SoC and Apple SEP more than say, a RockChip SoC or a MediaTek SEP. And I trust a finger print reader that does not transmit actual fingerprints to the application processor more than a finger print reader that does.

If you are really on the spectrum of 'trust nobody', then what are you doing here on the internet? You had to trust your GPU, your window manager, your browser, the network stack, your internet provider, the server this site runs on, the people who own it etc.

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#328

Post by heavyset_go »

pb7 wrote: post #323
heavyset_go wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to be an Apple customer to be affected by Apple's anticompetitive business practices. Apple's actions affect the whole market and all consumers in that market, that's the point behind antitrust law and litigation.

How do their actions affect you as an Android user?

Easily, Apple and Google collude to maintain dominance in the mobile OS markets and leverage that duopoly to dominate other markets like mobile app distribution and mobile app payments. Google's app payments policy is now nearly identical to Apple's, you must use their payment platform to distribute apps on their app store. Just like Apple's policy to prevent competition in the mobile app payments market prevents app developers from even mentioning alternative payment methods in apps or app store listings, Google quickly followed suit and implemented the exact same anticompetitive policy.

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#329

Post by [deleted] »

sangnoir wrote: post #307
vishnugupta wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but they’re super difficult to use That dude is looking for problem when there's none. He starts off the article with this > For people like me who have little experience repairing electronics, the self-repair setup was so intimidating that I nearly wussed out. Did he expect Ikea like instruction manual to repair an advanced consumer electronic gadgets? That kit is clearly meant for professional (or at the very lea…

> I mean that 75pound repair equipment requiring $1200 hold on a card... How is this legal? Holds ought to be capped at the maximum payable for a transaction.

[deleted]

Re: Apple’s iPhone 14 Redesign for Repair

#330

Post by grishka »

londons_explore wrote: post #58
oneplane wrote: post #49

This has got to be one extremely expensive toolchain and supply chain redesign to do, but since they have done it a few times before (instead of incremental changes) I suppose the money department has worked out when it is feasible to do that kind of thing while keeping the people in charge happy. I'm curious to see if this is a 'test' to see if this doesn't have too many downsides, I imagine ingress area increasing…

I disagree that integrity protection is necessary across many components of the phone. There should be integrity protection on the SoC, and then all other components should be untrusted. Sure, that means someone can proxy the fingerprint sensor or put on a fake screen that shows a fake consent dialogue. But I think that is an acceptable risk - after all, you can never protect against someone making an entirely new de…

> There should be integrity protection on the SoC

And even that should be possible to disable the same way Android allows bootloader unlocks.

Post reply on HN