There's not that many satellites outside of GEO, and even those that go beyond are usually not circularized (e.g. Molniya orbits), so tend to have shorter periods. Unless you count things in GEO graveyard orbits (which rise very, very slowly in the west -- their orbit is just slightly less than synchronous), I can't think of a significant population of artificial satellites that orbit slower than earth rotates.
Apple isn’t that bad, and being able to find parts for 10 year old devices and actually having nearly a decade of software support makes up for it.
Ofc it would be better if they didn’t lock down parts further at least the screen and battery aren’t locked down yet.
I replaced a screen on an iPhone XS not even a month ago with a £30 kit from Amazon that came with everything needed including a new liquid protection seal.
Apple should definitely get flack what what they do but this pathetic attempt is just that pathetic this isn’t a way forward in any practical manner.
If you really think you’ll be able to find parts for this phone in 5 years then well I got a bridge to sell you. And not for nothing it will turn into a paper weight after the 3 years of software support period will be over.
"Encrypting" parts also has to do with the black market for iPhones. If you steal someone's iPhone, they can brick it remotely, so you can't just resell it as a whole working device, so you part it out to a shady cell phone repair store who will reuse the parts and give you like fifty bucks so you can score your next bag of drugs. By embedding serial numbers on the parts, Apple stops this and makes the parts unusable, driving down the value of a stolen iPhone.
And driving up the cost of repairs. If I want to turn off the thing that bricks the identification features, there's no technical reason why I shouldn't be able to do that- my device follows my orders, not the other way around.
Yes, but Apple provides low-cost replacement parts. Like the cost of an iphone battery via apple store or apple self-service is objectively reasonable, so yeah, you can't use amazon batteries and who cares?
> If I want to turn off the thing that bricks the identification features, there's no technical reason why I shouldn't be able to do that
The reason is because it encourages the resale of stolen goods, which encourages the theft of goods.
"Why shouldn't my dollars do what I tell them to, they're paper in MY wallet" well if what you're telling them to do is buy a hot stereo out of the back of a truck, that's illegal and society is going to discourage that because we don't want our stereo to be stolen next. And stereos are going to be built with things (like serial numbers) that help prevent that. Even if you feel that infringes your privacy (serials are the root of all this tracking after all!) tough shit.
That's always the problem, the people complaining pick out specific elements and whine about that one thing being unfair and ignore that they're specific elements of an overall system that includes elements to compensate the unfair parts.
Yes, iphones will only accept signed parts because that discourages theft, because the phone can't be stripped and sold as parts. And then Apple provides subsidized services (their service division runs at a loss) for people who want repair service, and at-cost OEM parts to anyone who wants to service their own phone. That's also why you have to buy parts individually - because they have to be paired to the phone. Yes, this is inconvenient for third-party service vendors who can't just keep a backroom of parts, but it's not infeasible, they just have to have users order their own parts. This is not John Deere where nobody but techs can even order parts, everyone can, they just don't want to have to.
The big-picture e-waste and service picture of iphones is completely fair overall for consumers. It's less fair for servicemen who have to deal with subsidized services and OEM parts being sold at-cost and losing revenue on selling those parts (rossman is not selling you a screen at-cost), but, that's what auto service centers had to learn to live with when RockAuto showed up in the picture too. And none of that is bad for consumers.
If you're just making a moral stand that you have a god-given right to put a $20 battery in your phone every 6 months instead of a $40 battery every 2 years, and you think that justifies unwinding anti-theft provisions and increasing e-waste to do it... just use the repair/service chains from the vendor like a normal human being, buddy. In the meantime we can all enjoy not having our phones stolen and stripped.
Or maybe a better analogy is removing immobilizers from cars. I have a god-given right to just have a normal metal key without needing to take it into the dealer to get it programmed, right? It's my car, why should I have to pay the manufacturer just to replace a $2 metal key? But in aggregate we're all better off not having well-developed criminal networks built around stealing and stripping cars... so people have just learned that they need to keep at least 2 spare keys at all times to program the immobilizer if they lose one, or else you'll have to take it in to a dealer and have the key programmed. It's just not that big a deal to most people, and actually the opposite is true - not having your car stolen is actually a huge deal to them.
Could you build a car without an immobilizer? Sure. Would it be more expensive to insure? Yes. Does anybody actually want that, apart from a few weirdos? No.
>well if what you're telling them to do is buy a hot stereo out of the back of a truck, that's illegal
You're dodging the question.
If I buy a replacement Home button, I expect the fingerprint sensor within to work. The fact is, that expectation is objectively right; it neither breaks your arm or picks your pocket.
That's the entire reason why we're getting right to repair laws, for that matter; society agrees with me, and not you (and so you're wrong, by your own rules).
The fingerprint sensor is tricky, it’s not clear if it’s actually is Apple’s call or not as it’s part of secure payment flow which would make it quite problematic vis-à-vis the certification requirements that the payment card industry enforces.
FaceID devices don’t have that problem since the front camera including the FaceID IR camera simply move from the old device to the new one.
It also was technically possible to move the old Touch ID sensor just a tad harder.
Apple doesn’t lock down screens and battery replacements (currently at least) as I’ve done both on 6-7 devices for F&F in the past decade or so.
Apple has by far some of the cheapest 1st party replacement services of the major brands, and also the cheapest OEM parts now Samsung charges far more at least in the UK.
3rd party parts are also much more readily available.
I’ve just recently replaced an XS screen with a £30 kit from Amazon for a Galaxy S10 which came out about the same time IIRC the cheapest replacement screen kit on Amazon is more than £200 and Samsung does no longer offer repair services despite the fact that this device isn’t even 5 years old.
Apple does a lot of shitty stuff and whilst it’s about as far from being a right to repair champion as one can imagine in reality the long term support they offer for their devices and the fact that they release only a limited number of SKUs each year whilst moving extremely large volumes of them makes that in practice their devices are the easiest to repair whether you are using 1st party, 3rd party or doing it yourself.
The fingerprint sensor is the important one, because thats where the secure enclave is, that's where your fingerprint is stored, it's the lynchpin to Apple's entire security system. The more access to any parts of that system, the more it needs, the more software it has, the more likely that software is to have bugs, the more likely bugs there are, the more likely it is that there will be an exploit, and the more likely exploits are, the more likely it is that your fingerprint will get leaked, or that the security will be broken.
It pains me that TouchID sensors can't be reused/it's harder, because of the waste, but as a protection measure, I don't see any way around it.
That’s not particularly effective since it seems that most repair shops even the none official ones have ways to rest the devices.
Also the screen can be still easily reused and the rest of the parts can be salvaged for components that end up even in Apples own supply chain I suspect.
If your iPhone is stolen it will be in an electronics chop shop in China within a week.
Think there is some sort of advantage they had by doing that rather than say, four screws at the ends of the PCB? Damage resistance? - Trying not to believe planned obsolescence was the priority.
They're cheaper to make this way. It's not 4 screws in the earlier models, it's more like 100. Fitting those, even with a special mechanism will be more time consuming and problematic than riveting.
They don't care about repair. They are optimising solely for manufacturing.
When I spilled a drink on my Framework and ordered a new keyboard, I discovered it had 3 mis-aligned screws in the keyboard from the factory. Like either a hole was punched wrong or a screw was rammed in off center. The holes and threads are all messed up and impossible to tighen those screws.
3 out of 60 or more.
Never knew there was anything wrong from the outside but I can't imagine wouldn't have worked loose over more time if I hadn't happened to have a reason to uncover them in the first year.
I love that I was able to replace a keyboard, but 3 out of 60 is a pretty bad rate.
The 2012 era ones are screwed in place (I didn't know this until this weekend when I took one apart to that level). I've never known one come loose, and a properly torqued screw will never be a problem in this situation.
