• ddh
    link
    fedilink
    English
    646 months ago

    From the article, parts pairing is “a practice manufacturers use to prevent replacement components from working unless the company’s software approves them.”

    • Hildegarde
      link
      fedilink
      English
      586 months ago

      It’s the practice of preventing you from even using genuine parts. If you buy two identical iPhones, you can’t even use parts from one to repair the other. The one phone won’t accept the genuine part from the other because it’s not paired to that phone by the manufacturer’s proprietary tool.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        36 months ago

        This stops theft significantly.

        iPhone were one of the easiest devices to steal and sell. Even conventional anti theft measures wouldn’t deter theft significantly. Because they are so popular and common stealing an iPhone just to sell parts would still be worthwhile. Making stolen iPhone parts worthless reduces incidence of theft significantly.

        This is less of an issue for other manufacturers. They often have more models serving a small customer base, with significantly less retail value.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 months ago

          I don’t actually know the details of how Pairing or Find My iPhone works, but couldn’t they just have the parts individually report their position since they apparently already “know” which device they belong to?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            06 months ago

            They wouldn’t know their location or have a means of sending that location. This would require every subsystem to have a gps antenna, radio and battery. It would be expensive, heavy and wasteful.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              26 months ago

              I mean when they’re on a working device. The device detects that the part is not original and uses the usual system to send the position as if it was the entire iPhone. Is that not feasible?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                16 months ago

                That’s a good approach for a single device. But for millions it’s not as good. Apples current approach significantly reduces theft and the industry around theft of their phones.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    16 months ago

                    There would be an excuse that your using your friends components to fix the phone. But they didn’t deregister it. It would be enough to create a viable business.

                    Repairers could use stolen parts and the owner wouldn’t know until apple locked their device.

                    It can be stopped by controlling the internet traffic to the device. Various methods, even simple DNS systems. Especially in developing economy organised crime can get cooperation with phone networks to do this.

                    For organised crime this problems can be worked out. But it very difficult to workaround a whitelist of only one part.

                    Other manufacturers don’t have the same issue as their phones don’t last as long. Nor do they have as high a resale value. Old iPhones still sell well 5+ years after release.

                    Google will give you big discounts for trading in iPhones that were cheaper than pixels when released when they won’t offer you anything but recycling for an equivalent year pixel. All because the iPhone resale value remains so high.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 months ago

          I’d rather stop the company from stealing from me in unpreventable ways than the random petty thief who I can beat senseless.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          26 months ago

          I’d rather have an easily repairable phone than a supposed “deterrent” for which workarounds are eventually found.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      226 months ago

      And since the DMCA makes it illegal to circumvent copy protection, they just put copy protection on the software (sometimes laughably weak - still counts!) and if you try to get around the hardware lockout you’re officially breaking the lawwww

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      46 months ago

      Hope this applies to cars as well. Bust a taillight in your Ford and get your own replacement, you still have to have a dealer configure the integrated BLISS sensor.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        76 months ago

        Section 1, 1, 3, g, C says “This section does not: Apply to: A vehicle…”

        So, probably not

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        56 months ago

        From the article

        Some products — like devices powered by combustion engines … — are excluded from Oregon’s rules entirely.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      16 months ago

      Thanks for the clarification. I was being lazy and didn’t read it and thought that meant apple couldn’t solder the ram to the motherboard aka pairing it.