[randomuser23423]

> Avoidant as I am of Apple's ecosystem, I can only imagine the "security" justification for serializing a display panel. Covert exfiltration of sensitive information from password managers and such?

They're a more valuable target for theft the more parts that can be "cleanly" sold.

[hsbauauvhabzb]

Are ipad thieving gangs really breaking down and on selling stolen components?

[kmeisthax]

Yes. I have a friend who works at Geek Squad and had to service someone who got their iPhone chop-shopped. Someone had stolen the phone, swapped out everything with knock-off parts, and then left the phone behind. The victim flagged the phone as lost on Find My so they at least got a free warranty replacement.

The fact that chop-shopping is a thing with phones now does not excuse Apple's parts serialization shenanigans.

[somat]

I am not doubting you, it just is really weird that they would bother to replace the parts at all. my guess would be to try and sell the chopped unit as a real iphone? but why leave it behind?

[TillE]

If you make Apple devices totally worthless to thieves, you discourage theft. Make them bricks which can't even be harvested for parts.

That's the goal apparently, and it makes sense.

[can16358p]

This.

As a user I'm okay with using only authorized components if it makes theft virtually impractical as there wouldn't be much to use even if the device is stolen.

It will give me more peace of mind as no one will have the incentive to steal an iPad anymore.

[hyperhopper]

Does anybody really think that one company removing users freedom at the software level, will make thieves not steal hardware worth $1000+?

This is some silicon valley tech bubble mentality.

[can16358p]

It makes sense from Apple's image that want to create: being associated with trust and stability, even if means less freedom at some extent.

If I ("I" as the potential customer) can buy an iPad where I can trust Apple because they are taking many measures to make my iPad non-stealable (by practically removing many incentives to steal) it would create a trustworthy image and I'd feel safer, and Apple would have reached its goal of that image.

[tjoff]

It makes sense from Apples perspective yes, I mean, after all third party repairs was seen as a huge threat to revenue.

As a user though, lol.

[userbinator]

I'm not. It's only creating more e-waste, and thieves will find a way around it sooner or later anyway.

[kaba0]

Does it? Apple products have an absolutely blooming 2nd, 3rd hand markets, they easily serve 4-6 years I might even say on average.

[Timon3]

Yes, it does, and there is no way it doesn't. If you want to argue otherwise, you'll have to logically explain how not being able to replace parts of a device leads to longer lifetimes. Because we're not talking about selling your iPad that fully works, we're talking about selling one with a broken display.

[can16358p]

Well there are many other alternatives then.

It's good to have at least one company to go this way for people who want to be (relatively) safe from theft.

[veave]

"ipad thieving gangs" makes it sound like a joke, but yes, there are people who steal iphones and ipads, and they know who to talk to to sell them, which in turn disassemble them and know who to talk to to sell the components, etc.

If you go to aliexpress you will find tons of used, original Apple components. Where do you think they came from?

[BoorishBears]

Yes, in Shenzhen.

[Retric]

Discouraging chop shops for phones seems silly, but 3rd party repair shops have major incentive to find cheaper components. Compare the history of car stereos vs catalytic converter thefts.

I support the right to repair, but there are real issues that should be addressed. Steps like stamping catalytic converters with the cars VIN really can help.