Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Just want to jump in on this - the SanDisk external SSDs have a very high failure rate:

So I would perhaps... grab something else.
Any recommendations for an SSD alternative ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 120FPS
He picks on Apple, because I think he made a good amount of money repairing Macs and that is coming to a close
He slags Apple because that's what drives engagement. Fame and power is addictive, as is having an army of sycophants slobbering all over you. Money also follows. It's the same old story as any other YouTube reactionary who came before him. It's the same as the radio commentators before that and the street corner proselytizers before them. Moral outrage is profitable. He's Rush Limbaugh with a soldering iron.

Apple is the world's richest company and should be criticized about everything they do. IMO, that's beside the point.
 
Just want to jump in on this - the SanDisk external SSDs have a very high failure rate:

So I would perhaps... grab something else.

I've have to say, my SanDisk has been absolutely magnificent. I've had it permanently plugged into my M1 iMac for over two years as my Time Machine backup, and it's performed perfectly. The reports specifically point to the 2000MB/s transfer-rate SanDisk SSDs, and the 4TB and 2TB versions as the problematic ones.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
I find it sad that the person who said I am not worth listening to because I lack engineering knowledge is the person who put error 53 in the same sentence as the word security and discussed it for three paragraphs. It has been more than six years since it came out that it was a manufacturing QC check , not a security feature. It was a mistake that this ever made it out into the wild, post-manufacturing, and had nothing to do with security. Since that person has said they will never listen to anything I say, they may just go the rest of their life thinking that's true. You're welcome to go to apple's own website where they direct you on how to remove error 53 from your phone without changing any of its hardware, including that evil nefarious home button repair you had installed by the Andrew Tate of MacBook repair! 😅

And the person arguing that "defect" is the wrong word to use on a device that sent 12 volts to the NAND 😂🤣 with the "uhm, akshually....." 😅 ...defect, defective, bad design, bricked, BROKEN...whatever you want to call it. I'll give you that one.

AS LONG AS; you're the one who makes the next call to the customer explaining WHY it's not fixable..... you can use whatever synonym you want to describe 12 volts to the SSD. 😉

Stop, seriously, you're killing me...

I'm always open to address any of these issues and criticisms and good faith, as soon as you are! Most are in the video, without juvenile character assassination, and ad hominem stuff everywhere. Read the comments in this thread... do you walk around vibrating with this much negativity towards people you've never spoken to or met regularly? Go outside! Check out Mansfield dam Park. Laguna Beach. The white mountains. Franconias notch. Especially franconias notch - take in the view on that one! Have some fun. Breathe in, breathe out, and be happy.

Have a lovely day!
 
Last edited:
I find it sad that the person who said I am not worth listening to because I lack engineering knowledge is the person who put error 53 in the same sentence as the word security and discussed it for three paragraphs. It has been more than six years since it came out that it was a manufacturing QC check , not a security feature. It was a mistake that this ever made it out into the wild, post-manufacturing, and had nothing to do with security. Since that person has said they will never listen to anything I say, they may just go the rest of their life thinking that's true.

And the person arguing that "defect" is the wrong word to use on a device that sent 12 volts to the NAND 😂🤣 with the "uhm, akshually....." 😅 defect, defective, bad design, bricked, BROKEN...whatever you want to call it. I'll give you that one.

AS LONG AS; you're the one who makes the next call to the customer explaining WHY it's not fixable..... you can use whatever synonym you want. 😉

Stop, seriously, you're killing me...

I'm always open to address any of these issues and criticisms and good faith, as soon as you are! Most are in the video, without juvenile character assassination, and ad hominem stuff everywhere. Read the comments in this thread... do you walk around vibrating with this much negativity towards people you've never spoken to or met regularly? Go outside! Check out Mansfield dam Park. Laguna Beach. The white mountains. Franconias notch. Especially franconias notch; take in the view on that one. Have some fun. Breathe in, breathe out, and be happy.

Have a lovely day!

Hi Louis,

The burning question everyone wants you to answer: Is AppleCare+ worth the money ?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ArkSingularity
TL;DR - it depends what you break, and how bad you break it!! Sometimes Applecare+ is a steal and you are lucky you got it. Sometimes you will be paying almost $700 for a basic repair. Did you break your machine in a way where I can salvage what you have, or did you break it in a way where I have to replace everything? If you did the former, you're almost always better off with a good independent. If the latter, Applecare+ would've been the way to go.

When it comes to warranties, that's where I'm going to be talking out of my ass. I 100% admit I do not keep up to date on this and don't have much knowledge on it at all, so take with a grain of salt.

The OLD Applecare that I remember back when I started doing this in 2008 wasn't a great deal. From what I remember, you had zero coverage for accidental damage. It was just an extended warranty that extends you to the warranty that other countries with halfway decent consumer law give you to begin with. You still got quoted $700+ for a screen back then even if you had applecare. This left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths. I universally suggested people stay away from this plan.

Apple listened to consumer feedback and it got a lot better. Now it's more like an insurance plan... Applecare+ covers accidental damage incidents if you paid a deductible The last time I went over the pricing of this was over 5 years ago. It was $379ish from what I remember to buy applecare, and $299 for a deductible. From what I see, the same $299 deductible exists and pricing is $179-$399 for 3 years of base coverage. It can actually be a good deal, and a way better deal than ANY independent service center, depending on how you broke the machine!

In 2018 when I wrote that page for my site, if you had a machine where I could fix the board - I was a better deal, every time. If you had a machine where your board was unfixable & needed replacement, applecare+ w/ deductible was a better deal. It seems like that is still the case.

Some examples:

Where we beat Applecare+:
Let's say you have a 16" Macbook Pro. $399 for 3 years base coverage, $299 deductible. That means a liquid damaged board repair will cost you $698 through apple, vs $325-$425 through us. Applecare loses. That same repair can be found cheaper if you find a place that has lower payroll than we do. Also keep in mind this is only for the first 3 years - after that, you're on your own unless you keep renewing. In this scenario, We are the better deal. The price is lower, and the price stays lower for longer.

Where Applecare+ beats us:
Let's say you got water on the power supply for the T2. T2 got 12v. CPU got 12v. GPU got 12v. This board is toast. I can't fix it, I can only replace it, and it costs over $1200... Applecare will cost you $698 for the entire repair, which is hundreds less than my parts cost of the board. AND, Apple will cover everything else that's wrong with the machine. Applecare is a way better deal in this case.

Where we beat Applecare+:
Let's say your issue with the machine is nothing but... an angle sensor.... a sub-$300 repair. BUT... but.. it has liquid damage on it! Even though the rest of the machine is liquid free... they're not having it. You have to pay the full rate for a liquid damage repair. You're stuck paying $698 through Applecare+, and it has to be in the first 3 years. That's harsh. We charge less than half that and it would be the same whether you're 3 years in or 7 years in. Actually cheaper 7 years in because parts cost is cheaper, machine is older & easier to work on once more familiar with it, etc.

Where Applecare+ beats us:
If you have any uncertainty about the quality of the independent repairers in your area and just don't want to deal with going outside of Apple, the price premium of Apple would make sense.

Again, Applecare+ is faaaar from what it was back in 2008. I remember people getting quoted $1200 for display assemblies because of a cracked screen back when a grade A+ screen from a factory unopened AUO box was $77. Apple had zero mercy for the customer that they paid $300+ for Applecare when they bought the machine.. the $300 would cover the screen and $200+ on top in labor... but they still wanted $1200. It was a crazy time.

Apple listened to their customers and came up with a far less crappy system, which is a good thing for you all. Applecare+ of 2023 is a far cry from the Applecare of 2008 when I started doing this, shortly before registering on this forum :)

If you're careless, I would get Applecare+ and keep renewing it every year. If you are not careless, I wouldn't. It's impossible to say whether it is a good deal without specific future-vision into how you will damage your machine.
 
I've have to say, my SanDisk has been absolutely magnificent. I've had it permanently plugged into my M1 iMac for over two years as my Time Machine backup, and it's performed perfectly. The reports point to 2000MB/s transfer rated SanDisk SSDs as the problematic ones.
Gotcha yeah, some of the SanDisk stuff is rebadged WD stuff and they certainly have some good products, I just wanted to make sure in case you both had that model AND weren't aware of the issues. If it's working for you and it isn't one of the known problematic ones I am sure it's fine, though I think the lack of support to people who are experiencing these issues turns me off from buying their products in the future.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
  • Love
Reactions: Jay Tee
I find it sad that the person who said I am not worth listening to because I lack engineering knowledge is the person who put error 53 in the same sentence as the word security and discussed it for three paragraphs. It has been more than six years since it came out that it was a manufacturing QC check , not a security feature. It was a mistake that this ever made it out into the wild, post-manufacturing, and had nothing to do with security. Since that person has said they will never listen to anything I say, they may just go the rest of their life thinking that's true. You're welcome to go to apple's own website where they direct you on how to remove error 53 from your phone without changing any of its hardware, including that evil nefarious home button repair you had installed by the Andrew Tate of MacBook repair! 😅

I find it sad that you refer to people in this thread without quoting them directly so they're aware they're being spoken of. I know it's uncomfortable after a career speaking from your couch without having to hear a response that doesn't improve your engagement score, but different place, different rules. I'm not a celebrity and everything I say worth commenting on (or not!) is within this forum, I don't expect I'm being talked about without being part of the conversation.

Since all I can do is guess and search what you mean, I'm not finding anything I didn't know. TouchID is a critical piece of the Apple security strategy. Tampering with sensors and the connections to the secure enclave are a potential attack vector. For this reason, Apple restricts unauthorized repair shops, such as yours, from tampering with or attempting to replace the TouchID sensor. Some unauthorized repair shops tried to do it anyway. System tests meant to flag a misconfiguration in an authorized repair began to notice the bad buttons by unauthorized repairs and flagged an error. Apple eventually released a patch that disabled the TouchID functionality but let the phone continue to boot without that feature.

I'm guessing you didn't link to Apple's statement because it doesn't support your argument.

Here was Apple's statement:

We protect fingerprint data using a secure enclave, which is uniquely paired to the touch ID sensor. When iPhone is serviced by an authorised Apple service provider or Apple retail store for changes that affect the touch ID sensor, the pairing is re-validated. This check ensures the device and the iOS features related to touch ID remain secure. Without this unique pairing, a malicious touch ID sensor could be substituted, thereby gaining access to the secure enclave. When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure.​

If repair shops sought proper authorization from Apple, or referred security critical repairs to a repair shop suited to handling them, this wouldn't have been a problem, but since some were scavenging buttons from iPhone corpses and installing them it became one. Apple later updated their firmware to support the customers who prefer shops such as yours:

Some customers’ devices are showing ‘Connect to iTunes’ after attempting an iOS update or a restore from iTunes on a Mac or PC. This reports as an Error 53 in iTunes and appears when a device fails a security test. This test was designed to check whether Touch ID works properly before the device leaves the factory.​
Today, Apple released a software update that allows customers who have encountered this error message to successfully restore their device using iTunes on a Mac or PC.​
We apologize for any inconvenience, this was designed to be a factory test and was not intended to affect customers. Customers who paid for an out-of-warranty replacement of their device based on this issue should contact AppleCare about a reimbursement.​

It is clearly referred to as a security test meant to test the proper functioning of an authorized button when installed by Apple.

So, everything I've said is accurate:

Error 53 is an interesting example. Touch ID. Apple has gone through tremendous lengths to preserve user privacy and security in their biometrics and elsewhere, yet one obvious vulnerability is the sensor itself. Remember, Huawei has been essentially banned from selling equipment in the US because of concerns they would backdoor hardware, so this isn't purely hypothetical. Serializing the TouchID sensor and implementing tamper detection is an obvious step to take.

Which you seem to know, or you would have quoted me directly.

I'm always open to address any of these issues and criticisms and good faith, as soon as you are!

Except you're not, or you'd have replied to the people you're addressing rather than making oblique references to them. I won't watch the video and pay you for my time, but if there's something you said in that video that you're willing to repeat here for free and it's interesting enough to engage in, I'm game.
 
I find it sad that the person who said I am not worth listening to because I lack engineering knowledge is the person who put error 53 in the same sentence as the word security and discussed it for three paragraphs. It has been more than six years since it came out that it was a manufacturing QC check , not a security feature. It was a mistake that this ever made it out into the wild, post-manufacturing, and had nothing to do with security. Since that person has said they will never listen to anything I say, they may just go the rest of their life thinking that's true. You're welcome to go to apple's own website where they direct you on how to remove error 53 from your phone without changing any of its hardware, including that evil nefarious home button repair you had installed by the Andrew Tate of MacBook repair! 😅

And the person arguing that "defect" is the wrong word to use on a device that sent 12 volts to the NAND 😂🤣 with the "uhm, akshually....." 😅 ...defect, defective, bad design, bricked, BROKEN...whatever you want to call it. I'll give you that one.

AS LONG AS; you're the one who makes the next call to the customer explaining WHY it's not fixable..... you can use whatever synonym you want to describe 12 volts to the SSD. 😉

Stop, seriously, you're killing me...

I'm always open to address any of these issues and criticisms and good faith, as soon as you are! Most are in the video, without juvenile character assassination, and ad hominem stuff everywhere. Read the comments in this thread... do you walk around vibrating with this much negativity towards people you've never spoken to or met regularly? Go outside! Check out Mansfield dam Park. Laguna Beach. The white mountains. Franconias notch. Especially franconias notch - take in the view on that one! Have some fun. Breathe in, breathe out, and be happy.

Have a lovely day!
What’s a defect? You do understand Apple or any other manufacturer is obligated to fix defects or can be liable for shipping defective products. Maybe brush up on basic quality control or quality standards from the Engineering 101 course.

The travesty here is poor repairability of Apple products gets lost in clickbait/FUD/sensationalization without looking at the bigger picture. I don’t think anyone is arguing about a trade-off between other Apple choices over the ability to repair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Analog Kid
I'm just going to take a minute to clear up what error 53 is, because it had nothing to do with the hardware serialization requirements of the iPhone.

Apple (like any manufacturer) performs a great deal of automated testing before devices leave the factory. Error 53 was one of these tests (designed to prevent broken iPhones from accidentally landing in the hands of a consumer). It was a bug that existed in one of the iOS updates that would cause the iPhone to reject some touch ID sensors many months after being replaced due to the iPhone incorrectly performing these tests after an iOS update, which caused the iPhone to wrongly assume it was mis-manufactured at the factory.

Error 53 wasn't a security feature. It was a bug in iOS, and Apple has since addressed this. They have shown users how to fix this without any further changes to the hardware (including users who had third party touch ID repairs from independent repair shops).
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire
I'm just going to take a minute to clear up what error 53 is, because it had nothing to do with the hardware serialization requirements of the iPhone.

Apple (like any manufacturer) performs a great deal of automated testing before devices leave the factory. Error 53 was one of these tests (designed to prevent broken iPhones from accidentally landing in the hands of a consumer). It was a bug that existed in one of the iOS updates that would cause the iPhone to reject some touch ID sensors many months after being replaced due to the iPhone incorrectly performing these tests after an iOS update, which caused the iPhone to wrongly assume it was mis-manufactured at the factory.

Error 53 wasn't a security feature. It was a bug in iOS, and Apple has since addressed this. They have shown users how to fix this without any further changes to the hardware (including users who had third party touch ID repairs from independent repair shops).
Apple says differently. They specifically say it is flagged at failure of a security test. What's your source?

And just to prevent drift on this, the way error 53 entered the discussion was here:
Apple has made some, at times, fairly arbitrary decisions that have further restricted this much more than other manufacturers across the industry. The push towards serializing components, designing things in such a way that even those with the special tools required can't repair them (e.g. the storage chips), among many other things are all examples of this. Error 53 on the iPhone is an especially notorious case of this

So is it related to increased component serialization or isn't it? Was it a notorious move by Apple to restrict repair or an inadvertent bug that Apple fixed, no harm no foul? And what source do you have saying it wasn't part of an effort to ensure end to end security of TouchID and the secure enclave despite Apple's public statements that it was?
 
Last edited:
Apple says differently. They specifically say it is flagged at failure of a security test. What's your source that says differently?

And just to prevent drift on this, the way error 53 entered the discussion was here:


So is it related to increased component serialization or isn't it? Was it a notorious move by Apple to restrict repair or an inadvertent bug that Apple fixed, no harm no foul? And what source do you have saying it wasn't part of an effort to ensure end to end security of TouchID and the secure enclave despite Apple's public statements that it was?
Apple's own sources ALSO tell people how to remove this error without replacing the hardware on their devices. If we're going to use Apple as a source, we cannot use it as a source to claim that this was required because independent third party shops were creating a security risk by replacing the sensor. If this were the case, Apple would not have addressed this issue.

I don't know why you're trying to cite my argument to claim that touch ID sensor replacements by independent repair shops are an inherent security risk. From the very beginning, I've been challenging this notion (there are ways to prevent this from being an issue).
 
Last edited:
Not that apple cares, but I have seen YouTube remove videos/suspend channels for spreading fake news about product defects. Startups/mid size companies are pretty aggressive about potential loss of revenue or reputation on social media calling their products defective. Not to mention the legal liability of a defect for the company.
 
Apple's own sources ALSO tell people how to remove this error without replacing the hardware on their devices. If we're going to use Apple as a source, we cannot use it as a source to claim that this was required because independent third party shops were creating a security risk by replacing the sensor. If this were the case, Apple would not have addressed this issue.

I don't know why you're trying to cite my argument to claim that touch ID sensor replacements by independent repair shops are an inherent security risk. From the very beginning, I've been challenging this notion (there are ways to prevent this from being an issue).

Apples response was after the media picked up this as a real story, not a technical misunderstanding (which really should be the name of 90%+ of tech “journalism” out there).

Basic speed run of the saga:

The error comes up when a serialized touchID is mismatched with the security enclave it was originally paired with.

Tinkerers mistakenly thought it wasn’t supposed to happen if an actual TouchID module from another unit was swapped in under the assumption that a “real” (non counterfeit) part could simply be swapped.

The self tests flag the authentic part because it’s not the one that’s supposed to be there.

Media hype ensues.

Apple updates Configurator to allow for authentic modules to be re-paired with the Secure Enclave.

The tinkerer types mistakenly claim victory over an alleged plot to stifle repair services, ignoring security because that’s not important to them.

The media and lawyers smell an easy story devoid of technical fact.

A modern myth about error 53 is born.
 
Apple's own sources ALSO tell people how to remove this error without replacing the hardware on their devices. If we're going to use Apple as a source, we cannot use it as a source to claim that this was required because independent third party shops were creating a security risk by replacing the sensor. If this were the case, Apple would not have addressed this issue.

Apple inserted a hardware check when iOS was updated to ensure the TouchID sensor was properly authenticated to the system. It would prevent boot if it was not.

Apple discovered that with or without the knowledge of customers, unauthorized repair shops had been scavenging parts. This means the security check Apple included to confirm proper authentication of their work also brought down existing units in the field to the surprise of their users.

Apple updated their iOS to allow the device to boot while also disabling the use of the foreign TouchID sensor.

To say it isn't security related is wrong regardless of whether Apple later made efforts to minimize the pain to customers who used unauthorized repair shops, knowingly or not.

I don't know why you're trying to cite my argument to claim that third party repairs for the touch ID sensor are a security risk. From the very beginning, I've been challenging this notion.

You are the first mention of Error 53 in the thread. Perhaps I misunderstood your argument here? My read was that you were saying error 53 was a notorious effort by Apple to restrict 3rd party repairs through serialization of parts.

Apple has made some, at times, fairly arbitrary decisions that have further restricted this much more than other manufacturers across the industry. The push towards serializing components, designing things in such a way that even those with the special tools required can't repair them (e.g. the storage chips), among many other things are all examples of this. Error 53 on the iPhone is an especially notorious case of this
 
Apples response was after the media picked up this as a real story, not a technical misunderstanding (which really should be the name of 90%+ of tech “journalism” out there).

Basic speed run of the saga:

The error comes up when a serialized touchID is mismatched with the security enclave it was originally paired with.

Tinkerers mistakenly thought it wasn’t supposed to happen if an actual TouchID module from another unit was swapped in under the assumption that a “real” (non counterfeit) part could simply be swapped.

The self tests flag the authentic part because it’s not the one that’s supposed to be there.

Media hype ensues.

Apple updates Configurator to allow for authentic modules to be re-paired with the Secure Enclave.

The tinkerer types mistakenly claim victory over an alleged plot to stifle repair services, ignoring security because that’s not important to them.

The media and lawyers smell an easy story devoid of technical fact.

A modern myth about error 53 is born.

Now I wish I waited to respond, yours is better...
 
Apples response was after the media picked up this as a real story, not a technical misunderstanding (which really should be the name of 90%+ of tech “journalism” out there).

Basic speed run of the saga:

The error comes up when a serialized touchID is mismatched with the security enclave it was originally paired with.

Tinkerers mistakenly thought it wasn’t supposed to happen if an actual TouchID module from another unit was swapped in under the assumption that a “real” (non counterfeit) part could simply be swapped.

The self tests flag the authentic part because it’s not the one that’s supposed to be there.

Media hype ensues.

Apple updates Configurator to allow for authentic modules to be re-paired with the Secure Enclave.

The tinkerer types mistakenly claim victory over an alleged plot to stifle repair services, ignoring security because that’s not important to them.

The media and lawyers smell an easy story devoid of technical fact.

A modern myth about error 53 is born.
Facts don’t get clicks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Analog Kid
Apple updates Configurator to allow for authentic modules to be re-paired with the Secure Enclave.
Is this part true? My understanding is that TouchID won’t work unless the part is sourced and installed through an authorized provider. The button clicks, but TouchID doesn’t.
 
Apple inserted a hardware check when iOS was updated to ensure the TouchID sensor was properly authenticated to the system. It would prevent boot if it was not.

Apple discovered that with or without the knowledge of customers, unauthorized repair shops had been scavenging parts. This means the security check Apple included to confirm proper authentication of their work also brought down existing units in the field to the surprise of their users.

Apple updated their iOS to allow the device to boot while also disabling the use of the foreign TouchID sensor.

To say it isn't security related is wrong regardless of whether Apple later made efforts to minimize the pain to customers who used unauthorized repair shops, knowingly or not.



You are the first mention of Error 53 in the thread. Perhaps I misunderstood your argument here? My read was that you were saying error 53 was a notorious effort by Apple to restrict 3rd party repairs through serialization of parts.

Apple themselves states that it was a factory test unintentionally left in with the iOS update. My source for this claim is is Apple's own statements:

"We apologize for any inconvenience, this was designed to be a factory test and was not intended to affect customers. Customers who paid for an out-of-warranty replacement of their device based on this issue should contact AppleCare about a reimbursement."
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.