My friend Jia got a 16GB memory custom MacBook Pro 13 in 2016, which had a new mold with Touch Bar, Touch ID, and a butterfly keyboard.
In four years, Apple has offered a Butterfly Keyboard Replacement Program, a Screen Coating Replacement Program, and a Screen Backlight Repair Program for the 2016 MacBook Pro 13, or the first generation of the Touch Bar. In other words, the screen and keyboard of MacBook Pro 2016 are defective.
Unfortunately, the battery of Xiao Jia’s MBP took the lead in the trouble, and the battery was replaced at a third-party institution for convenience. Naive, six months later, the screen backlighting problem, which happened to fall within the “Screen Backlight Repair Program”, with apprehension, could only go to the Apple Store to try their luck.
But fortunately, the geniuses at the Apple Store did not find any abnormality by checking the “hardware code” of MacBook Pro 13, and finally gave Jia a replacement for the entire A-side including the screen.
The purpose of this story is not to emphasize how poor the quality of the 2016 MacBook Pro 13 is, nor how good Apple’s after-sales service is. I simply want to say that it’s a good thing the 2016 MacBook Pro 13 is equipped with the T1 security chip, but if it comes two years later, the T2 MacBook Pro won’t be so lucky.
The T2 security chip in post-2018 Macs records information about the characteristics of each part of the computer and “identifies” all hardware before it is turned on to prevent a hardware breach.
MacRumors reported in 2018 that because of the T2 chip’s control over Mac computer hardware, if users or third-party official repairers use parts that are not officially verified or disassemble and repair them privately, they will not pass the T2 chip’s repair inspection and the system will even automatically lock the computer.
The Apple T2 security chip that records hardware information. Image from: iFixit
The iPhone (iPad) has long used chip-level protection for security, as opposed to the Mac’s T-series security chip. The TouchID and FaceID modules are directly bound to the A-series chip, so if you replace them, you cannot use the corresponding biometric identification, and thus cannot access the system by “changing the lock” to prevent malicious cracking.
The new version of the device will be available for purchase in the future. Image from: Twitter
In addition to the hardware, Apple has started to do hardware identification in iOS one after another. The serial numbers of some components are written on the motherboard at the Time of shipment, so that they can be verified and compared during use. If a user replaces a non-certified part, iOS will pop up and notify the system, but it won’t affect normal use yet.
The new version of the iphone 12 Pro is a new version of the iPhone.
▲ iPhone 12 Pro‘s camera components. Image from: iFixit
However, in the latest iOS 14.4 Developer Beta 2, developer Steve Moser found some code about “third-party camera authentication”. This means that Apple will warn those replacing iPhones with non-certified third-party cameras, similar to the previous battery and screen, with just a warning, but it works.
Fixing iPhones is getting harder and more expensive
In fact, as early as last year (2020), the iFixit website took iPhone 12 to do a test, using a third-party camera iPhone 12 can not call “portrait light effect”, can not switch to ultra-wide angle lens.
After replacing the third-party camera, the ultra wide-angle lens did not work. Image from: iFixit
Moreover, Apple internal documents show that authorized technicians must run Apple’s proprietary cloud-based system configuration application to complete screen and camera repairs on the iPhone 12 series. In short, on the iPhone 12 series, the screen, camera and other components are calibrated more strictly and may affect normal use.
Doing so obviously increases the difficulty of repairing the iPhone 12 series, as well as narrowing the scope of our repair phones.
The company’s main goal is to provide the best possible service to its customers.
The Face ID module bundled with the A-series chip. Image from: iFixit
The battery, screen and camera components are still only “reminders”, which do not affect the function of the hardware, and naturally do not affect us much. But Apple’s habit will not stop at “reminders”, it seems to be a temporary layout, and then close the net. Maybe in one of the iOS versions, it will directly block the non-certified hardware, and then we will have to go to the official/authorized repairer.
Security” is an all-purpose excuse
The most basic aspect of restricting non-authorized hardware is “security,” including device security and personal information security.
When Touch ID was first introduced on the iPhone, Apple said that the fingerprint information collected (and later, facial information) would only be stored in a secure chip inside the SoC and would not be uploaded to the cloud. Restricting this type of hardware essentially prevents the device from “breaking” the hardware.
As for the battery, we cannot rule out the possibility that third-party batteries may have quality problems that affect the normal operation of the iPhone, and may cause damage to other iPhone devices in minor cases, or may cause accidents due to unstable lithium batteries, which may also seem justified.
In fact, replacing non-authorized iPhone devices carries a certain amount of risk, in this case, a lack of functionality. I vaguely remember that once the iPhone 7 series replaced the third-party vibration motor, there is also a certain chance of failure.
To say that the battery, biometric devices such as directly linked to the security of the device, indeed need to do a little restriction, but the screen, camera, motor and then linked to the motherboard/cloud is a little redundant, more like an “excuse”.
Apple’s ultimate goal may still be “profit-seeking
By frequently expanding the scope of non-authorized components, the ultimate benefit is actually Apple’s own interests and those of authorized repair organizations.
Apple has always had a high level of control over its hardware products and services, and has recently been gradually pushing into the “repair” industry, with the IRP Program (Independent Repair Provider) program, which just entered China a few days ago, being one such initiative.
In November 2019, Cook said in a document responding to the U.S. Congress that “every year since 2009, the cost of repair services has exceeded the revenue generated by the repair business” and that Apple’s official repair business has been losing money for ten years.
The official out-of-warranty repair charges for Apple devices, including the iPhone, iPad, and MacBook, are quite high. For the latest iPhone 12 series, for example, out-of-warranty screen repair prices range from $1,699 to $2,559, battery repair costs $519, and other repairs go up to $4,495.
Such a high out-of-warranty repair price ultimately triggers two situations: one is to buy AppleCare+ in advance to balance the risk, and the other is to find a third-party, non-authorized repair facility.
Apple’s repair business is not profitable, but AppleCare+, which is classified as a service, has nearly $4 billion in revenue (2017 data). Fear of high out-of-warranty repair fees should lead few to purchase AppleCare+ value-added services.
Non-authorized third-party repair facilities have a significant advantage in terms of fees, and the fees are detailed.
The verification code buried in the iOS system can be “activated” at any time if Apple wants it to, so that the iPhone with unauthorized parts is down. Apple’s layout is like having an invisible hand controlling the repair market, which can be collected at any time and thus control the whole market.
For us, if we don’t buy AppleCare+ service, the cost of iPhone repair will rise. For users in third- and fourth-tier cities without an Apple Store, the repair process becomes even more troublesome.
When the invisible hand falls, it will indeed further stimulate sales of AppleCare+ services. But overly strict restrictions that result in high repair costs will also backfire, prompting some consumers to choose manufacturers with simpler, more portable repairs. I think this kind of strict control consequences, Apple should also estimate get.
Previously, Apple’s repair (iPhone) mostly took the “exchange for repair”, so the repair policy eventually gave rise to the black market of “official exchange”. Apple had to tighten the policy, from “exchange for repair” to “repair only”, only a few years, but the “gray industry” about Apple equipment repair has become a very profitable industry, Apple’s initial intention is actually to take the opportunity to sort out these “unseen” repair industry.
However, before tightening the policy and imposing stricter hardware restrictions, should Apple consider appropriately lowering repair prices, increasing the number of authorized repairers, and expanding the number of authorized components, rather than just pushing users to Apple Care and official repair channels?
Apple’s introduction of the IRP program in China is clearly intended to expand the scope of authorized repairs and increase repair options by absorbing more third-party repair stores. Although this is suspected to be a monopoly on repair parts, it is a good start to sorting out the iPhone repair industry as opposed to the “one-size-fits-all” hardware restrictions.
Scotty Allen’s iPhone 6s assembled in Huaqiangbei.
The company’s main goal is to provide the best possible service for the iPhone 6s.
Recent Comments