I had a similar issue with Apple a few days ago. I was running and an AirPod fell out of my ear and I just happened to be by a drainage drain. It fell through the grate. I immediately rode my bike to the Apple Store (still with a working case and left AirPod) and purchased a replacement right AirPod. The Apple person who helped disconnected the left one and told me to have it plugged in for 30 minutes so the case and AirPods could reconnect and connect to my phone.
Except they didn't. I brought it back to Apple after lots of phone calls and troubleshooting and Apple has now told me that something must have gotten messed up with the software. I am able to buy a new pair of AirPods if I would like to, or I can spend $250 for them to diagnose the issue (the price of a new set of AirPods).
I can't imagine having a problem like this that seems so obvious to be a software bug and passing that cost down to the consumer instead of making it right. I left the Apple Store in a worse situation than when I arrived. I had a working case and one working AirPod. I left with having spent $90 on my replacement AirPod, with none of them working.
I worked at Apple years ago in Apple Retail. I am shocked the people there thought this was the right approach to take. I love Apple products, but this is making me rethink the Apple ecosystem. I am certainly not buying another pair of AirPods. The environmental impacts of this also irk me. Instead of trying to solve the problem they want me to just throw away my AirPods and buy new ones.
If a company has a software issue and pushes the cost of that bug onto the consumer the company is incredibly unlikely to ever solve it. Apple pushed the pain point of their software issue onto the consumer. That's a painful experience as a customer.
This is why I love wired headphones. Even if I lose them, I can replace them quickly for a lot less than $250 and I never have to worry about syncing or batteries or disconnecting or any of the other problems that routinely plague bluetooth devices.
Wires can be great. Unfortunately it seems like high quality wired ear buds are getting harder to find: a lot of distributors seem to have swapped them out for the wireless version of the same product.
Hi-end wired in-ears / headphone won't go away anytime soon thank god. Having firefly dac and sennheiser ie-900 in addition to AirPods would give you access to Apple Music hi-res lossless on the go. The only problem is - after having used AirPodsPro 2 my tolerance for street noise is extremely low and noise cancellation kind of competes with reference sound reproduction features in a lot of products I think.
I mean sure, those upsides are nice, but don’t you hate it when your wires get a knot in them? Ruins your whole day.
Totally worth having to deal with charging, fiddly volume controls, losing them, and the complexity and power usage needed to transmit audio to them wirelessly, to eliminate that possibility from ever happening again.
Get into IEMs (in ear monitors), there's plenty to choose, with different sound signatures and excellent sound quality. Most IEMs also have detachable cables!
The worst thing about bluetooth headphones is that people who use them subject everyone else to their awful microphone quality while either oblivious or in denial about the fact.
I've reviewed old meeting recordings, when my notes were not clear/complete, and after getting over what I sound like generally (an issue on any recording device!) I sound clearer than some people who are using wired headsets. I'm actually using a bone-conduction headpiece (Shokz OpenRun, a friend has some from a different manufacturer and he sounds fine too when using them for a phone call) so it might be even more surprising that I sound reasonable.
If someone does have a problem with how I sound then they can buy me a decent wired headset, or just stop inviting me to remote meetings that I don't want to be in anyway :)
Shokz products work surprisingly well and the sound has also gotten a lot better. I commend them for keeping to the same formula and iterating on it. The microphone was better than the Sony headphones last time I tried them.
All wired earphones I have ever used had a line connect which is analog and completely unencrypted. What wired earphones have you had that where encrypted?
I think the GP meant that in theory someone could break into a Bluetooth connection and snoop on your phone calls. But with a wired headset, there's nothing to break into. "Unbreakable encryption" is a bit tongue-in-cheek, there.
Wired headphones are giving off EMI of the signal they're playing, one could sense that signal with the right equipment and know what you're listening to remotely.
Eh... If your adversary can break modern bluetooth encryption, I probably... would not bet on this? I would think that with appropriate radio equipment you can probably pick up audio from many wired headphones.
bluetooth encryption has been broken before. "KNOB" (https://www.usenix.org/system/files/sec19-antonioli.pdf) was less than 5 years ago. The kind of equipment that could pick up the audio over a wired headset from across the room could probably pick up something from the speakers of wireless earbuds too.
That's not a failure of the protocol but of the user. It's like saying PGP for email can be broken if you have a telescope to look at the user's screen.
I bought wireless headphones (for $20!) because I got tired of getting tangled up in the cable and yanking the headphones (or my phone) away when cycling, and never looked back.
Definitely the killer feature of wireless headphones I'd say. Although I bet if you used some kind of easy break magnetic connection like Apple used to have on macbooks you could get a lot of the same utility back with wired.
Not really, because I'd still have to have a wire flopping around and when it does get snagged I lose my audio. Its still not as good as just not having a wire at all.
I can pair my headphones to my laptop, start playing something, and then walk all around my house without any interruptions. I can't do that with wired headphones, I'd have to carry something around with me everywhere I go. I can walk around the room without issue. I can quickly get up and go make some food in the kitchen without interruption. I can answer the door and sign for a package. All kinds of things that don't require me to then change to a different device, restart some stream there, etc. Its just freedom to get up and move.
"I dropped my wired headphones into a sewer" is likely not a very common occurrence. In fact they have a built-in anti-sewer lanyard... Unlike AirPods which fall out of your ears continually.
I've had my AirPods Pro for 3 years and they have never once fallen out of my ears, but I don't wear them while biking or running or anything like that.
But like I said, they are very nice. I've had probably 100 headphones over the years and these are the ones I enjoy the most. They are indeed a nice product.
There is a lot more to the AirPods than the fact they are wireless. They sound great, good noise cancellation, and very comfortable to wear for long periods. I am amazed how short-sighted many of the comments here are. You cannot find a cheap wired headphones with anything close to the overall comfort and quality of Air Pods.
Well, when one product costs 10x as much as the other does, I would expect it to be a nicer product. But for me, it is not even possible for a product to be so much better as to justify that price increase. Headphones have exactly one use case for me: listening to music (or playing a game on a handheld device) when in public, so as not to disturb others. So we're talking 1h max of quick and dirty use. All the features you mentioned don't actually add any utility for my usage.
Sorry, but cheap chi-fi IEMs easily beat them. Other response says KZ ZSN, but that's not really that. I've recently got Moondrop Chu 2 (a ~ $25 budget IEMs) and they're amazing. The case is aluminum, they're quite small and comfortable to wear (should be fine for smaller ears) while fitting snugly into the ear giving good, passive noise isolation, the wire is very soft and fits neatly around your ear preventing them from being pulled out. If you break the wire, you can buy a replacement one following the 2 pin standard. If you wish so, you can get a cable with a microphone - even worst buds have better mics than any true wireless buds can currently deliver.
Seriously, air pods advantage is just being wireless and having some software features like ANC (they're good overall, but that's nothing special). If that is not a killer feature for somebody, they're just really overpriced ok set of earphones.
Automatic handoff, conversation awareness, transparency mode, and how they work on calls are the killer features for me. I also have IEMs and appreciate good quality audio when that's what I'm looking for, but I see my AirPods as serving more of a utilitarian purpose. They're not for active listening, they're for exercise, working from the cafe, taking a long call while cooking a meal, etc.
If your earphone price range is $19 then those things will indeed not be the right choice for you, that's true. But there are wired earphones which cost 10x as much as Airpods, so your statement only shows your bias.
> Unlike AirPods which fall out of your ears continually.
If you genuinely have that problem you're doing something very wrong with your Airpods when many of its users are able to do long walks and runs without them ever budging.
I wear mine to the gym, on hikes, long runs etc - I can confidently say I have never, ever had them fall out in 3 years of ownership.
Read as: "My ears happen to be of the right size that AirPods fit inside them without falling out, and if your ears don't conform in that way, you must be a broken human."
> you're doing something very wrong with your Airpods when many of its users are able to do long walks and runs without them ever budging
It's a product relying on friction fit with a body part that's shaped differently on every person, what makes you even consider the individual user is at fault?
Also in my experience Airpods require a very precise orientation in the ear to really hold well. If the angle is a bit off they can fall out within 30 seconds, if it's exactly right I can listen to music for an hour without any issue. But I can't eat or drink in that time as that almost guarantees they'll slip out, and lying on my back is also not a good idea apparently.
Those things are otherwise really cool devices but this is definitely a problem. I've seen a YouTube review where the guy said he's on his third pair by now.
That is a bit too harsh, his ears may not be the right size or shape. I have had a lot of problems with AirPod like headphones and had to try several models before I found ones that don't fall off.
Maybe you are talking about different things? The normal AirPod has a fixed shape - it either fits your ear canal or it doesn’t. You definitely should try it out before buying it.
The AirPods Pro has changeable sizes, so it really shouldn’t fall off anyone’s ear.
Couldn't get my AirPod Pros to stay in with any of the tips I could find. Tried silicone, foam, all shapes and sizes, different amounts of pressure and depth in ear, but nothing worked. They'd just slowly creep out and eventually drop out, especially if I spoke.
Regular 2nd gen AirPods are like glued in though, I could headbang or do handstands and they wouldn't go anywhere. Go figure...
In my experience the fit can be very dependent on the precise orientation in the ear. When I get it right they almost never fall out, when the angle is off a bit they hold for a few minutes at most.
I haven't tried the AirPods yet and the shops around here (remote Atlantic islands) don't have an unboxed pair for me to try. From my experience the Pro models would work fine but the other models will probably fall when I am doing work in the woodshop or doing yard work. I have maybe three or four in ear headphones lying around that didn't fit the bill. For some people, that type of headphones don't fit.
> That is a bit too harsh, his ears may not be the right size or shape.
Correction: his ears have perfectly right size and shape. The thing which might not have the right size and shape is the Airpod. We do not fit ourselves to human made objects, but the other way around.
Airpods and similar shaped earbuds just never fit well in my ears. I couldn't tell you why. But unless they're like IEMs with molded fit pieces or those rubbery cones that dig in deep like hearing protection, they're going to fall right out of my ears.
I don't like earbuds, I avoid them. They're great for other people, and that's awesome, but they're not for me.
Not everybody stands in-ear headphones for long periods of time (the other ones are much easier to handle for me). Maybe this was an issue only with Airpods 1 but still, earbud types or over-ear are more comfortable
Best of both worlds: I got a Fiio BTR 5 [0] and now headphones become "wireless" when I want. Plus, use them as HQ DAC on your laptop or phone in non-wireless mode.
My rule is use wireless headphones for phones and wired headphones everywhere else. For a phone, the phone is in your pocket a lot, and having a wire from your pocket to your head is a pain, and you have to untangle it and whatnot.
For a laptop or desktop, the computer is open in front of you. The pairing and unpairing process to turn wireless headphones on and off is 5000x less convenient than just plugging headphones in. You don't need batteries for wired headphones and they never accidentally are connected or disconnected at the wrong time.
The physical difference of the two scenarios makes a big difference. Also maybe someday they will make a Bluetooth software stack that doesn't suck, but it hasn't happened yet.
Well, I did honestly think that was what a pair of airpods cost. Apple isn't known for being cheap. Apple's website says they want $170 for "AirPods (3rd generation) with Lightning Charging Case" though so I don't know what you have to buy to pay $250 for pair when you already have a charger!
I also assumed that non-airpods were not an option because most people who have airpods only have them "because apple".
I mean, airpods aren't known for being the best when it comes to sound quality compared to other bluetooth options. Even Macworld thinks beats sound better (https://www.macworld.com/article/550796/beats-fit-pro-review...). Beats as in "Beats by Dr. Dre" which are also well known for being expensive and stylish while under-delivering in terms of quality. I'm not even an audiophile, but I've seen it said over and over again that you can get more for your money if you're willing to avoid overpriced status symbol brands.
> This is why I love wired headphones. Even if I lose them, I can replace them quickly for a lot less than $250 and I never have to worry about syncing or batteries or disconnecting or any of the other problems that routinely plague bluetooth devices.
I switched to bluetooth because I always broke my wires. however, I still manage to break wires in the bluetooth headphones (and I don't like the earpod type)
This plus a Qudelix5K is my headphones endgame at this point. I can’t stand TWS earbuds for many reasons, but having the ability to apply DSP tuning to whatever headphones I plug in, and still have “wireless” freedom has been great.
I had this “should be 30 minutes” but is really “never”… after getting an AirPod replacement in August this year.
In my case it was actually a pretty easy to fix once I knew what it was. You have to do a little fiddling to check this since it involves a couple reset/pairing cycles with just a single AirPod in the case … but if you check I bet the replacement has an older firmware since it’s been sitting in the stores spare parts room.
So you trigger the firmware update with just one AirPod in the case (which was pretty easy and I could just follow the Apple information) and then once the firmware is the same then yeah they will both do the automatic pairing like the Genius Bar tech expected them to… the issue might be related to a recent firmware changing something and the stores not having updated process to ensure the firmware is correct because apple are probably going to prefer this having a software fix not a fix that takes up more human store employees time.
In Australia at least I’d feel confident that getting in contact with the ACCC (govt consumer protection agency) would at least get that (eventually) resolved (new AirPods).
A software bug that bricks a new device is definitely a defect of workmanship and warranted for the expected life of the device.
Even threatening Apple with the ACCC is almost always enough to get a full repair or replace. ACCC policy is very clear and strict. If you have to go speak to the ACCC, Apple have likely already broken the law.
I went to the Apple Store to get replacement AirPod Pros and while I had to do it a few times it was still under warranty and they gave me a set of replacement Airpors pro.
I received a broken Pro Display XDR (red line on it) and they gave me a replacement but I had to pick it up and also give them the old one.
I was having screen problems with my first MacBook Pro I bought with my Pell grant (zebra pattern with the backlight) they gave me the newer model of my MacBook Pro. This is where they earned my loyalty.
The worst experience I had with Apple is that they lost my Touchpad Macbook but they eventually returned it.
> I was having screen problems with my first MacBook Pro I bought with my Pell grant (zebra pattern with the backlight) they gave me the newer model of my MacBook Pro. This is where they earned my loyalty.
I had a MacBook with screen and display issues. Multiple times they denied any issue. Even when I showed them that if we did a fresh install of macOS I could reliably and repeatedly cause a kernel panic in (IIRC) Safari, when doing something with the GPU.
While there was an active recall for the same issue.
Similarly, they insisted nothing was wrong with the logic board on another Mac. There was.
And then when the charging circuit died on my step-daughter's MBA (healthy battery, laptop worked fine on AC, just couldn't charge), I thought $2-300. Nope "The repair estimate is $890. Maybe you should look at a new Mac instead?"
Can you not return at least the replacement AirPod you bought at least for a refund? Not sure where you are, but there are usually consumer protection laws that require that to be possible.
They should be able to. It would be classified as a repeat repair or DOA. To get a replacement airpod they have to create a repair. Almost all of the "repairs" are covered by a 90 day warranty.
I have an iPad I left on a shelf for a while that is now a paperweight because during that time, in what I assume was a transition from iTunes to Apple accounts, the account it was logged into ceased to exist.
I was actually able to reregister an account using the same email address as the one I previously had, thinking maybe that would work, but still couldn't log back in.
Broken, as in physically broken? Sure, but that can be fixed/repaired if it's not beyond any hope of that.
Broken, as in "the software is broken"? Well, at least all my devices are repairable, if that happens. Even if it might require the nuclear option of reinstalling/reflashing. But at least there are no shenanigangs such as these and the ones OP described happening.
But now we’re just going down a path where it’s not a binary broken/not broken but “how broken is it?”
If I change the oil in my car but forget to put the plug back in and then start it and drive off and seize my engine, it’s basically broken. With enough effort, it could be rebuilt. Is it the responsibility of the manufacturer to expend the necessary effort to do so, though?
I'm sorry but that's false equivalence. If you do something to your device and it stops working as a result, sure, that's on you. But if your device is untouched, but stops working because the manufacturer rejiggered some virtual ones and zeroes on a server possibly halfway around the world, that's a completely different situation.
This is more equivalent to garaging your Tesla for 10 years, firing up for a drive and wondering why the cell network no longer works.
Tools that require infrastructure are dependent on things that can cease existing one day.
No need to apologize. I didn’t say they are equivalent, I’m trying to draw analogies. If you leave your car sitting for 5 years, you will probably have a bit of a hard time starting it too. If you leave a garden or house untouched for 5 years, it’s not going to be pretty.
They didn’t give us much to go on about their situation. I’ve not heard of an iPad not being able to be turned on and unlocked with its passcode because of an iTunes account or server issue. If that is indeed what happened, I agree that is not cool. But I doubt that is what is going on. I’m curious to know more.
And yet I guarantee the Linux computer that's been sitting in my closet for 10+ years will boot up just fine. As would it's Windows partition. As would the old MacBook I don't have anymore. Those are a lot more analogous than cars or gardens.
It has spinning rust. Additionally it's true that SSDs have trouble retaining data for long periods of time, but afaik this is separate to actual degradation. So if it had an SSD it might not boot off it, but the hardware is otherwise fully usable. Same situation if you lose an encryption key.
I can get replacement hardware for my lenovo laptop, it got repaired twice under the warranty. My android cellphone is on it's 3rd screen. My bicycle got a bunch of new pieces this summer. Fixing hardware isn't that different from fixing software.
> Fixing hardware isn't that different from fixing software.
It absolutely is different. How do you propose even changing the software when there is an interlock preventing access?
Should Apple also be responsible for people who enable FileVault, set a 50 character password of random characters, and then not write it down? How would you fix that software problem without introducing glaring vulnerabilities?
Software is scalable in ways that hardware simply is not. It presents vastly different challenges than swapping out standardized pluggable components. It’s incredibly difficult to change a complicated software system without introducing side effects. Comparing an operating system to a bicycle is absurd.
I don't remember the details at this point, I do remember spending quite a bit of time exploring every avenue I could find on the internet, but still couldn't get it to work. I brought to the Apple store and they basically told me I was out of luck and they couldn't do anything about it.
You haven’t said if you emailed Tim Cook to see if they take it more seriously. I’ve read anecdotes of some people getting their problems solved by writing to some top names at Apple. No guarantee that it’d work, but it’s worth a try.
Or, more simply: go back to the store, calmly tell them that your property was made non-functional by their staff, and you want them to make right on that.
If they decline, calmly say you'll resolve the matter in small claims court with a suit for damaging your property.
People: stop letting corps push you around. Exercise your rights.
I wonder if the new one is a different generation than your original set, I don’t think they’ll work together if that’s the case. They have tiny model numbers printed on them, do they match? They probably gave you the right one since they’d see the model you already owned in your profile and match it in their inventory, but maybe…
My experience with pretty much any consumer company is the opposite? They generally help out.
Random example: I had an expensive Sonos speaker just the other week that broke in a move across the Atlantic. Sonos support helped for nearly an hour trying reset options, then gave me a 30% discount coupon for any product, even though the speaker was long out of warranty.
How did they help? Your expensive speaker is still broken. All they accomplished is making it likely to get another direct sale. Anybody can get a 20% discount on almost any Sonos product by buying it retail instead of direct.
I wasn't asking for anything. I wouldn't expect much help from Sonos, and, indeed, and the OP got what I'd expect.
If pressed, I'd wish at least an aspiring boutique manufacturer like Sonos would make service manuals and replacement parts available. But again, I wouldn't expect them to do that unless they were forced to. (And it may not have been viable or cost effective for the OP in any event.)
I don't think the expectation is to do it for free, but it sure would be nice if companies could repair their expensive products for less than the cost of a new system.
Modern electronics is just planned obsolescence + replacement.
It's really hit or miss, and kind of depends on the product category, and the manufacturer. Sonos has an uphill battle convincing people to even think about an option other than AirPods. Some manufacturers will give their support reps tremendous freedom to just send free shit out for positive word of mouth.
Apple is in no need of positive word of mouth, and in fact thrives despite a very vocal subset of consumers that are adamantly against anything Apple does (sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly).
That is, Sonos has to work to keep you a customer, but plenty of Apple customers will just buy Apple no matter what.
I don't think Sonos really cares either. Their shuffle has been broken forever (you simply can't shuffle a playlist on Google Assistant), my Roams frequently randomly disconnect, they tried to alienate half their userbase with the S2 update and only changed their tune with massive outcry, the desktop app auto-update doesn't work on Mac... I can go on and on. I tried to report these issues to support, and then to their beta community, and every single thing I reported was ignored for years. Shrug.
I really like their hardware but their software is so bad it's making me want to quit their ecosystem altogether. Their support is bad too.
I dunno, I own nearly like a third or half of Sonos's product line, and have had numerous software and UI problems with them. Their support has never been very helpful and I just gave up. Giving you 30% off an expensive new product isn't really the same as just repairing it...
Maybe, but I know that Google or Samsung don't care about me. There has never been any pretence that Hoover give much more than a Walmart greeter level of concern for you, Microsoft would throw you under a bus for an extra cent.
Americans seem to think that Apple really cares about them and not just in a way to extract as much as possible from your wallet.
Of course it's not legal. OP's property was damaged by store staff.
Also, in the US there's implied merchantability warranties, and most people have no idea it exists. If your expensive high quality headphones die a week after the one year warranty ends, implied merchantabilty still applies, because people expect headphones to last several years if treated appropriately.
OP needs to go back to the Apple store and say "I came in with a working airpod and case, and left with nothing working. Please make this right."
If they refuse, say "my next stop is small claims court for your staff damaging my property."
Actually, that's a good point... outdoor companies tend to be great at that!
Patagonia repaired/replaced damaged clothing for me, Yakima and Specialized sent me free parts, NiteRider fixed a bike light, ReeLight sent me a replacement from overseas, Osprey replaced a backpack after my dog chewed it up... all for free.
Maybe it's just electronics companies that's bad at this stuff
To think that I've been able to mix and match left and right earbuds from the same manufacturer+model, and they pair up as the same, and be able to order replacements only from one side from Aliexpress, directly from the manufacturer after explaining myself, for very little, really tells me a lot about this unnecessary convenience baked in, where the lesser option is much cheaper and less hassle when it doesn't work, for very little sacrifice.
Also, just a heads up on Apple ID's 2FA: it's different from the trusted number used in recovery, which can be repeated across many IDs. I had my parents set my number for their Apple IDs, as they seem to constantly forget their passwords and don't really understand much of the app downloading process, so I end up getting the SMS but it doesn't interfere with my own accounts.
Similar - 2021 MBP 16". splash of red wine on the keyboard and despite all the usual solutions a few keys don't work. Works fine with external keyboard. Apple Store: we can send it away to be fixed but you must agree to a charge of up to $1600 because we don't know how far the damage has gone. Me: It all works except a few keys. Apple: That's the deal, and actually we'd recommend its not worth repairing and you should buy a new one.
Sounds similar. Charging circuit on an MBA. Laptop worked perfectly on AC power. Battery health via various tests and Apple diagnostics, healthy, just 0% charge.
"That will be $890 to repair. Maybe you should wander around and have a look at the new MBAs."
Have you tried just pairing them again like-new? As in put both in one case, close it, open it, and hold the sync button until it glows white?
I've personally lost more Airpods than I want to admit and now have roving pairs of unpaired AirPods in my apartment, which I randomly re-pair when I'm in a hurry and don't want to find the correct pair.
I'd imagine that's as much of a torture test for the pairing system as could exist and it still works...
Anecdotally, I've had several good experiences with Apple support and no bad ones. The one bad experience I had wasn't supports fault (there was a bug where if you tried to use a Time Machine backup on a Airport to restore onto a new machine it would sometimes backup the new machine instead and wipe out your backup) and even then they admitted it was a bug and not user error immediately.
> or I can spend $250 for them to diagnose the issue (the price of a new set of AirPods).
FYI they are on sale right now for $199 on Amazon, and Costco has them for $10 less. Hopefully you can get Apple to do the right thing though! At the very least you should be able to "return" the AirPod you bought from them, since it doesn't actually work.
My one year old AirPods Pro has a problem charging the left ear pod. And, this is my 3rd AirPods in as many years. I have promised myself that I won't buy another one once its battery dies like the previous two AirPods.
I have cleaned contacts everywhere with electronics alcohol wipes. I see that the pins inside the left holster are not as protruded as they are on the right holster of the case. I have tried to pull it gently with a tweezer but it has not helped. Its 1 year warranty period just expired as well.
When you have near complete vertical integration there is no reason to handle edge cases. Everything plays well together because you made it all. Until it doesn't, and then it just doesn't work at all.
any possibility that the apple rep screwed up and unpaired/replaced the wrong pod? i.e your "pair" would now have two pods, neither of which are actually associated with the hardware you have access to
to clarify what I mean: GP lost the right one, but is it possible the replacement pod was never actually associated as the "right" one due to a mixup? In this situation, the charger case would have left and right pods, but neither of them would be associated with the "pair"
Ya know, for $5 from AliExpress you can get a pair of airpod clones and a charger case. They are remarkably good considering their price is just 2% of the money apple wants!
And they won't mess you about with any 30-minute-till-they-work behaviour.
I don't understand how you draw a connection between this and Stockholm syndrome. "The products are great when they work, but Apple is horrible to deal with when something goes wrong" is a completely sensible opinion.
And after all, the 99% case is that things work well. Choosing products which are worse 99% of the time but where the company is more pleasant to work with in the 1% case where something goes wrong is a tough sell. (Omitted from this discussion is whether Apple products are truly better when they work or not. That's a wholly unproductive discussion which comes down to opinion and mattcantstop clearly thinks that they are.)
It's a completely sensible reason to avoid products that are undependable by design.
Many Apple "engineering" decisions favor the walled garden over robustness; for example, I am unable to update many important applications on my old work Macintosh because they were installed from the app store using an "Apple account", or whatever it's called, that cannot be used anymore because the colleague who knew the password has left the company; having a privileged account on the computer isn't good enough.
That sounds a lot like your company allowed either a personal account or an account tied to an individual to be used to purchase the software. Surely a better policy would be to use an account not tied to an individual in that case?
This is universally a bad design. It's not just Apple. I know, for example, Microsoft closed a loophole with Microsoft accounts being allowed to be opened using a company email address when your organisation has a hosted domain. This is stupid. Every year I now need to purchase my MSDN subscription using a personal email address based account because my corporate account is not allowed to buy anything from the Microsoft Store. To add insult to injury - unless I am very, very careful and make sure the personal account is completely logged out, I then can't apply the activation code correctly to my corporate account that is associated with the subscription renewal. Before this renewal, which was successful, I have had two years in a row where I have ended up needing to file a support ticket and wait for the "magic" activation flag to be re-set because my browser was half logged in. This year I just logged in to my personal account with Edge and use Chrome for my corporate one to register the activation for the renewal. It shouldn't be this hard!!!
Also - yes, this should probably all be done by IT for me in the background, but we are a small company and that is just the way it is. The subscription was set up years ago and I inherited it from another developer when they left about 3 years ago.
> That sounds a lot like your company allowed either a personal account or an account tied to an individual to be used to purchase the software. Surely a better policy would be to use an account not tied to an individual in that case?
It wasn't even obvious that the personal account existed in the first place; if the app store "just works" and the former designated Macintosh user doesn't care about software updates too much, forgetting that the account was necessary and it should have been either handed over to posterity or purged by uninstalling the involved apps is a reasonable outcome.
The way Apple handles this sucks. It is not clear how you can transfer purchases, or if that is even possible. It would be nice if there was an easy way to merge obsolete/outdated accounts in to a valid one.
> It is not clear how you can transfer purchases, or if that is even possible.
I agree, but there are at least a few clear reasons I can imagine why Apple don’t want this:
1. They don’t want people to resell software that they bought.
2. If you could transfer licenses, a group of many people could share a single license between them, transferring it back and forth. Instead of all of them buying one license each.
3. If licenses could be transferred there would for sure be cases of scammers tricking people to transfer their licenses for paid software to them.
I used to think so, but it gets difficult with DRMed digital downloads.
For example, I owned a piece of hardware called Akai MPC X. It came with a companion software for the computer, a DAW called “MPC2 Software”.
When I sold the hardware Akai MPC X to someone else, I wanted to transfer the companion software for the computer to them. Akai demanded a ridiculous €100 fee to transfer the license for the software from my user to their user. I had other software on my user as well, so me handing over the user as whole was not an option and therefore only Akai could have helped us transfer the license.
In the end the buyer of the hardware therefore got only the hardware and not the companion software for computer.
That experience soured my opinion of Akai by a lot.
The MPC X is still nice hardware and I kind of want to buy an MPC X again in the future. But it sucks that Akai is like this with the software license.
Microsoft has the tools to manage these subscriptions in a business, they work pretty smoothly even for a small org. There's no reason for you to continue to do that other than just inertia of the way you've done it in the past.
Microsoft makes the tools you want available, you're just not using it and acting like it's Microsoft's fault.
I don't get mad at the knife maker when I cut myself cooking.
Probably, but my org leans very heavily on outsourced IT, and so we are at the mercy of whatever their policy is. Also - if I let the said outside IT take over management - it will go wrong. The current system just means I need to go find a director and ask them for a company credit card - it really isn't any more complicated than that. The big drama is that I never created a personal work account, so I only have my AD one, and I am not allowed by MS to create an account associated with that identity now. If I go to renew, I guess as we have always done it via retail, that is the only option. The pain I went through to transfer this account to my identity after the original owner left the company, I am not really likely to mess with it again if I only have to do this dance once a year.
Apple's system design is brittle and forces both the individual and the company to be meticulous about stuff that shouldn't matter. How is that not an Apple problem?
I mean, yes, fairly literally; this is not how any company should be installing software. Anywhere; they'd have the same problem if they were using the Microsoft one, or had just had a former employee register commercial software directly with their personal email on the company's behalf.
Maybe that account with a personal name and company domain as an address is a company thing and maybe it's a personal thing. In the case of the former, that's bad company IT practices. In the case of the latter, it's bad personal IT practices. In any case, I'm not sure I want a vendor to just hand over access because there's a company domain in the email.
Maybe there are circumstances where it makes sense to do so, but it's not clear that as a general rule, setting up an account with a company email should magically hand over all the data and other information associated with that account to the IT department. Maybe you should assume it does though.
It is definitely reasonable to avoid Apple products! For both these sorts of reasons and others. I'm not trying to argue otherwise. However, the claim "it's reasonable to not use Apple products" is very different from "using/liking Apple products is a sign of Stockholm syndrome".
It may contravene some sort of HN guidelines to point this out, but the fact that this comment has not been downvoted by a large number of people is quite an indictment of the mindset here. In my opinion, of course.
there are various programmer types who find the Apple way really onerous and problematic, because they want to control everything, these can be either Windows or Linux since both give you the ability to control and mod your system at very high level.
Every example of bad behavior by Apple in relation to their products, customer service etc. connects in the mind with this underlying philosophical difference between how computers should be used, and so the indignant feeling wells up in their brain that Apple users are misled and abused, and if you are misled and abused you must have Stockholm syndrome.
This however is just my reading of the phenomenon I have observed quite a lot.
Before anyone tells me I'm an Apple lover, I would say until the M1 I considered all OS'es equivalent with some various benefits to each, but as long as I have M series Macs I do believe they are very superior (but haven't tried recent - this year - non M machine)
>there are various programmer types who find the Apple way really onerous and problematic, because they want to control everything
Treating customers like renters after they buy your products at a premium is a pretty onerous practice and it's pretty surreal to see the pushback characterized as megalomania.
Funny, because I get the impression that users of Windows and Android systems are treated as renters. They're certainly not treated as owners, because the devices and OS continuously give the OS and software more control over the device than they give the end user.
Sure, Android has improved lots, mostly because of comparisons with iOS, but who can forget that it used to be the case that you literally couldn't install and run certain apps without agreeing to ALL of the apps' demands? What if someone doesn't want to give Facebook access to your microphone and location?
The fact that you can't uninstall Edge or even have links reliably open in your browser of choice just shows how Microsoft thinks of you, and it's only getting worse, with the extra steps you have to take to even just have a local account. They'll phase that out eventually.
Sorry, but most people, myself included, want and are happy to use a "walled garden" device, particularly if it means I don't have to deal with spyware and apps trying to steal all the data they can.
when one makes a statement it happens in context, this context is often important to consider to get the meaning of the statement, this is especially important in the English language.
This importance of context in English is the reason why "Buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo Buffalo" and similar expressions are valid sentences.
One should try to be precise in usage, but it's also reasonable to assume interpretation follows normal usage all of which is preamble to pointing out that:
Hey, given the context it should be obvious that "because they want to control everything" actually means "because they want to control everything on their computer" which is a commonly expressed desire by a large portion of this community and thus the expression is not an accusation of megalomania.
The problem with the "walled garden" is that it is insidious.
At some point they control everything and at that point, it's too late to create an alternative product as it would be like 20 generations behind in performance.
You don't have to go so far back as to build your own NAND gates or a computer out of falling marbles, but giving the user almost zero ability to customize is just crazy.
Right. 50 step manual fix! Only that it actually is like generally 3-4 step fix.
But I get it. As opposed to trying to let it sink in that something that could have easily been fixed and diagnosed you get to hear “buy a new one; nothing can do”, I am sure being able to fix something is less appealing. Because we must not lose sight of things like the organismic satisfaction one experiences when being able to pay for something Apple. That opportunity! Oh, my breathing is going up already. Just the thought of it.
I mean, right, right? Once friends and family agree to promote you to their voluntary tech support position, you are installing, reinstalling, upgrading no end.
But if they have sony, apple or any of those - endless vacation!
There are times when I find this utterly infuriating, but other times it's an absolute blessed relief. I know there's no point wasting time hunting for a solution (that may or may not make the situation worse) and I should just walk away and do something more meaningful instead.
It's interesting when somebody lists A, B, and then comes to the exact opposite conclusion C that you would. What a different life you and I must have lead.
The 50 step manual fix is actually just generated by chatgpt and sounds plausible, but does not actually work. It's just a red herring to get page clicks / ad views.
Stockholm Syndrome was invented by a man who didn’t even talk to the people he accused of it, but simply asserted it as explanation for why former hostages were criticizing the police, while those former hostages were clearly stating that it was because the police were aggressive and irrational, escalating with acts like unnecessarily pointing guns, and generally disregarding the safety of the hostages. The only other famous case turned out to be acting under duress. It is to this date not a real psychological diagnosis.
Similarly, if you’d like to understand why people put up with Apple’s moderate abuse, maybe ask not how one might write them off as insane, but instead what their alternatives are.
I think it's more like defence of investment. They have spent tens of thousands of money, time, knowledge on this brands ecosystem of devices and software. It's not just airpods it's the phone, watch, desktop, laptop, all the software purchased over their lifetime and the identity that goes along with it. In deciding to leave there's also future costs of moving to something more free but "worse".
The pain needs to be way greater than the cost of what they have invested. In a way they are not captors of peoples freedom but bankers who hold people's time, effort and money. Even with OP's case I can almost guarantee that whilst he might consider moving away from Apple because of his bricked laptop, he won't - he will side with his investments. Leaving this ecosystem would also cause psychological pain - its very hard to tell oneself that "I was wrong".
The genius is that Apple makes good stuff and they know that what they make "just works" and it all works great together and people will invest not only money but their very selves in the company. The company is the world biggest tech company for a reason.
I yearly upgrade on the iPhone for the better modem support. I always buy Apple leather case, also a yearly upgrade, to protect the phone. A number of years ago I had a screen break and I mentioned at the Genius Bar how I did the best I could using the Apple Cases, and they ended up replacing the screen, a $150 charge, for free. This is Apple.
You may have had a firmware incompatibility problem. That is what had happened to me when a few month-old AirPod Pro v2 earbud battery lost charge. I have AppleCare+ (I recommend that for all AirPod purchasers because the batteries wear out after 2 years of use). I used the Apple Support app, selecting my device, and selected for Apple to call, which they immediately did. Apple did the CC hold sending out a replacement. When I received it, it did not work, and the reason was that the firmware on the case and airpod earbuds was recently updated and the earpiece sent to me was not. It is a kind of race condition that occurs whenever Apple updates firmware.
In the process of trying to get things to work initially with the replacement earbud, I disconnected my AirPods from the phone, following instructions. When I could not get it to reconnect, I tried to contact AppleCare+ for the AirPod Pro with the Apple support app as I had done 2 days earlier, and this time my device was not showing up in the device list, even though I still owned the device. This is an Apple bug.
So, I called 800-APL-CARE, but had to wait on hold to talk with someone a couple of minutes. Then I asked to be escalated to 2nd tier tech support. I explained the firmware incompatibility problem to the advisor. I expressed my annoyance since Apple has known about this problem since shipping Airpods, yet never fixed it. The tech rep had me go through a couple of more steps, including the 30 minute charge of the case with the earbuds (they called me back after 30 minutes).
Then they resolved the issue for me.
So, Apple had 2 repeatable bugs.
1. Firmware incompatibility with parts replacements.
2. Even though I still owned the AirPods Pro with AppleCare+ support associated with my AppleID, when disconnected the phone, it no longer showed up on my device list.
But overall, Apple has been great at support.
With AppleCare+, you don't have to go to the store for replacements. They send it to you with a CC hold and then have a prepaid label for Fedex Pickup returns. Call Fedex for the pickup, and that is that.
This person lost their laptop at an airport - to all intents and purposes it was stolen. They even bought a replacement on the assumption they weren't going to see it again.
The person who returned the laptop returned an unusable MacBook that Apple refuses to even confirm is the original laptop that belonged to them. In addition they incurred shipping and import costs to have this brick shipped. But they don't have their laptop back in working order, so... effectively that laptop was stolen and destroyed, just as surely as if a stranger at the airport had grabbed it and smashed it in front of them.
Are there other solutions to remedy the pain? Yes.
Could they not just get back the same laptop they already have? Most definitely.
Whenever there's a story shared on HN that implies a negative sentiment towards an Apple policy, people come out of the woodwork talking about how we can work around the policy or why Apple has to do it the way everyone hates. Why? Why does the biggest company in the world get volunteers spitshining their PR?
> A new report from Reuters found that iPhone theft dropped by 50 percent in London, 40 percent in San Francisco and 25 percent in New York. The drops represent theft activity as measured during the 12 months following Apple’s introduction of the remote locking feature in September 2013 as part of iOS 7. With iOS 8, Apple made its so-called said “kill switch” active by default, in accordance with California regulation, and that should help the rates of theft continue to trend downwards.
If you have receipts for an iDevice and you have the iDevice in your possesion, Apple could just unlock the device. They could also lock the device to an iCloud account even if the user doesn't enable FindMyDevice on it.
And I will re-iterate, what's with all this risk management from unpaid volunteers for the biggest tech company in the world? :)
An old invoice doesn’t necessarily indicate current ownership. I have the invoice of pretty much everything I’ve purchased in the past decade (I scan in anything physical), including for a lot of items that I no longer have ownership of.
Unfortunately, except for the invoice, all of the other evidence pointed to the blogger _not_ being the current owner.
If you have the receipt, and ID showing your picture and the name under which I ordered the device, and can receive physical mail at the address to which the device was shipped, and/or at the address listed on the cloud account that we both know the device effectively forced me to create, then yes.
Unfortunately, this wasn't covered by the travel insurance that goes along with my credit card.
I didn't purchase additional travel insurance, and I'm in the fortunate position that I can eat the cost of a replacement, so it probably isn't worth it.
I really take issue with the idea that your travel insurance will save you in a case like this. It's almost a naive position to take. Travel insurance is notoriously exclusionary when it comes to individual items, especially high value items.
Travel insurance is probably one of the most least likely types of insurance where there will be a positive outcome for the consumer.
An Allianz OneTrip Premiere trip insurance covers $2000 for loss or theft of baggage and personal effects. They reported the loss to airport security. Getting a written notice of that report ought to be enough to file a claim.
If you later recover an item that you've successfully claimed an insurance claim against, you would just have to hand over the item to your insurance company (who might not even want it at that point). And you should have been able to successfully claim the laptop since at the airport, it was most definitely lost and/or stolen.
Also, how can you even assess that the laptop has no physical damage? They can't boot into the OS and can't see that the laptop is in fact completely physically intact. What if the other party broke the webcam or one of the USB ports?
This entirely misses the point. Using travel insurance for "loss or theft" of something when something is actually, well, lost. The guy has possession of his property, how has anything been "lost"?
I really, really doubt a travel insurance company would pay out on this one.
The computer was “lost” for a whole month before being found and 2 months before being returned. You should claim losses immediately anyway so probably he could have gotten the refund before even knowing it was found.
Are you suggesting the recipient found another Activation Locked laptop, presumably stolen, that somebody was keeping "for parts", swapped the keyboard for a Japanese keyboard, sent OP that locked laptop and wiped/kept their laptop?
Considering how long it took for the laptop to be returned and Apple's resistance in removing the lock, it is possible that the recipient waited until an acquaintance returned from Japan carrying a similar laptop (acquired cheaply or even for free due to the lock), and simply shipped that to OP.
Why would someone not set up activation lock? This is exactly what it is for!
> An attacker could “prank” someone by wiping their MacBook, activating it with their own Apple ID, and then reporting it as lost. The victim then has no way to recover it.
There is really no solving denial-of-service problems associated with losing a device. The priority in that case should be preventing unwanted disclosure of data, which is exactly what Apple did here.
I didn't set up "Find My". The connection with the Activation Lock wasn't obvious to me.
The main thing Apple emphasizes is that you can recover a missing device. But it wasn't obvious to me how that would work without an internet connection (unlike with an iPhone where I have a data plan).
Protecting unwanted disclosure of data is different than preventing the erasing of a device, which is where I'm stuck.
Yeah, I'm a lifelong user of apple products and I had no idea until your article that "Find My" was an activation lock. I thought it just reported your location to Apple, and so I turned it off for privacy reasons...
That's an interesting fight between minimalist designers/product people and a good security team wanting to make things crystal clear. Especially at a company like Apple that really strives to prioritize both. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that conversation.
Because I want my laptop to be hostile any potential users other than me, the owner. Many other devices can be wiped and put back into service with physical access alone. This is a vulnerability because it makes the device valuable to thieves.
> Imagine buying a car that requires activation from the manufacturer, and they could permanently disable it at any time if someone stole it.
This has been standard on GM vehicles for decades.
OnStar's anti-theft feature requires it to be initiated by the police. Not some rando who stole it and signed in with his own Apple ID... It is a premium service that requires you pay a monthly fee.
Nor does it permanently brick it; it can be unlocked by any dealer, or more likely once the police recover the car. In fact you could probably just remove the OnStar box and the car would be drivable.... it's designed to stop a theft in progress.
Most importantly, if you don't pay for the service it does nothing at all.
Basically the opposite of everything that went wrong in this article.
Yeah, it's a leaky analogy and doesn't quite compare. The biggest difference with cars is that they're titled and so ownership is much easier to prove. Although, if you have title issues with property you can also get yourself into quite a difficult situation. In the case of Apple products, Activation Lock more or less functions like a digital title system.
Not really. Things with value are valuable for thieves. Unusable devices are less valuable than usable ones, which is why iPhone theft has plummeted after the introduction of activation lock. It isn't completely gone, but it is way less of a problem than it used to be.
> The better question is why would someone buy a computer that is so user-hostile it requires "activation"?
It's user hostile but owner friendly.
> Imagine buying a car that requires activation from the manufacturer, and they could permanently disable it at any time if someone stole it.
I would absolutely buy that car. If you want it now, you can purchase OnStar [0] which proves that enough people want it. "Once law enforcement confirms your vehicle has been stolen, our Advisors use GPS to help authorities find your vehicle. But that’s just the beginning. When it’s safe, we’ll work with authorities to remotely slow it down.* And with Remote Ignition Block™,* we can also remotely prevent a thief from restarting your vehicle."
Tech geeks tend to assume everybody wants to live in anarchy. I absolutely think every car should have a remote slower to eliminate the risk of most car chases.
> Tech geeks tend to assume everybody wants to live in anarchy.
The tone I get here is that tech geeks assume we want to live in a civil society, where one can plead their case and see Apple unlock the device when one has shown they have legal ownership and possession of it.
But, if the story is telling the whole story, anarchy is what we are living in. Apple just goes off and does its own thing without recourse.
If you really want, there are devices you can install to do this yourself and self-host the infra for (minus the mobile data), not sure how well they work with fancy modern cars, but they exist.
> I absolutely think every car should have a remote slower to eliminate the risk of most car chases.
I can't wait to be pulled over literally by an angry cop who doesn't care about where they choose to stop my vehicle, and if it's safe for me or not, or deliberately chooses to do stop in a concealed spot for reasons that won't be good me.
> since we're talking about HN's favorite computer company
That's not even remotely true, as evidenced by many other comments on this submission.
A lot of people seem to think that HN has a consensus on various subjects, but I'd say a defining feature of HN is argumentation and lack of consensus.
Such car exists. It is basically any modern car. Even your beloved Tesla. It needs an activation by Tesla and they can revoke that and lock it up at will.
You beloved Porsche is this way as a theft prevention, when you bought the right options.
IRC Renault doesn't sell you the battery for your electric car. You need to rent it. Then it is in the contract, that if you miss your payment that they can lock down the battery and as such the car.
One of the reasons for the activation lock is to deter people from stealing your laptop, since even if someone swipes your laptop from under your nose, they have a brick that they cannot use. Best they can do is cannibalize it for parts (and Apple is even trying to prevent that, for better and for worse).
Are we to suggest buying Microsoft instead? Windows login and forced Microsoft accounts are a thing. I try to justify buying anything but apple for every purchase. Unfortunately, everyone else insists on making their products worse at a faster rate than apple.
We are talking about computer hardware, Microsoft or the OS vendor is irrelevant. For the record you can install Linux on many Surface devices unimpeded.
The hardware and the software go hand in hand. Both hardware and software from non-apple products is inferior. I wish it were not the case, but here we are. I run Linux on my server & Windows on my desktop. The windows desktop has destroyed itself multiple times on forced updates. All my Android phones fall apart or have major features stop working around the 20 month mark. All my apple devices have lasted, never crashed, and never suddenly make me think about something other than what I picked up the device for. Installing Linux is trivial. It has it's own problems. Ultimately, that is why I've landed where I've landed. Sadly, Apple is the least terrible experience of all those options.
Activation Lock is a weird feature. Users love it when it helps prevent device theft. But really, at the end of the day, you're giving up control of the device to Apple.
Apple has already stopped supporting activation of certain versions of iOS[0]. Also, just as a user can request locking down a phone at any time, Apple could technically lock down your device when they see fit. They're not going to do that, but the fact that it's possible is a bit freaky.
Someday, far in the future, their activation servers will go down, and no unactivated Apple device will be usable. Already, it is not possible to set up a new device without an Internet connection. Hopefully the jailbreak community figures something out by then, or maybe Apple would release a tool...
Apple has stopped signing older version of iOS for devices that could upgrade to later versions. The case you linked to is an iPhone running iOS 9 when Apple will happily sign iOS 11 for that device. iOS 11 is that latest version of the software that will run on that device.
Do we blame Google for not allowing Chromebooks to stick to an older version of their OS?
This isn’t about signing the OS updates. This is about the device contacting Apple’s activation servers during initial setup.
In the linked thread, the users have a “working” device with software already installed, but the activation fails with a cryptic “Activation Error” without any reference to the fact that they must update.
Typically, Apple continues to allow activation on older OSes, as long as they were installed previously. I’ve intentionally kept some devices on older versions, and personally have never had a problem activating after a reset. But I suppose that’s only possible because Apple allowed it.
EDIT: I was wrong about the "Activation Error" not mentioning a software upgrade. It does mention it. But my point about Apple controlling access to the software still stands. It's something weird that Apple did specifically for iOS 9 and the iPhone 6s. Naturally, who really cares about one random version combination? I don't in this particular case, but the fact that Apple can control it is weird to me.
Hardwares doing its job; locking unauthenticated users out of it. Unfortunately, this is a consequence of not understanding how to use it and you not using it.
I wish Apple was more informative about the risk of not using Find My, but this is software doing a good thing. The reason why Macs become bricks is because 9/10 of the times they’re stolen. And guess what? You’re not getting past Activation Lock. Really good deterrent.
Sorry this happened to you, but this is Apple doing a good thing and something I wish more manufacturers did.
Activation Lock is in fact not a good software because Apple have the keys.
If they refuse to accept the responsibility that comes with owning the keys, which, basically comes down to helping the customer when they can authenticate him, they should not own the key at all. At least they could be honest when they say they can’t do anything.
Because, reading this post, my question is not "why Apple don’t help?" but rather "why did we give them our keys if they are not willing to use them to help us ?"
What is a more legitimate use case than OP simple case that justify Apple’s decision power over Activation Lock.
> If they refuse to accept the responsibility that comes with owning the keys, which, basically comes down to helping the customer when they can authenticate him, they should not own the key at all.
Apple has a process to remove Activation Lock with proof of purchase documentation:
It doesn't matter why it failed. Apple decided not to fulfill their responsibility in this case, for whatever reason, so I agree with the GP that Apple should not be trusted with the key.
Yes, because clearly whatever someone said in an HN comment is the full story and nobody would ever lie or distort to reap karma among a community of knee-jerk Apple-haters.
"Assume good faith." "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The process works. I once got a MacBook issued from work that didn't have DEP or any MDM, so I did enroll it in Find My / Activation Lock. When I returned it I thought I had removed the lock, but there's a bit of a misleading option to remove a device (until it checks in again) from Find My that doesn't disable the lock. So work tried to contact me through a colleague, failed, and when I called back they already had the Apple reseller do it for them.
It’s not a good thing to lock out users who are clearly and demonstrably the owners of a device. Automated protections are good, but there should be procedures in place to handle cases like these.
That's great in a world where people are unable to resell devices, but the concept of "ownership" is fluid in a world where users can sell their devices. I can think of many scams that could abuse a system where anyone who presents an ID associated with a receipt can claim "ownership" of a device and bypass various security measures. Keep in mind, Apple's threat vectors range from "random phone thief" to "state level actors", with equally as varied clientele.
Still, Apple chose to keep the keys of Activation Lock although they could have made an autonomous system that they could not disable themselves.
By keeping a copy of the keys, they are also getting the responsibility to use them when the owner needs them because if they don’t, it raises serious concerns as to why they keep the keys in first place.
The problem is that you can't permanently disable it.
To me, the risk of something like what happened to OP is more concerning than being able to lock a thief out of using/reselling my laptop. So I'd prefer to just disable Activation Lock entirely, and prevent it from ever being enabled. Of course, the ability to do that essentially reduces the theft deterrent somewhat, so Apple wouldn't want to implement this ability.
If somebody has POSSESSION of the Mac, and either:
1. An Apple ID registered with the Mac
2. A proof of purchase
3. A court ruling establishing them as the owner.
Presume they are the owner.
Regarding state level actors, they are not interested in stealing people’s MacBooks, they are interested in stealing peoples Data. Removing the activation lock from a Mac != exposing the data on it. Regarding common thieves, see above.
If Apple isn’t confident that they can authenticate ownership, they have no business locking out Macs. It is really not as hard to authenticate ownership as you think though in cases where the person claiming ownership has possession of the Mac.
And the owner could have sold it and stolen it back in in the many months he have bought it. I guess if you manage to block the device in the store itself, they will unblock it for you - but it would defeat the purpose in this case.
They have to work on the balance of probabilities though. It would be very long odds to sell a device, steal it back, then need to approach Apple for help unlocking.
They can't rely on the odds, because scammers would step in and increase the odds if the possibility existed to exploit Apple's behavior. IMO, this is what should happen given that Activation Lock is enabled.
It's a separate question whether the customer should be able to disable Activation Lock before it gets tripped, which would prevent the computer from bricking itself. Apple makes that choice for the customer because they don't fully respect your ownership of the device that they made.
A police report made before or right around when the activation lock was implemented could be a pretty good indication on whether or not it's been stolen.
This sounds terrible, but there are some lingering issues which don't sit right:
If this person has their original invoice/receipt. Then it's trivial to show that this is not an item which requires that duties be paid. He's clearly not buying it twice. Agreeing to pay duties for something that was bought inside of the country, or already delivered to the country at the time of sale raises a red flag on this story. (Like why aren't they claiming the duties back now?)
The second issue is that Apple are pretty good about unlocking devices when the owner has their purchase paperwork (invoice/receipt) because this contains the serial number and the owners name. If that doesn't work for some reason (e.g. Apple have information that the device was sold or legitimately owned by someone else), then the owner can turn to further resources to prove ownership, including the documentation that shows that it was a missing item, a police report, an insurance claim, a notarised witness statement and so on. It's not as simple as "computer says no".
Altogether there seems to be more to this story. Has the other person meddled with the laptop? The author seems to have some suspicions that the other user attempted to make good with it - that seems like the source of his woes.
> The author seems to have some suspicions that the other user attempted to make good with it
This seems like something that should be extremely easy for Apple to see. If the data aligns completely with thr story OP tells, why won’t they help him?
Nobody is saying it’s bad for Apple to lock unauthenticated users out of a device.
The problem is Apple equating the completion of not just an on-boarding process, but an optional on-boarding process, with ownership. It’s that they have a feature to lock users out of their Mac but no procedure to actually bypass this lock for the legitimate owner of the device. Without such procedures, they should not have implemented such a lock.
I’m not even against Apple applying locks that they cannot break, such as with their enhanced security for iCloud, but the difference there is that Apple legitimately doesn’t control the keys, and that can only result in mere data loss rather than resulting in devices being totally bricked.
> I also needed to pay ¥11,100 of import duties on it - it didn’t seem to matter that the MacBook was mine.
I traveled to Mexico a few weeks ago. In my luggage I had two MacBook Pro laptops and an old ThinkPad. To my dismay the people at the airport in Mexico demanded quite a bit of money, telling me that because I had brought more than one laptop I had to pay import taxes. I am a tourist from Europe traveling with three laptops. I begrudgingly paid up. It’s abusive and stupid to demand import taxes in situations both like that in the OP story and like they did from me.
> I also needed to pay ¥11,100 of import duties on it - it didn’t seem to matter that the MacBook was mine.
I hate this too.
I've sent quite a few things from one country to another - from myself, to myself. I own the things, I bought them years ago in the country I'm sending them to, took them in luggage when leaving, but am now sending it snail mail back.
They demand I pay import duties, even when I have receipts showing I own it and bought it years ago in the country they want duties.
I've never been able to get out of it, and I've spent hundreds of hours trying.
There are ways to do it, but it probably requires an expert in customs law to get the paperwork filed correctly.
When I moved from Australia to Sweden I shipped about half a shipping container worth of personal items -clothing, furniture, books, electronics - and I didn't have to pay any import duty apart from a small processing fee.
They assume you are going to be working when you have multiple laptops like that. Sort of a faulty way for them to collect taxes from the nomad/expat crowd who are skirting income taxes.
I asked them if I show the laptops and the receipt for the import tax when I leave the country, will they refund the import tax.
Nope, that will not happen they told me.
If it was true that it was to avoid that I sell any of the laptops, it should also be possible to get the import taxes refunded upon leaving the country with the same laptops. But such is not the case :(
Iirc, you're entitled to bring in a single laptop, above that, import taxes may apply. The issue is that "personal laptop" is not really something the customs has evidence of. They just see someone with multiple laptops, which could represent intent to sell.
In the interest of curiosity, everyone should read more about the situation - political, economic, etc. - of Mexico in order to understand the sincerity of a policy like import taxes on extra tourist laptops.
Thank you, that is great advice. I had not heard about it before but the Wikipedia article seems to indicate that this is exactly what I should have gotten. Will remember that for future trips.
Imagine if people from dubai complained about having to pay import taxes to bring a few extra ferraris into the states, we would call them insane, yet a macbook is likely many months comfortable living in most of mexico.
Exactly. One is for work, and one for personal use. And both of them are coming with me when I leave.
The value argument does not hold water to me. Why does the value of two laptops matter, but not the amount of money in my bank account? Why would I go the roundabout way of selling one of my laptops in Mexico, when I have money in my bank account that I can use directly.
The whole system is weird. And it ends up unfairly punishing travellers. When they should be focusing on the big scale stuff.
> Why would I go the roundabout way of selling one of my laptops in Mexico, when I have money in my bank account that I can use directly.
Because you might be taking advantage of price differences between markets? iPhones are cheaper in Hong Kong than in Mainland China, so people smuggle them to collect the margin gained by avoiding tarifs https://9to5mac.com/2017/07/18/iphone-smuggler-china-hong-ko...
Even if there was some price difference to take advantage of, the airline tickets I bought to go from Europe to Mexico are way more expensive than any sort of gain that would be worth the effort.
Also, I don’t think European countries in general have particularly good prices at all. If I were to sell one of my MacBooks here I imagine it would actually be at a loss even before you consider the cost of dragging them half way around the world in the first place.
Normally, in any country of the world, you do not pay taxes on things, you import just temporary.
I doesn't matter if it is an Ferrari just for pleasure or if it is a new machine you bring in for a trade show for your business. The thing is, that you need to make a customs declaration (and not the easy one that you normally do at the airport as a traveller). You do the full declaration including information for which reason you are importing, when you will export it again, including all the tax codes. Then when you leave you need to declare the export.
Several times I've travelled with three to Chile, always one is a new purchase, the other two usually work + personal. And 2-3 smartphones and a camera, same flight. Never really had a problem. I guess if they all were BNIB they'd ask questions, but none of my friends have had issues with their gear or their shopping, yet it's usually a different story with places like Argentina or Mexico. They do ask in Chile about possible odd luxury items that stand out, like art or golf clubs, not so much about personal jewellery tho.
Just take Apple to small claims court. Every single person who runs into a Stupid Apple Problem like this should immediately file in small claims court. Apple can continue this kind of policy because they have no incentive to fix it. Sometimes if someone makes a stink (on HN or other) in an act of Deus Ex Apple, they will descend from the cloud and fix it. Maybe.
But if 20 or 200 people go to small claims court they will have to pay legal fees to represent themself. They may decide fixing the problem is cheaper that lawyers fees
It is relatively easy to go so small claims court.
3. Get your ducks/facts in a row. Collect receipts, emails, phone notes. Get the names of people you talk to.
4. Get the procedure in a row. Much of court is about procedure. Forget to notify the other party? You are dead in the water. Miss a deadline, don't follow rule 33.b.7A? you lose. But you just have to be diligent. And if you make a mistake ask the judge if you can fix it.
4. Serve Apple.
5. Show up at Court, bring your documentation, find out what else you need to bring.
6. Be a fair and reasonable person.
Some states like New Hampshire allow you to appeal small claims decisions to the state Supreme Court. Do not accept easy failure. Many judges and lawyers look down on commoners and find them annoying. Don't be annoying and don't accept arbitrary rulings by a judge.
In New Hampshire a coffee shop owner took Instagram to court, lost the case and appealed to the NH Supreme Court who reversed the decision.
Do not be a victim, but do not expect to win. Do expect to make it clear to Apple that you will contest the "oh this is policy" or "oh we can't do this" kind of nonsense.
Oof. Step-daughter was involved in a car accident. Our insurance denied liability, his insurance said to involve small claims.
(This is in Washington state.)
What was described in the Small Claims paperwork as "optional arbitration available" was actually mandated by the court, as in "We won't hear you unless you go through this".
I ended up filing a complaint about the arbitrator.
Was a citation issued? "Yes, to my step-daughter, that we are contesting, because it says she ran a red light, based on the evidence of the other person in the collision alone, who is not exactly an unbiased witness". "That's irrelevant to this proceeding. I just asked if a citation was issued."
This guy had his car towed to a shop who charged him storage fees. When my insurance informed him, whether he agreed or not, that they were not paying the bill, he kept the car in the shop for another six weeks accruing a $200/day bill because the shop said "Oh, it'll all be fine, they'll pay eventually". Couldn't understand why I was not going to accept any responsibility for that decision, apropos of anything else. Neither could the arbitrator.
Arbitrator: "Well, you're going to have to pay for it somehow - your rates will go up because it's an at-fault collision". "No, my insurer is happy with considering this not at-fault based on everything." "Well, you were at fault, a citation was issued!" "I thought the details of the citation were irrelevant to this?" "..."
And then a slight tactical error on my part, "What if the court awards against you?" "Then our insurance will pay, based on a court judgment being entered."
Arbitrator (being absolutely neutral and impartial /s) "Well, in that case, I simply cannot understand why you would not - as a human being (her emphasis) - agree to give him everything he is asking for in this claim. I don't understand that."
Really, you don't understand why I might have an objection to paying $10,000 (his claim) for damage to a $1,400 car that may have been his fault, that he then incurred a nearly $7,000 storage bill for due to him just assuming "it'll all be figured out, don't worry".
Yeah, I had a big problem with that.
Oh, and when we did finally figure something out, the arbitrator, who had mentioned she was a lawyer in family practice, wrote out an agreement that said that "FireBeyond and [insurer] agree to do this", and "if FireBeyond or [insurer] do not, it is agreed that they will be in default"...
"I'm not an attorney, but pretty certain I don't have authority to enter into an agreement binding my insurer to anything at all..."
"Sigh. Fine, I suppose not", and makes a big dramatic deal about rewriting it to remove that.
Sorry to hear your experience. In my limited opinion this is the kind of thing that is fundamentally broken. It is designed to make life easy for insurance companies, not for people.
We as a nation, have decided to be governed by laws not by people. If we are truly to a people governed by laws, the common people (you and me) must have fair access to the courts to effect those laws. If we cannot afford an attorney, or if courts mandate arbitration - we cannot have equal access to the legal system.
In my opinion (again), the judge's requirement for mandatory arbitration denied you one of your fundamental rights as an American. Just saying.
> In my opinion (again), the judge's requirement for mandatory arbitration denied you one of your fundamental rights as an American. Just saying.
I entirely agree, actually. Especially since my step-daughter is a minor. Judge: "So, you've sued a minor in small claims. That's not a thing you can do. There's a process to do so, but we may not be able to proceed today."
I was ready to lean on that, but there was the associated stress to her and partner that they just wanted done.
As it was, the arbitration used e-signing. I wrote an agreement, and didn't sign until I spoke to our (insurance) lawyers (who couldn't represent us in small claims, but could advise). In the end they said "we could definitely argue procedural issues, etc." but they drew up a quote for what that would cost in Superior Court, etc., etc. "How much did you tentatively agree to?" Told them. "Yeah, we'll just cut a check versus making a big deal out of it." (It was an amount far more in line with a questionable liability accident than what they asked for... and then we filed a claim right back...).
I have represented myself `pro se` (no lawyer) in a state court and a state Supreme Court. One of the fundamental things I have learned is that lawyers and courts work on what is "cost effective".
The way this works is that a lawyer says it is not worth while to take something to court - "... what that would cost in Superior Court..." In this the "cost" lawyers are calculating is not your cost but theirs - and I would suspect the same with the insurance agency.
Lawyers are driven by profit period. Not all lawyers certainly, but almost all. (note 1). Your case may have merit, and it may be cost effective for you. But, if it won't be profitable for the lawyers they won't want to do it. And profitable depends on two things. The first is the amount of work.
For example, lets take a divorce case. Most divorces, no matter what, go down a well worn path. The lawyers have boiler plate forms, probably know each other, know the judge. It is like a well oiled dance. The actual work they need to do versus the work they can bill is very low. If you are a programmer, this would be like you just wrote a program and now someone wants you to write almost exactly the same program.
For this profit to work, the clients - that would be you - need to go along and not go outside the well-worn-path.
The second dependency is your chance of winning. You might think this depends on the merits of your case, but that is your issue - not the lawyers. The lawyer is evaluating odds. If they have two cases, one with a 90% chance of winning and yours with a 50% chance of winning they take the 90. Things that affect their odds are who the opposing lawyer is, who the judge is. You may have a case, but the judge may have a reputation for having a grudge against people like you. Or your lawyer may have just lost too many times against the other lawyer.
And no sane, profit oriented lawyer will contemplate appealing your case. It is just too expensive and time consuming.
I'm just trying to give you the lay of the land, because there is a kicker here. As a person representing yourself, you can appeal a case. And if you have a case, time and diligence you can pursue a wrong all the way to the US Supreme Court. In appealing a case - and I mean a case where you understand the law and have merit - you break the ordained dance. Suddenly the math for the lawyers and even the judge does not work any more.
I urge people who can do this to do it. Lawyers and to some extent judges, have gamified our courts in the interest of lawyer profit.
But I would be selling you a bill of goods if I did not raise the stress factor. You were absolutely correct: "there was the associated stress to her and partner ...."
Thanks for posting and sharing.
Note 1. For example in New Hampshire lawyer operated, free phone line you can call. But they will only answer questions if the case you want to know about is not about you getting money. Then you have to get a lawyer. But then the "cost effective" part comes into play and lawyers will not take your case.
[edit for grammar, clarity and incomplete sentence]
But what if you sold it for cash? For all Apple knows that's what happened in the poster's case (he sold it, then somehow got physical access again, then wants to steal the other person's data)
I really see no way for Apple to support the use-case of someone who a) doesn't want to use Find My and b) loses their Mac where another party activates Find My and c) regains access.
You really need to be in the a+b+c situation which is quite rare.
The irony being that it's extremely trivial to completely/permanently bypass MDM on a Mac, even if you have an M1/M2. Took me about five minutes (and was not complicated) when dealing with an old work laptop that I had personal info on (I know I know) that I wanted to be sure was wiped before returning it.
With apple DEP+MDM, You can wipe it no problem. It's trying to reinstall the OS and then activate it, is where it will fail. If you added your icloud account and turned on activation lock. The system is locked to your account. In that scenario, apple feels the device belongs to whoever locked it with their icloud account. Unless I can prove ownership of the device with a credit card statement, invoice, or MDM/DEP screenshots apple will tell me to kick rocks.
I was able to reinstall and reactivate it, and even add my personal iCloud account.
And it's actually absurdly easy (install older version of OS with three Apple DNS names blocked at your router/nameserver), then edit /etc/hosts similarly, and then you can upgrade all the way to Sonoma with everything functional, no alerts or warnings.
> But when I opened it up, a stranger’s profile greeted me. Evidently we had swapped laptops going through security. So I raced back, and returned the stranger’s laptop, and explained the situation.
A friend had this exact problem going through airport security. It ended up being a huge ordeal getting things settled.
Before hearing his story I was against putting stickers on my laptops, I felt it ruined the clean aesthetic. However, after hearing that story I always add a sticker to my laptops just to be damn sure there are no mixups like this.
they kept the unlocked laptop and bought an icloud locked device on ebay and sent that one to you, thats why it took a long time and they wouldnt return it to their airport.
It’s possible they took it to a local shop that paid them and swapped out the internals with a stolen laptop’s. The external case returned to you would be the same.
I think your second theory about how Activation Lock turned on is the most likely. My understanding is that if Find My wasn't active, then Activation Lock also wasn't enabled. The person who incorrectly received the laptop probably wiped it and set it up under their personal account, activating Find My + Activation Lock.
If the laptop had originally had Activation Lock enabled, the unintended recipient would not have been able to do this, and as a bonus, the location of the laptop would have been trackable.
So, I don't think they had to swap the laptop out for another Activation Locked laptop... they probably locked it themselves, whether intentionally or not.
I don't see how that's relevant; there are many ways bad passwords could have been entered. We have no way to know the package wasn't tampered with during shipping. The unintended recipient could have handed it off to a friend to handle the shipping back to the original owner, and that friend could have been bored. Whoever levied the import duties could have also opened the package and been bored enough to start typing in random passwords, before repacking it and shipping it onwards.
Where did "90 times" even come from? I can't find that number documented anywhere in regards to Activation Lock, even googling specifically for that number in case there were anecdotes online.
Came here to say this. My understanding is that locked Macbooks are unusable, only have salvage value, and are therefore sold at pennies on the dollar. (Many such laptops are quite likely stolen.)
When the OP mentioned a different login, etc, I started to wonder if he'd been sent a different laptop. This fits in with the other guy asking OP to cover the courier costs, etc.
Apple confirmed it didn't match with "If you need help removing Activation Lock and have proof of purchase documentation, you can start an Activation Lock support request." -> "We are unable to process your request at this time."
Sure. I’m saying OP could confirm explicitly by turning the device upside down (and looking near the regulatory markings) and pulling the receipt up. Apple is being too opaque considering Apple has the purchase history on file and could communicate, “this device is not in your purchase history, that is why we can’t unlock it.” This leaks no information of value.
It is a good security policy in general to not disclose reasons for denials, because doing so gives attackers a hint as to what they need to target. (But yes, it is better customer service to disclose.)
But it also frustrates legitimate users. I think we should balance the extra security needed to prevent attacks versus creating a kafkaesque nightmare for ourselves.
ah yes, correct. I don't know if disassembly is required for the HWID when its forced into bootloader lock, and i am not going to experiment to find out haha. But yes correct reasoning.
edit: sorry for bad reading comprehension it's late for me >_<
they aren’t locked down for parts like the phones but some major parts have issues. swapping the lcd on the m1 and m2 MacBooks will result in strange artifacts because the backlight needs to be recalibrated to the new computer. This is only possible if you buy the replacement lcd via apple as this will give you access to their system configurator tool. If you harvest an lcd from a dead/locked unit there is no way to access the tool and recalibrate the backlight, so the artifacting remains forever.
Swapping the logic board can also cause this issue. Additionally Touch ID is paired to the logic board so if you change one without the other that won’t work anymore.
Not sure if there are other paired parts or limitations like that, I’ve only done 2 of the lcd repairs and have only read about the Touch ID pairing (which isn’t a surprise)
Serial is on the bottom of the case of the laptop. OP would be able to see the serial of the mac he bought either from his original order email or from his list of signed-in apple devices, which he mentioned his mac still showed up on.
What stops them from just keeping the laptop altogether? Unless the departing airport is also in UAE, I highly doubt the airport would send interpol to confiscate a laptop.
Since they did return the laptop, maybe assuming benevolence is way to go? It took them long time maybe because they waited the airport to send their laptop back first.
> Since Apple isn’t able to handle legitimate requests to disable the Activation Lock like mine, you should turn on Find My on your own MacBook, or risk it becoming a brick like mine.
Why do people accept this nonsense when it's Apple? They wouldn't for any other company.
You bought and paid for a laptop from them. It's broken. You've gone through their process and they haven't fixed it. At that point you escalate to a credit card chargeback and/or small claims court.
This seems to be an extremely rare situation. OP did not lock the device to their account and left it free. Someone else picked it up, wiped it, and locked it to their own account. That stranger could have also poured apple juice on the macbook or just not responded to the request to send it back. Once someone else has their hands on your device, there is a risk it's just gone.
As a Macbook user I'm not at all concerned about this happening to me since I have find my set up and my mac has stickers on it so I can clearly identify it as mine and avoid this mixup.
And I also benefit from the theft resistance features.
Here is a better example: try to take the radio out of any modern car and stick it back in yourself. When power is lost it will require an activation code from the dealership. This is an anti-theft feature that consumers pay for when they buy the car.
If you fail to register your purchase (harder to do with a car, but stick with me) and go to the dealership, you won't get the activation code. This is literally what happened to OP.
I would have gladly disabled that misfeature on my old car if I could've. It was always a huge pain to find the activation code, and having to contact a dealer and jump through their hoops is a huge hassle.
The funny thing is that for this particular car, removing the radio (really the full navigation head unit) would have been a major undertaking, requiring specialized tools and quite a bit of time. If a thief has that much time and expertise, losing the radio is the least of my worries.
I am a licensed locksmith and consult on auto theft. If you have dealt with a dealership that provided unlock codes without proper paperwork feel free to shoot me an email (in my profile) and I will get it escalated up to the manufacturer.
He has it back in a broken state. The person who took it rendered it inoperable before returning it. Even without activation lock there are numerous other ways if you are holding the laptop in your hand.
True, but at the same time, it's not performing the function that was advertised upon which the purchasing decision was made. A reasonable person would believe that if it wasn't subject to physical harm (impact, water, heat, excessive voltage, etc.) then it would perform the advertised functions for a certain useful life. "Anyone who briefly possesses it can destroy that function without physical harm" wasn't advertised. IANAL but I think a judge would see it this way.
For non-Apple laptops (ie, Dell) it's also possible to effectively brick the device by setting BIOS passwords that can't be undone without replacing a chip or similarly invasive means
The question isn’t: “what are the numerous ways someone can break someone else’s laptop if they physically have possession of it?”
The question is: “how are people apologising for the fact that Apple are refusing to support individuals who are locked out of their own devices?”
The question you are answering is an irrelevant hypothetical whereas question being asked is a very legitimate consumer request.
It’s like dismissing a mugging by saying “it’s ok because they didn’t stab you”. Both are legitimately wrong but only one of those scenarios is being discussed.
UAE is a huge purchaser of 0days and hacking tools. If they were able to add their own icloud account and were "kind" enough to send it back. I wouldn't touch it.
Why do people accept this nonsense when it's Apple?
Because it's a very effective theft deterrent. All of my Apple devices have Find My turned on. If someone steals my MacBook or my iPhone, I can track them with the app. I can also remote wipe the device and brick it until my password is entered. If Apple agreed to remove the Activation Lock for the thief then they would get the full benefit of stealing it. Since Apple has an ironclad policy of refusing to remove the lock, there is nothing a thief can do to remove it.
If the thief cannot unbrick the device in any way, it is worthless to them. This deters stealing.
>Why do people accept this nonsense when it's Apple? They wouldn't for any other company.
Because 99% of the time it saves one's ass.
Three times now I've left my iPad in a shopping cart. All three times my phone has gone "WAIT! WHERE'S THE IPAD?" as I left the parking lot and all three times I was able to retrieve the iPad.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your comment, but I'm reading it as saying if I can show I bought it at one point in time, then nothing else should matter, and they should unlock it for me. But I believe I must be missing something, because that proof of purchase doesn't necessarily prove it's my laptop after it's been locked by someone else's iCloud account.
For instance, I've given family my old laptops, and they setup their accounts after they take ownership of the device. The way I interpret your comment with regards to my scenario is that Apple should disregard the fact it is locked to their iCloud account and unlock it for me, because I can prove I was the original purchaser - even if they accidentally left it at my home or I steal it from their home.
Is that what you meant, that if I can give Apple a receipt then I am the de facto owner no matter what? Or am I just way off base?
Because of this one extreme case that will almost certainly never affect you, that you can easily work around, you should abandon all the other benefits of 'buying Apple'?
I suppose if I was a big influencer like John Dvorak -- you'd have a point. But I have 38 points on Hacker News. You might be the only person listening to me :p
But doesn't Apple explicitly disavow secondary sales?
No way would they unlock a device like this for your relative. It's odd that they won't unlock it even for the original owner. In what cases do they even plan to unlock these devices?
They can't prevent it, but they can certainly disavow it. By explicitly saying they don't support it or by making it harder to sell to the next person like region-locked or console-locked media.
I guess I'm surprised they don't! As the other commenter points out they have a page dedicated to this. I conflated their stance on secondary sales with their hardware and software self-service hostility.
> Is that what you meant, that if I can give Apple a receipt then I am the de facto owner no matter what? Or am I just way off base?
That's currently how it works. Except for OP of course.
I personally think that a better tactic would be to create a separate device that is paired to the machine, comes in the box, and can bypass activation lock. This would layer nicely on top of the existing system without forcing rigorous document management and an appeal to an opaque system of power to exercise true ownership over your own computer.
In short, yes, that's probably the right approach, unless another person comes to Apple to prove they legally are the new owners (I'd imagine Apple contacting the registered adress, and requiring proof if there is a response)
For more background on this, the fact that you actually have the laptop in your possession is the key point:
In my unqualified opinion, I would think having an iCloud account tied to the device that the person in possession of said device doesn't own shows "clear and compelling testimony or documentation to the contrary [of them being the rightful/current owner]". Although, I can see how others might argue it proves nothing; in the end, neither side is probably 100% correct in all of the scenarios, and it's all up to interpretation.
All I know for sure is I can say I'm glad I'm not a lawyer!
I'm also fully unqualified, but short of the person that authentified the device coming up and detailing how they're the current owner, I still think a person with physical and proof of purchase should be prioritized.
If for instance the device had been sold to a different owner, that owner should have the receipt and be contactable (they have the email address and probably other info). And if the owner declared theft, we're out of Apple's field and it should be an official claim.
I see the passing down to a family member situation in the same light: if it was an informal transaction, the official owner is a still the same, and getting back the device unbricked and wiped out shouldn't be an ethical connundrum.
The thing that gives me the most pause is that Apple keeping a hard line on refusing to unbrick the device means they get an additional purchase from someone who's already heavily invested in the ecosystem. From their POV, bricking more devices has no counter incentives.
But maybe this guy sold his computer to someone else and then stole it back, or something else crazy. The point is that having an ironclad policy in this case is a feature for most users, not a bug.
...why would you leave a tablet or a laptop in a shopping cart?! I don't mean 'why did you forget', why would you leave it out of your hand at all, or leave anything in a shopping cart? I pull out my phone to check a price or product specification sometimes when shopping, but then I put it back in my pocket, not in my grocery basket.
I imagine they can't fit their iPad in their pockets. I'm guessing they prefer using their iPad to their phone for their shopping list, maybe because it's easier for them to read.
Some people leave their stuff in a shopping cart, some people don't setup their new laptop completely, some people aren't careful with their equipment at airport security. It's not a personal failing, it's just the way they are.
Honestly I'm kind of surprised one would bring their tablet at all. Having a phone is useful in situations like you said, but I can see no good reason to bring a tablet.
A quick look at the Australian Apple store shows iPads are AU$749.00.
Why would you put goods to the value of $749 in your shopping cart, much less leave it behind there?
It saves your ass, yeah, but maybe you should ask yourself if you would have learned a better lesson leaving it in there once and losing it forever and then being more careful in future.
I left my iPhone at a restaurant in Ayala mall in the Philippens and when I went back an hour later they not only had it, but had wrapped it in plastic.
Australia is not the only place with a functioning society.
About ten years ago, I left my iPad in the seatback pocket on a Southwest flight. I reported the lost item assuming it was gone forever and instead was notified that it has been located and that they were sending it to me. I got it in perfect shape a few days later.
I'm in Japan. From what I've heard, chargebacks are nearly impossible to initiate here. Besides, I bought it with a corporate debit card, so it wasn't an option either.
With small claims court, I doubt my Japanese fluency is sufficient, and researching how to go about it would take more time than it is worth.
The article was worth my time because it makes others aware of the situation.
People accept it because they believe in the security model.
For a lot of those people, the security model just works. Same for their online activities and apps.
There are at least these scenarios:
They have been helped by the model. Yay Apple!
Nothing has happened to them yet. Yay Apple, and surely Apple being so great is why.
They have been burned by the model. BOO Apple!
Fact is the machine is not broken and is working as designed.
The owner did not take full advantage of the security and left the door open for someone else to walk through.
No judgment on the owner.
Now Apple? Yeah, a bit too draconian for me.
And I am on the other side of this mess. Bought a very new M1 Air from them. Cheap because the owner had died and nobody knew the password.
Interestingly, I had booted into recovery mode, and I found I could mount the SSD and a USB thumb drive which let me pull docs, pictures and such for them.
After that, I was able to boot into installing a fresh OS, supply my Apple ID and use the computer just fine...
Had it been in lost or stolen status? Probably would not have worked out..
At the time, I gave security a lot of thought. The Apple stuff is good enough people really do need to understand it or risk bad scenarios like this.
(I turned Find on)
My daily driver is a lenovo. The Apple is a fun machine for me.
> Interestingly, I had booted into recovery mode, and I found I could mount the SSD
I was under the impression that Apple Silicon Macbooks had disk encryption enabled by default and that this wouldn't be possible. Turns out while that is technically true, it's only relevant in the case of the SSD somehow being removed from the device and installed in another. In the case of real disk encryption FileVault needs to be enabled. Apparently it's easy to miss that step during setup, especially if you setup the Macbook without an Apple ID/iCloud.
The weirdest Apple cult thing I ever witnessed: A colleague at university, when the transparant bubblegum all in one line of Mac's launched bought 4 for personal use to 'support Apple'.
That attitude was more common years ago when Apple was beleaguered and in real danger of going out of business. People who grew up with Macs and preferred the hardware and OS didn’t want it to go away, so they made efforts to support it. I don’t think it’s as common an attitude post-iPhone.
you can actually set up a local account for Windows which doesn't require a MS account, which is what I did after they arbitrarily suspended my account. But yes, they intentionally make it more onerous than it has to be to do so.
The second set of instructions there ("How to Create a Windows 11 Install Disk that Allows Bypassing Microsoft Accounts") seem non-cryptic and fairly approachable for anyone who can create USB install media.
I haven't tried it myself, I'm trialling an "upgrade" to Pop OS rather than Win11. So far so good, full credit to System76 for the progress they've made a in a few years. I'd consider buying one of their systems if they handled tax + duty for international shipping - insanity can ensure in the UK for packages that arrive without it all arranged.
Have you tried dealing with support for any electronics company? They're all bad and it takes a lot of arguing to get anything done, even when you pay for the extended corporate support.
You may have your reasons for lack of sympathy, but I feel like this type of response is unnecessarily callous and is not befitting of the Hacker News community.
It’s a personal attack and tears someone down for no purpose that contributes to the discussion.
Yes, I was kicking myself for not putting a sticker on it. I didn't mention it in the article, but I was going through security with my young child, so it was a bit of a hectic situation to begin with.
A moral of the story is: put a sticker on the cover of your laptop. Similarly, a bit of flagging tape[1] on luggage isn't a bad idea. Having an expensive and precious belonging that looks exactly the same as an uncountable number of other people's belongings is, on the face of it, unwise.
I wrap the handles of all my travel stuff in patterned washi tape. Multiple times at luggage return I have seen someone else pick it up and then immediately set it back down.
> don't let your belongings out of your sight at the airport.
I try extremely hard to do this, but last time I flew it was chaos at the x-ray, and my laptop got way ahead of me, and was sitting on the other side for at least a few minutes before I was able to get through and get it.
No but Apple is much easier with unlocking business managed Macs when you have AppleCare Enterprise and can prove the company bought it.
Besides, if that happens it's the company's problem, not yours. And they tend to care much more about the data on stolen devices than the hardware itself.
> Since Apple isn’t able to handle legitimate requests to disable the Activation Lock like mine, you should turn on Find My on your own MacBook, or risk it becoming a brick like mine.
Or not buy MacBooks anymore. I don't want my computer doing anything out of my control.
it's perfectly possible to just encrypt data and not completely destroy the machine. bricking the device for the actual owner because it might get stolen one day is Mutually-Assured Destruction levels of lunacy.
No, I'd want the ability to encrypt it fully, the rest doesn't really matter. I'd also want the ability to enter a (separate from my user password) decryption key on every bootup (which Macs did in fact have until recently!)
As this article shows, Apple is locking the legitimate user out. They care more about their brand perception than their customers.
> An attacker could “prank” someone by wiping their MacBook, activating it with their own Apple ID, and then reporting it as lost. The victim then has no way to recover it.
An attacker can also prank you by running a drill through your laptop.
I feel like this story is just a longer version of "I left my laptop at the airport and never saw it again." The moral should be don't let your laptop leave the airport without you.
Pro tip: when you put your laptop on the tray also put some other personal belongings in the same tray (but not ON the laptop) such as shoes, belt, watch etc. This way it would be more difficult for other people to get confused when they pick their own stuff
Second tip: Add some stickers to personalize your laptop
Less than a year old device and it is no longing functional. That would be covered by consumer rights in Europe. I would start a small claim against the apple store if i was in that position.
The legitimate owner possesses the device, but it just doesn't work anymore. That's pretty much textbook definition of "broken", and considering it is happening solely because of misbehavior of Apple's software it should be covered under warranty. If you try to report it as "theft" to the police or your insurance, they are rightfully going to laugh at you.
Compare it to a friend borrowing your car. Turns out there is a bug where if you change radio stations 30 times before turning on the ignition, the car permanently destroys its ability to turn on. Your friend accidentally triggers this. Would you consider that "theft" too, or should the manufacturer fix it under warranty?
> Compare it to a friend borrowing your car. Turns out there is a bug where if you change radio stations 30 times before turning on the ignition, the car permanently destroys its ability to turn on.
This explicitly exists in most PCs to protect the Secure Enclave.
If you push the wrong sequence of buttons in the bios or cause too many failures, you can definitely wipe secure boot, which is on by default now, and in a default windows install (with bitlocker) this will result in total data loss, by design, for exactly the same goals and reasons as when apple does it.
Sony’s android phones will even do this to destroy the camera firmware if you unlock the boot loader. Can’t have some competitor get a look at your super secret debayering algorithm!
It sounds like the other person tampered with the computer. Either by swapping HW, or adding their own iCloud info.
I believe at least with older MacBooks, if you swapped the logic board, it’d effectively remove any kind of association with the iCloud account / MDM. I wonder if OP can do that.
Ah yes, Apple support. It's been decades, sure things must have changed now, but as an anecdote. Back then my wife and me both used computers for work at home. I had a Dell, she had an Apple. When my Dell needed repair, a technician would come to the house next business day (it was a standard support option you clould choose back then even for their 'consumer' line) and perform the task. When her Mac needed repair, the only option was to deliver it by hand to the Apple store in town, and then you could pick it up again in 2 weeks. There was no other option. That was the last time she used an Apple product for work.
I had to get a Dell XPS 13 laptop repaired in 2009. The hinge had broken (probably my fault for tossing my backpack around). I contacted support, and a day later the bell rang. A young tech jockie with slicked back hair politely appeared, a silver BMW M3 in the background. He quietly ignored the errant super glue residue around the hinge, my bodged attempt at a self repair.
He sat at our dining table for about 45 minutes and expertly conducted the repair. I remember the quiet rumble of that M3 V6 as it left the neighborhood.
That computer served it's duty faithfully for another 2 years, before I upgraded to a new computer (another Dell XPS).
I have no idea how that could be a profitable business model, but Dell's support really impressed me that day.
Dell pushed out a bios update, relayed on by ubuntu, that bricked mine because after the update I closed the lid and put it in my bag because I bought a laptop. Situation: I was beside a child's ICU bed.
The bios update made using the device advertised and bought as a laptop as a laptop become fatal behaviour. Can anyone talk to Dell about it because any reputable company would apologise and fix? No. Cannot contact them because they bricked it for me just out of warranty.
So no, I do NOT recommend Dell. Ever. Their support blows goats. I hate them. I'm far from alone in that.
I’ve had the same phone number of mine connected to different Apple IDs over the years. Based on different places that I’ve worked I’ve been able to tie my phone number to different Apple IDs with different email addresses.
The other thing that the author should’ve done is physically, walked into an Apple Store and asked them to remove the lock. I’ve had this removed a couple of times for clients of mine with no issue. You just have to show a receipt and someone at the store will go in the back and come out in 2030 minutes later at the machine unlocked.
It's similar to screen sharing over FaceTime. You first have to accept it, afterwards the technician can see a video stream of your phone and tell you where you have to click. They can't directly interact with your phone.
I am currently using Linux on the desktop on my work laptop. It's fine, but lots of things don't work (e.g. camera doesn't work at all).
Last time I used Windows about 5 years ago it updated itself and it took most of a morning to sort out and get four programs which it had broken to work again. I had a deadline that day so that wasn't extremely convenient.
> I am currently using Linux on the desktop on my work laptop. It's fine, but lots of things don't work...
I have been regularly developing on and for 3 OSs, Linux (Mint and Raspberry Pi), MacOS (including iOS), and Windows.
My verdict is:
* as far as user interface goes it is taste whether Linux or MacOS.
* The Linux machines are more reliable than the Macs, just. It is close run and other people probably have different experiences. But they are on a par
* Tools. Linux wins by a big margin. The MacOS command line is a Unix (BSD I think) command line ten years out of date. The package management is either the official App Store (is it called that on MacOS?) that is full of utter rubbish or homebrew, which I really appreciate, is a good effort, but a long way behind Debian. The compilers on MacOS are unreliable, the default IDE (Xcode) has a lot of nice features out of the box, and in the three years I have been using it some are starting to work better, but it has a long way to go. Swift would look good, if Rust did not exist. The ergonomics committee from Rust - if any body listening - I love you people. Swift has nothing like that. Swift's concurrence model is really bad. Really bad. Embarrassingly bad. ARC was a good idea in the nineties for simple languages but there is no excuse for using it as the main memory management in the twenty first century.
I will stop ranting now, but you get the picture. I could have a rant three times as long
For the tools on Linux, less promises are made, quality varies, but it is all fundamentally honest. The underlying Unixisms are up to date, the compilers are top notch, all the languages I could ever want are first class citizens (I have no interest in .Net - it might not be) etcetera.
So, from my perspective - perhaps not others, it is Linux that I have walked away to
It seems like your entire decision comes down to the BSD userland? Which is the exact same as you’d get in, eg, FreeBSD.
If you’re that wound up about it, why not ‘brew install coreutils’ and then add the optional command in the install errata notes to your zshrc, giving you the gnu userland permanently?
(The shell is probably low-key another point of friction. Zsh and csh do feel older compared to bash. Oh my zsh helps a lot imo, but you can also just use bash too.)
There are an awful number of Macbook got bricked and there no no other way to destroyed it as scrap. Yes, it is quite intended, but irony for the company claimed that they protect the environment.
That article was pretty widely derided because it’s only applicable to third party companies trying to resell the entire Mac.
They don’t have a way to prove ownership but could still salvage the parts, but don’t. They’re the ones who are choosing to accept these devices and then scrapping them.
No, Apple has also been locking down part salvaging for years now. Many parts are now cryptographically linked to a specific device, and swapping them out between devices simply will not work. They are scrapped because for all intents and purposes they are scrap.
Parts linkage is only a thing on the mobile devices.
Additionally, even on the mobile side, Apple can recycle or reuse them. So they’re not scrap unless you can’t get ownership formally.
The article in question was for a company that was tasked to dispose of the devices and wanted to double dip by reselling. They didn’t want to ask their customers to remove the activation locks because it would cut into their double dipping.
It’s not Apple’s fault that people don’t RTFM and disable the locks before getting rid of their old devices. It’s absurd to claim this is Apple’s MO or that it would make a dent in their numbers. If you have proof, show us the receipts. That whole article is mostly hand waving trying to hide the few words that admit that, yes, it was the previous owner that left it locked.
If it were that easy to break into a $3000 product, and the stolen goods market intensified, then that’s more laptops Apple has to make because more victims must replace their equipment. So your environmental argument breaks even at best. Which scenario would expend more natural resources?
You’re of course free to think the feature is horrible, but hopefully you realize that’s your opinion on the matter, and not some kind of objective truth.
Chesterton’s fence: why did Apple make this feature in the first place? There is a reason.
The iCloud thing is weird, is it possible that the email was automatically created for you using your username? I believe that Apple used to do that or something similar, regardless of which email the AppleID actually used. Alternatively, it seems like whoever had your laptop had your full name, so maybe they factory reset your laptop and then created a new AppleID under that name. Unclear why they would go to all this trouble to then brick it and send it back to you, especially when they already owned a comparable one which you had returned to them. Do you recall enough to confirm whether the AppleID on the other laptop matched the name of the person who emailed you? Or does it match the one you're currently seeing?
Overall this truly sucks, sorry you had to go through it. However I'm not sure if "Not setting up Find My" is what bricked your laptop. Rather it sounds like you didn't utilize Find My, and then an adversary was able to use it to brick your laptop. It's frustrating that Apple isn't making an exception to help unblock you here, but I can also understand how they might have a pretty strict anti-theft policy that you're falling just outside of.
yeah, i would be more suspicious that he accepted a default setting provided at OOBE, and created a new icloud account, than some bug in the Activation Lock system. i haven't gone through the OOBE flow recently but it's super easy to overlook something like this.
he does question whether this might have happened:
> That the iCloud address starts with a “p”, my first initial, is haunting me. Could it be that I somehow created an iCloud address when first setting up the MacBook? I certainly don’t remember doing this though.
Or another scenario:
> If I hadn’t set up Find My for the MacBook, they should have been able to wipe it themselves. When they set it up for themselves, they could have set up Find My, and now the Activation Lock would be enabled.
Very, very plausible.
So in either of these cases, the system seems to be working as designed and they just got caught up in an edge case. The criticism of Find My seems appropriate ... the link to activation lock is definitely not well known. Just as macOS gives you an annoying notification about "take a tour" after a little while using it on a new install, it should give you an annoying notification that without Activation Lock someone with physical possession can make it theirs.
If I have to go somewhere via an international airport, and that somewhere is outside Schengen zone, I’m not taking any laptop with me that I would mind parting with.
Which is why I have a small stack of old thinkpads and whatnot.
The risks range from misplacement to customs officers being corrupt and petty, or airport security being draconian and wanting to poke around.
Thankfully, VPNs like Tailscale or Zerotier exist, and I can leave the dearer pieces of tech at home and get into them when I need them.
If Find My was not activated, therefore there was no Activation Lock, the most likely scenario is that the other person just reset and activated it themselves with this "mysterious" new iCloud account and is lying about it. The device can still be attached to Paul's original Apple account if its not removed from the list of devices by Paul, new activation lock or not.
Did the author try asking the UAE person to de-register the computer from their account?
Not seeing any mention of that but that seems like it would be my first step before trying to get Apple to do anything. They were willing to send it back to you, so if they really did just wipe it so that they could use it, seems like they'd probably be willing to remove the lock.
I read as far as “Or so I thought. About 30 minutes before my flight was boarding, I pulled out my laptop to do some last minute work. But when I opened it up, a stranger’s profile greeted me.”
At this point, everything below that line is working as intended. Be glad you still have your identity and bank accounts whole.
I know this sounds harsh but, your laptop and your data is just as personal and vital to you as your phone. When going through airport security, throw your ID and phone in the same basket as your laptop. If they make you separate them, throw your ID in the laptop basket. Better, put a sticker on your laptop. Stop keeping it pristine and uniform like everyone else’s macbook. Then you would easily know you picked up the wrong laptop. Next time buy a Lenovo.
To my eyes: you send a formal letter to Apple, describing the issue, with proof of purchasing and advise them if they do not unlock your device, regularly purchase they have to respond to a formal aggravated theft complaint because not only the device it's yours but also you data (a copy of them, maybe) it's on it and their tool prevent you to access them.
I do not know the Japanese law but here in EU such complaint PLUS a copy with some chatty journals will make the deal VERY quickly.
Sometimes peoples tend to avoid biting when they should.
Availability is a key part of security. When Apple can trivially authenticate that this man is the legitimate owner of the device, given he:
1: Bought it
2: Possesses it
I’m not sure how “But it’s not him linked with the Apple ID” is a legitimate reason not to assume him the owner pending any evidence to the contrary. If the man had his laptop stolen by somebody at the post office, who set it up with their own Apple ID, does Apple just shrug its shoulders and go “lol how is this our problem buy another Mac XD”.
Going through an onboarding process does not actually prove ownership, at all. I don’t believe what Apple is doing is actively illegal but it sure smacks of bureaucratic ineptitude.
There are plenty of ways to do this without completely bricking second-hand devices.
For example, allow the Macbook to be wiped and reused, but inform the previous owner and ask them if it has been stolen. Yes? Trigger lockdown. No? Release ownership to the new user.
While I appreciate the security implications for Apple of reversing Activation Lock when they can't verify that you are the current, legitimate owner of the hardware (given Find My hasn't been set up), there is something intensely frustrating about the idea of a perfectly functional piece of hardware becoming unusable because of a software lock.
Perhaps Apple should consider making Find My mandatory? I can't imagine this is the only case where this has happened.
The macbook should still be usable if you wipe the OS and replace it with Linux. Still, that shouldn't be necessary, considering this is a problem that Apple created.
Isn't activation lock part of the firmware, not macOS? It might work on an older Intel Mac with a T2 chip (you can jailbreak those, entertainingly enough), but probably not on the ARM ones.
It was stolen and a security feature was turned on. I think the fact that you lost physical control of your own hardware is why your MacBook is bricked.
I only used a macbook personally around 2009, but I imagine these days you can't just buy a new drive and install MacOS on it...
I don't understand why we accept a product there the above isn't possible. If security is the argument, those claims need to have some proof of a widespread problem actually existing that was solved by removing the ability to swap your drive in your own computer.
Hard to know without running the experiment again without the controls to see how much more theft would result were they not in place. I doubt the theft issue would be better without them.
You are just letting the perfect be the enemy of the good by demanding absolute results.
Very small nit: there's a reference to the Apple T2 chip. The Apple Silicon devices don't have a T2 - the functionality is integrated directly into the SoC. If it had been a T2 device then it would be possible to "simply" jailbreak the T2 and wipe all enrolled ownership data, since the T2 is based on the Apple A10 and has the same bootrom vulnerability.
I'm surprised he didn't even try that. That's a brand new laptop - go to a store and have it replaced. Or if they won't do it because of this activation lock, then purposely break it and say it stopped working.
The best part about stories like this is that I just know the person is going to go out and buy another one, even though they are now fully aware that they don't own any Apple device they "buy" and are actually just renting it from Apple until they decide not to allow you to use it anymore, instead of just buying a real personal computer.
That might explain why Apple won’t deactivate it. They don’t have a way of knowing if the OP sold it to someone and “stole” it back.
If the guy who got is legit OP may want to reach back out to that guy and ask him if that’s the case the guy who had it may be able to disable it from Find My.
If you bought the laptop with a credit card, you should try doing a charge-back. Airport story aside, the laptop is now bricked at Apple's discretion, so you should just get your money back from them to cover a new one.
CC companies are usually pretty sympathetic in cases like these.
He has a purchase receipt and his name is connected to this specific device in apple's systems!
What else would apple want to unlock it? The only scenario where they should not do this if he sold this laptop and then stole it back but that is so unlikely they should just unlock it.
I think the fundamental problem here was choosing to use an apple product. I loathe the software on my M1, and there is nothing I can do about it besides hope that Asahi adds support for everything
I understand that it should be an option: don't track me by Find My network but also there should be an option to register as my device to guarantee that others can't register.
> Since Apple isn’t able to handle legitimate requests to disable the Activation Lock like mine, you should turn on Find My on your own MacBook, or risk it becoming a brick like mine.
Or don’t buy overpriced gear from a company that is aggressively user-hostile. Take them to some kind of small claims court. It is your device, you purchased it from them, and they have no right to refuse to un-brick if they have the ability to do so, just because you didn’t do the magic handshake in the right way.
>Or don’t buy overpriced gear from a company that is aggressively user-hostile.
This adds nothing to the conversation. Saying "Just stop using it", when 'it' is the most popular mobile phone in the US and one of the dominant computer manufacturers in the world is a gross oversimplification. You say it's that easy, but it isn't. And you know that.
Don't be surprised to find out who owns the hardware when the time comes. All these "security" features are IMO excuses to remove more and more control from the user and bring it to Apple. If you fall for it, you have only yourself to blame. Next time, buy a machine that you truly own. This is the number one reason I will never buy anything from Apple, not even a simple air pod.
Why would you give a third party control over your device? You're just renting overpriced devices from Apple at this point, one of the many reasons I stopped buying iPhones (that and they're just awful anyway, the UI/ux is offensive.)
By using this crap you're allowing Apple to brick your device on a whim etc if they feel like it.
Apple is a very happy path company. I set up everything and all my shit is on their stuff. Thank you for sharing your experience. Good to know where the hard edges are.
TL;DR author did not lock MBP to themselves, lost it, someone else wiped it, locked it to themselves and used for a bit before returning without unlocking. That's the point of locking, it's not yours now.
Sure the problem is Apple's GUI around how to lock it to yourself. I personally always have Find My on so it never occurred to me that's how it locked.
But it's very far from "not setting find my bricked the device". I feel cheated.
This is indeed a cautionary tale. But soon enough, this taking out electronics at airports will be a thing of the past as more and more airports deploy luggage scanners like the ones at Dubai airport where you don't have to take anything out of the bag.
In general, here's my operational security to prevent scenarios like this:
1. All my luggage has uniquely identifiable tags and stickers on them. This includes my laptop, mobile phone, chargers and cables. This largely avoids myself or someone else mistakenly picking up wrong things.
When I'm asked to take out electronics at airport security, I use 4 trays in sequence – carry-on luggage, all my electronics in the tray, and my backpack, my shoes. This way, my electronics tray is sandwiched between my luggages. I also put my laptop in a thin cushion sleeve and I have not been asked to remove the sleeve. I also put all my smaller electronics and cables in a clear plastic zip bag and put it in the tray. Then, I try to cross the human x-ray at the same time as my luggage (most airports do a good job of ensuring this if you stay in the lane next to the luggage line). When I pickup my luggage I'm super focused to make sure I verify I got back my stuff correctly.
2. My corporate MacBook and iPhone does not allow iCloud account on it. Hence, there is no Find My. But it is tied to corp MDM. If anyone were to find it and try to wipe and install, the MDM will force a profile on it. When I report my laptop is lost, they will put it in lost mode (via MDM) and also remote wipe it. Also, they have loss/theft insurance to cover the cost of the laptop.
3. On my personal MacBook and iPhone, I have had firmware lock (on Intel ones), and always had FileVault (for M1/M2 silicon, this is same as firmware lock) on with recovery key (not iCloud recovery). Recently I have turned on lockdown mode as well. I do have an apple account for Activation Lock, App Store and TV. And I have advanced data protection mode on for this iCloud account and I have disabled iCloud Web. I have recovery key and recovery contact for this iCloud account. I don't want my data on iCloud servers without end to end encryption nor do I want Apple to be able to unlock/wipe my devices without a cryptographic consent from another iDevice I possess. With File Vault on, nobody else who gets my laptop can unlock it or wipe it or reinstall it. On some of my devices, location service is off, so Find My can't show the location but it can still activate lost mode or remote wipe the device.
4. I have both physical sim which is locked and eSIM on my iPhone. And my iPhone is locked with a password. I disable Face ID while traveling.
5. Similarly, I have advanced data protection on my Google accounts.
6. I use physical Yubikeys with pin locks for 2FA.
Look, Apple haters: there’s much to criticize about this company, and I understand everyone who wants to be in full control of their devices (and all related encryption keys), but this story is just documenting the feature working as expected. If Apple would unlock the devices after validating a proof of purchase, the next HN headline would be about some unlock scam for used devices on eBay. And if you cannot foresee what would happen if people would have to manage the unlock keys themselves, then you probably should get out of your bubble.
So maybe you can argue that this feature should not exist at all. Or be able to be deactivated permanently by burning a fuse in the device. But in that world there would be more people without their devices than in our current one.
Except they didn't. I brought it back to Apple after lots of phone calls and troubleshooting and Apple has now told me that something must have gotten messed up with the software. I am able to buy a new pair of AirPods if I would like to, or I can spend $250 for them to diagnose the issue (the price of a new set of AirPods).
I can't imagine having a problem like this that seems so obvious to be a software bug and passing that cost down to the consumer instead of making it right. I left the Apple Store in a worse situation than when I arrived. I had a working case and one working AirPod. I left with having spent $90 on my replacement AirPod, with none of them working.
I worked at Apple years ago in Apple Retail. I am shocked the people there thought this was the right approach to take. I love Apple products, but this is making me rethink the Apple ecosystem. I am certainly not buying another pair of AirPods. The environmental impacts of this also irk me. Instead of trying to solve the problem they want me to just throw away my AirPods and buy new ones.
If a company has a software issue and pushes the cost of that bug onto the consumer the company is incredibly unlikely to ever solve it. Apple pushed the pain point of their software issue onto the consumer. That's a painful experience as a customer.