
iOS 11.3 update breaks iPhone 8 devices with third party-repaired screens - s_dev
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/10/iphone-8-ios-113-breaks-smartphones-third-party-repaired-screens-apple
======
astockwell
Apple, I get it. I get why you do it. But seriously, this retroactive
punishing of prior 3rd-party purchases is asinine. I had purchased multiple
lightning cables from Anker (a very reputable brand), and had one of the iOS
11.x updates basically render them useless. Apple's product support is not
fast enough, nor pervasive enough (to say nothing of cheap enough), to justify
this behavior.

Edited for clarity

~~~
axoltl
It was not done intentionally. They simply don't QA their releases on repaired
phones (because why would they?). The touchscreens in question highly likely
use an older touchscreen controller from a previous iPhone. These controllers
don't support certain commands that evidently they are now using.

As far as the lightning connectors go, that WAS done intentionally. The third
party lightning connectors generally don't implement a very specific charging
protocol designed to prevent metal migration between the pins and the pads on
the connector. They only implement the handshake. But guess who has to honor
the warranty if you've used a non-compliant charger cable?

~~~
michaelmrose
Why doesn't any other phone manufacturer have this problem?

~~~
axoltl
Apple relies very heavily on customized silicon to provide an edge (Lower
power consumption, for example, or extra features). This means that there
might be a part out there that's sorta close, but not quite. Once Apple starts
pushing their customized silicon, the off-the-shelf part doesn't keep up.

~~~
michaelmrose
This is complete nonsense

------
umpc
Why would Apple test every 3rd-party compatible screen?

If they don’t test, components will break. If they don’t change APIs,
components won’t be able to improve sufficiently.

In this case, there are only two actual solutions from Apple’s perspective,
and they’re both ‘bad’ for customers:

Restrict users of 3rd-party screens from upgrading their devices, even when
breakage may not occur, or, let them update and take the risk.

Technical debt, likely caused by time-pressure before releases, is expensive
when it can’t be left behind.

Apple also doesn’t have to support much 3rd party hardware because their
phones are the only built to run iOS.

I would imagine that Google’s processes are better equipped to support more
hardware and for longer durations.

------
0x0
Hard to know if this was done on purpose, or if the third party replacement
parts are actually substandard/not-to-spec and therefore naturally not QA'd at
Apple.... at least until a technical root cause is found?

~~~
throwaway2048
the issue is apple refuses to provide third party repairs with parts, or even
specifications for parts, so its a bit of a roundabout arguement that is
tantamount to saying "only apple should repair them" to blame them as they
have no alternative.

~~~
axoltl
That's not true.

[https://support.apple.com/en-lamr/aasp-program](https://support.apple.com/en-
lamr/aasp-program)

~~~
throwaway2048
This isnt the sale of parts to people that wish to buy them, its a very
stringent certification program that very few are going to meet the
requirements for, and requires you do things like

"Actively promote the Apple brand as part of their business along with
AppleCare service and support products."

"Service Providers are required to use Apple Certified Macintosh Technicians
when conducting diagnostics, Covered Repairs, modifications, alterations and
upgrades on Apple products."

" Individuals or sole traders may not apply."

Imagine these kind of restrictions being placed on car repairshops before they
were allowed to buy and use replacement parts from manufacterers, there would
be a massive lawsuit.

~~~
axoltl
You mentioned "third party repairs". Even Louis Rossmann has his reservations
about selling to individuals:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaR593TrXf8&t=493s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaR593TrXf8&t=493s)

Plus, for TouchID enabled phones you MUST have a special rig in order to re-
pair the sensor, and for FaceID you have to have a special rig to re-calibrate
the sensor stack every time you open the device!

------
no_wizard
All the more reason to support the right to repair

[https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/3/8/17097256/cali...](https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/3/8/17097256/california-
right-to-repair-bill-apple-microsoft-service-replace-parts)

~~~
cheeze
Oh man, someone advocating for right to repair but linking an AMP article on
HN? Surely this will lead to some fun discussion

~~~
calebegg
The amp version of this page takes my browser 1.39 seconds to load with about
616KB of data over 27 requests. The non-AMP version takes over 10 seconds, and
loads 2.2 MB over 300+ requests.

In this case, it's just a light version of the article with the same content.
That seems objectively better. If AMP wasn't incidentally in the URL path you
wouldn't have noticed it was AMP. If the existence of AMP encourages people to
write faster, less cruft-y pages, that's a good thing to me.

~~~
cheeze
I have zero issue with it, but HN is super outspoken about how AMP is the
worst thing on the internet.

~~~
kup0
I understand this thread has really gotten off topic from the original, but I
think it's a good discussion nevertheless. I think the criticisms we often
hear about AMP tend to be more principle-based/philosophical in nature.

Yes, the overall user experience is better. It's not that the experience is
bad, it's more about the means they're using to reach those ends.

I see AMP as a set of training wheels that Google was able to get publishers
to adopt. All the tools were available for publishers and their developers to
make performant/clean sites to begin with, they just chose not to do so. AMP
is basically a standardized form of "the way they should have built their site
in the first place".

My other issue with AMP is that it makes companies focus on performance for
mobile, but not for desktop. Why not build a quality, high-performance site
for all platforms?

At the end of the day, is AMP a net positive? Maybe, I'm willing to consider
the end result, but I don't think it's a problem for us to explore and
criticize the means or the reality that necessitated AMP's existence.

------
opencl
This seems like a potential violation of the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act, which
prohibits the refusal of warranty service for using third-party parts without
proving that the third-party parts were the source of the malfunction.
Assuming Apple will refuse to repair these under warranty, which they almost
certainly will, this is effectively requiring the purchase of screens from
Apple to receive warranty service. On the other hand it's somewhat debatable
whether the screens or the OS update are responsible for the problem, but the
screens were clearly working fine before the update.

~~~
rlanday
Given that iPhones with OEM displays are apparently still working fine...isn't
it pretty obvious that the third-party parts are the source of the
malfunction?

~~~
opencl
There is zero evidence so far as to whether this is intentional sabotage of
third party parts or not. However Apple has already demonstrated that they are
able and willing to do this kind of thing i.e. with non-certified Lightning
cables that also previously worked perfectly fine.

If there is a bit of code in the OS update along the lines of

    
    
      if(DisplayID != GenuineApple) { breakPhone(); }
    

then it's obviously Apple's fault. But it's not at all clear yet exactly
what's causing this problem and whether or not it was intentional on Apple's
part.

------
cpeterso
I replaced my iPhone screen (at a Staples office supply store) and the new
screen was polarized such that it was dark when viewed (in portrait
orientation) through my polarized sunglasses. Very frustrating that I had to
either look over my sunglasses or rotate the phone to use it. Apple's screens
appear to have some slight polarization but it is cleverly at a diagonal to
both portrait and landscape orientation. Details matter.

~~~
r00fus
Apple added circular polarization display tech way back in iPhone5 or 6 I
think. I used to notice this in my iPhone4S when I had my polarized lenses on.

[https://appleinsider.com/articles/11/05/26/apple_exploring_i...](https://appleinsider.com/articles/11/05/26/apple_exploring_improved_outdoor_lcd_viewing_with_sunglasses_friendly_screens)

------
dmitrygr
This could have been entirely innocent. It happened to an android device I am
familiar with as well. Third-party screens will usually identify over
i2c/spi/whatever the same as original, but you cannot apply original firmware
updates to them (they are different internally and will get bricked). However,
as they are designed to appear original, there isn't always a way to tell. The
two options both suck: do not ship firmware updates (bad) or ship them and
risk damage non-original screens (marginally less bad). The choice in the case
I know of was made to not ship update (it was minor). Apple chose otherwise.

~~~
bdamm
Two other options also exist.

OS performs a handshake with the target subcomponent and authenticates that
the component really is manufactured by the manufacturer that is targeted by
the pending firmware update. If the authentication completes successfully,
then push the firmware.

A flip-side alternative is for the component to only boot firmware that it
recognizes as signed by the correct authority.

In the first case the device has an embedded identity within the hardware. In
the second case the device merely needs to validate a signature. Crypto
acceleration is becoming very widespread and very cheap so I don't see either
of these as difficult to manufacture.

~~~
axoltl
You've obviously never been involved in the design/manufacture of an ASIC.

What you're proposing will take roughly 2 years, and be an organizational
nightmare. 'Just' having an embedded identity is already complicated:

1\. Where do you store the identity? Fuses in the ASIC? Now you need a fuse
bank. Not every process node supports fuses, so you may now have to port you
entire design to a new process node.

2\. Using this new-fangled identity means you can now perform a handshake with
the host. Let's 'just' put down an ECDSA accelerator. What do you mean, this
increases the die size by 33%? What do you mean it needs to be resistant to
differential power analysis? Oh, right, because stealing a single identity
means you can make as many clones as you'd like, and we can't revoke
identities if we think they're stolen because of laws in China!

Etc. etc. the second option doesn't even work because the cloned device will
simply ignore the signature on the firmware.

I used to think this was all trivial too, but having been through this _exact_
wringer 4 or 5 times before I can tell you it is Hard(tm).

~~~
bdamm
I most definitely have been involved in ASIC design. I appreciate how
difficult it is. But, the time has come to recognize parts authentication via
hardened identity to be a requirement in pretty much all ICs.

------
apple314
You know, this would be far less of an issue if Apple offered some way of
downgrading iOS...

~~~
wbkang
I thought you can do that with iTunes if you just get the signed old ipsw
file. I remember reverting from iOS 11 to 10 this way

------
a-the-ist
iPhone 6S on 11.3. I just replaced the rear camera assembly and the front
camera+light sensor+earphone assembly with third-party parts (on a moving
train, I might brag). Everything works except the auto-brightness setting
disappeared. I did Erase Settings and it's still gone. I'm wondering if:

\- I didn't place the light sensor correctly

\- I touched it/ruined it

\- the part is defective

\- Erase All Content & Settings options is absolutely necessary

~~~
axoltl
It does sound like your ALS (Ambient Light Sensor) isn't connected correctly.
I'd suggest reseating all the little connectors!

------
tinus_hn
In my opinion Apple should be forced to provide original spare parts to any
repair shops that wants them, and for a reasonable price.

------
tambourine_man
Do we know if it was intentional? Otherwise a better title would be “Some
third party repaired screen fail to work on 11.3”

------
wintorez
Apple is punishing the iPhone owners, and I think it's unfair to punish them
while they are being punished by owning an iPhone.

------
curiousgal
I don't get it. You paid a full amount for that device. You can do whatever
you want with it. These tactics are ridiculous.

~~~
grecy
Hmmmm.

Step 1: Buy new car

Step 2: Replace engine with something other than OEM.

Step 3: Complain when car's ECU does not run engine.

~~~
krangu
More like

Step 1: Buy a new car

Step 2: Replace engine with something other than OEM

Step 2.33: Car runs fine

Step 2.66: Manufacturer comes to your house and 'fixes' your ECU while you're
asleep

Step 3: Complain when car's ECU does not run engine

~~~
axoltl
So the manufacturer is not allowed to make everyone's ECU better because you
decided to replace your engine with an older model?

~~~
recursive
You changed the premise. What's being made better? The change being discussed
is broken phones. That's not better. Hypothetically, that could be from a
change that makes something better. Is there any reason to believe it though?

~~~
axoltl
Fun fact, it'd actually be illegal for Apple to disable devices if it detects
a replacement part.

There are anti-trust laws against 'tying agreements', and forcing consumers to
only buy components from Apple (due to tie-in) would be violating those laws.

That said, those laws don't say anything about having to interoperate with an
inferior part.

So assuming Apple isn't willfully violating anti-trust laws, we can be fairly
sure the change was intended to improve some aspect of the touch controller.

Note: There are exceptions if the tying serves a purpose other than
maintaining a monopoly (such as the security pairing between the TouchID
sensor and FaceID camera).

