> “This could be an attempt to grab more market share from the independent repair providers. Or it could be a threat to keep their authorized network in line. We just don’t know.”<p>Good grief. "Apple adds systems integrity hardware to reduce the risk of local compromise" becomes "Apple is out to destroy your repair business" because reasons.
This doesn’t seem like a very big deal.<p>Unless I read it wrong this only applies to repairs that could interfere with the operation of the T2 security chip, but I’ve only ever had my Macs repaired by Apple or authorized third-parties when I couldn’t do it myself so maybe it’s just me not seeing the issue.
And by blocking some third-party repairs, it is also making it harder to replace components with "backdoored" ones like the "big back" bloomberg article posted recently. These types of changes at their core are good, even if they're annoying.
Pretty much at the end of my 2008 Mac Pro rope. Along with repair-ability, the base and upgrade pricing is just getting out of control. With a high spec mac mini approaching 2k, I can only imagine what the new MacPro will end up being. I sure as hell am not spending $6000+ on one. Next machine will be a coffee lake Hackintosh, it really takes very little effort to install nowadays.
Is there a technical reason why the T2 chip can't be disabled wholesale for situations like this? Obviously, this would disable features like touch ID, but that seems like an okay trade off.
The newest Above Avalon podcast makes the case that Apple is embracing secondhand markets and key to that is increasing device longevity.<p>If it’s true they’re thinking about devices as likely to have multiple owners it makes sense to take precautions against hardware backdoors.<p><a href="https://www.aboveavalon.com/podcast/2018/10/26/above-avalon-episode-135-the-gray-market-factor" rel="nofollow">https://www.aboveavalon.com/podcast/2018/10/26/above-avalon-...</a>