djsherly

As explained by Apple, iOS performs routine Touch ID module checks to ensure that the hardware "matches" other components installed on an iPhone and iPad. To maintain a high level of security, and thwart fraudulent hardware, Touch ID sensors that fail these tests are automatically disabled.

Except that's not what happened - the whole device is rendered inoperable not just the faulty bit.

There's no free warranty being discussed here, it's a consumer guarantee - or rights that you have a consumer - that can't be taken away. 

If Apple are refusing to service a iphone's headphone port because the screen has been replaced, then that is not allowed as they're unrelated things. If Apple refuse to service a faulty screen which was replaced by a third party, they should be well within their rights to refused to repair that component.

Strikes me the error 53 was due to faulty workmanship or not understanding how to repair the defect, so it's not really clear why Apple would be in trouble here. 

on the other hand, our law is quite clear that you're not forced to go back to a seller for service or maintenance. You can have your car serviced with anyone as long as it's done to the standard prescribed in the service manual.

I have trouble understanding why this article exists. As an editorial I would assume it's meant to comment on something topical but this just seems to be a rant about pundits complaining about Apple capex with some non-existent nexus with Samsung profits/exploding phones.

To be honest, the Samsung comparison could have been left out and the article would have stood well on its own, as well as chopping a few hundred words away.

It's no news flash, but Dilger confirms his zealotry here with a needless comparison with a competitor which adds nothing to the story. But that's no surprise, right?



Of Course, it *is* April Fool's day as I wake.

larrya said:

Either let others properly, competitively, repair it, or make the standard Apple warranty 2 years (as is required in other countries).  

"Presents more issues than it solves"?  If your auto repair isn't correct, there is no recourse with the original manufacturer even though the shop owner bought a service manual from that manufacturer.  This isn't really any different.

I would have a lot more respect for Apple's position if they didn't have to resort to battery scare tactics.  

Depends where you are. In Australia, as long as car servicing is done according to manufacturer spec then warranty is not voided at all by 3rd party servicing.

Phones on the other hand, particularly with the crypto element should probably be left to the manufacturer to handle. They'll probably put DRM in all the components now just to make it a real PITA. Apple are keen to control the whole customer experience which is admirable but there's a reason why 3rd party repairers exist - cost and flexibility. Of course someone will pipe up and say if you can't afford to get it fixed you shouldn't buy one. That's a stupid argument.

I've been with anz since forever but am also an ING customer. Talk about luck. 

StrangeDays said:

djsherly said:

StrangeDays said:

djsherly said:

StrangeDays said:

djsherly said:

boltsfan17 said:

Pumpkin Escobar said:

Dang, somebody got paid for writing an article...

With your logic, I guess no one can write a positive article about a product they really liked. 

I'm sure they're amazing headphones, but effusive isn't the word I'd use for this article. Fawning might be a better one. 

Why? Because he really liked the product? The product that has people lining up outside of stores for? If he found it to be as good as hope, why on earth wouldn't be enthusiastic in his article? Should he throw in some made-up negatives in an attempt to be perceived as "fair & balanced"? I think that would be disingenuous..

Allow me to go back... 

"I'm sure they're amazing headphones"

It's a comment on his writing style, his assessment that these headphones cancelled out all the bad of 2016 (I don't think he meant solely from an Apple perspective, btw) was particularly ridiculous. It's one of those things I'm sure he'll read in a few years and cringe. 

Btw he messed up a statement. I'm pretty sure it's the "intersection of technology and the liberal arts", not the "corner".

at 0:50

That's your criticism? Corner vs intersection? Try harder man. 

My criticism was that the article was fawning. I was pointing out that a favourite quote was incorrectly referenced as a side note. It was a btw. Did you miss that?

maybe it's not me who should be trying harder. 

No, I got it, but your attempt at trolling the review is just pretty weak. He wasn't quoting the line from Jobs, he was referring to it conceptually, thus there is absolutely nothing "incorrect" about saying the word corner instead of the word intersection since they're completely analogous. Troll fail. 

As others noted above, only those trying hard to find things to dislike about the product and Apple are having issues with the review as written. If you can no longer criticize the product, then criticizing the review seems to be your next step. Weak. 

As far as I know, it's only Apple who have painted themselves at that intersection. And for someone whose knowledge is as all encompassing as mr dilgers, I'm surprised he got it wrong. I'm not sure who is trolling who here. I started out by saying it's probably amazing, the product, but the article is fawning. I'd hardly call that a troll. 

And yet you still miss the bit where I did not criticise the product. At all. I won't make a secret of my dislike of dilgers perspective. I think he's over the top and completely apologetic. Apple could stab him in the eyes and he'd spin it as an opportunity to fine tune his hearing. Which is what he wanted all along. But he didn't realise it.