iPhone 5 through 8 and some iPads self-destruct w non-MFi cables and chargers

I’m not surprised that if you use accessories that aren’t vetted to work with a particular system, that the system may get damaged over time in a way that isn’t an intentional “self destructing” design. At the time that I’m writing this, the HN title is an editorialized “iPhone 5 through 8 and some iPads self-destruct w non-MFi cables and chargers” when the ifixit link says “How [do] I test the Tristar?”

If you take your car to a mechanic and get repairs with generic third party parts and the car isn’t as efficient or reliable as the same model car that was taken to the dealer mechanic doing repairs with parts officially approved by the car maker, would you be surprised?

Back in 2013, a woman in China was electrocuted because a poorly designed generic charger was letting dangerous current through to the phone while it was being used:

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/apple-starts-power-adapter...

If you were Apple and wanted to guarantee a minimum level of quality and safety, doesn’t the MFi program make sense? I’ve never thought of MFi certification as a ploy to charge more just because they can. Such a program lets you buy (MFi certified) Anker lightning cables for a lot less than a similar cable made by Apple.

This looks like an under-recognized, purposefully-anti-competitive gambit to lock people further into Apple's hardware ecosystem, limit consumer choices, and purposely ruin a customer's product if they stray outside the walled garden.

Both of the "tristar" and "hydra" chips are fragile and prone to degradation, when they are connected directly to the Lightning port.

https://store.rossmanngroup.com/ics-components-and-chipsets/...

https://www.ipadrehab.com/article.cfm?ArticleNumber=32

iPadRehab mentions a tester, on which site also explains the causes and symptoms

http://tristartester.com/en/

More technical discussion about Lightning

https://nyansatan.github.io/lightning

Replacing these fragile chips isn't a solution in the long-term because it reinforces an artificially-constructed monopoly. In the short-term, it may get a user's device working but it doesn't help but throw them right back into debt peonage.

That just shows that the iPhone is "not suitable for use" and should be discarded.

Also a Brand that shows that it's "not suitable for use" is a Brand that I would be very reluctant to purchase again.