This is the old embrace and extend strategy. They know they are losing the argument, so they’ll embrace it and redirect to a version they control. It’s good for them, not the consumer.
In microelectonics, there’s not really such a thing as an “off brand part”. Nearly all the parts that matter in an iPhone are custom. You’re not going to buy just any old camera module and shoehorn it in. It won’t physically fit, and it likely won’t support the right commands. If somebody makes one specific for the iPhone, well… Look at that… It meets the specification.
Even if it does become an issue because (for example) the optics aren’t exactly the same and face ID doesn’t work, would someone complain to Apple or the repair shop that didn’t do an effective repair?
Really, because of the custom nature of most components, what Apple is trying to stop is the canibilisation of iPhones to fix other iPhones. That would give old broken iPhones value. Only Apple is allowed to exploit that value.
No. No credit.
This is the old embrace and extend strategy. They know they are losing the argument, so they’ll embrace it and redirect to a version they control. It’s good for them, not the consumer.
In microelectonics, there’s not really such a thing as an “off brand part”. Nearly all the parts that matter in an iPhone are custom. You’re not going to buy just any old camera module and shoehorn it in. It won’t physically fit, and it likely won’t support the right commands. If somebody makes one specific for the iPhone, well… Look at that… It meets the specification.
Even if it does become an issue because (for example) the optics aren’t exactly the same and face ID doesn’t work, would someone complain to Apple or the repair shop that didn’t do an effective repair?
Really, because of the custom nature of most components, what Apple is trying to stop is the canibilisation of iPhones to fix other iPhones. That would give old broken iPhones value. Only Apple is allowed to exploit that value.