All Apple news

How Apple could avoid catastrophic consequences of disabling informally refurbished iPhone

Law firm PCVA intends to file a class action lawsuit against Apple, accusing it of illegal imposition of its services and products to customers. The reason for the trial was “error 53”, which occurs when you update software on iPhone with a fingerprint scanner Touch ID and block the gadget without the possibility of its recovery.

The discontent of thousands of customers of the California-based giant could result in a class action lawsuit in the United States. Law firm Seattle is going to suffer the wrath of citizens in the legal way and are even ready not to charge them money for it. The reason for the claim was “error 53”, which appears on the screens of the iPhone after the next update of the operating system. And all anything, but to restore the gadget after that is not possible. And now people who have spent a large sum of money to buy an iPhone, will have to think about an unplanned purchase of a new smartphone.

About the problem itself, it became known last week, when thousands of Apple users suddenly refused to continue working. As it turned out, the problem with the Home button and/or Touch ID sensor that had been damaged and not repaired in authorized service centers for Apple, and from third parties. the Corporation stated that the blocking of mobile gadgets linked to security issues.

The company explained that the fingerprint scanner Touch ID collects users ‘ personal data. In the case of replacement products for third-party there is the possibility of leakage of this information to third parties. To avoid this, an interlock is provided and smartphone.

READ  In the Network appeared the site, which "kills" the iPhone, iPad and Mac

Analysts IT is considered here that the main problem lies not so much in the fact of locking the iPhone, but how Apple presents their actions. Instead of a vague “error 53” in iTunes, the company should give details of the specific malfunction. Until recently there was not even documentation explaining what the error is. Recently, the “Support” section of the website apple.com was replenished with a fresh article on this crash. But the previous document is only classified the “error 53” as a problem with hardware, from which users could not understand that it is caused by change of the Home button. And since the error occurs when you try to upgrade or restore the OS, and not immediately after the repair, users did not understand the reason, because repairs could be made weeks or months ago.

According to observers, instead of “kill” the iPhone, Apple should simply disable it with the Touch ID requirement to go to an Apple Store or authorized service center for restoration of function. The user in this case could make a choice, contact him at the official service center or to use the smartphone without Touch ID.

IPhone owners are already frustrated due to a broken Home and paratuses the repairs are unlikely to be happy to see their phone completely out of order. The reason people turn to unauthorized service centers, is simple: the official service centres are not cheap. Thus, the U.S. non-warranty replacement Home will cost $150 – $200, in the UK for a similar procedure will have to pay £236. At the same time informal service center button along with the Touch ID sensor can be replaced for less than $10. So Apple, among other things, it would probably be best to make the repair prices of their products more affordable.

READ  5 hardware features that the iPhone 7 should copy from Android

Why this error attracts so much media attention? All, again, simple: the function Touch ID was first introduced in 2013 in the iPhone 5s, and now, two years later, the likelihood of problems with the Home button on these devices becomes higher.

In General Apple should have choose to solve the Home button replaced by other methods than disconnecting devices after which user is left wondering alone with the mysterious “error 53”. Selected the Apple method may result, in addition to lawsuits, and serious blow to the reputation of the company.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *