iPhone restore error 53 - not listed anywhere, what is the problem? has anyone seen it before???

Where is the correct place?

People are coming here because they received the error, they should at least know the truth about why they have the error. I think think keeping these kind of policies quiet help consumers.

But lets face it, you guys are not here to help customers you are here to help and defend the actions of Apple regardless of how appalling they are.

You know it's like a car wreck. I see that a new post has been logged on any one of these threads, and I just HAVE to look..... I don't know why - it makes me crazy and gives me a headache, but I just can't seem to stop....

😝 GB

Jay 75 wrote:

So now you are in agreement with Apple that they should have a repair monopoly regarding iphones? You realise that in a monopoly the owner can charge ANY fee they wish, do you realise why monopoly's are bad for consumers?

So why did you buy a device that could only be legitimately repaired by the manufacturer? Why did you willingly support such a monopoly?

And that's not the definition of a monopoly. A monopoly is when a single entity possesses or controls all of the supply and trade of a commodity or service.

Apple is not the only manufacturer of smartphones. You can't have a 'monopoly' when it comes to a specific brand.

No one but Nike can manufacturer or sell Air Jordans at original point of sale. They have the right to choose who they do business with and what stores can buy from them and then resell their products. Does Nike have a 'monopoly' on sneakers? Of course not. You can buy any of dozens of different brands of sneakers.

The owner of a brand has the right to protect the integrity of their brand. If someone wants to be an Apple Authorized Service Provider, they can discuss it with Apple. And that would result in Apple knowing that that service provider has gone through the required training and will be using the correct parts and procedures. If a business wants to fix iPhones but doesn't want to go through the trading & certification, and a customer chooses to use that option, that's not Apple's problem. I don't let an uncertified or untrained person work on my car; I take it to an actual mechanic. I don't let an uncertified or untrained person diagnose or treat my illness or injury; I go to an actual doctor.

Do you have the right to know the qualifications of your personal finance accountant or realtor? That's your property they're dealing with. Why shouldn't Apple be allowed to require anyone working on their brand to be properly certified & trained?

Hi Gail,

Thank you for your reply it is appreciated, luckily I have never damaged my phone so I'v never had it repaired.

To be honest I am a fan of Apple, I have had a number of iPhones. But this new policy is unfair to consumers.

I realise you cannot help, just a bit frustrating that Apple would do this in order to force a repair monopoly.

Regards,

J

These folks will never see your position as reasonable, just as we will not see theirs as compassionate. A free-thinking person might say something like "I probably wouldn't have done it this way, but we are just the sycophants here, we don't drive the bus, we just cheer it on." Instead, you get this almost religious mantra about who is not following the rules and why you should not expect a corporation which could be reasonable, to actually be reasonable. It's a lost cause. And my final words because they do have one point: this is not the place for this. People will vote with their wallets.

I don't disagree that it was an extremely consumer-unfriendly method of going about "protecting" our privacy, and I've not been impressed with the response given by the Apple spokespeople. Too much like listening to the never-ending political garble that we have all been subjected to for almost a year now..... 😐

I also appreciate your very civil response. Thanks for that.

Best,

GB

Protecting!?!?!!

My partner works in Africa, Abidjan. Smashed the screen and fixed it in town ... and no: It was not an Apple Store. They don't exist there .... think for fixing the phone, would have been 3 days taken out of the calendar and a trip to Lisbon or Madrid ...

Love the planet, Apple.

This is a new policy, apple released software updates that bricks peoples phones. This is a deliberate act. It is affecting people who have never had a third party repair.

If you think its fine to brick phone that have had a third party repair you are wrong. if you think its fine to brick peoples phones for faults with apples own manufacturing process you are crazy.

Your sense of self entitlement is ponderous.

jakob.joergensen wrote:

Protecting!?!?!!

My partner works in Africa, Abidjan. Smashed the screen and fixed it in town ... and no: It was not an Apple Store. They don't exist there .... think for fixing the phone, would have been 3 days taken out of the calendar and a trip to Lisbon or Madrid ...

Love the planet, Apple.

There is an excellent example of someone that should have purchased a competitive product, one more in line with your partner's needs. It's called "personal responsibility."

Credit where credit is due. You were right. I did not read the very reasonable alternative you laid out to the handling of this error. And you were right again in splitting hairs on the the security claim. But the words are right there as you stated, so you are right about what you said. I don't know if I can disprove or prove the claim about it being the most secure in the world. Wouldn't even know how to measure that. I don't think it is, but that is purely opinion. The bounty claim, as I said, was one of the more spectacular ones and I dont care if it is true or not given the plethora of other exploits which taken together could get an attacker to where he/she wants to be. But this is besides the point. Your comment that they could have handled this better is a critical one I did not see and for that I apologize. But being lazy, i am not going to go modify the rest of my posts. I will however, drink a glass of my own Kool-Aid. Fowl taste.

bobfromlosangeles wrote:

I will however, drink a glass of my own Kool-Aid.

Bob, some of us are old enough to remember the real meaning of "drink the Kool-Aid". I, for one, am truly offended by using this glib phrase, which originally referred to the mass murder-suicide of over 900 people (including 300 children) by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones

Lawrence Finch wrote:

bobfromlosangeles wrote:

I will however, drink a glass of my own Kool-Aid.

Bob, some of us are old enough to remember the real meaning of "drink the Kool-Aid". I, for one, am truly offended by using this glib phrase, which originally referred to the mass murder-suicide of over 900 people (including 300 children) by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones

Thank you, Larry. It always pains me to hear people trivializing the deaths of so many people who really just wanted a better life.

The policy to brick the phones is obviously new, if Apple had been bricking phones since release it would be common knowledge.

Your claim that the policy of bricking phones is old.

<Edited by Host>

bobfromlosangeles wrote:

These folks will never see your position as reasonable, just as we will not see theirs as compassionate. A free-thinking person might say something like "I probably wouldn't have done it this way, but we are just the sycophants here, we don't drive the bus, we just cheer it on." Instead, you get this almost religious mantra about who is not following the rules and why you should not expect a corporation which could be reasonable, to actually be reasonable. It's a lost cause. And my final words because they do have one point: this is not the place for this. People will vote with their wallets.

Because this forum is not for compassion.

Once again: Technical Support Forum, not Emotional Support Forum.

bobfromlosangeles wrote:

Interesting reply to the technical points raised. Quite revealing.

I'd already addressed the few technical points in your reply that I quoted in the comment of mine that you've referenced. Feel free to read my posts again.