Last Active
  • CBC Video claims Apple's repair policies are abusive, but 'proof' falls far short


    Mike and Malcolm say that the world works best when consumers have choices, including the particular brand of service Apple offers. I agree. What I'm finding troubling is Apple's trend towards trying to eliminate everything BUT its own brand of service. I appreciate Apple providing me a way to verify the security of my device after service. I do NOT appreciate Apple making it the ONLY option, which they've done with the Home button and the Mac verification routine. If I decide to compromise security to save money, like for an older device relegated to limited duty, that should be my choice. Apple is not my mom.
    Let's say you or someone else decides to compromise security to save money, then the device enters someone else's hands. At that point has that person been informed that the device they are taking possession of, is no longer as secure as they would expect? Arguably it would be better for everyone to have confidence that a second-hand Apple device is as secure as one new out the box.

    The discourse regarding repairability is much more complex than most realise, and I suspect there are many implications being overlooked amongst most of the debates that are being had.
  • How to turn 'Hey Siri' on and off on your iPhone and iPad

    This tip/article is way too complicated, having to re-train Siri every time.

    All you have to do on a modern iPhone (the requirement AFAIK is one that supports "Hey Siri" on battery power) to stop Siri activating is place the device face-down.

    Similarly, "Hey Siri" functionality is disabled when the device is placed into low-power mode.

    Why didn't the article mention those two simple tips, before instructing users how to turn off and on "Hey Siri" functionality?
  • Australia fines Apple $6.7 million over misleading 'Error 53' repair practices

    Since when is ABC news is reliable source on technical and legal issues? I would not rely on ABC (like many otyher major media sources) to give public reliable and precise nswers. We have seen this many times over years and especially recently.  

    I don't know where you're from, so maybe you thought that ABC was the American Broadcasting Company not the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
    In any case allow me to quote to you the relevant parts from the legislation:
    cf. https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00375/Html/Volume_3#_Toc499717716

    Competition and Consumer Act 2010 Cth
    Schedule 2

    54  Guarantee as to acceptable quality

                 (1)  If:

                         (a)  a person supplies, in trade or commerce, goods to a consumer; and

                         (b)  the supply does not occur by way of sale by auction;

    there is a guarantee that the goods are of acceptable quality.

                 (2)  Goods are of acceptable quality if they are as:

                         (a)  fit for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are commonly supplied; and

                         (b)  acceptable in appearance and finish; and

                         (c)  free from defects; and

                         (d)  safe; and

                         (e)  durable;

    as a reasonable consumer fully acquainted with the state and condition of the goods (including any hidden defects of the goods), would regard as acceptable having regard to the matters in subsection (3).


                (6)  Goods do not fail to be of acceptable quality if:

                         (a)  the consumer to whom they are supplied causes them to become of unacceptable quality, or fails to take reasonable steps to prevent them from becoming of unacceptable quality; and

                         (b)  they are damaged by abnormal use.

    So a consumer cannot claim that the goods were not of acceptable quality and therefore demand a replacement or repair under the law, if the consumer has caused them to become of unacceptable quality such as arguably through performing or obtaining a botched repair.

    The consumer has rights they can hold the repairer to under the guarantees relating to the supply of services in subdivision B in the same document.

  • Australia fines Apple $6.7 million over misleading 'Error 53' repair practices

    The issue must have been that Apple said, 'no we won't repair it.' 
    Presumably, if they said, 'yes we will repair it but it will cost you because you took it to someone who was unauthorized to work on it,' they would have been ok.

    But honestly, if the ACCC thinks Apple should foot the bill for the repair after someone else has screwed it up, that's crap.

    What's missing from the SMH article is that if a third party repair has damaged the device, then the manufacturer is not obliged to repair it.

    That fact is noted in this ABC news article.
    mattinoz[Deleted User]icoco3jony0