Imagine if, after criticising the panel gaps on a Tesla, a representative from Lego points out that Lego cars don't have this problem and that Lego has a steadfast commitment to precise tolerances. As someone who uses (and is continually appreciative of) multiple AirGradient-derived devices throughout my house, my immediate reaction was one of confusion given how monstrously incomparable your product is to an iPhone.

AirGradient hardware is little more than a plastic box and a relatively basic PCB which makes around a dozen connections between few off-the-shelf prototyping components which need direct exposure to room air — they can't be sealed or weatherproofed. Repairability is literally the default state for this class of product; making it less repairable would have required more effort.

Apple devices weren't made difficult to repair because Apple actively despised repairers. They were difficult to repair because Apple lacked sufficient concern over repairability and had other priorities such as as thickness, weight, simplification and efficiency of manufacturing.

That is a good point.

I believe you are having our DIY air quality kits that are as you describe very simple. Our commercial product AirGradient ONE has a much more complex PCB with tons of additional components e.g. DC DC converter to run it from 12-36v, modbus chip, external hardware watchdogs etc.

We have made a lot of comparisons to other air quality monitors and there is a significance difference in the repaiarbility, e.g. I broke an enclosure of a competitor because it was glued together and just couldn't be opened easily.

Yes, iPhones are by a magnitude more complex products but I think a lot also boils down to attitude. I believe for a long time (and probably still), Apple made it conciously very difficult to repair/upgrade their product e.g. with proprietory screws, glued batteries, etc.

Look at the Fairphone that is a phone and also allows easy replacement of components. If they can do it, why not Apple? Maybe because so far they did not want to?

For the most part phone consumers don't really care about this though, at least not at the point of purchase. If you're going to offer a choice between easier repair and the newest feature, say a new camera sensor, and that makes it harder to repair, they're going to pick the better camera. (I accept that Apple is actively hostile to repairers as well)

If it was a hugely important element, the Fairphone would be the market leader vs Samsung/Apple.

As you no doubt know, it varies depending on the audience. If you have a nerdy DIY audience, or a technical enterprise tech audience they're going to come with different requirements.

Your reply makes no sense in the context of the article. They have just now shown that they do want to.

Proprietary/security screws don’t inhibit anyone from opening a phone other than those who would have no hope of doing anything beyond causing further damage with 100% certainty. Anyone with a sufficiently curious ten-year-old ought to be particularly thankful here.

Obscure security screws are common throughout the industry and are rarely ever the reason why a device is difficult to repair by anyone for whom success is within the set of possible outcomes.

> Your reply makes no sense in the context of the article. They have just now shown that they do want to.

This is the iphone 14. It's been a long time since the original iphone. I'm glad to see that they are changing things, but them making it better now does not cancel out all of the problems with their previous line (or the current issues with the macs).

> Obscure security screws are common throughout the industry and are rarely ever the reason why a device is difficult to repair by anyone for whom success is within the set of possible outcomes.

I think this misses the point. Even for a insignificant choice such as the screw head, Apple chose to use the option less friendly for repairs. This is a symptom of the fact that repairability has not been high on their priority list.

> Apple devices weren't made difficult to repair because Apple actively despised repairers.

IIRC the front panel uses DRM to stop unauthorized screen replacement.

Or, to be generous, it is to prevent the use of stolen components?

Foxconn workers reportedly stole US$43 million worth of iPhone parts to make new phones https://www.scmp.com/abacus/news-bites/article/3042987/foxco...

Which is to make the device secure for users who are Apple's highest priority.

It's amazing to me that developers, resellers etc seem to forget this.

"Security" is an excuse that Apple (and other anti-repair companies) love to use and it disappoints me to see people fall for it on a technical forum like this one.

It is debatable whether the devices that are restricted have any security impact to begin with (the fingerprint or face recognition sensors should just be untrusted input devices with the actual comparison happening inside the secure element of the CPU - compromising this device wouldn't give you anything you don't already have), but either way, even if there was a security impact, you can always let the user choose by giving them the (per-device) keys to override said security.

This is a bad excuse.

0.002% of our customers need security against sophisticated hackers who have the capability to hijack a repair service and replace it with a spying custom made iphone screen replacement.

Let’s make screen repairs 5-7x more expensive for 100% of our customers !

That will get the hackers !

Yea, right.... If you’re that paranoid about your security, go to an authorized apple repair centre which doesn’t bother repairing the parts and just charges you to replace the entire circuitry.

No one’s stopping you. Leave the rest of us, alone from this.

My opinion of this dismissive attitude towards security, were I to express it with sufficient honesty, would probably get me banned from Hacker News. It is the hardware equivalent of “only people with something to hide need encryption”.

It is not.

Encryption issue is about banning it altogether.

This is about user choice in terms of repairability.

This excuse is more to the equivalent of , we are banning all communication in plaintext or any encryption standard, except aes-256.

Everyone has different requirements, choice and deserve the freedom.

Companies dont get to excuse away freedom and choice, in the name of “security”.

> Companies dont get to excuse away freedom and choice

Companies don't owe you freedom and choice. If you don't like their product, if you don't like their concern for your freedom and choice, don't buy it.

Now you’re just being defensive.

We were critiquing a product, now you’re saying, companies dont owe us the right to criticise their product, and that we must move elsewhere instead of complaining.

one second you’re saying “it’s for our benefit”, the next, you want us to stop using the product, because we aren’t “owed anything”.

When did I say that companies don’t owe you “the right to criticise their product”? I didn’t say that.

Arguments with a dishonest interlocutor are frightfully boring. Reply as you see fit, but I’m closing this thread and not looking at it again.

But this doesn't add any real security because it addresses a made up threat scenario.

If people with that kind of resources are out to get you, they can simply lift your fingerprints from elsewhere. A transparent tape on the home button would probably be enough.

It makes my phone much less attractive to thieves would would strip it and resell the parts.

Maybe that isn’t so important to you, but it’s a very practical concern for many people.

Please explain to me how pairing a screen, vibration motor and battery to the motherboard keeps me secure... I'd understand faceid (which is paired of course), sure. But not these.

I really have a strong feeling that some folks have Stockholm syndrome or something.

For the record, I don't think Apple does this entirely for security. I think they do it to stop the illegal distribution of items which leak from Apple's supply chain, as well as counterfeit goods sold as though equal in quality to Apple parts. (I know multiple people who have had non-genuine screen replacements and they've always been low quality fragile glass.)

If someone tried to sell whole iPhones assembled entirely from parts leaked from Apple's supply chain, it ought to seem obvious to anyone that this is wrong. Why is the principle any different when it's not an entire iPhone?

If they sold the parts outright with resonable pricing as any other manufacturer I don't think there would be any reason for supply chain leaks...

Why would it be any different for Apple?

I agree that spare parts should be more widely available, but I take issue with your broader assertion. Are you seriously arguing that when something is too expensive, theft is justified?

Hmmm, I always wanted a Ferrari.

Wow that strawman is really quite poor. I really hope you can do better than that...

If you want a Ferrari, go buy one. They have quite long waiting lists from what I've heard.

edit: In order not to be completely off topic: Apple might have just the same problems with parts stolen from their suppliers but since every single iPhone needs to be activated, I'm very sure they would be able to catch "iPhones made entirely from stolen parts". So this is clearly not it. The fact that they don't sell anything will probably make this whole thing quite worse because if you could buy a genuine display for 250$ from Apple, why would you really buy from anyone else? That market would of course exist but it would be much much smaller.

I would not expect them to sell motherboards or for exampe face id sensors without some kind of pairing. But batteries and LCDs? Come on!

They are doing it just to stick it to anyone who wants to repair their device. Quite sad when you think about the origins of that company :-(

It makes your phone a much less ripe target for thieves who sell it for parts. Depending on where you live, this might greatly increase your personal security.

Couldn’t an adversary replace the screen in my phone with one that records the contents of what it displays? And/or tap locations. Modern keylogger.

My guess is Apple started doing all this pairing stuff due to some security threat they saw before we did.

Apple does not do this for security but just to piss user off - hence disabling the TrueTone & autobacklight features. These features are hardly anything that could be argued is "security relevant". I mean would you really velieve that vibration motor or battery could compromise security of your phone? One has to (unfortunately) stay in the realm of possible and feasible despite all the James Bond & CSI Miami & Bones TV shows...

Apple does somewhat care about users privacy (I like that very much) but this is really not it. And it goes for the battery as well. And vibration motor. And rear facing camera. All these are just plain and simple middle finger to third party repair shops. You could argue about FaceID sensor and motherboard and I would agree with security concerns, but that's pretty much it.

Why are you just taking Apple's claims at face value?

No, it’s to make stolen iPhones worthless.

Yeah, but it does not make it worthless at all...

Even broken logic board is worth quite a lot so this argument is really more of a wishfull thinking than a reality.

”worth less” then instead of worthless

That's cool and all, but what you've built is not a phone and doesn't need to be IP67-rated for water resistance at 1 meter depth.

Yes it's probably easier to design but there are no reasons why a phone needs so many glued parts inside and the latest iPhone demonstrates that there are ways to design for maintainability.

> there are no reasons why a phone needs so many glued parts

There are numerous reasons (some very good reasons) why adhesives are used in smartphone assembly. Sometimes these reasons can sometimes come into conflict with repairability, but that doesn't render their usage completely devoid of any valid reason.

For example, many uses of adhesive are to improve water resistance. And improved water resistance reduces the likelihood of a product needing repair, which is equally virtuous (in my opinion) as repairability.

How much are they, and where can I buy one? I don't typically follow through on "contact for pricing".

We focus on b2b and prices start at USD200.

We also have an open source kit with very similar sensors starting at around USD70. More information here: https://www.airgradient.com/open-airgradient/kits/

This is a really cool idea.

As a business owner I would never buy the DIY kit, I would want it fully assembled and have an appropriate warranty, factory testing/calibration and fast replacement - doubly so if I needed the sensor data for compliance or safety reasons.

However as a tinkerer I probably wouldn't buy a $200 air sensor... but $70 and get a bit of a project out of it? Sure!

Perfect example of broadening reach without cannibalising core business IMO.

Thanks! I'm happy ya'll sell a kit, definitely going to pick one up. :)

That about page is really bland. Your comment feels far more genuine than this. It would sell far better.

That's a good point we were not aware. We will rewrite that page and make it more authentic.

That might be because comments are more personal than about pages.

Looks promising and I'm in the market for a few. Too bad I can't buy them.

See my comment above about pricing. We also have pre-soldered open source kits available that are "hacker friendly". More information on this page: https://www.airgradient.com/open-airgradient/kits/

Excellent! Is there any sample code for connecting to the device? Does the cloud dashboard have an API?

>not using plastic for packaging and we ask our supplier to not use plastic when sending us the parts

This honestly cheapens the rest of your efforts. Paper straws vibe.

tbh, products/services named "one" are so cliche these days. At least it makes sense if the next product is called AG 2 or something.

I think it should be illegal to have product names containing "One" or "Plus" in them, unless there is another product offered in the same product line containing "Zero" (or "Two" I suppose) or "Minus".

> - using no glue or snaps

What's the reason to avoid snaps?

Okay this is understandable as while some snaps are easy to both insert (snapped) and remove (unsnapped), some can not be removed easily.

Your scrutiny stopped at the hardware. Your first link showed a white page for 31 seconds while it was running javascript and using up to 50% of my M1 Mac's power. All that, for a page 2 MB page.

They are hardware guys, they probably wrote some good firmware but their expertise falls short of cutting edge web stuff. I would cut them some slack and hope they are successful enough they can pay someone else to do web stuff at some stage. :)