iFixit Confirms Third-Party 2018 MacBook Pro, iMac Pro Repairs Still Possible

[ColeWorld]

Seems like Apple either isn't enforcing their internal document of "bricking" the MacBook if repaired by 3rd party or the internal document was an error.

 

https://www.macrumors.com/2018/10/06/ifixit-repairs-2018-mbp-without-apple-diagnostics/

 

The Original Document leaked stated: 

Quote

For Macs with the Apple T2 chip, the repair process is not complete for certain parts replacements until the AST 2 System Configuration suite has been run. Failure to perform this step will result in an inoperative system and an incomplete repair. 

• For notebooks: Display assembly, logic board, top case, and Touch ID board 
• For desktops: Logic board and flash storage

 

iFixit: 

Quote

So why is Apple doing this? It could simply be a mechanism for tracking parts used by their authorized network, to check quality or replacement rates. It's possible that units with swapped parts may operate normally, but still report a failure in Apple diagnostic tests for having 'unauthorized' components installed—much like earlier units did on earlier versions of AST for third party HDD/SSD, RAM and batteries.

 

[mr moose]

Quote

but still report a failure in Apple diagnostic tests for having 'unauthorized' components installed—

I can see them using this to deny repairs caused by unrelated issues.

[DrMacintosh]

I still wrote to my Congressman to make sure that it stays that way. 

Spoiler

https://lowenthal.house.gov/

 

 

[DrMacintosh]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I can see them using this to deny repairs caused by unrelated issues.

Certainly possible. Lets just get Right to Repair stuff through and we won't have to worry. 

[mr moose]

24 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Certainly possible. Lets just get Right to Repair stuff through and we won't have to worry. 

we have right to repair in Australia, Unfortunately it doesn't stop them from being a pain in the arse and insisting you don't have the rights you have.  Like the extended warranty on laptops, that they only accept for repair if there aren't any scratches on the laptop.  Or the shop that forces you to make a complaint with consumer affairs before they honor their legal obligations.

[DocSwag]

41 minutes ago, mr moose said:

we have right to repair in Australia, Unfortunately it doesn't stop them from being a pain in the arse and insisting you don't have the rights you have.  Like the extended warranty on laptops, that they only accept for repair if there aren't any scratches on the laptop.  Or the shop that forces you to make a complaint with consumer affairs before they honor their legal obligations.

Honestly that's probably what would happen . Just look at warranty void stickers - technically illegal, but companies do em anyways.

[ARikozuM]

19 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Honestly that's probably what would happen . Just look at warranty void stickers - technically illegal, but companies do em anyways.

This is why a class-action is probably the best idea. Just compile a shit-ton of cases and go up against them as a mass. Getting small amounts of coin is nothing compared to really teaching a corporation a lesson. 

 

[Trik'Stari]

I'm still waiting for them to bring back their silver screwdriver. It was superior to the newer one.

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

This is why a class-action is probably the best idea. Just compile a shit-ton of cases and go up against them as a mass. Getting small amounts of coin is nothing compared to really teaching a corporation a lesson. 

 

I'd love to see this happen to the major OEM's.

[sof006]

10 hours ago, mr moose said:

I can see them using this to deny repairs caused by unrelated issues.

Apple for the most part will still replace parts on a device that uses third party parts however you will be made to pay to replace the parts. Any existing prior warranty doesn't exist when getting the device repaired by a third party. Unlike other manufacturers who point blank refuse to fix a product if tampered with, Apple will.

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, sof006 said:

Apple for the most part will still replace parts on a device that uses third party parts however you will be made to pay to replace the parts. Any existing prior warranty doesn't exist when getting the device repaired by a third party. Unlike other manufacturers who point blank refuse to fix a product if tampered with, Apple will.

In Australia they can't do that by law.  Apple can not refuse a warranty repair simply because you had it repaired somewhere else prior. They can refuse to repair the replaced part, and they are allowed to charge for replacing that part, but if the fault has nothing to do with that part then they cannot refuse nor charge for the warranty repair.

 

They can however be pricks at the counter and just tell customers they won't fix it claiming whatever they want and make you go through consumer affairs to get the repair done.

[mr moose]

9 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

This is why a class-action is probably the best idea. Just compile a shit-ton of cases and go up against them as a mass. Getting small amounts of coin is nothing compared to really teaching a corporation a lesson. 

 

Yep, $4 in your pocket is better than companies getting away with anti consumer practices.

[Jito463]

15 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

This is why a class-action is probably the best idea. Just compile a s***-ton of cases and go up against them as a mass. Getting small amounts of coin is nothing compared to really teaching a corporation a lesson.

I once somehow ended up included in a CAL against AT&T (only found out about it when the settlement check arrived).  I still have that settlement check, I may even frame it.  A whole, whopping $0.06.  It wasn't worth the gas money to drive to my bank.  In fact, I'm certain they spent more on the check and on shipping it than the check was actually worth.

[Syntaxvgm]

16 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

This is why a class-action is probably the best idea. Just compile a shit-ton of cases and go up against them as a mass. Getting small amounts of coin is nothing compared to really teaching a corporation a lesson. 

 

oh and im sure those rulings are more than the money they saved by the offending actions. 

[ARikozuM]

5 hours ago, Syntaxvgm said:

oh and im sure those rulings are more than the money they saved by the offending actions. 

It adds a precedence that can be pushed to all consumers. Having a SCOTUS (if we're talking US) or higher court decision to stand behind makes a big difference if they do something against it. We consumers can use that as a legal safeguard against predatory practices. If a company isn't willing to work for the consumer's dollar, we don't need them. 

 

6 hours ago, Jito463 said:

 In fact, I'm certain they spent more on the check and on shipping it than the check was actually worth.

Unless they used a mass payment (sending 100 letters on the cost of weight), they definitely paid more than you received. GOOD! 

[ARikozuM]

12 hours ago, mr moose said:

Yep, $4 in your pocket is better than companies getting away with anti consumer practices.

I can't tell if you're disagreeing or agreeing. 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

I can't tell if you're disagreeing or agreeing. 

agreeing,  People tend to poo poo class action lawsuits because each claimant only gets a few $ from the win,  but the bigger picture win is not necessarily the payout, but the holding companies accountable for their actions.