Someone Uploaded What Look to Be Apple’s Internal iPhone Repair Videos
motherboard.vice.com
motherboard.vice.com
When the video get taken down, it showed a large device resembling a 3d printer where the phone is precisely mounted while a probe carefully presses on the glass in multiple places to calibrate touch sensitivity. This works in conjunction with a special app running on the attached iMac. The process takes 15 minutes if it works the first time--the instructions indicate that it might fail the first time.
I can't speak to whether you're correct or not, but that feature is a massive time saver for me. It's one of the most compelling features that keeps me on their platform. I have large fingers and selecting text with 3D touch is incredibly easy compared to using the twin cursors offered by iOS/Android for that purpose.
I run into quite a number of folks who have no idea they have 3D touch though. Surprises them even more than me when I show them.
I don't use 3D touch for much else though, which sort of supports your assertion.
I wonder if better training by Apple could help? But it seems they’ve already accepted the tap-and-hold workaround for supporting some 3D Touch functionality on devices without 3D Touch.
Seems like 3D Touch, and iOS 7’s lightboxing parallax effect for backgrounds, was likely part of a broader vision by Ive and the design team to bring depth to a thin phone screen. It’s an admirable goal, but whether by lack of discoverability or lack of training, seems like it isn’t poised to be a widely-adopted technology.
Mobile is increasingly looking like desktop in terms of the gulf between "ordinary users" and "power users"; applications designed of one group are likely to be highly sub-optimal for the other, presenting developers with a difficult UX compromise. Most users understand the hamburger menu, which could be read as a sign of progress or a dismal failure.
Personally though I don't think 3D touch is any less discoverable than your right mouse button on a computer. If you have a 3D touch capable device you had to configure it at least once when you got a new device capable of it so you know it exists just like you know a right mouse button click state often exists (Macs don't even ship with obvious right-click capability, the OS has it disabled by default and neither of their mouse input types have an obvious right click mechanism just by looking at them)
It might help if Apple would put a manual in with the iPhone, instead of making every feature a treasure hunt.
Whenever I have to edit text on my work iPhone SE I almost want to text it to my personal phone, correct it there, then send it back. Editing without 3D Touch is a nightmare, especially on a smaller screen.
Because it doesn’t always fire my muscle memory has evolved to just press down harder to increase reliability. And it’s still only sees 90% of my hard presses.
Why wouldn’t a Long press, for example, not work for that? Or just a dedicated button to switch to a cursor?
A dedicated button wouldn’t be slightly more inconvenient but would be ridiculously more discoverable and make it available for people who have phones older than the 3D Touch supported ones.
I do not own an Iphone to test though.
How do we know that the third-party teams hadn't previously seen these videos? If they had a source that was getting them the videos, they probably wouldn't broadcast that information.
They use elaborate equipment and even x-ray to figure out what is going on inside these things.
That sounds a little sketchy.
It’s more likely they use identifiers, chips or boards from unlocked but broken devices.
TIL..
The best third-party repairers are vastly more advanced than Apple's own warranty repair service. They're constantly pushing the limits of what is considered possible in SMD rework. None of these videos would have provided any useful information to them.
iFixit are rank amateurs compared to companies like G-lon, REWA and ZXW. The fact that Motherboard praise them as "incredible" is frankly embarrassing.
My gripe is with the author of this piece, who seems to unquestioningly regurgitate iFixit's PR talking points. iFixit provide a useful service and do cool stuff, but they're much better at marketing than they are at fixing things.
I don't get why they dislike iFixit, as the guides they put out are high quality and well suited for their target demographic. Not everything has to be geared to the super-knowledgeable reader, especially things like repair guides for consumer electronics.
Their actual comment history doesn't seem to reflect this https://hn.algolia.com/?query=jdietrich%20ifixit&sort=byPopu...
My objection is with journalists who uncritically describe iFixit as experts. iFixit are not experts on consumer electronics or electronics repair. They are well-meaning amateurs who run a tool shop and have a media budget. If a professional technology journalist is unable to discern this, then that is indicative of a profound malaise within journalism.
Every time Apple launch a piece of hardware, iFixit get a huge amount of SEO juice from technology news websites linking to their teardown. Why is literally nobody in the media doing it themselves? iFixit have taken on an outsized role in technology journalism, because the overwhelming majority of technology journalists simply do not have the knowledge to take apart a piece of technology and say anything meaningful about what they see inside. That is most certainly not the fault of iFixit.
I'm sure Apple has done lots of cost benefit analysis and found that it's way cheaper to just replace an iPhone motherboard than it is to pay someone skilled at SMD repair to find the bad component(s) and replace them.
It may be that skilled repair work isn't scaleable, so Apple have decided to constrain their repair operations to simple module swaps. It may also be that Apple would rather sell you a new device than fix your old one, so have taken an approach that is broadly hostile to repair. I suspect it's a bit of both.
DIY community - yes, but they are not a target market for apple at all.
Think about this what brands of car are there that aren't sold to DIYers. Tesla? We are in a long term trend whereby more and more things are non repairable trash that last less and less for no real good reason. Its irresponsible, hostile, and stupid. Can you imagine if we had cars that after 3-5 years died and had to be scrapped and we dismissed the matter as foo brand isn't for DIYERS that think you ought to be able to fix your car.
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/a3yadk/apple-sued...
It looks like the Apple authorized service program may be dead, or at least on it's last legs. Their website makes it hard to find these companies, I couldn't figure out how to get a list.
The writing was on the wall when Apple stores started opening up. In my city there was a decades-old independent Apple-focused computer store/repair shop. They were one of those places where you could buy a Mac or get it fixed, even when Apple was at the very bottom of its popularity. It didn't last long after Apple opened a store down the street.
It seems at some point Apple decided they wanted to bring everything in house, and that’s when these started drying up. Now it’s hard to get anything other than basic repairs done, and if it’s a phone, not come back with a replacement refurbished phone which is almost certainly in worse shape than the phone you took in.
This makes me sadder than it should. The days where you could modify your own devices are starting to fade away.
Which is not exactly the tale of plucky indie DIY repair hero people wanted it to be, and probably quite close to the "illegal importer trying to spin his way out of it" Apple accused him of being.
If they're stolen, that's bad, sure. But that's only one possibility for where they came from.
> the guy's defense was "there's no way I could be infringing on their trademarks because the Apple logos are all inked over to make sure nobody sees them before I put them on the phones, and once they're installed you don't see them either!"
When someone accuses you of infringing a trademark, pointing out that you don't use the trademark is a completely legitimate defense. I honestly don't understand why you imply that's a bad argument.
> Which is not exactly the tale of plucky indie DIY repair hero people wanted it to be, and probably quite close to the "illegal importer trying to spin his way out of it" Apple accused him of being.
What is an "illegal importer"? You shouldn't need Apple's permission to import anything.
If I steal something from you, can I then run around declaring I shouldn't need your permission to use it or to take it where I like?
Or -- since it's legally yours -- should you have some say in that and the opportunity to get it back?
At best the stuff he was importing was in the realm of really good counterfeits, and included trademark-violating logos that he or his accomplices did a bad job of covering up. At worst (and seemingly pretty likely) the stuff he was importing was legally Apple's property and had been stolen from them.
There is no chain of argument here that turns this guy into the narrative you want him to be.
He did not violate trademarks. You don't violate a trademark by having a secret hidden logo. That's not even close to how trademarks work.
Either the components were counterfeit, and bore hastily-covered-up trademark-infringing logos, and thus shouldn't have been legally importable. Or they were genuine but stolen, and thus shouldn't have been legally importable.
No amount of narrative spin can change that.
Not sure what the problem is for you - I literally clicked on that link, answered a few questions and in a matter of seconds had a list of 2 dozen + repair centers that could replace a cracked screen within 30 miles of me, the vast majority of which are 3rd party.
(or maybe it's still a problem and my peers are just more responsible/willing to pay for repairs?)
Oh your 2 year old laptop is broken? That's old tech anyway, you should buy a new one!
Virtually nobody pays much attention to how other peoples phone functions and if they say a dim display they would probably assume their battery was dying not that apple sucks.
If we go back to the auto industry I seem to recall them wanting to force people to get oem service/parts to maintain their warranty not to "protect their brand", a phrase which almost always precedes nonsense, but out of simple greed.
Greed is always always the simple answer in life. People that think their position is strong are always more willing to grasp at a few more pennies.
It's the same reason Kleenex sues when people use their brand for generic products, or Disney forces daycares to take down murals of Mickey, or Burberry burns unsold products. It's a slipper slope away from quality, and while no one thing is a huge deal, the culmination is.
I agree at the end of the day it's about making money, but that's just what being a business is. For certain brands, they want their products to be meticulous. It's not the only way to build a product (see Android), however it is the reason Apple products are so beloved by the people who buy them.
Are you sure? People love to blame problems on the last person that touched a thing, even when they are unrelated.
Apple does allow 3rd parties into their ecosystem (app developers), but they lock that process down to specifically retain control of the experience that customers have
You may not want that, and your company may not make the same choice, it Apple’s approach works pretty well for them.
Companies seem to have a worse idea of this is yours and that is mine than 2 year olds.
There's a fair bit of danger of reputational damage from unauthorised repairers.
> Arman Haji, who uploaded the videos to his YouTube channel, told Motherboard he initially saw them posted to Twitter
[Edit: made it clearer that the article doesn't identify the original uploader]
Source: Was an Apple Certified Macintosh Technician
Anyone got a new link?
Step 1: They want to increase revenue by vertical integration (repairs).
Step 2: They make the process rather difficult (e.g. damaging the device permanently with one wrong move), thus discouraging self-repair and third-party repairs. Also, they void guarantee in such a case.
Step 3: Now that they made it rather difficult, they need to buy/manufacture special equipment (like that metal battery rolling device seen in the video). This, in addition to having the need for more "man hours" replacing a battery, is rather costly.
Step 4: They can now offer repair services, which has to cover the cost of the battery itself, the time needed to repair one device plus the special equipment (which amortises rather quickly I guess).
(Step 5: Constantly increase lifespan of batteries, so that selling guarantees becomes more profitable; incurring costs of necessary time for replacing batteries likewise lower)
The repair isn't just about the revenue, but getting foot traffic to the stores. With a third-party repair model, like Samsung, all of that potential foot traffic goes to somebody else.
Somewhat similar to any modern luxury car brand BMW, Mercedes, Jaguar - bulk of the revenue is made on post purchase services but in most cases average luxury car buyer will trade in the car before it gets old and needs a service.
Similar case with average apple user - they'll upgrade to a newer phone in 2-3 years any way so no need to service anyway.
One thing Apple doesn't have in their favor, cars need regular on-going maintenance. Computers don't.
That said, I think Apples success is mostly inertia at this point: demand in the secondary market keeps resale prices high which quickens the new device cycle. As long as it costs less to sell the broken one and buy a new one, that will be the path people take when there is an issue.
I got sick of being my own tech support. I do that stuff all day at work and when I get home I'm tired of it. If I have to fix my computer, I'm probably going to rush through it and make it worse, because I really don't want to be doing it in the first place. I want to be using it, not dinking with it.
Same reason I ditched my old fix-me-up beater car for something with a warranty: I needed a car that started every time I turned the key. I haven't opened my own hood since, and it's taken a lot of stress off of my mind.
I'm dubious of this. They could easily do this on the software side, but don't. A five year old iPhone 5S is still supported as of iOS 12; some Android devices are sold already unsupported. Only two percent of devices run 8.1! https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/
Welcome to the real world. That applies to pretty much everything, including cars, electrical wiring in your home, appliances
Of course, not all actions by a skilled (but not trained on the device) will damage it. But some will.
For instance, I had my Moto G5 screen replaced at a non-offical repair shop here in Poland.
I told them to use the cheapest thing they could find.
The screen sucks. It's dimmer than the original, and the camera hole doesn't even align properly. Most importantly, the glass is not at all reinforced, and it already cracked.
For me it's fine because I don't treat my phones well anyway and it was bound to happen and I saved money, BUT people that see it will think a Moto G5's screen is dim, prone to scratching, and easy to break.
That's what Apple is trying to avoid.