Error 53 bricks iPhone 6 after updating to iOS9 if it has been repaired by a 3rd Party

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, zacRupnow said:

When you buy their phone it is yours. They have no legal right to deny you use of your device for any reason. This is going to go down the same path as Jailbreaks and Rooting. Your device is yours do do with as you please.

Except for the backlash that Apple would receive if you start to have credit card theft, your fingerprints get stolen, etc... 

[suicidalfranco]

2 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

 

Statement given by Apple

 

BS, Apple could have handle it in many ways that don't require bricking the phone:

1. simply disable ApplePay if it detects the mismatch

2. stop the upgrade process when checking the device before upgrading

3. if they wanted to keep the brick method: warn the user that the upgrade could not be performed on the device because of a "bad" touchID sensor and hurge them to consult an apple retail store to get a proper one

4. Make it the phone recoverable after being bricked even if it requires going at an apple store instead of tossing it away and asking money for a refurbished one

5. be more open with third party repair shops

[suicidalfranco]

6 minutes ago, atrash said:

 

But are they using first party part? People will think all sorts of malicious way to gain access to your phone and if the fingerprint scanner is compromised, Apple will be in serious trouble.

then just disable ApplePay and warn the user that it has been disabled because "enter reasons here"; don't brik the entire device as if the consumer deserve to be punished for not wanting to spend 100+€ on a fix at the Apple Store and then ask them even more to get it replaced with a refurbished one.

[RedRound2]

20 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

BS, Apple could have handle it in many ways that don't require bricking the phone:

1. simply disable ApplePay if it detects the mismatch

2. stop the upgrade process when checking the device before upgrading

3. if they wanted to keep the brick method: warn the user that the upgrade could not be performed on the device because of a "bad" touchID sensor and hurge them to consult an apple retail store to get a proper one

4. Make it the phone recoverable after being bricked even if it requires going at an apple store instead of tossing it away and asking money for a refurbished one

5. be more open with third party repair shops

Quote

The company did not go as far as acknowledging that there was no possible recovery once the issue has occurred, but simply advised affected users to contact Apple support. 

If they said that it probably means that they can fix this and not the user.

 

Source: http://9to5mac.com/2016/02/05/error-53-iphone-6/

[Brennan Price]

Is this effectively a way so that you cannot install the Apple OS onto something like a cheap android phone?

[zacRupnow]

28 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Except for the backlash that Apple would receive if you start to have credit card theft, your fingerprints get stolen, etc... 

Except that's all software side and couldn't be achieved with a new home button.

[patrickjp93]

2 hours ago, Nic said:

But the problem is that they don't let consumer have the choice to go to a different repair shop

Yes they do, just like they give you a choice to upgrade your software or not. It's buyer beware. Just because it's not your preconceived perfect solution doesn't make it anti-consumer or illegal.

[Yoinkerman]

6 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Yes they do, just like they give you a choice to upgrade your software or not. It's buyer beware. Just because it's not your preconceived perfect solution doesn't make it anti-consumer or illegal.

Having to say buyer beware inherently makes it anti consumer.

[79wjd]

30 minutes ago, zacRupnow said:

Except that's all software side and couldn't be achieved with a new home button.

Unless a malicious Touch ID sensor was used. By only allow Apple authorized replacement centers to do the replacement, Apple can make sure that nothing malicious will be used, which could be used to bypass the security restrictions put in place by Apple. 

 

Considering the screen is the most common and expensive thing to be replaced, and that it's quite easy to replace the screen while using the original home button, it's probably not too much of an assumption to make that Apple chose to only lock phones with a replaced home button for a reason. 

[zacRupnow]

11 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Unless a malicious Touch ID sensor was used. By only allow Apple authorized replacement centers to do the replacement, Apple can make sure that nothing malicious will be used, which could be used to bypass the security restrictions put in place by Apple. 

 

Considering the screen is the most common and expensive thing to be replaced, and that it's quite easy to replace the screen while using the original home button, it's probably not too much of an assumption to make that Apple chose to only lock phones with a replaced home button for a reason. 

The sensor either works or it doesn't. Malicious means there is a level of processing involved, it can only be mind or digital, software/firmware and brain of a malicious person. If a sensor lets anyone open the phone it isn't malicious, it's just not working properly. Now if a bad repair person intentionally makes the sensor not function as intended, the repair person is malicious, not the sensor. The sensor may be considered sabotaged by the repair but it is still only a sensor and either works properly or doesn't.

[NinjaJc01]

Apple are going to have the whole tech community on their doorsteps with pitchforks and flaming torches if they carry on...

[79wjd]

18 minutes ago, zacRupnow said:

The sensor either works or it doesn't. Malicious means there is a level of processing involved, it can only be mind or digital, software/firmware and brain of a malicious person. If a sensor lets anyone open the phone it isn't malicious, it's just not working properly. Now if a bad repair person intentionally makes the sensor not function as intended, the repair person is malicious, not the sensor. The sensor may be considered sabotaged by the repair but it is still only a sensor and either works properly or doesn't.

Technicalities. 

 

Either way the outcome is still the same. 

[dragosudeki]

34 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Unless a malicious Touch ID sensor was used. By only allow Apple authorized replacement centers to do the replacement, Apple can make sure that nothing malicious will be used, which could be used to bypass the security restrictions put in place by Apple. 

 

Considering the screen is the most common and expensive thing to be replaced, and that it's quite easy to replace the screen while using the original home button, it's probably not too much of an assumption to make that Apple chose to only lock phones with a replaced home button for a reason. 

Your second point, I can agree with.

 

Your first point is agreeable, but has problems. I'm not even sure if Apple has authorized any third party replacement centers to do any repair on Apple products and I don't think Apple really helps customers/repair centres out in that way (based on the video Louis Rossman did).

[captain cactus]

1 hour ago, zacRupnow said:

When you buy their phone it is yours. They have no legal right to deny you use of your device for any reason. This is going to go down the same path as Jailbreaks and Rooting. Your device is yours do do with as you please.

Yes, the device is mine.

 

My fingerprint and payment information and other passwords accessible with said fingerprint are also mine, and if you don't mind I'd like to keep it that way. If that means only authorized people/companies can repair my device with OEM parts that are validated by said people/companies then I'm more than happy to spend the extra few bucks on it, rather than having some random 3rd party shop do it with god knows what hardware resulting in a bricked phone which is a whackton more expensive.

[patrickjp93]

56 minutes ago, Yoinkerman said:

Having to say buyer beware inherently makes it anti consumer.

No, it just means consumers shouldn't be able to complain about the effects of their own blind stupidity when the pitfall is in plain sight.

[captain cactus]

7 minutes ago, dragosudeki said:

Your second point, I can agree with.

 

Your first point is agreeable, but has problems. I'm not even sure if Apple has authorized any third party replacement centers to do any repair on Apple products and I don't think Apple really helps customers/repair centres out in that way (based on the video Louis Rossman did).

That video is full anti-Apple with no sign of the guy having even read 1/4th of the whole story just so he can have a nice clickbait title.

 

And Apple has 3rd party replacement centers. They're called Apple Authorized Resellers (AAR), who can also do repairs. If you're not on that list you have no business in repairing/reselling Apple devices, and the AAR always have a big sign outside or on the store windows that say they're authorized. Partly because they are, partly because it attracts people shopping around, or in this case, look for a place to repair their device.

[Derpologist]

HMPHwhyIuseandroidHMPH

[zacRupnow]

12 minutes ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

Yes, the device is mine.

 

My fingerprint and payment information and other passwords accessible with said fingerprint are also mine, and if you don't mind I'd like to keep it that way. If that means only authorized people/companies can repair my device with OEM parts that are validated by said people/companies then I'm more than happy to spend the extra few bucks on it, rather than having some random 3rd party shop do it with god knows what hardware resulting in a bricked phone which is a whackton more expensive.

"authorized people/companies can repair my device with OEM parts"

- Those don't exist, Apple doesn't have any authorized repair companies.

"3rd party shop do it with god knows what hardware resulting in a bricked phone"

- Apple bricks it for detecting hardware changes that they didn't make, not because the repair is bad.

"My fingerprint and payment information and other passwords accessible with said fingerprint are also mine"

- Repair shops don't access your phones software, they have you turn it off or show you how to set it into service mode before they take it. They have no reason to go after your payment info through your phone when you are paying them to service it.

[suicidalfranco]

7 minutes ago, Derpologist said:

HMPHwhyIuseandroidHMPH

tfw a android device with fingerprint scanner doesn't get bricked when replacing a faulty scanner, rooting or installingg custom roms

[Poomer]

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35502030 

 

BBC is also reporting it too

[zMeul]

3 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Yes they do, just like they give you a choice to upgrade your software or not. It's buyer beware. Just because it's not your preconceived perfect solution doesn't make it anti-consumer or illegal.

this time I don't agree with you

 

it;s like car manufacturer would say put engine oil from X company, but you used from Y company

and as soon as you go for scheduled car inspection that car would brick itself because of it

 

it absolutely is a an anti-consumer practice

by doing this, Apple forces the consumer in a corner and the consumer isn't even aware of the issue until it's too late

they don't block access to services related, like Apple Pay, they just brick your phone

 

do you think next time those affected by it would buy an iPhone? I seriously doubt that

there is no more growth in the smartphone market, it's saturated

 

---

 

I still don't' understand why people buy their overpriced HW, I guess they really like being treated like trash

[syoumans54]

There's better ways of doing this than throwing that error... Android phones when rooted are unable to activate Android Pay. When they remove root from the phone it is then accessible to them. They make it fully aware that they are unable to activate their pay system until they remove root access to the phone.

[spartaman64]

19 hours ago, Mantayd17 said:

Apple asks too much for the repair indeed, but the logic behind it is correct. A third party may as well be a malicious party, that'd potentially expose you.

what if the person wants to repair it him or herself. and also let me get this straight to prevent a third party from breaking your phone apple is going to break it instead 

[spartaman64]

13 hours ago, syoumans54 said:

There's better ways of doing this than throwing that error... Android phones when rooted are unable to activate Android Pay. When they remove root from the phone it is then accessible to them. They make it fully aware that they are unable to activate their pay system until they remove root access to the phone.

if you unroot add a card then root again it will work just fine

[spartaman64]

15 hours ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

Yes, the device is mine.

 

My fingerprint and payment information and other passwords accessible with said fingerprint are also mine, and if you don't mind I'd like to keep it that way. If that means only authorized people/companies can repair my device with OEM parts that are validated by said people/companies then I'm more than happy to spend the extra few bucks on it, rather than having some random 3rd party shop do it with god knows what hardware resulting in a bricked phone which is a whackton more expensive.

so to protect you from your phone getting bricked by a third party apple is going to brick it themselves how thoughtful of them