Apple's New Proprietary Software Locks Kill Independent Repair on New MacBook Pros

It seems that some people think Apple is building mechanisms into their products and into their service policies just to be malicious and prevent people from having a choice in product repair. I doubt service & repair is a big profit center for Apple, such that they would really care where you service your product. In fact, it is quite the opposite, warranty fraud is a huge cost to Apple. As such, I'm glad they are fighting fraud as otherwise the costs of such fraud would eventually get passed on as an increased product cost affecting all consumers.

Apple reportedly cut Chinese iPhone repair fraud with hidden dyes and software

 

Interesting.

So the bad actors are running what it boils down to a auto chop shop operation of sorts only the product being Apple's phones.

For the crooks, the more things change, the more they always stay the same.

 

Yeah, it is silly for those people to think this is done with malicious intent. You are right that warranty fraud is a big cost for all companies. This is exactly why there are "authorized service centers". But that is for our (consumers) protection too. If we take something to an authorized service center, and they blow it up instead of fixing it, they (either the center or manufacturer) are liable for the full compensation.

But these companies go too far, IMO, if their policies affect repairs after the warranties have run out.

 

That is what is happening. There is a lot of money to be made, as often Apple's authorised repairers are not able to fix issues that third party repairers can. If it can't be fixed, you need to buy a new device. Just take a look at some of Louis Rossmann's videos to see what is going on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2_SZ4tfLns&t=312s

 

@roger_m

Well said. Apples appetite for money just like all the other giants like Google, FB etc, is a bottomless pit.

 

No its not. Again, to suggest they do this out of maliciousness is just silly. Greed, admittedly, may have something or even a lot to do with it. But greed does not equal malicious intent.

The purpose of these policies is to prevent the loss of profits through botched repairs by unqualified people who then attempt to get warranty repairs on those products.

Is it greedy, arrogant, and disgusting? Absolutely! But malicious? No. And I say that not just as a consumer, but as a technician who has been dealing with unnecessary proprietary parts and strong-arm tactics for decades. This is nothing new. I've been pushing for "right to repair" legislation since IBM pushed out the first PC and "clone" makers were struggling to compete. But when it comes to Apple, the original Apple I and Macintosh computers were so proprietary, it was ridiculous - and not just with the hardware (including all peripherals), but the software that ran on it too.
How many Apple products have I owned? A big fat 0. No Apple computer, iPad, Ipod, Iphone, no Ianything.

What gets me is Apple's philosophy has been common knowledge since their beginnings. So how did I show them I did not approve? I bought Samsung, Gigabyte, MP3, etc. I didn't reward them by buying their products which I knew were proprietary, then b1tch because they were proprietary!

Consumers are to blame here, sadly because consumers keep buying their products and have made Apple the #1 company in the world. That just tells Apple consumers approve of Apple and their ways.

Right! And for sure, the new device should made by a different manufacturer. Don't reward Apple by buying another overpriced, hard to repair, proprietary Apple.

 

Greed can actually conduct to malicious intents such as malware to rob your money online, make a company to poison the environment and so on. So I'm not sure greed does not equal to malice.

 

No! While greed "can" lead to malicious intent, greed does not equal malicious intent. Just because someone is greedy, that, IN NO WAY, means they will act maliciously to feed to their greed. To assume so is prejudging and stereotyping.

Greed is one of the most common motives for murder. Does that mean everyone who is greedy will or intends to murder? Of course not.

 

LOL of course not but in life exist many types of malicious intentions other than murder.
In this case Apple has set mechanisms in place to ultimately harm my pocket and economy, thus Apple's conduct is malignant as it is taking my money by force when I need to service my device. Their policies are not covered by the law or maybe they are, but I perceive them as malignant to my interests.

 

Of course! I never said otherwise. What I am saying, however, is Apple is not being intentionally "malicious". Their actions may be a "malignant" (Freudian slip on your part?) scourge on consumers but that is not the same thing as intentionally causing harm to others.

Their intent is to keep their profits, not "harm" your pocket. While the end result from your viewpoint may be the same, it is the intent that manners.

Are car manufacturers being "malicious" when they want you to get all your oil changes at their dealers using only their, more expensive brand filters and oil? Or are they just trying to earn the most profit from their customers?

"Corporate greed" is nothing new where capitalism is the way of life. But that does not suggest every company that is greedy is intentionally being "malicious" in their methods for the purpose of "harming" the very consumers they depend on.

 

I agree with Bill that Apple tends to design products that are proprietary and non-modular / non-upgradable... but that doesn't equate to "planned obsolescence," nor does that make me think something is inherently "bad" (in a moral sense) either. There are lots of products I purchase which are functionally "black boxes" and in which I have zero interest in trying to reconfigure, upgrade, or self-repair.

I have never felt forced into purchasing a new Apple device simply because I had no repair options on an old model. Indeed, my Apple devices have had relatively long lifespans for tech-oriented devices... the phone I use every day is an iPhone 5s (circa 2013, 5 years old); my son still uses his iPhone 3gs (circa 2009 or 2010) everyday; and my personal home computer is an iMac that I just recently upgraded from a 2011 model to a 2018 model (for which Apple replaced the entire motherboard at one point due to a graphics chip failure at their expense... over $1100 repair I was told).

Apple doesn't need to resort to some repair shop trickery to get people to upgrade devices. Human nature and personal ego's do that well enough on their own. I'm always constantly amazed by the people that look as though they can barely afford lunch let alone be carrying around the latest, highest-end iPhone or Samsung. Nope, I sincerely believe that Apple's efforts are attempts to combat fraud... and I'm 100% ok with that.

 

Well it may not be malicious, but Apple do not want anyone other than themselves or Apple authorised repairers, repairing their devices. This is a big problem, considering that there are many instances where Apple and their repairers will not repair devices that independent repairers can fix.

 

No way I can argue about that.

I am all for enterprise and capitalism and companies do have Rights too. But the primary jobs of our governments is to protect its citizens and our leaders need to step up and start doing that instead of worrying about where their next election money is coming from. This issue with Apple vs consumer Rights is actually related to the Epson thread here.

 

Apple confirms its T2 security chip blocks some third-party repairs of new Macs
November 12, 2018
https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/12...mini-t2-chip-security-repair-replacement-tool

 

T2 security chip 'a nightmare for Mac repairers'
"Beautiful $3,000 MacBooks" being destroyed because data cannot be wiped
May 8, 2020
https://www.macworld.co.uk/news/mac/t2-security-chip-mac-repair-3787402/

 

Doesn't this just reduce the value of a used Apple device to ~$0?