21–30 of 35 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, but what do you want to say with your comment? Changing a broken screen does not invalidate any chips on the motherboard afaik..
I think my comment is pretty clear. Just to address your one cherry-picked hardware item: >Changing a broken screen does not invalidate any chips on the motherboard afaik.. On some devices (those with fingerprint sensors) there are security implications.
Let them repair but it should void any warranty.
Why exactly should a vendor not be responsible for the quality of its product just because they weren't hired to repair it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For that matter, if more altruistic people had access to these tools, couldn't you argue that security bugs would be found quicker as well? As of right now, it's possible that there are a million security bugs that black-hat hackers are sitting on that the average person doesn't have the tools to know about. Isn't security-through-obscurity considered the worst kind of security?
Security-through-obscurity can be very effective by using it to throw up a smoke screen. Case: you need to protect a web server. If you can successfully hide/spoof your OS/software fingerprint, an attacker won't know whether your server has vulnerable software. This makes exploit selection extremely difficult. You can protect an already secure system from 0-day or unknown exploits by hiding whether you're running win…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why exactly should a vendor not be responsible for the quality of its product just because they weren't hired to repair it?
Why should a vendor be responsible for any damages caused by unauthorized repairs using unknown methods and equipment?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly, like the guides do not leak anyway.
The way I read GP's comment, is that security researchers have been able to find security vulnerabilities even without access to information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The right to repair does not make the device less secure. Most vulnerabilities are exploitable via the lightning connection. And being able to change your battery or your screen will not magically legitimize "honor killings" or prevent atheists from being open.
OK it's true there are also more issues at play. Since you mention battery, that's a big one. When Apple cannot control which batteries get swapped into their devices, their brand is at risk due to fires caused by bad batteries. You can generalize this point to other components and quality in general. If people swap out third party parts, which some repair shops and end users will do to save money, the products end u…
I never seems this argument when you install after market car parts and install the parts yourself or your neighbor or some random car service, if you changed your lightbolb in the car and the engine breaks 1 month later you can't void my engine warranty. When I install a cheap battery, the pone burns and I bring it to warranty then the warranty people can photo the phone, show the problem, show the faulty battery and I am at fault.
If you are concern that evil people are out to get Apple, those evil people have many other ways to do it, there is no good reason to screw 99,99% of your user because some random guy install a cheap battery and then puts a photo and rand on the internet, that does nothing, there was a need for thousands of people to complain about the keyboard issues before most(but not all) of Apple fans believed that Apple could make a mistake(so a few rants won't have any effect).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The right to repair does not make the device less secure. Most vulnerabilities are exploitable via the lightning connection. And being able to change your battery or your screen will not magically legitimize "honor killings" or prevent atheists from being open.
OK it's true there are also more issues at play. Since you mention battery, that's a big one. When Apple cannot control which batteries get swapped into their devices, their brand is at risk due to fires caused by bad batteries. You can generalize this point to other components and quality in general. If people swap out third party parts, which some repair shops and end users will do to save money, the products end u…
If I swap the parts myself, I either get the new parts from apple themselves (in which case it IS their fault if something goes wrong or they can blame it on me for wrongly assembling it; e.g. "You were holding it wrong")
If I go to a shop or a friend to get my phone repaired and they replace parts, this would be different. If the device malfunctions I would obviously blame the guy who last fiddled with it first. Look at car repair shops, household appliances etc...
In the case of batteries its even more simple. If its an apple battery, its obviously apples fault if the device catches fire. Because either the battery was bad or the manuals were. If the swap is so terribly difficult that many users will damage the phone while swapping batteries, it's also apples fault, but they will (as usual) deny any claims so no harm done.
If it's a third-party battery, I can't see how the blame would fall to apple.
All in all, the reputation argument is on them. I don't see how e.g. Ford can be blamed for a car where the independently repaired brakes didn't work and caused an accident.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK it's true there are also more issues at play. Since you mention battery, that's a big one. When Apple cannot control which batteries get swapped into their devices, their brand is at risk due to fires caused by bad batteries. You can generalize this point to other components and quality in general. If people swap out third party parts, which some repair shops and end users will do to save money, the products end u…
>When Apple cannot control which batteries get swapped into their devices, their brand is at risk due to fires caused by bad batteries. I never seems this argument when you install after market car parts and install the parts yourself or your neighbor or some random car service, if you changed your lightbolb in the car and the engine breaks 1 month later you can't void my engine warranty. When I install a cheap batte…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why exactly should a vendor not be responsible for the quality of its product just because they weren't hired to repair it?
Why should a vendor be responsible for any damages caused by unauthorized repairs using unknown methods and equipment?
2. Who says the vendor should be responsible for damages caused by repairs not done by the vendor? I was responding to someone who said that a repair not done by the vendor should void the warranty. Warranty only covers defects caused by the vendor, thus what they suggested was that vendors should not be liable for defects they themselves caused if someone else has repaired their product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK it's true there are also more issues at play. Since you mention battery, that's a big one. When Apple cannot control which batteries get swapped into their devices, their brand is at risk due to fires caused by bad batteries. You can generalize this point to other components and quality in general. If people swap out third party parts, which some repair shops and end users will do to save money, the products end u…
This is really not a good argument. If I swap the parts myself, I either get the new parts from apple themselves (in which case it IS their fault if something goes wrong or they can blame it on me for wrongly assembling it; e.g. "You were holding it wrong") If I go to a shop or a friend to get my phone repaired and they replace parts, this would be different. If the device malfunctions I would obviously blame the guy…