Apple's anti-repair and anti-refurbishment practices: Difference between revisions
m →Green energy sharing: FoxConn is Taiwanese owned |
→Relevant incidents: Added a basic draft about activation lock, but this could use reworking by someone more familiar with how it works in detail |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
===Blocking operating system downgrades<!-- Will emulate "Operating system downgrades" from parent article -->=== | ===Blocking operating system downgrades<!-- Will emulate "Operating system downgrades" from parent article -->=== | ||
=== | === Activation Lock === | ||
Apple | Apple prevents activation of devices that have not been unlocked by the initial owner before giving them away, selling or recycling them. | ||
The reason cited by Apple is theft prevention, but it has been argued that this practice may be in place to prevent second hand sales and recycling of devices since they would compete with new devices, and Apple only makes a profit on the latter. | |||
This leads to a colossal amount of e-waste from devices where the previous owner has not disabled the activation lock. It also makes the devices dependent on Apple services. If Apple one day decides to no longer support this procedure for a particular model, it becomes impossible to use. Aside from putting undue restrictions on what consumers can do with their devices, this also makes historic preservation very challenging. | |||
Apple | |||
A simple solution to the theft problem could be to send previous owners an e-mail to the address linked to their Apple ID with an option to either consent to the release of the activation lock or report their device as stolen. A default answer (either allow or deny unlock) could be chosen if the user does not make a choice within a reasonable timeframe, for instance if the e-mail address is no longer in use. However, Apple has so far chosen not to implement a system like this. | |||
===Underpowered base models=== | ===Underpowered base models=== | ||
Latest revision as of 18:16, 16 September 2025
❗Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub
This article is underdeveloped, and needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. Learn more ▼
Since the inception of the iPhone in 2007, Apple has contributed severely to the production of e-waste from its products by blocking consumers in various methods. This has ranged from authorized repair, to the blocking of sideloading 3rd-party software, and disposing of legacy apps and legacy appstore access.
Relevant incidents
[edit | edit source]Flawed hardware design
[edit | edit source]Apple's response
[edit | edit source]Blocking operating system downgrades
[edit | edit source]Activation Lock
[edit | edit source]Apple prevents activation of devices that have not been unlocked by the initial owner before giving them away, selling or recycling them.
The reason cited by Apple is theft prevention, but it has been argued that this practice may be in place to prevent second hand sales and recycling of devices since they would compete with new devices, and Apple only makes a profit on the latter.
This leads to a colossal amount of e-waste from devices where the previous owner has not disabled the activation lock. It also makes the devices dependent on Apple services. If Apple one day decides to no longer support this procedure for a particular model, it becomes impossible to use. Aside from putting undue restrictions on what consumers can do with their devices, this also makes historic preservation very challenging.
A simple solution to the theft problem could be to send previous owners an e-mail to the address linked to their Apple ID with an option to either consent to the release of the activation lock or report their device as stolen. A default answer (either allow or deny unlock) could be chosen if the user does not make a choice within a reasonable timeframe, for instance if the e-mail address is no longer in use. However, Apple has so far chosen not to implement a system like this.
Underpowered base models
[edit | edit source]Most contemporary Apple devices do not have upgradeable or replaceable storage and memory.
Apple sells many of their base models with storage and memory specifications that are well below the industry average, despite the memory having to do double duty as both main memory and graphics card memory[1]. This gives users the choice between an underpowered base model, or paying a multiple of common industry prices[2] for higher-specc'ed versions. It should be noted that the price difference for the components that Apple would pay in manufacturing are within a few cents.
This leaves buyers in a difficult situation: Either they user has to pay significantly more at the time of purchase, or the user has to buy a new device much earlier than would otherwise be necessary. Some models even have limits for the amount of memory the user can choose, thus forcing them into more expensive models if they want more.
A significant number of non-technically inclined users with only moderate requirements hence chooses the base model in the trust that Apple would only sell them a reasonable configuration.
Since many of these devices are not user upgradeable, this floods both the used market and the landfills with unnecessarily underpowered devices that could otherwise be used for many more years.
Blocking third party apps
[edit | edit source]Apple only allows apps to be installed on their mobile devices through their own App Store (there are exceptions to this in the European Union, but due to what many have called Malicious Compliance, this possibility is more of theoretical nature).
When a device loses manufacturer support and the App Store stops working, or when Apple deletes or blocks versions of apps from the store which are compatible with that version of the operating system, the user no longer has any way to install or re-install any software on their devices.
This also means that if devices are factory reset to be handed to other people or to be sold on the used market, the built-in first party apps are the only ones that remain accessible.
Moreover, Apple does not appear to always test new versions of apps on old hardware, so sometimes the last update to an app breaks it for that device, sometimes due to bugs, sometimes due to increased memory requirements.[1] Since the App Store allows no downgrades, this leaves the user with an app that is unusable on that model of device. If Apple allowed either app downgrades or independent installation of apps, these devices would remain completely functional for users of those apps.
Blocking third party browsers
[edit | edit source]Apple does not allow other browser engines other than their own Safari engine on their mobile operating systems. While the EU is an exception due to regulatory constraints, Apple has put conditions in place that make this so unattractive for both developers and users that at the time of writing, no browser vendor offers their engine to Apple's mobile devices.
Unlike third party browsers, the version of Apple's own Safari browser is always tied to the operating system. It is not possible to update system apps like the browser or the Mail application independently.
Therefore, once Apple stops supporting a device with updates, the browser can also no longer be updated, leaving users vulnerable to security flaws and causing more and more compatibility problems with modern websites over time.
If Apple allowed users to install a third party browser or browser engine, this would significantly extend the time the device is usable for browsing the web and open up other possibilities that involve web browsers, such as repurposing an iPad as a control display for Home Assistant.
Lawsuits
[edit | edit source]
Consumer response
[edit | edit source]
References
[edit | edit source]- ↑ Simon, Michael (2023-11-08). "Apple defends 8GB of RAM in the MacBook Pro as 'analogous to 16GB' in a PC". Macworld. Retrieved 2025-09-15.
- ↑ Hussain, Imran (2019-12-03). "Apple Sells 16GB RAM for $400 – Almost 700% Higher Price Than Other OEMs". WCCFTech. Retrieved 2025-09-15.