Finally Apple reverses policy ... Maybe they care about the customer (maybe for the first time EVER)?

[arlen holder]

Finally Apple does something that shows they care about the customer
(maybe for the first time EVER)
o I wonder what (legally?) prompted them to reverse long-standing course?

Normally Apple does everything possible to screw the loyal customer
o And yet, perhaps for the first time ever ... they reversed policy!

As we all know, Apple generally doesn't give a shit about their customer
o Apple removes basic hardware functionality
o Apple lies brazenly (even to Congress)
o Apple secretly throttles customers' phones
etc.

The proof that Apple doesn't give a shit about the customer is huge!
o Apple even intentionally bricked phones that had 3rd-party repairs!

And yet, perhaps for the first time ever...
o Apple makes a (rare) choice that is in the customers' favor

Wow.
o Just wow.

o Apple will repair iPhones with third-party batteries
<https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/05/apple-iphone-third-party-battery-repairs/>
"It┬ a reversal of Apple┬ longstanding repair policy."

o Apple will now reportedly fix iPhones even if you▔e replaced the battery yourself
<https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/5/18251882/apple-iphone-third-party-battery-repair-genius-bar>
"They're now eligible for repair at Genius Bars and Apple Authorized
Service Providers"

o Apple Says iPhones With Third-Party Batteries Now Eligible for Repairs
<https://www.macrumors.com/2019/03/05/iphones-third-party-batteries-now-repair-eligible/>

o Apple Stores begin consumer friendly repairs of iPhones with third-party batteries
<https://9to5mac.com/2019/03/05/iphone-third-party-battery-repair/>

Apple must really be hurting when they even begin to care for the customer!
o This reversal of long-standing customer antipathy stems from "something"

But what?

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 01:19:21 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

> o I wonder what (legally?) prompted them to reverse long-standing course?

The question is why did Apple finally give a shit about their customer?
o The logic is, most likely, that they bowed to legal pressure...(IMHO).

LOGIC:
It's hard to tell from the leaked documents what specific legal action
prompted Apple to suddenly reverse their long-standing antipathy toward
customer's rights to repair their own possessions.

FACT:
o Proposed California Law Would Give You the Right to Repair Your Tech
o The state joins 18 others in taking on the tech industry.
<https://futurism.com/california-right-to-repair-law/>

"People shouldn┤ be forced to 'upgrade' to the newest model
every time a replaceable part on their smartphone breaks"

FACT:
o California Right to Repair bill takes aim at gadget makers like Apple
<https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/07/california-legislator-introduces-bill-requiring-electronic-makers-to-make-repair-manuals-and-parts-publicly-available/>

FACT:
Forbes reported this week, and I quote:
"Apple is on record as saying it throttles iPhone performance
with worn batteries. *This can happen as soon as 1 year old*"

"Owners can now go to their local repairer, saving time & money
(iFixit charges just $29) knowing their Apple support remains intact"

<https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2019/03/05/apple-iphone-xs-max-xr-upgrade-iphone-battery-2019/#713852a82dc5>

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-03-07 22:36, arlen holder wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 01:19:21 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:
>
>> o I wonder what (legally?) prompted them to reverse long-standing course?
>
> The question is why did Apple finally give a shit about their customer?

Apple was very slow in admitting the battery problem the first and
second time around. While I waited the first time, I was told a year
later that I wouldn't be eligible for another replacement, so I went
ahead and replaced it with ifixit battery since Apple would charge me an
arm and a leg for it. After that, Apple announces the "battery health"
and that one doesn't support 3rd party batteries and then Apple
announced the $25 battery replacemenrt programme.

And now, that programme has ended, which means people have to replace
with iFixit since Apple is too expensive.

The isssue is that if Apple wants to keep those customers, it will have
to accept those phones for tradein. So a change in policy helps keeps
customers who were ille served by Apple.

Also, if this battery-gate is to be long term, then the policy needs to
become kinder to those who need to replace it.

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 00:13:34 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:
> Also, if this battery-gate is to be long term, then the policy needs to
> become kinder to those who need to replace it.

Hi JF Mezei,

Everything you wrote makes sense, where you have first-hand experience
of this clearly anti-consumer policy, as explained in MacRumors yesterday:
"Genius Bar and AASPs were previously instructed to deny service
of any kind for an iPhone with a third-party battery, regardless of
the circumstances"
<https://www.macrumors.com/2019/03/05/iphones-third-party-batteries-now-repair-eligible/>

What's new is this, which the policy SHOULD have been, all along:
"If the repair is unrelated to the battery, the Genius Bar and AASPs
are now instructed to ignore the third-party battery and proceed
with service as normal"

And, if, perchance, the repair _is_ related to the battery, then...
"If the repair is related to the battery itself, the Genius Bar and
AASPs are now permitted to replace the third-party battery
with an official Apple battery for the standard fee. "

*The good news is this world-wide policy went into effect yesterday.*

This new policy joins the screen-repair policy of a while ago:
o Apple Says Third-Party iPhone Screen Repairs No Longer Fully Void Your Warranty
<https://www.macrumors.com/2017/02/24/third-party-iphone-screen-repairs-now-allowed/>
"Previously, an iPhone with a third-party display was not eligible
for any authorized repairs under warranty."

The bad news is that
"Apple will still decline service for iPhones with third-party logic
boards, enclosures, microphones, Lightning connectors,
headphone jacks, volume and sleep/wake buttons, TrueDepth
sensor arrays, and certain other components"

The shock is that this isn't like Apple to be customer friendly on repairs.

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-03-08 01:43, arlen holder wrote:

> The shock is that this isn't like Apple to be customer friendly on repairs.

It also has to do with countries considering passing "right to repair"
laws.

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 03:32:44 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:

>> The shock is that this isn't like Apple to be customer friendly on repairs.
>
> It also has to do with countries considering passing "right to repair"
> laws.

Hi JF Mezei,
You speak using adult logic, which is refreshing on this newsgroup.
o Adults comprehend the facts & formulate opinions based on those facts.

I did try to find the smoking gun of a DIRECT connection with the loomingly
large right-to-repair laws with Apple's sudden and clearly quixotic
decision to be customer friendly for once; but I don't (yet) see any
_direct_ connection.

*However, it's unlikely Apple suddenly became customer friendly.*
o So I agree with your logical assessment of Apple's true motivation

If Apple did simply see the writing on the wall (they' NOT stupid!), then
they simply proved, yet again, that they will screw the customer any way
they can 'get away with', which, for this one aspect, they apparently felt
that they could no longer get away with it.

I think what HURT their case was the fact that batteries are literally
almost REQUIRED after only ONE YEAR, which nobody would say is a "normal"
requirement for any phone other than for an iPhone.

*That fact puts Apple DIRECTLY in cross hairs of any right-to-repair law!*

The good news is, as of yesterday a 3rd party battery doesn't negate an
Apple Genius Bar or AASP repair, which is the takeaway from this thread.

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 01:19:21 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

> The proof that Apple doesn't give a shit about the customer is huge!

The "Verge" calls Apple "user hostile", which is classic Apple hubris:
<https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/6/21/11991302/iphone-no-headphone-jack-user-hostile-stupid>

The fact is that it's well known Apple is clearly & obviously user hostile.

So why, all of a sudden, Apple makes a consumer friendly move?

It boggles the mind actually, since it's so unlike Apple to ever be
consumer friendly.

I can't (yet) find a _direct_ connection to the upcoming consumer laws,
where the logic, so far, appears to be:
1. The iPhones need batteries after just one year of use
2. Up until now, Apple wouldn't allow 3rd-party repairs to be repaired
3. Now they do - likely - but not provably - to forestall legal action

If you can find a _direct_ connection to that adult logic, let us know.

[arlen holder]

FACT + LOGIC

Why, all of a sudden, Apple makes a consumer-friendly move?
o It makes no sense that Apple did this ... unless... unless... ???

Apple is not stupid.
o Apple is one of the most profitable companies on the planet for a reason.

The admittedly loyal CUSTOMERS are who give Apple all that money
o And yet, Apple screws that loyal customer in astoundingly perverse ways

Not only did Apple _brick_ third party repairs,
o But Apple throttles customers secretly, permanently, & drastically.

Worse, Apple, up until now, refused to allow 3rd-party repaired repairs.
o And yet, all of a sudden ... Apple has become "consumer friendly"?

It's not likely that Apple will _ever_ be consumer friendly
o Not unless the Apple consumer herself actually changes in personality

And that's not likely to happen.
o Because Apple has a _long_ standing history of disdain for customers!

o Apple fighting new right to repair legislation after successfully lobbying against it in the past
<https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/15/apple-nebraska-right-to-repair/>

o Apple Is Fighting A Secret War To Keep You From Repairing Your Phone
o The company has repeatedly opposed legislation that would help
<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/apple-right-to-repair_us_5755a6b4e4b0ed593f14fdea>

o Inside Apple's absurd lobbying strategy.
<https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/pgxgpg/apple-tells-lawmaker-that-right-to-repair-iphones-will-turn-nebraska-into-a-mecca-for-hackers>

o Apple Is Lobbying Against Your Right to Repair iPhones
<https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/nz85y7/apple-is-lobbying-against-your-right-to-repair-iphones-new-york-state-records-confirm>

Apple has never cared about their admittedly loyal consumer...
o So the real question is why, all of a sudden?

o Apple Lost Lawsuit Against Independent iPhone Repair Shop in Norway Over Unauthorized Parts
<https://www.macrumors.com/2018/04/13/apple-lawsuit-repair-shop-norway/>

Why, all of a sudden, Apple makes a consumer-friendly move?
o It makes no sense that Apple did this ... unless... unless... ???

o ĄRight to repairĒ legislation gaining steam amid AppleĒs iPhone battery replacement program
<https://9to5mac.com/2018/01/18/right-to-repair-battery-program/>

Apple will never tell the truth
o The facts have always shown Apple to be anti-consumer

So why the _sudden_ change of attitude?
o Is it _really_ all about the batteries?

Is the adult logic really this simple?
o Apple makes steps toward a more flexible right to repair
o You can now have your iPhone with a third-party battery worked on by Apple.
<https://www.imore.com/apple-makes-steps-toward-more-flexible-right-repair>

Did Apple see the writing on the wall in California on their batteries?

o ĄRight to RepairĒ bill could be coming to AppleĒs home state
<https://www.cultofmac.com/533353/right-to-repair-california/>

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 03:32:44 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:

> It also has to do with countries considering passing "right to repair"
> laws.

Hi JF Mezei,

FACT + LOGIC.
*Apple screwed _you_, JF Mezei!*
o The fact is obvious - the logic is the part that's hard to decipher.

I've been looking this up for days, where I agree with you.
o Apple has a long history of not allowing basic repairs

I provided cites showing Apple strongly lobbying against consumer rights
o And yet, all of a sudden, Apple changes their mind? WTF?

Obviously, Apple is not stupid... where _something_ drastically changed.
o But what?

I think we don't know as Apple isn't "advertising" anything yet
o All we have are internal memos of the internal policy changes

I suspect, using basic adult logic, that it's three facts combined:
1. Most current iPhones require batteries after only "about a year"
2. Repairing batteries by Apple is astronomically expensive over time
3. The right-to-repair laws were gaining steam on _that_ evidence

Bearing in mind that allowing users to repair batteries by Apple,
in and of itself, caused an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE more phones to be repaired
by Apple!

The normal battery replacement is on the order of 1 million per year, where
last year it was well over ten times that amount!

*This means a LOT of clearly defective iPhones are _still_ out there!*
o And they all have to be repaired!

Not only do they all need to be repaired ... but far worse...
o *Most iPhones need this needlessly expensive repair EVERY YEAR!*

In effect, Apple screwed their loyal consumer every chance Apple gets.
o *Apple screwed _you_, JF Mezei!*

[Alan Baker]

On 2019-03-11 11:24 a.m., arlen holder wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 03:32:44 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:
>
>> It also has to do with countries considering passing "right to repair"
>> laws.
>
> Hi JF Mezei,
>
> FACT + LOGIC.
> *Apple screwed _you_, JF Mezei!*
> o The fact is obvious - the logic is the part that's hard to decipher.
>
> I've been looking this up for days, where I agree with you.
> o Apple has a long history of not allowing basic repairs
>
> I provided cites showing Apple strongly lobbying against consumer rights
> o And yet, all of a sudden, Apple changes their mind? WTF?
>
> Obviously, Apple is not stupid... where _something_ drastically changed.
> o But what?
>
> I think we don't know as Apple isn't "advertising" anything yet
> o All we have are internal memos of the internal policy changes
>
> I suspect, using basic adult logic, that it's three facts combined:
> 1. Most current iPhones require batteries after only "about a year"

That is not a fact.

> 2. Repairing batteries by Apple is astronomically expensive over time

That also is not a fact.

> 3. The right-to-repair laws were gaining steam on _that_ evidence

That conclusion wouldn't be a fact even if the first two were facts.

>
> Bearing in mind that allowing users to repair batteries by Apple,
> in and of itself, caused an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE more phones to be repaired
> by Apple!

What in the world do you mean? Apple has always been allowed to repair
Apple phones.

>
> The normal battery replacement is on the order of 1 million per year, where
> last year it was well over ten times that amount!

Because Apple offered a really good deal.

>
> *This means a LOT of clearly defective iPhones are _still_ out there!*
> o And they all have to be repaired!

That conclusion doesn't follow from those supposed "facts".

>
> Not only do they all need to be repaired ... but far worse...
> o *Most iPhones need this needlessly expensive repair EVERY YEAR!*

No. They don't need to have their batteries replaced every year. That is
nonsense.

[arlen holder]

On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 09:09:38 -0700, Alan Baker wrote:

>> I suspect, using basic adult logic, that it's three facts combined:
>> 1. Most current iPhones require batteries after only "about a year"
>
> That is not a fact.

Hi Alan Baker,

FACT + LOGIC

I realize you're an apple apologist who denies facts out of hand when you
don't like those facts, but you not liking well-known well-cited
well-reported public facts doesn't change that they're facts.

I asked a question over here, just now, as to WHY you apologists deny, out
of hand, any fact you don't like, where I think I finally know why:
o What key trait distinguishes Apple Apologists from normal adults?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/yyNyGsFKPlQ>

Basically, I think you apologists deny facts you don't like so that the
actual adult discourse on the logical assessment of those facts, can never
proceed.

>> 2. Repairing batteries by Apple is astronomically expensive over time
>
> That also is not a fact.

See above.

The Apologists' approach is simply to deny all facts they don't like.

>
>> 3. The right-to-repair laws were gaining steam on _that_ evidence
>
> That conclusion wouldn't be a fact even if the first two were facts.

See above.

By denying all facts out of hand that you don't like, you can then prevent
any logical adult assessment of those facts from occurring.

It's the Usenet equivalent to a filibuster.

[Alan Baker]

On 2019-03-19 8:09 a.m., arlen holder wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 09:09:38 -0700, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>>> I suspect, using basic adult logic, that it's three facts combined:
>>> 1. Most current iPhones require batteries after only "about a year"
>>
>> That is not a fact.
>
> Hi Alan Baker,
>
> FACT + LOGIC
>
> I realize you're an apple apologist who denies facts out of hand when you
> don't like those facts, but you not liking well-known well-cited
> well-reported public facts doesn't change that they're facts.
>
> I asked a question over here, just now, as to WHY you apologists deny, out
> of hand, any fact you don't like, where I think I finally know why:
> o What key trait distinguishes Apple Apologists from normal adults?
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/yyNyGsFKPlQ>
>
> Basically, I think you apologists deny facts you don't like so that the
> actual adult discourse on the logical assessment of those facts, can never
> proceed.

None of that makes an assertion into a fact.

>
>>> 2. Repairing batteries by Apple is astronomically expensive over time
>>
>> That also is not a fact.
>
> See above.
>
> The Apologists' approach is simply to deny all facts they don't like.

Sorry, but your unsupported assertions don't become facts because you
sling around insults.

>
>>
>>> 3. The right-to-repair laws were gaining steam on _that_ evidence
>>
>> That conclusion wouldn't be a fact even if the first two were facts.
>
> See above.
>
> By denying all facts out of hand that you don't like, you can then prevent
> any logical adult assessment of those facts from occurring.
>
> It's the Usenet equivalent to a filibuster.

If you actually had facts, you could support them.

You don't support them.

That which is asserted without support may be dismissed.

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

Alan:

Please drop me an email; doesn’t look like the address I have for is current.

-hh

[Arlen Holder]

It's clearly _not_ a safety issue if no Android manufacturer feels the
intense need to incessantly screw the customer like Apple is infamous for
doing to its (admittedly) loyal (but gullible) customer base.

o Is there an Android manufacturer who employs the customer unfriendly repair practices that Apple foists upon its loyal customer base?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/vE9fFSUVBeU>

REFERENCES:
o Shame on Apple
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/RuNJppbZ_o8>

o Apple is activating secret software inside the iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max and iPhone XR
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/OqOM4rY-oNY/LgnoNuE9DQAJ>

o Even if a genuine Apple display is used by your repairer, you will receive the warning messages based on the price of the tools repairers used
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/5Ge0WpaDjjM/_tOmfOA9DQAJ>

o Finally Apple reverses policy ... allows repair of iPhone w 3rd-party battery
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/_mmzNV73MuU/SItGkCFPAAAJ>

It's clearly NOT a safety issue if Android makers don't do it.

--
Apologists lack logic & reason when they incessantly apologize for Apple.

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:

See also larger thread on the same topic of Apple repair policies
o Independent repair shops disappointed with Apple's repair programs
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/qIXtCvV2Wtc>
--
You don't make those ungodly profit margins off of intelligent people.