[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?

[maltalex]

What if the manufacturer didn’t do this to make everyone’s ECU better, but specifically to discourage users from buying third party parts?

I’m asking hypothetically of course...

[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).

[tajen]

Step 2.66: Manufacturer pokes you until you let him upgrade...