Other option is that Apple bakes in calibration details of all possible serial numbers in every iPad sold which doesn’t sound like a plausible scenario.
Just bake the one that the device is bonded with, using the display serial number as a lookup key.
Then, if you change the serial number of the display, the lookup would fail, and fall back to whatever "default" values are.
Even if the screens would cover the whole spectrum, there is still a high chance this coincidence could happen, and more data would be needed to validate either theory. Is there any statistics showing that this happens all the time or just some times.
At software level iOS registers some calibration data (after some factory calibration) tied to that specific serial number (as calibration makes sense only for that specific instance of the panel anyway) so when serial number changes iOS can't find calibration data on device and continues uncalibrated instead of trying to use calibrations for another-serial screen (from the OS perspective).
It makes sense, if there actually is some sort of calibration going on in the first place of course.
However, I wonder why the pen calibration data is not stored on an controller on the display panel? That would absolutely make sense.
Pencil also has a small calibration table and when paired with a new iPad it checks and downloads that immediately.
If not, it might also be (more likely) sending whatever it senses to iPad and iPad processes that raw input with the calibration data to determine the final output.
Printer manufacturers have been pulling the same trick with storing (approximations of) ink levels in chips in the cartridge, claiming that it makes it easy for users to swap cartridges and continue to have accurate quantities and in that case there's a little bit more truth to the argument, but not this one.
I mean, if cartgridges' calibration drift a bit it might also be more acceptable for many, but if Pencil starts drawing incorrectly many artists would be extremely frustrated and move away from the ecosystem.
That said, I see a generous explanation that I can't rule out based on what they're describing. It seems like the only test this Redditor mentioned was that you can modify the serial number and cause it to go from correct behavior to misbehavior. But I would think the reverse direction is the real test, since otherwise this could just imply that the device is looking up some embedded calibration information for that serial number and not finding it, and therefore falling back to some default behavior?
So, if it's just a matching serial numbers problem, why aren't they programming the new screens with the serial number of the old screen, and thus the problem goes away?
They were a genius grunt and their penchant for drawing conclusions on incomplete information is exactly why they aren’t trusted to perform manual calibration that hinges on their manual interaction with the screen.
If you read their other comments then you see that they believe that all components used are identical and thus wouldn’t need calibration.
Never mind the fact that different vendors are used to supply screens depending on the model in question, even between “identical” screens there’s plenty of subtle variation.
The controller holds calibration information in the form of offsets for touch and color amongst other things. The controller is married via serial numbers and if there’s a mismatch it’ll default to no offset.
This also serves as a clear indicator, with other indicators, that calibration is needed in an effort to prevent the calibration from being forgotten.
Despite not every screen being identical, the accepted tolerance makes it so that offsets for one screen are often “good enough” for another screen to the point most people won’t notice it’s not perfect, provided they’re from the same vendor.
There’s no other super secret mystery to it.
Which is an even bigger issue caused entirely by apples anti-competitive anti-user practices.