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

We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

ifixit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 367 posts

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#151

Post by crazygringo »

mmastrac wrote: post #145
crazygringo wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (If anyone at Apple is reading this: ffs, allow the legitimate owner of a device to "unpair" all components in their phone in iCloud so that legitimate second-hand shops can strip a broken device at least for its parts) If you've lived in certain places, you'd know this isn't a solution at all. Thieves will start holding people at gunpoint forcing you to unpair it all while they wait.

Are thieves currently forcing people at gunpoint to iCloud-unpair/unlock their devices right now?

Oh absolutely. Happened to a friend of mine, and there's another commenter here who had it happen to them.

Crime is real. Obviously its frequency is going to depend on where you live/travel.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#152

Post by [deleted] »

tumdum_ wrote: post #147
smoldesu wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't "explain" it, he doesn't work for Apple nor know their true intentions. It's entirely his conjecture from the POV of a reverse-engineer. In any case, his conclusion certainly doesn't align with a "less access is better" mentality: > Advocate for Apple to provide access to their calibration re-provisioning processes instead [...] Them not providing those tools sucks and is anti-repair. By that rationale, Ma…

I'm not sure what is his take on iFixit decision, but he does provide some good explanations why some things are the way they are. I don't expect that Apple will officially provide better info, so that is probably the best we have. At least I haven't seen anyone with intimate knowledge of apple hw and sw provide a better or contradicting information.

[deleted]

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#153

Post by deely3 »

triceratops wrote: post #113
LightHugger wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is complete nonsense, if apple cared about phones being stolen for parts, they would just start selling the damn parts so people could repair their phones. Right now the reason parts are so valulable is because there's no other way to get them! Apple's unrepairability policy FUELS theft not the other way around.

The counterargument to that is cars are regularly stripped for parts even when spares are easily available to buy.

Does this counterargument mean that DRM is actually good, and in the future all cars should be unfixable without approval of producer?

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#154

Post by hbn »

MostlyStable wrote: post #127
hbn wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm going to go out on a limb and say that far far far more people have a phone that needs to be repaired than have a phone that gets stolen. Perhaps because it's known to many thieves that iPhones are a useless thing to steal due to Apple's tight account-tied software locks?

Go back five years and I'd guess this is still true. I do not think Apple's policy has changed this.

I'd bet it's even more true now.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#155

Post by Joeri »

ejstronge wrote: post #60
mschuster91 wrote: post #6

There is also another issue why Apple is restricting "part harvesting": theft. iCloud locks or Samsung's KNOX lock entered the field because the manufacturers were pretty pissed that customers using their devices in public became a target for "enterprising" robbers who'd factory-wipe the devices and flip them to a pawn shop or second-hand store in a matter of half an hour. When people are afraid to use your products…

> (If anyone at Apple is reading this: ffs, allow the legitimate owner of a device to "unpair" all components in their phone in iCloud so that legitimate second-hand shops can strip a broken device at least for its parts) I was robbed at gunpoint (but not in a 'problematic' part of town) and the thief outlined all the steps he needed me to take to remove my phone from Find My and from iCloud. I think a lot of these m…

Unpairing a device from icloud should probably require a second factor or a mandatory safety wait period. Same for every potentially really harmful action.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#156

Post by circuit10 »

misnome wrote: post #19
toxik wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While anti-consumerist practices such as this authentication mechanism sometimes accidentally protect the consumer, it is not the reason why companies do it. If it were, they would also allow you to say “yes this replacement is desired.” Similarly, if it was about security and preventing backdoored parts, they could allow you to authorize the replacement. But no, it is of course about money grabbing, and then the con…

> If it were, they would also allow you to say “yes this replacement is desired.” How does that not completely bypass any of the reasons for wanting to do this? And it is “anti-consumerist” to make my property a less desirable target for theft?

> And it is “anti-consumerist” to make my property a less desirable target for theft?

That's not the main purpose, it's an excuse. You can tell because they don't take relatively simple steps to make things easier for non-stolen parts replacement like the one being suggested

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#157

Post by flanked-evergl »

nemothekid wrote: post #144
flanked-evergl wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get the iFixit point as well but if I have a 1500€ phone, I don't want to think about it being stolen, when I am on vacation, because someone needs some parts (oh the human trafficing/organ harvesting similarity...) Do you think thieves are that descending? I know someone whos iPhone 14 was stolen in London. If this helped protect against theft, then why did they steal the phone anyway?

> If this helped protect against theft, then why did they steal the phone anyway? They are plenty of stories on Reddit and TikTok where the stolen phone ends up in China, and then the owner is phished into disabling iCloud so that the phone could be wiped. If not the sold is phone for parts. To me the very fact that you need an entire phishing ring to make stealing iPhones profitable means that there is some cost tha…

How do the thieves get the contact details of the person whose phone they stole to fish them? And why did they steal the iPhone I mentioned without having the contact details of the person?

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#158

Post by sciolistse »

bonzini wrote: post #116
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Change "replacement" to "removal" and it should work as intended. I haven't authorized my stolen phone's parts to be removed so they can't be installed in any other phone.

But if the phone doesn't turn on you can't authorize the removal. And if it turns on but a factory reset is enough to let you authorize the removal, you're back to square 1. Either way it's not feasible.

the phone is likely linked to an apple account. seems reasonable that if the components are approved for a specific phone and that phone is linked to an icloud account, that account could permit a swap?

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#159

Post by circuit10 »

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #17
toxik wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While anti-consumerist practices such as this authentication mechanism sometimes accidentally protect the consumer, it is not the reason why companies do it. If it were, they would also allow you to say “yes this replacement is desired.” Similarly, if it was about security and preventing backdoored parts, they could allow you to authorize the replacement. But no, it is of course about money grabbing, and then the con…

Yes. I could see a better system being made. Perhaps alerting you that the screen was marked as stolen and refusing to have it operate. Hell, for screens in particular you could display a “please return to ” message and nothing else.

I think this is being downvoted as it initially reads as a snarky way to say "the way it works now is fine", but reading closer I think they are saying it should only happen when the screen is marked as stolen which seems reasonable

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#160

Post by bakugo »

adesanmi wrote: post #104
bakugo wrote: post #82

The average Apple fanboy's ability to rationalize every single anti-consumer decision made by Apple is impressive. Literally all Apple has to do is say "it's for your own safety!" and they will defend it to the death.

I don’t understand how this is Anti Consumer in any way? I have an iPhone and a FairPhone. One’s niche is that it’s repairable, and the other is that it’s not. A consumer who wants a repairable would buy something like a FairPhone (modular parts!!!) and someone like my mum can get her all-in-one “nice” experience. They’re allowed to have an opinion, and with engineering there are tradeoffs. They tradeoff design with…

> and someone like my mum can get her all-in-one “nice” experience.

This is a great example of what I had in mind. Apple has successfully convinced you that pairing every part of the phone to the motherboard such that it can never be replaced by anyone other than Apple (usually for a price greater than the phone itself) is somehow essential to the iPhone Experience™ and beneficial to the user.

Post reply on HN