Slashdot Mirror

Both at work and at home, I use a pair of Apple Extended Keyboard II Model M3501. They're more than 15 years old, one of them came with my first Power Mac in the early 90s. These are true mechanical keyboards that aren't too large (unlike the famous IBM ones) and have a standard modern key layout. As I've gone through the successive generations of Apple keyboards I've found myself more and more disappointed by their feel and durability. A couple years ago I stumbled on my old Mac parts in the basement and was pleased to discover that everything, including the keyboard, still worked. It was a joy to use that hardware again so I looked for a way to adapt it to my current Macs.

They do use an Apple-proprietary PS2 equivalent called ADB connectors but it's trivial to build a USB converter for them. You don't even need to splice up a cable to make the adapter, the ports on the keyboard are connected to the main board with removable ribbon cables.

Thankfully, the Copyright Office has already provided an exemption for motor vehicle repair (including modifications) [1].

This is important because manufacturers are starting to install DRM into their cars. For instance, I drive a Nissan Leaf and the battery is software locked to the car. Replacing the car requires that the person involved pair the new battery to the car. And given the technology advances in batteries in the last 10 years, you're going to want to install a bigger battery than the car originally shipped with. Theoretically, a larger capacity battery is not "original specifications."

Similarly, you are allowed to reverse the CAN bus to add a new entertainment device, and there's no copyright violation to modify the emissions control software either. Both are allowed under the previous ruling. That said, you probably are breaking some EPA law if you violate the emissions settings as described.

Sources:
[1] https://ifixit.org/blog/8510/c...

1870 when the Librarian of Congress centralized copyright functions and then the Copyright Office became its own department in 1897. As for the frequency of these interpretations, section 1201 of the DMCA provides for exemption petitions to be heard. A little more detailed link on the original story.

Update from iFixit - https://ifixit.org/blog/11673/... "This service document certainly paints a grim picture, but ever the optimists, we headed down to our friendly local Apple Store and bought a brand new 2018 13” MacBook Pro Touch Bar unit. Then we disassembled it and traded displays with our teardown unit from this summer. To our surprise, the displays and MacBooks functioned normally in every combination we tried. We also updated to Mojave and swapped logic boards with the same results." Apparently the updated policy is not yet in effect. Was this leaked to test the water?

https://ifixit.org/blog/10279/...

tl;dr Apple implemented one of their own patents called "Ingress Protection for Keyboards".

We took a fully functional, space gray iPhone 6s and removed its original home button. In its place, we dropped in the stock home button from a different, rose gold iPhone 6s.

We downloaded and installed the latest iOS through iTunes by connecting to a computer (in this case, a MacBook Pro). Halfway through the process, iTunes gave us the bad news: The iPhone could not be updated. An unknown error occurred (53).

I may have cherry picked the sentences, but not changed the context etc to imply a different meaning.
Search for yourself for "iphone 6 error 53 refurbished screen"

And what behavior is that?

Apple didn't intentionally "brick" anything. It's not reasonable to expect them to support 3rd party displays which they neither designed nor vetted for their products.

Except that Apple have also done this with refurbished displays eg where the glass has cracked, but the underlying electronics are fine so the gladd was replaced
It's also been proven when a display was swapped from one fully working iphone6 to another working iphone6

This ain't auto parts.

Fake Auto parts can cause serious injury or even death
Personally I'd prefer to use a 3rd party part in my phone than my car. I'm far less likely to have a life changing injury from my phone

but later apologized and issued a fix

I don't think you understand "bricked". When something is "bricked", it can then do anything a brick can, and nothing the bricks can't. Bricks can't be given a "fix" that turns them into a smartphone.

Well, if it convert a phone to a brick (and yes, it can't be used and really becomes a functionality brick), then a fix should simply convert the brick back to a phone. What's wrong with that meaning?

Right to repair, which should be the law. You can't get OEM parts because Apple won't sell them.

It should. However, smartphones, whether they are made by Apple or anybody else, are not like build-it-yourself custom PC's that you can mod anyway you want with any hardware that catches your eye because there is such broad driver support for 3rd party hardware for smartphone OS'es. If you buy a highly tuned piece of kit like a smartphone which is specifically geared up to work only with a narrow set of manufacturer tested pieces of hardware, then those are the hardware that is guaranteed to work and you are best off replacing OEM parts with OEM parts. If, however, you put a piece of 3rd party hardware into your device that the manufacturer has not certified will work then you should not be surprised when an update breaks your device when the OEM has the 'audacity' to issue an update for the device that does not take your 3rd party hardware into account. This applies to all these devices not just Apple and the iPhone but Google/Samsung/HTC/Microsoft ... all of them. The guy cited in the summary offered a repair service, he used non certified parts because they are cheaper and then he pocketed the extra revenues generated by people flocking to his service. Now these parts are not working properly and people are beating down his door demanding reparations. Tough shit but this was kind of predictable.

As for Apple refusing to sell OEM internal spares to 3rd party repair shops, they are in good company since according to iFixit: "It’s important to note that while Apple is improving their battery replacement program, every single Android phone manufacturer also refuses to sell consumers integrated batteries or other internal repair parts."

https://ifixit.org/blog/9491/a... is also doing $29 for those who want to do it on their own or have someone else do it.

It has been known in the iPhone repair community that these specific iPhone models have a factory problem known as "touch IC disease" that makes them prematurely fail way faster than other models. It's basically a soldering issue on a component that's in a sensitive place (that heats too much), which ends up losing contact and stop working.

Apple is just trying to deflect the problem here by saying that the company cannot be expected to keep warranties over their pre-stipulated time, without recognizing the issue in itself.
https://ifixit.org/blog/8309/i...

But yes, Apple is a corporation like any other, and people should just realize that. They have used the exact same strategy for past problems, at least initially, some very well known like antennagate, bendgate, Apple Maps, Purple Haze, poor iCloud security practices, and others.

And yeah, that whole thing about a robot disassembling and iPhone because Apple is an environment friendly company that cares about eWaste? That's just bullshit and marketing propaganda. Having a robot arm that quickly disassembles iPhones means nothing when your company is lobbying against stuff like Right to Repair Bill. And of course it doesn't help when the company fails to recognize problems like the one on this case, telling costumers that they have no responsibility for a design failure that will ultimately land a whole bunch of those iPhone 6 and 6 Plus on the garbage, or on repair places they don't support nor care for.

"error 53"

That again?!?

It was a coding error, subsequently fixed with an Update (which iOS devices actually RECEIVE, unlike 99.9999999999999999999999999999% of Android devices).

https://ifixit.org/blog/7924/e...

[M]y 2011 MB Air will have to do for another few years - which I know it will relyably do.

Apple pities you.

Apple has had right to repair issues such as error 53. Apple, or any other company, remote bricking a phone because you had it repaired with 3rd party parts should be illegal. That kind of lock in is the BS this is attempting to resolve.

1. TRANSFER the ORIGINAL Home Button/Touch ID Sensor from the ORIGINAL Display assembly to the NEW Display Assembly. There are many tutorials available on HOW to do this, as well as the IMPORTANCE of doing so.

I do like how you capitalised all the words that become completely irrelevant when the ID sensor has failed. You know ... one of the reasons you would take such a device to a repairer.

But that's why you're just a fake. The Real Tim Cook would put a lot more thought into user blaming.

Doesn't matter. We are ALL wrong.

It actually seems that Apple accidentally left some Production Testing code in an iOS9 build, causing the Error 53.

They released a patched version of iOS 9 last February to both fix the problem, AND "unbrick" phones that had inadvertently been "caught" by the test-code.

http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er...

By the way, BLOW ME for using Caps to Emphasize. As soon as Slashdot gets into the 20th (let alone 21st) Century and grows a Rich-Text Editor, I will continue to use the equally antiquated method of using CAPS TO EMPHASIZE.

So, FOAD.

they reversed already

besides, it could just revert back to asking the code onscreen. or letting you reset the device.

But it actually seems that Apple accidentally left some Production Testing code in an iOS9 build, causing the Error 53.

They released a patched version of iOS 9 last February to both fix the problem, AND "unbrick" phones that had inadvertently been "caught" by the test-code.

http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er...

Not out of context. It's an absolute.
We went through this shit with cars a few years ago. The product is supposed to be owned not leased and the owner should be able to do anything legal they want to with the thing they own - including taking it to whatever mechanic or technician they want to.

But in this case, it actually seems that Apple accidentally left some Production Testing code in an iOS9 build, causing the Error 53.

They released a patched version of iOS 9 last February to both fix the problem, AND "unbrick" phones that had inadvertently been "caught" by the test-code.

http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er...

Everything I've read or heard about it is that it happens upon update. Louis Rossmann of Rossmann Group (3rd party Mac repair facility) and Jessa Jones of iPad Rehab (3rd party iPhone and iPad repair facility) are my primary sources on this. One iPhone/iPad repair neither of them will do is a home button replacement, after the first batch of such repairs on fingerprint-enabled devices resulted in Error 53 weeks after the repairs. Given that the phone must be shut down for the repair, a reboot is part of that process and the error would have been evident before the phones were returned to their owners if it happened after a reboot.

Ok, I understand.

But it actually seems that Apple accidentally left some Production Testing code in an iOS9 build, causing the Error 53.

They released a patched version of iOS 9 last February to both fix the problem, AND "unbrick" phones that had inadvertently been "caught" by the test-code.

http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er...

Which is exactly what they did

You obviously didn't bother to read the article. Apparently that behaviour changed with the iPhone 7. The home button now won't work at all if you try and replace it.

That was a bug and has already been fixed ages ago: http://ifixit.org/blog/7924/er...

Which is exactly what they did

False. The headphone jack is not prone to failure. That's a myth you've personally created to rationalize Apple's decision to remove such a useful port. Apple has also never claimed that the reliability of the headphone jack was ever an issue in any of their devices. In fact, you're far more likely to have a problem with the Lightning port. In the iPhone 5 series (5, 5c, and 5s), Lightning port replacement is the third most common DIY fix—right after screen and battery replacements. If headphone jacks were as unreliable as you claim, shouldn't jack replacements be in the top 3? Yet, they aren't, because in fact the headphone jack is highly reliable due to its simplistic design.

In my 40 years of experience, both personal and professional, I've only seen 1 headphone jack on a laptop, a Mac in fact, that was damaged after a DJ tripped over the cable and ripped the connector right off the motherboard. Why did an Apple customer bring their laptop to an unauthorized repair center? As many Apple users have told me themselves, its because they'll get raped in the wallet if they take their device to an Apple Service Center. Not a surprise. Apple has been screwing over customers since the Apple II. I recall a story when Apple engineered a newer Apple II model that used less ICs, thus being cheaper to manufacture. Apple users interpreted that to mean the newer revision would be cheaper to buy... which, of course, Apple being Apple, it wasn't.

It is caused by a chip that uses a BGA mounting method; the same method of mounting that caused all the nVidia display issues in the Macbooks a while ago.

http://ifixit.org/blog/8309/ip...

This time, rather than thermal stress causing the problem to appear, it seems to be related to Bendgate. Because the phone has very poor structural strength, it isn't able to properly keep the board from bending under the chip, causing the BGA pads to eventually separate, and lose connectivity.

Now, let's be honest. If it diden't bend easily then how can they have chips delaminate from the PCB and fritz the screen and force an upgrade? It's "Business Case Engineering 101" there...

https://ifixit.org/blog/7668/u...

Apparently if a machine breaks it just goes to a landfill instead of being repaired - because they cannot be repaired.

What happened was that iFixit broke the NDA by posting the pics before the device was released. Apple then cancelled their developer account, which as they also used that developer account for their App, had the knock-on effect of pulling their app from the App Store

http://ifixit.org/blog/7401/if...

I'm not speculating anything.

Again, can you scroll up? Can you read the article? Can you read the blog from iFixit? They all say the same thing: It was a developer unit from Apple. The AppleTV 4th gen is not for sale to the public yet so Apple is the really the only source for the unit.

Your false dichotomy asserts that if I want to see evidence from you to prove your assumption, that I must believe the opposite. That's a dangerous (and stupid) logic.

I have to prove your false assumption and disprove my own. All the while you are not accepting the word of iFixit that they had a developer unit. In your world a company that gives out presale developer units to developers do not normally have them sign NDAs. Do I have that right?

bad link to the iFixit blog link

here's the correct one
http://ifixit.org/blog/7401/if...

The "fair" part of FairPhone isn't of too much concern for me. What is of much interest is the fact that it is extremely easily repairable and expandable (down to the level of replacing ports, sockets, the microphone etc.) with nothing more than a screwdriver!
This phone, if it gets funded, will have a number of different, easily replaceable, batteries.

I run iFixit. We started writing our own repair manuals because of this very issue way back in 2003. Slashdot has run stories about us on a number of occasions.

Apple has been very aggressively protecting their copyright on service manuals pretty much since the dawn of the internet. Heres an example of them going after Something Awful. Many of the sites theyve gone after have ceased to exist.

Since then, with the help of tens of thousands of incredible repair technicians around the world (including many redditors), we have built the largest free repair manual. Because we write them ourselves, the manufacturers cant shut us down. The community has written over 6,000 manuals, and you can download and reproduce any of them to your hearts content. We even post all of our manuals on bittorrent and the internet archive so they are guaranteed to be free forever.

Heres our Toshiba laptop service manual. Weve made progress on half a dozen laptops so far, with more on the way. Not nearly as comprehensive as what timix had, but its a start.

Toshiba is not an outlier here--they represent the status quo. Many manufacturers havent gotten around to issuing these C&D letters, but its perfectly within their right. Any site hosting manufacturer service manuals without permission is at risk of a shutdown like this at any time.

Thats why what we do at iFixit is so important. The world needs to know how to fix these products. Repair is critical for the environment. Repair helps bridge the digital divide by keeping the secondhand electronics market alive. And electronics repair represents hundreds of thousands of jobs in the United States alone.

We cannot rely on the good will of manufacturers. Yes, many of them have looked the other way and ignored sites like timixs, but that is unlikely to continue. We have three options:

1. Create a free and open alternative to the manufacturers service manuals (thats what were doing at iFixit).
2. Pressure the manufacturers to waive copyright to their manuals so that we can reproduce them. Dell, HP, and Lenovo are the best targets for this because they already provide manuals online. (I am involved in discussions with some OEMs to make this happen. The more public support we have, the more success well have.)
3. Legislate. The auto manufacturers refused to provide independent shops with the information they needed, so they banded together and just passed Right to Repair legislation in Massachusetts last week. There's no reason we can't do the same.

Its easy to say, "shame on Toshiba" and move on with your life. But this is not unique to Toshiba. No cell phone manufacturer makes their service manuals available. In fact, outside of the heavy equipment industry (where customers demand it) and the automotive industry (where legislation requires it), its the rare manufacturer that does not use copyright to prevent publicat

Maybe you didn't understand this. The rMBP is unfixable without specialized equipment, like the right solvents. That doesn't mean Apple can't fix, just that you can't. They still sell a battery replacement service. You pay them $199 and they take your rMBP and replace the battery. On the older systems it was cheaper, generally around $129.

Here is an article in ifixit that backs up my point about the repair cost: http://ifixit.org/2763/the-new-macbook-pro-unfixable-unhackable-untenable/

http://ifixit.org/1843/new-ipad-teardown/

Vid : http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPad-3-4G-Teardown/8277/1