Apple Pencil functionality compromised with third-party iPad parts

AppleInsider

Apple has migrated a "feature" from the iPhone to the iPad that results in the loss of Apple Pencil functionality when repaired with third-party parts, tossing a wrench into the Right to Repair movement.

Third-party repairs affect iPad Pro functionality

The "serialization" method complicates the process for third parties to substitute components in damaged Apple gadgets effectively. That's because these parts are linked to the device's logic board using special chips. Apple has used the technology with iPhone parts to verify that its smartphones are using verified components.

However, the company has been undergoing the same controversial practice with iPad Pro models. Serialization makes it challenging to use non-genuine Apple parts in the company's products, limiting customers' ability to repair their gadgets in cases where they may not want -- or can't afford -- genuine Apple components.

According to Forbes, the practice has now been applied to the screens of the fifth and sixth generations of the iPad Pro 12.9-inch, as well as the third and fourth generation 11-inch iPad Pro. A repair expert found that when he repaired a customer's iPad, the Apple Pencil wasn't drawing straight lines after the iPad's display was swapped with a screen from a different iPad.

"We found with the newer versions of the iPad that when you put a new screen on, even if it's taken from another iPad, the pencil strokes don't work perfectly," Ricky Panesar said. "They have a memory chip that sits on the screen that's programmed to only allow the Pencil functionality to work if the screen is connected to the original logic board."

Panesar believes serialization poses a significant issue for consumers. He suggests that Apple is penalizing users by establishing a monopoly, implying that in the future, repairs will have to be exclusively done by Apple.

According to Panesar, the concern is the substantial cost difference between getting repairs from Apple and third-party repair services, which use authentic components from other damaged models. He says the issue currently affects the displays of fifth and sixth-generations of the iPad Pro 12.9-inch and third and fourth-generation 11-inch tablets.

It's likely that Apple's concern around third-party displays revolves around Face ID, a security feature for logging into specific iPhones and iPads. If the device detected a new screen, especially one not authorized by Apple, the Face ID feature would be automatically disabled.

Apple similarly disabled Face ID on third-party screen repairs. It has come around some on this matter, but not entirely.

The company also has a Self Service Repair Program for some of its devices. Apple currently does not offer tools or components for the iPad.

Read on AppleInsider

coolfactor

The source video was posted 2 months ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sWmBNj6Eok&t=7s

Could it just be a software issue that could be corrected by Apple? Jumping to the immediate conclusion that Apple has nefarious motives makes for great headlines (good job, Forbes!), but could not be the actual factual issue. Has anyone asked Apple?

robin huber

I have no problem with allowing people to use third party parts so long as Apple is not on the hook for problems that result. Fix it yourself or have the vacuum cleaner repair guy take a whack at it, but doing so voids the warranty. Rights regarding repair go both ways. 

chasm

Here’s the problem: most third-party parts are probably fine and Apple should have no problem with them.

BUT

It is possible for third-party parts to compromise security. A replaced fingerprint reader, just as a mild example, could not only send your biometrics elsewhere, but could also conceivably compromise the Secure Enclave.

So I totally understand Apple’s hostile attitude to using third-party parts — it cannot be sure which are fine and which aren’t, and should probably start a certification program for third-party parts so that the good ones don’t trigger this issue.

THUS

I doubt it is realistic for Apple to maintain this “you have to use our parts or else” attitude, even if their motives are as pure as the driven snow. Legislation would probably result to bar Apple from requiring only genuine authorized parts, and we REALLY don’t want that.

mayfly

There is a huge industry in third party repairs, using parts from who knows where. I've used both, and never had a problem. But I worked at an Apple VAR, and we saw many, many people who bought cheap MacBook AC adapters that caught fire, or shorted out their logic boards. Caveat emptor.

The only culpability Apple has in this matter is their expensive repair price structure. It's a bit like going to your local mechanic instead of your car dealer for an oil change.

mr. h

lmasanti said:

To make really ‘honest journalism’ the title should have been: “Third-party iPad parts compromise Apple Pencil functionality!”

The ‘culprit’ is the third-party part… not Apple.

But we all know that making Apple appearing in fault of anything… brings page view… a.k.a. as money!

NO! WRONG!

How about you read the rest of the article? In fact, the failure of journalism here is to even mention "third party" parts in the first place, because the only examples given are of genuine Apple parts being used* to attempt a repair, and it doesn't work properly because of serialisation.

* If you take a working screen from an otherwise broken/faulty iPad, that is not a "third party" part, it is a genuine Apple part. If Apple actually cared about the environment or their customers, they would make the necessary tools available to allow parts to be "re-paired", allowing screen swaps like this to work again.

baconstang

chasm said:

Here’s the problem: most third-party parts are probably fine and Apple should have no problem with them.

BUT

It is possible for third-party parts to compromise security. A replaced fingerprint reader, just as a mild example, could not only send your biometrics elsewhere, but could also conceivably compromise the Secure Enclave.

So I totally understand Apple’s hostile attitude to using third-party parts — it cannot be sure which are fine and which aren’t, and should probably start a certification program for third-party parts so that the good ones don’t trigger this issue.

THUS

I doubt it is realistic for Apple to maintain this “you have to use our parts or else” attitude, even if their motives are as pure as the driven snow. Legislation would probably result to bar Apple from requiring only genuine authorized parts, and we REALLY don’t want that.

Just because you MAY repair items yourself doesn't necessarily mean you CAN or should...

mr. h

baconstang said:

chasm said:

Here’s the problem: most third-party parts are probably fine and Apple should have no problem with them.

BUT

It is possible for third-party parts to compromise security. A replaced fingerprint reader, just as a mild example, could not only send your biometrics elsewhere, but could also conceivably compromise the Secure Enclave.

So I totally understand Apple’s hostile attitude to using third-party parts — it cannot be sure which are fine and which aren’t, and should probably start a certification program for third-party parts so that the good ones don’t trigger this issue.

THUS

I doubt it is realistic for Apple to maintain this “you have to use our parts or else” attitude, even if their motives are as pure as the driven snow. Legislation would probably result to bar Apple from requiring only genuine authorized parts, and we REALLY don’t want that.

Just because you MAY repair items yourself doesn't necessarily mean you CAN or should...

It's a pity that this major misconception of the right to repair movement persists. Right to repair is not primarily about allowing individuals to repair their own stuff, it's about providing access to legitimate parts, components, tools, and documentation.

This allows third parties to provide repair services, so if you don't have the skills to repair something yourself, you can take it to an independent repair shop instead of direct to the manufacturer. This often represents a significant saving, as independent repair shops can for example replace one broken component on a motherboard, instead of just replacing the entire motherboard (as Apple would do).

mikethemartian

lmasanti said:

To make really ‘honest journalism’ the title should have been: “Third-party iPad parts compromise Apple Pencil functionality!”

The ‘culprit’ is the third-party part… not Apple.

But we all know that making Apple appearing in fault of anything… brings page view… a.k.a. as money!

The article specifically calls out cases where the same original part from another unit can’t be used because Apple intentionally locks it.

greg price

The symptoms sound more like it's a calibration issue,  not serialization.

Just because someone knows how to solder some components doesn't mean they understand the design and hence how to repair something.

pscooter63

If I'm a pro, using a "pro" device, why would I want to risk my livelihood with ill-informed repair people?  Which is what this article really highlights.

jrg_uk

“They have a memory chip that sits on the screen that's programmed”

Sure, that’s exactly how memory chips work... and, I get it, the quote has probably come from some simplified report given to some non-tech journalist somewhere and then misreported further for some good ol’ anti-Apple click bait. I’m sure the repair guy could have had a career in integrated circuit design and consumer product development, but chose to work in a repair shop instead.

But, you know, it makes me question the veracity of the whole claim.

mr. h

It hurts my brain how many people have fallen for the "repair people are idiots who don't know what they are doing" bullshit.

eriamjh

baconstang said:

Just because you MAY repair items yourself doesn't necessarily mean you CAN or should...

What kind of attitude is this?   Don't tell me or anyone else what we can or should do.  It's about CHOICE.  That's all we want.  

It's your choice not to, but don't insult those who do.

davidw

greg price said:

The symptoms sound more like it's a calibration issue,  not serialization.

Just because someone knows how to solder some components doesn't mean they understand the design and hence how to repair something.

Just because one replaced a bad Apple iPad part with the same part from another same model Apple iPad, it doesn't necessarily mean that the Apple part use as the replacement, is not a "third party" part to the iPad being repaired. Even the same Apple parts could be made by different companies, the same company but at different factories, the same company but made months apart, the same company but using components from different manufacturers, etc.. Even though they are all the same part, each one or each batch might need to be calibrated differently to the logic board and other parts within the iPad, due to any slight differences between them. Which is one of the main reason why serial numbers exist on these parts. The serial number reveals what company made the part, the factory that made the part and the date the part was manufacture. The serial number helps Apple keep track on whether any high number of part failures are related to certain batches of the part . Thus telling Apple which devices sold might end up needing repair because of the same part failing.

Too many seems to think that the only reason why Apple serialize parts, is to prevent third parties from repairing the device with the failed part.      . 

mr. h

davidw said:

greg price said:

The symptoms sound more like it's a calibration issue,  not serialization.

Just because someone knows how to solder some components doesn't mean they understand the design and hence how to repair something.

Just because one replaced a bad Apple iPad part with the same part from another same model Apple iPad, it doesn't necessarily mean that the Apple part use as the replacement, is not a "third party" part to the iPad being repaired. Even the same Apple parts could be made by different companies, the same company but at different factories, the same company but made months apart, the same company but using components from different manufacturers, etc.. Even though they are all the same part, each one or each batch might need to be calibrated differently to the logic board and other parts within the iPad, due to any slight differences between them. Which is one of the main reason why serial numbers exist on these parts. The serial number reveals what company made the part, the factory that made the part and the date the part was manufacture. The serial number helps Apple keep track on whether any high number of part failures are related to certain batches of the part . Thus telling Apple which devices sold might end up needing repair because of the same part failing.

Too many seems to think that the only reason why Apple serialize parts, is to prevent third parties from repairing the device with the failed part.      . 

Nice try. I am confident that Apple don’t use serialisation to prevent second or third parties from repairing devices, it’s just a “fortunate” coincidence for them that it does, in the absence of Apple providing tools to allow things like displays and motherboards to be re-paired.

There are zero technical reasons why Apple could not provide such tools; they choose not to because it’s (superficially at least) good for their bottom line.

get serious

Well this certainly makes it difficult to fence all of those iPads stolen to supply the "third party" parts inventories of the world. How are we supposed to dispose of all the activation locked iPads we've stolen?

MplsP

pscooter63 said:

If I'm a pro, using a "pro" device, why would I want to risk my livelihood with ill-informed repair people?  Which is what this article really highlights.

And you have the option to take it to Apple. 

Go back to the car example - if FedEx gets its trucks from Ford do they and should they need to go back to a Ford dealer for every repair? Or is it conceivable (I know, this is way out there) that a non-Ford mechanic might be qualified to make a repair?

AppleZulu

What’s described here looks to me like Apple foiling ‘chop shops’ from being able to swap around parts to sell stolen (or otherwise dubiously sourced) iPads. 

This complaint feels a bit like the guy who was trying to create an uproar to demand that Apple unlock Macs if their prior owners didn’t respond to an inquiry within some short period of time. 

What’s presented as Apple being money-grubbing, anti-right-to-repair or whatever, is really Apple protecting the security of its actual customers. 

gadgetcanadav2

MplsP said:

pscooter63 said:

If I'm a pro, using a "pro" device, why would I want to risk my livelihood with ill-informed repair people?  Which is what this article really highlights.

And you have the option to take it to Apple. 

Go back to the car example - if FedEx gets its trucks from Ford do they and should they need to go back to a Ford dealer for every repair? Or is it conceivable (I know, this is way out there) that a non-Ford mechanic might be qualified to make a repair?

If Ford requires all maintenance from Ford, you have the choice not to buy their product. Same with Apple. What you want is to dictate to Apple how they should run their company. Apple is in business to make money, not coddle to your whims.

mr. h

gadgetcanadav2 said:

MplsP said:

pscooter63 said:

If I'm a pro, using a "pro" device, why would I want to risk my livelihood with ill-informed repair people?  Which is what this article really highlights.

And you have the option to take it to Apple. 

Go back to the car example - if FedEx gets its trucks from Ford do they and should they need to go back to a Ford dealer for every repair? Or is it conceivable (I know, this is way out there) that a non-Ford mechanic might be qualified to make a repair?

If Ford requires all maintenance from Ford, you have the choice not to buy their product. Same with Apple. What you want is to dictate to Apple how they should run their company. Apple is in business to make money, not coddle to your whims.

Until there’s no car company left that allows your car to be serviced by an independent shop.

When it comes to consumer electronics this has pretty much happened already; there is no choice.