Apple are deliberately destroying iPhone 6's

Apple is big on security.

Which is precisely why I, like millions of others, have 'bought into' the Apple system. I have an iPhone, iPad and an iMac desktop computer. I feel very safe with these devices as I don't have any anti-virus installed on any of them, but have never, ever had any serious threats. One or two scams, which were easily dealt with, but no viruses or malware.

Anyone who tries to pinch my 6 will have to prize it from my old cold dead hands!

Apple is big on security. Anyone could claim that the iPad in their possession had belonged to a dead relative. The same people would be criticising Apple for not checking the facts if they didn't check and double check before unlocking a device. It's not obstructionism, it's carefulness with other people's data.

Read the story about our MacBookPro. How is that even the teensiest bit unhelpful?

They don't seem to be a very accommodating firm. It reminds me of a news story I was listening to in 2014 about a lady, terminally ill and bedridden, whose two sons had bought her an iPad. She died not long after, leaving her estate to her sons. They agreed that one of them should have the iPad but their mother had died before she had passed on the security codes to her sons, so they couldn't unlock it. Apple refused to help "without permission in writing from the owner" having already been told she was dead. After being approached by a solicitor, Apple insisted on having a copy of the will, a copy of the death certificate and a court order! Compassion obviously doesn't count for a lot in what they like to call the big Apple family. One of the sons said they found the whole thing so distressing he wished they'd just thrown it away.

That's interesting thatbags. Glad you found that - I rarely go on Twitter (never been able to get my head round it really.)

"The company did not go as far as acknowledging that there was no possible recovery once the issue has occurred, but simply advised affected users to contact Apple support. We have asked Apple whether it is able to restore or repair affected phones and will update if we get a response".

via Twitter

The trouble is Apple do think they're a little bit fireproof. They have an amazingly loyal ( and large ) user base who will spend anything to get the latest and greatest from Apple.

Maybe there's some method in their madness?

Are they sending a very deliberate message to their user base? They can easily throw their hands in the air in horror if it all backfires on them .

Wrecking its customer base doesn't seem like good business practice to me so I suspect that if there has been no warning about this or if the warning wasn't loud and clear enough, Apple will do something to remedy the situation. Time will tell.

I agree that a warning should be loud and clear.

However, I don't immediately think Apple is in the wrong here. They might be but they might not. We have had an Apple MacBookPro mended for free (including collection and transport costs and back delivery) after something kept going wrong and we had had it mended by a local repairer twice.

So I'd like to hear more of this story before deciding.

Yes, I agree, thatbags and I can understand their thinking. But something is very wrong if customers are not warned in advance about this. And I don't mean somewhere in the small print - if people can be at risk of losing not only their very expensive phone, but also all of their data (which may be of value to them in their work, for example), then the warning should be loud and clear. In the case of people like the journalist who had no choice but to use a 'non-official' repair workshop in Macedonia, there should be provision for them to visit an official repairer as soon as they can to have the repair validated. This provision may indeed exist, but if no-one knows about the risk in the first place, then they are unlikely to seek out an 'official' repairer before updating the IOS. And then it's too late.

The last two paragraphs of the article explain Apple's reasoning very well, I think. It's about security.

Maybe that law doesn't exist in the US?

Wow ! Incredible and surely against anti competition law ?