
Apple uses water damaged boards in Apple refurbished devices? [video] - tbirdz
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TZ_ZGCLaiA
======
ChuckMcM
Ok, first I am always in awe of people who have the skill to disassemble, fix
at the component level, and reassemble modern electronics. I am also not
surprised that both the independent repair folks get told they aren't as good
as Apple, and that Apple isn't doing anything more or less magical in their
repairs.

I do however take a bit of issue with generalizing from one or two instances.
Just as there are "bad" independent repair techs, there are no doubt "bad"
Apple repair techs. And bad techs make sloppy repairs, period. The reality is
that the "best" your electronic device will be, is likely just after it comes
off the assembly line and passes QA, that entire assembly process and the
components used are tightly controlled so you get the best possible outcome.
Rework inevitably it hard on components, traces, and often has to use
materials that differ from the ones usable in the original manufacture.

~~~
ratsmack
Apple should maintain a standard of quality control. If this is representative
of that control, then what she is saying is correct in that their work is not
representative of what they espouse.

------
georgespencer
Can someone tell me what the big deal is here? Apple's refurb devices are
guaranteed. Isn't it binary whether or not the water damage kills the device?
I.e. if they're able to sell a water damaged board with a few replaced chips
on it, then the water damage by definition isn't an issue because the board is
working.

~~~
jschwartzi
The biggest issue I see is that the original tech didn't replace the
underfill. As a result the PMIC would not have the same drop resistance as a
factory installed chip.

I would expect anything sold as refurbished to meet the same spec as a new
device, and this one absolutely doesn't. This includes mechanical specs, which
would not be fully tested when smoke-testing a rework.

~~~
Someone
I'm not saying anything about this example, but why would you expect a
refurbished unit, _sold at a lower price than a new device_ to meet the same
specs as that new device?

Surely, something must be different about it?

~~~
troisx
Yes, it is different because it's used. It's also supposed to be have been
brought back to new condition on the inside where damaged and faulty parts
have been replaced by as-new parts, not by replacement parts that are also
damaged.

~~~
jschwartzi
This is what is meant by refurbished, as opposed to repaired.

------
r0m4n0
This is an interesting case because dropping a phone is the customer's fault
(and thus that action voids the Apple warranty) but based upon the videos
claims, the refurbish process did appear to alter the overall durability of
the phone.

I suppose there is a risk involved with buying anything refurbished... whether
from the manufacturer or not.

For anyone that is interested, Apple has published a few QA and inspection
processes involved with refurbishment. Would be surprising if 1. it slipped
through this process 2. Apple doesn't actually perform these inspections 3.
this device was deemed fit for resale under Apple's standards

[http://www.apple.com/shop/browse/home/specialdeals/refurbfaq...](http://www.apple.com/shop/browse/home/specialdeals/refurbfaq_popup)

I'm still not completely convinced this was an unaltered Apple refurbished
phone though (and I'm not sure we will ever know)...

~~~
bbchase
I did repairs at an authorized store for about 5 years. It's unlikely that her
customer both knew the repair history of that iPad and reported it truthfully.
It's also extremely unlikely they they knew and reported truthfully whether
the iPad had every been exposed to liquid while in their possession. People
just usually aren't honest about these things (and who can blame them when it
means the difference between a free iPad replacement and a repair that costs
almost as much as buying a new one?).

And no matter how clear we tried to be at my shop, we could not seem to
convince customers that we were not owned and run by Apple. I can't even get
my friends and co-workers to stop saying that I worked for Apple, so the fact
that her customer reported to her that this iPad was replaced by a corporate
Apple Store means just about nothing. Funnily enough, if her shop was an
authorized repair center, it would have been trivial for her to verify the
repair/purchase history.

It's also really frustrating that the video is blurry when she's trying to
point out the water damage. All I could make out of flux from the solder job.
I also suspect, but can't say authoritatively, that the "heat damage" she
pointed out was just an artifact of after-factor solder work on the board, not
from the board shorting or overheating. Unless a chip is visibly burned or
blown out, you really need to test it to know whether it's been damaged.

------
542458
In addition to what other commenters have said: Maybe I missed something (it
is a 10 minute video), but how do we know whoever brought in the water-damaged
iPad in for repair hadn't caused the water damage themselves? They could have
gotten it a bit wet, but not enough to kill anything.

I also find the evidence for the iPad never having been worked on before
fairly tenuous - I've done repairs using swapped Apple parts in the past (ie
Apple original digitizers), and I doubt _everybody_ who does aftermarket
repairs uses the same adhesive.

Also, this is really a n of 1. So Apple maybe shipped a single crappy refurb.
I'm not sure that's cause for huge alarm, or enough to make broad claims about
their entire refurb program.

I guess what I'm saying is while the allegation might be true, the evidence
here seems fairly shaky IMHO.

~~~
jessa_ipadrehab
It is at least n=2. I have seen the exact same thing once before. Keep in mind
that I will only see an iPad that was from a user who went to Apple for a
refurb after a problem with their original, and then went to independent
repair rather than back to Apple for a subsequent problem. That is less common
than someone going straight to independent repair with a problem on the
original or sticking with Apple for a problem with a refurb

------
ICS_tech_repair
I've seen something worse! Once had a 5C come in for repair. Still under
warranty, so sent it to and Apple Store in the USA for replacement. We don't
have an Apple Store in my country. Got back a unit that upon reception didn't
start. Lifted the screen to inspect it out of curiosity, because it looked
somewhat used from the outside, before proceeding to send back to Apple (and
waiting another 3 week for the trip back and forth) and saw a device missing
plates, screws, with a sticker inside with some Chinese words, and the red LCI
(water indicators) were tripped (meaning the unit was water damaged prior). We
sent it back and they declined to replace it again because... it had liquid
damage and was tempered with!! After much aggravation, they accepted to
replace it OOW (they usually don't replace devices that had been tempered with
even OOW). Since then Apple Certified Service Providers in my country were
allowed to replace iOS devices under warranty, and we did receive defective
units on a few occasions that were fortunately replaced. But the second worse
"incident" was my 15" 2011 laptop that had the logic board replaced 3 times
under the Apple logic board program, before I got back a working unit! The
ACSP told me that it happened many times over, but only (?) twice did they
have to replace the same board 3 times in row! They're all refurbished boards
of course (nothing wrong with that), but their QA after refurbishing seems to
let a lot of bad Apples (pun intended) through!!

------
Yetanfou
What worries me more than the evidence for water-damaged components is what
seems to be a substantial amount of hair on that 'refurbished' board. It did
not notice any hair on the 'factory-stock' board, so I assume that the source
of the hair is not this repair shop. If this is the (lack of) quality of work
Apple refurbishments get, Apple has some serious issues wrt. quality control.
The other option is that this device was in fact repaired by a third party
which used the proper adhesive procedure (which seems to be to apply more than
one layer of adhesive).

------
j45
Outside of a warranty, this should be a concern.

In warranty, it's important to remember you are not buying a computer, as much
as a guaranteed computer.

Apple has decent warranty for replacements if a machine has multiple issues in
a short amount of time.

I would never buy any laptop I can spend 8-10 hours a day on most days without
a laptop. In fact, the replacements that Apple has ended up fairly replacing
if my machines have misbehaved too often have been priceless.

Jas

------
jwildeboer
TL;DR there was no underfill injected after a chip was replaced in an iPad
mini that was repaired/refurbished by Apple or an authorised repair shop.

That's all. We don't know if that was an oversight or not. We don't know if
Apple requires underfill to be applied. So this is all just speculation
AFAICS.

------
benguild
I can definitely say that the quality of Apple refurbs has gone downhill.

I lost radio access randomly in Europe while traveling with a Genius Bar
replaced iPhone 6. No cellular service whatsoever. Awful. Kept cutting in and
out for days and then stopped working completely.

Had to buy a new phone for cash.

------
DanBC
Can someone explain how those two capacitors exhibit "clearly water damage"?
(about 6:25 onwards)

Is it the dull grey (not shiny silver) solder?

------
exabrial
Misleading title... Of course they use damaged boards in the refurbished
devices. Otherwise it'd be "new."

The woman here makes a great point about repairability though, a quality shop
should can do just as good (or better in this particular case) of a job as
Apple. Apple wants you to throw away expensive devices at a whim...

~~~
ams6110
I agree -- by definition a "refurbished" device is one that was returned and
repaired. That's why they are cheaper. You can expect it is not quite as good
or reliable as a new one -- though Apple does warranty them so that's the
tradeoff for the lower price.

~~~
jessa_ipadrehab
The point to add is that if you pay for a new device, and you notice anything
faulty about it and take it back, you will be handed a refurb like this one as
your in warranty replacement if it has been 15 days or more since the
purchase.

------
zer0her0
I kind of find this video to be disingenuous. She claims that the device was
direct from Apple and only proof is by the parts they used and the
craftsmanship, in the comments she does mention receipt, but no timeframe so
could've been replaced by Apple the later repaired by someone else, also she
implies 3rd party vendors parts and craftsmanship is just as good. So wouldn't
it stand to reason that it's equally possible they got the repair done
somewhere else and not mention it?

I've worked as a tech long enough to know customers often forget to mention
all damage, issues & past repairs. Sometimes out of malice, but generally
simply because they forgot, they don't know better or they weren't privy to
all the info (bringing it in for some other family member, so on).

Also, bad boards happen regardless if they're refurbished or new. With Apple
supplied boards I find that to be the exception rather then the rule. Wish I
could say the same about 3rd party vendors, I understand it's a cut throat
business and Apple getting into the business a decade and a half ago didn't
help, but this video really seems to want to make Apple out as the villain
trying to pass off crap products/repairs as ok.

~~~
jessa_ipadrehab
After opening thousands of iPads, there is no question whether you are opening
an iPad sealed by Apple, or if has had a prior repair and been resealed.

Independent repair screen swaps can be very good, especially when 100% of the
old adhesive is removed, the frame cleaned, and the aftermarket adhesive is of
original quality. But even with this, the pressure required to remove the
sealed screen is less than an original screen. The dust seal between the LCD
and digitizer can't be replicated (or isn't replicated) by independent repair.
The dust seal in this mini was intact.

There is no question, from experience, that this mini was an Apple refurb.
Also, I don't know of any other shop that would replace the iPad mini PMIC. We
only do it under duress since the effort required to CNC drill out the old
chip, combined with the cost of the new chip is not amenable to profitable
board repair compared the market value of a used iPad mini first gen.

There is no question that this board was an Apple refurb, and it's not the
first one that I've seen that is like it. In reality, it is a very good
refurb. Those damaged caps are not likely to cause any practical problems, and
replacing the PMIC underfill was probably deemed not that important--which I
would agree with.

I have no problem with Apple putting out refurbs like this, it is a great
environmental move. But own it. It is what it is. I'd like to see Apple say
"You betcha, that's our work and we're damn proud of it."

~~~
zer0her0
Thank you for the explanation, I left the repair industry just as iOS devices
started to take the forefront and there wasn't much left to "repair" w/o
getting out (de)soldering and reflow equipment.

Pretty sure they do "own it", that's what the whole warranty, either original
or 90 days from last repair is all about. ;) I just think a single digit # of
boards, that should've possibly failed QA, making it out to the public
compared to the thousands you've seen is a pretty good testament to them being
damn proud of their work.

Re-reading the description for your video, I think the issue is for non-AASP
repair centers, much like any 3rd party repair location (whether it be Apple,
or some other name brand electronic, appliance, or vehicle) is guaranteeing
the quality of parts and labor one gets from the plethora of independents out
there. I think the real issue to rail against is the plethora of poor 3rd
party repairs that aren't certified or backed by any sort of warranty vs these
outliers, as they're the ones that really cast a bad light on the independent.

~~~
jessa_ipadrehab
I agree that poor third party repair shops are an incredible nuisance to the
independent repair industry. But on par with that is how entrenched the
opposite viewpoint seems to be among Apple fans--that "only Apple is qualified
to repair Apple devices" The reason I made this video is to shine a light on
what Apple refurbishment really means. I don't believe this case is an
outlier. I have only ever seen two iPads that I knew for sure were Apple
refurb and both were like this. More strikingly, is the iPhone 6/6+ touch ic
epidemic. There is widespread failure of the touch ic(s) leading to a
characteristic gray flashing bar at the top of the screen and loss of touch
function. What stinks is that many people turning in their in-warranty new
iPhones for this defect are leaving with Apple refurb phones that contain
boards that once had another life in someone else's hands. The problem is
exacerbated by drop, so these refurb boards that made their way back to Apple
have a high percentage of having sustained a drop severe enough to warrant
trading in the phone for out of warranty replacement. When Apple puts these
boards straight into new housings with a new screen and battery, the refurb is
set up for touch ic failure---and we are seeing tons of reports of touch
failures in refurb phones.

Compare that to independent repair where a new touch ic is soldered on the
board to replace the weak original chip--that is a much more robust solution,
and carries a longer warranty.

I was prompted to make this video to just float the idea that "Apple always
has superior repair because only they are 'authorized' to fix their products"
is not true.

My motivation largely came from aggressive bullying and harassment, by some of
the regulars at the Apple Support Community forum at any mention of
independent repair as a viable option. I was banned from the forum for
continuing to suggest that some problems could best be served by independent
repair (such as data recovery after water damage) I did another video on my
experience there. [http://youtu.be/3VqYui3piV8](http://youtu.be/3VqYui3piV8)

