1STnTENDERBITS
About
- Banned
- Username
- 1STnTENDERBITS
- Joined
- Visits
- 20
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,331
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 460
Reactions
-
New 'Service' battery message in iOS pushes consumers toward official replacement
I gonna let you have that bud. Everything you wrote is so out there that it's... yeah. Imma let someone else try to... yeah. Wow. I am now regretting that curiosity.macplusplus said:
Simple. “User repairability” is an attribute of the car. A car is already sold with this option. Some products are just not user-repairable. How will you repair the crashed read/write head of a hard disk? Are you qualified enough to refill a lithium ion battery or is the lithium ion battery filler is unregulated to freely circulate without any security concern? Once you understand that replacing a battery is not similar to refilling the inkjet cartridge of a printer you will come close to my point. I hope...1STnTENDERBITS said:
Not gonna comment on your speculation. It's too... nah, not touching that. But your right to repair or right to warranty bit? That's absolutely 100% wrong. They are not mutually exclusive. I'm not even sure how you came to that conclusion. Easy. Take a car. You can repair your brakes, change your oil, complete a tune up, get new tires, repair a fender... I could on for a long time. None of those things void a warranty. There is no choose one, and you most assuredly can have both. Again, I'm not really sure how you reached your conclusion. I'm kinda curious. Where did you get that idea?macplusplus said:
Allegedly. Maybe it is more focused on stocking original components to speculate on those while behind the doors dealing with the trade of counterfeit ones? It is always more effective to inspect a company instead of inspecting millions (billions!) of itty-bitty components. Which one protects the consumer better, inspecting company or inspecting components? Right to repair or right to service? Choose one, you cannot have both, the two are mutually exclusive. Right to repair or right to warranty, choose one you cannot get both. Warranty? OK take that replacement part for free and leave !1STnTENDERBITS said:
Would you mind terribly pointing towards any evidence supporting that theory? Both you and @sergioz used the same claim of aftermarket batteries catching fire and Apple getting blamed. That really doesn't happen though. Not really sure what rights you think Apple has, but the right to force 1st party and authorized repair ain't one those rights.AppleExposed said:zroger73 said:FU, Apple. This is the stuff that is going to drive me back to PC's after a 12-year run and tens of thousands of dollars donated to your organization.
Apple has a 100% right to do this. Remember if anything is YOUR fault Apple gets blamed. Also if an aftermarket battery blows up an iPhone we get tons of articles, videos and memes mocking Apple.
Also, Apple has a charity?
Right to repair is focused on consumer protection and consumer choice. I think anyone advocating against that, especially a consumer putting corporate desires above their own, needs to have their priorities adjusted.
For Apple, and almost all industrial companies it is trivial to prove before the court that their product is not user-repairable if the product really isn’t. Try to sue the manufacturer or the importer of the Li-ion battery for right to “refill” a consumed battery!..
You have right to return. The manual states that it is not user-repairable. If you learn that after purchase then you just return the product. Nothing in this universe forces you to use a product your very capable and talented self cannot repair.
-
New 'Service' battery message in iOS pushes consumers toward official replacement
Not gonna comment on your speculation. It's too... nah, not touching that. But your right to repair or right to warranty bit? That's absolutely 100% wrong. They are not mutually exclusive. I'm not even sure how you came to that conclusion. Easy. Take a car. You can repair your brakes, change your oil, complete a tune up, get new tires, repair a fender... I could on for a long time. None of those things void a warranty. There is no choose one, and you most assuredly can have both. Again, I'm not really sure how you reached your conclusion. I'm kinda curious. Where did you get that idea?macplusplus said:
Allegedly. Maybe it is more focused on stocking original components to speculate on those while behind the doors dealing with the trade of counterfeit ones? It is always more effective to inspect a company instead of inspecting millions (billions!) of itty-bitty components. Which one protects the consumer better, inspecting company or inspecting components? Right to repair or right to service? Choose one, you cannot have both, the two are mutually exclusive. Right to repair or right to warranty, choose one you cannot get both. Warranty? OK take that replacement part for free and leave !1STnTENDERBITS said:
Would you mind terribly pointing towards any evidence supporting that theory? Both you and @sergioz used the same claim of aftermarket batteries catching fire and Apple getting blamed. That really doesn't happen though. Not really sure what rights you think Apple has, but the right to force 1st party and authorized repair ain't one those rights.AppleExposed said:zroger73 said:FU, Apple. This is the stuff that is going to drive me back to PC's after a 12-year run and tens of thousands of dollars donated to your organization.
Apple has a 100% right to do this. Remember if anything is YOUR fault Apple gets blamed. Also if an aftermarket battery blows up an iPhone we get tons of articles, videos and memes mocking Apple.
Also, Apple has a charity?
Right to repair is focused on consumer protection and consumer choice. I think anyone advocating against that, especially a consumer putting corporate desires above their own, needs to have their priorities adjusted.
-
Samsung's ARM-based Galaxy Book S lasts 23 hours, features touchscreen and LTE connectivit...
This is going to sound snarky but I promise it's not. Here goes. I live in the real world. I buy products for what they can do at the time of purchase. I recently replaced 4 older iPads ranging from the OG through the 1st Air. All of them were EOL, yet all of them worked fine as consumption devices. I didn't need to replace any of them. Amazon had the 2018 9.7 iPad so cheap that I impulse purchase 2... that I'll probably still own beyond EOL. EOL is a forum argument point, not a real world concern for most people imo. I guarantee there are tons of forum members who have devices, Apple and non-Apple, that are beyond EOL and those devices are working just fine. I'd even bet you're one of them too.rotateleftbyte said:1STnTENDERBITS said:If this thing garners good reviews and turns out to be viable, I might just pick one up around May 2020 when they will have likely depreciated by 40-50%You mean when they go EOL then?How long will Samsung/Microsoft guarantee updates etc for them? With all the documented issues with Surface things and especially their short life before they are EOL'd I'd be very careful about spending hard earned money on things like this.As they say, the devil will be in the details of the EULA that is burried 10 stories down in Samsungs HQ and guarded by a very hungry Tiger.
To answer your question directly. MS will, based on their history, update this machine every Tuesday (ugggh) until I am long dead. Samsung will try (I won't let them unless it's security related) to update their suite of software as long as they can ping the machine. This isn't Android so trying to use Android arguments really don't work here.
-
New 'Service' battery message in iOS pushes consumers toward official replacement
Bad analogy. Toyota's hybrid system warranty covers the battery for 8yrs or 100K milles. Replacements are free under warranty. Even if someone was crazy enough to pass up a free battery replacement and pay $2K for a replacement Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act would kick in if Toyota tried to void the warranty. edit: Magnusson Moss says that a company can insist on OEM parts only if the repair and parts are covered as free under warranty. That crazy person paying for what Toyota would do for free still has the other portions of their warranty intact. ← this is still true. Non-OEM parts do not automatically void a warranty.Rayz2016 said:
So I replaced “iPhone” with “automobile” and guess what? I found that Toyota does behave in this manner.wanderso said:Replace the word “iPhone” with automobile. Would you feel the same way about Apple’s decision if Ford, Toyota, or the like behaved in this manner? There are certain components that I would only go to a dealer for. The air bag system is an example. Yet there are ample things I can do on my own car, using OEM or aftermarket parts that meet or exceed OEM quality.
Battery replacements on a Prius have to be carried out using a genuine Toyota battery and at a genuine Toyota service centre, otherwise your warranty is automatically invalidated. In order to do this, Toyota can obviously tell when you’ve gone off-piste, repairwise.
Also bear this in mind: the iFixit report didn’t say that installed battery doesn’t work; they just said that Apple won’t provide information on it (without the correct chip on the battery, they can’t). If the battery was installed by a non-authorised dealer then Apple doesn’t want to get stung by warranty claims for case damage, damaged touchscreens, failed waterproofing, and broken security hardware that can come from dodgy repairs. When an authorised dealer carries out the repair, the info on the phone will tell Apple engineers who carried out the repair and when. If they get a spate of damaged phones returned from the same 3rd party dealer, them they know they have a problem. Without that info, they don’t know where the problem originates.
But that doesn’t stop you fitting dodgy batteries to your phone to save a few quid. If it explodes in your pocket then I don’t have a problem. But replace the words “in your pocket” with “on a plane” then that’s a different matter.
But we can still use your Prius as a base to demonstrate the problem with Apple's stance. Imagine if you had to use Toyota branded/approved replacement headlights or tires or window glass or door handles or... you see where I'm going. You don't and it doesn't void your warranty or stop your car from communicating with you.
Your last sentence is FUD. That same nightmare scenario you tried to build could occur with a battery supplied by Apple or an authorized repairer. Moreover, it's a highly unlikely scenario, otherwise we'd be hearing about it happening on a regular basis.
-
New 'Service' battery message in iOS pushes consumers toward official replacement
Would you mind terribly pointing towards any evidence supporting that theory? Both you and @sergioz used the same claim of aftermarket batteries catching fire and Apple getting blamed. That really doesn't happen though. Not really sure what rights you think Apple has, but the right to force 1st party and authorized repair ain't one those rights.AppleExposed said:zroger73 said:FU, Apple. This is the stuff that is going to drive me back to PC's after a 12-year run and tens of thousands of dollars donated to your organization.
Apple has a 100% right to do this. Remember if anything is YOUR fault Apple gets blamed. Also if an aftermarket battery blows up an iPhone we get tons of articles, videos and memes mocking Apple.
Also, Apple has a charity?
Right to repair is focused on consumer protection and consumer choice. I think anyone advocating against that, especially a consumer putting corporate desires above their own, needs to have their priorities adjusted.
