Yes. And that's part of what I paid for.
If this is your mindset, you're on the wrong website. The values of hackers are incompatible with the values of technological serfdom that you're espousing.
You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
91–100 of 235 posts
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#92I recently encountered a similar situation for my Macbook Pro. Touch ID sensor is paired specifically to your logic board. You must replace both if either one has a defect. Source: https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/MacBook+Air+13-Inch+Early+2020+...
I think this is an unavoidable side effect of Touch ID fully happening inside the module. The logic board has to have full trust of the module, because the module will simply inform the OS that fingerprint X was seen - the OS/logic board have no way to confirm the information
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#93At yet here we are with nobody having a better plan. The issue is still the same as it has been for the past 20 years: making a (PKI-based) security feature means you can never share the secret parts or make it optional, otherwise it is immediately defeated. You can't have selective security where it works sometimes but not all the times. And trading out that security system is not an option. PKI specifically is an a…
> At yet here we are with nobody having a better plan. The issue is still the same as it has been for the past 20 years: making a (PKI-based) security feature means you can never share the secret parts or make it optional, otherwise it is immediately defeated. You can't have selective security where it works sometimes but not all the times. And trading out that security system is not an option. This is BS. A security…
It seems you have no clue what you are talking about. A PKI where the CA private key is not secret is not really a PKI now is it?
As for asking buyers: I doubt 0.001% of buyers in any market segments has a clue about PKI or public key cryptography at all. This is E2EE "lets have a government back-door" all over again: IT DOES NOT WORK. The Clipper chip was not that log ago, now was it?
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#94At yet here we are with nobody having a better plan. The issue is still the same as it has been for the past 20 years: making a (PKI-based) security feature means you can never share the secret parts or make it optional, otherwise it is immediately defeated. You can't have selective security where it works sometimes but not all the times. And trading out that security system is not an option. PKI specifically is an a…
> At yet here we are with nobody having a better plan. The issue is still the same as it has been for the past 20 years: making a (PKI-based) security feature means you can never share the secret parts or make it optional, otherwise it is immediately defeated. You can't have selective security where it works sometimes but not all the times. And trading out that security system is not an option. This is BS. A security…
Quite a lot of people have a bonafide fear of their phone being stolen, especially when travelling and so on.
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#95I wish someone could ask Apple about the middle ground. You want to protect consumers? Fine. Alert customers to the use of non official parts but don’t brick any functionality then.
I want Apple to tell me when that shop that promises original parts is actually giving me an original which I can track.
I don’t want them stopping me from using it unless it’s genuinely incompatible at a firmware level.
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#96Yes. And that's part of what I paid for.
If this is your mindset, you're on the wrong website. The values of hackers are incompatible with the values of technological serfdom that you're espousing.
On the contrary, most people are not hackers, and our job is to make tools usable, unbreakable, and since this tool is their digital twin: secure.
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is SO WEIRD. I've seen this happen so many times around these discussions on HN: There is a valid argument in the source. There is discussion around the argument. There is some proof, there are political discussions. Etc. everything totally normal. But then there is this ONE comment. Usually just one: Anecdotal evidence to spread FUD. And it's up above all that usually discussion. Where is this coming from? Is t…
Nah, it’s the kind of experiences you expect in a low-regulation market. You either pay a premium—beyond what would be justified if “defector” manufacturers and vendors weren’t a factor, i.e. if effectively-enforced regulations were mandating a higher quality floor—to a vendor with a good reputation you expect them to want to maintain, or you pay in expertise and time-cost. If you don’t pay in one of those two ways,…
> Nah, it’s the kind of experiences you expect in a low-regulation market.
Nah, it's not. The market for Android devices has been there for years and it works.
Sure, you can be screwed over, like in everything in life, but it's not such a common thing that it would make it an equally relevant argument against liberalization.
I agree, though: people who can afford premium won't bother. Neither with alternative ways nor with people who can't afford premium. Maybe it's even intended to keep the brand somehow exclusive and special...sad world.
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#98Headline is wrong. Market paid $1K for the iPhone experience.
Look at ads: specs versus "life goals" enablement. This is not a hardware product or parts bin price.
If you pay $1,000 for a meal, you damn sure expect the restaurant to control the experience since the price isn't the cost of ingredients. And if you want to cook, that's great, but you're not getting to bring your own parsley, you hack together your own meal elsewhere.
. . .
Even if food became free, people would pay -- and pay well -- for the curated Michelin star experience.
So how to learn to think more about the diner's experience than the kitchen experience or the "right" to monkey with some other chef's prix fixe menu, to better build that kind of user appreciation for one's own product?
For sure, a Michelin star is hard to achieve.
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a case for post-purchase rationalization. Take an obviously negative trait and spin/distort it in such a way it sounds like an advantage, reinforcing your delusion that you made the right choice. Same for a single, apple-controlled store, the inability to actually install apps without a store, even deciding what browser engine should everyone use.
And this I think is called gaslighting? Telling somebody they are wrong about what they think or feel? Or maybe not gaslighting. What is the term for this? Attack via psychology undermining?
Are you saying there is no objective wrong?
You cannot "feel" that 2×2 != 4.
Re: You Paid $1k for an iPhone, but Apple Still Controls It
#100Anecdotal, but back in those "good old days" when you could get a screen replaced in 5 mins like this article said, on the three occasions I did this I ended up with the worst cheap Chinese knock off screens I have ever seen, the last time I ended up spending even more to get a genuine one. Hard to avoid this with small businesses when they need to make the enough of a margin at those cheaper retail prices. I'm sure…
Imagine if Apple sold OEM parts at a reasonable price. Imagine if they weren't pairing OEM parts to prevent repair shops from parting out broken devices. Imagine if they weren't making deals with manufacturers to prevent the sale of standard parts to third parties - even parts with no Apple IP like the ISL9240 [0]. Imagine if they weren't abusing Customs and Border Patrol powers to prevent distribution of legitimate parts via false acusations of counterfeiting [1]. Maybe then you could get a good screen from a small repair shop.
It's not about margin. It's about parts availability.
Apple stores are few and far between, but Apple products are ubiquitous. Official Apple repairs have them ship the device across the country to repair shops, which takes a lot of time. And they don't do things like component-level repair (i.e. specific chips, resistors, and other board components). They just replace the entire board and charge you for the new one.
An independent repair shop doesn't have to compete on price. They can compete with fast turnaround, minimal travel, and component-level repairs. Or at least they could if they could get the parts.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTpHa70DDX0&t=200
[1] https://blog.giovanh.com/blog/2023/10/26/apples-trademark-ex...