iPhone 5S, 5C teardown: Plenty of adhesive, missing M7 coprocessor

Shawn Knight

Posts: 12,605   +124
Staff member
Apple’s latest iPhones have finally hit the streets and for two unlucky devices, it’s already the end of the road as they wound up on the iFixit operating table. Both the iPhone 5S and the 5C have been given the...

[newwindow="https://www.techspot.com/news/54075-iphone-5s-5c-teardown-plenty-of-adhesive-missing-m7-coprocessor.html"]Read more[/newwindow]
 

freythman

Posts: 113   +10
No surprises here. Apple has to have a reason for you to bring your device into their store for repair, and to steer you away from using a third-party. What better way to do it than to use an obscure screw, more adhesive than necessary, and brittle cables?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jad Chaar
G

Guest

I don't follow... what prevents a third party to use the obscure screwdriver and deal with adhesive? If they are as professional as Apple's repairmen, they should not have problems with it.
 

MilwaukeeMike

Posts: 3,213   +1,462
Cool article, and I'm glad it didn't turn into 'The iPhone only has $200 worth of parts in', which would then lead to the discussion of whether 'it should only cost $210 to buy except Apple is sooooo greedy.'
 

Railman

Posts: 708   +100
Cool article, and I'm glad it didn't turn into 'The iPhone only has $200 worth of parts in', which would then lead to the discussion of whether 'it should only cost $210 to buy except Apple is sooooo greedy.'
The parts might only cost $200 but there are other cost which have to be factored in. R&D, marketing, return on investment come to mind straight away. It may well be that Apple are making an excessive profit on their phones but selling at $210 would mean them selling at a loss.
 

mailpup

Posts: 7,604   +725
TS Special Forces
I don't follow... what prevents a third party to use the obscure screwdriver and deal with adhesive? If they are as professional as Apple's repairmen, they should not have problems with it.
Nothing prevents a third party from obtaining the special screwdriver and, yes, professional repair people should have no problem with it. However, as the article says the security screws are to discourage ordinary consumers from tinkering with it. It doesn't prevent them from doing so. It just makes it more difficult so at least some of them won't bother, that's all.

I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing or that I agree with it. It just is.
 

MilwaukeeMike

Posts: 3,213   +1,462
The parts might only cost $200 but there are other cost which have to be factored in. R&D, marketing, return on investment come to mind straight away. It may well be that Apple are making an excessive profit on their phones but selling at $210 would mean them selling at a loss.

That's exactly why the stories about the $200 bill of materials annoy me. There's more to the cost of a phone than just the street price of silicon.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 3,025   +1,196
The parts might only cost $200 but there are other cost which have to be factored in. R&D, marketing, return on investment come to mind straight away. It may well be that Apple are making an excessive profit on their phones but selling at $210 would mean them selling at a loss.

That's exactly why the stories about the $200 bill of materials annoy me. There's more to the cost of a phone than just the street price of silicon.
Um, that's why its specifically labelled Build of MATERIALS. If that is too hard to understand, then don't click on those headlines. Simple.
 

MilwaukeeMike

Posts: 3,213   +1,462
Um, that's why its specifically labelled Build of MATERIALS. If that is too hard to understand, then don't click on those headlines. Simple.

I know.. I'm completely guilty of that sort of self-driven frustration. It's the same thing that makes me click on the alert that says 'hahahahnoobs has quoted you'.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 3,025   +1,196
I know.. I'm completely guilty of that sort of self-driven frustration. It's the same thing that makes me click on the alert that says 'hahahahnoobs has quoted you'.

You should get help with both issues, ASAP.

BTW, the BOM is more than just silicon, and iFixit is not responsible for the BOM numbers. iSuppli is.:)
 

ThanosPAS

Posts: 60   +20
Cool article, and I'm glad it didn't turn into 'The iPhone only has $200 worth of parts in', which would then lead to the discussion of whether 'it should only cost $210 to buy except Apple is sooooo greedy.'

In fundamental analysis of companies' financials, theory says, that a company's Competitive Advantage can be recognized by some pretty self evident charecteristics, and over priced products is one of them. It's just the way moats works - even if I don't prefer Apple's products, it's their position in the market that allows them to sell that high.
 

Emexrulsier

Posts: 615   +88
Cool article, and I'm glad it didn't turn into 'The iPhone only has $200 worth of parts in', which would then lead to the discussion of whether 'it should only cost $210 to buy except Apple is sooooo greedy.'
The parts might only cost $200 but there are other cost which have to be factored in. R&D, marketing, return on investment come to mind straight away. It may well be that Apple are making an excessive profit on their phones but selling at $210 would mean them selling at a loss.
Return on investment isn't a cost really, but yeah so many people simply look at the actual cost of the components and expect a company to make pittance of a profit simply because they can't afford it.
 

pmcardle

Posts: 117   +22
Cool article, and I'm glad it didn't turn into 'The iPhone only has $200 worth of parts in', which would then lead to the discussion of whether 'it should only cost $210 to buy except Apple is sooooo greedy.'
The parts might only cost $200 but there are other cost which have to be factored in. R&D, marketing, return on investment come to mind straight away. It may well be that Apple are making an excessive profit on their phones but selling at $210 would mean them selling at a loss.
Return on investment isn't a cost really, but yeah so many people simply look at the actual cost of the components and expect a company to make pittance of a profit simply because they can't afford it.
The biggest influence on the price of a device is consumer demand.
 

Railman

Posts: 708   +100
Cool article, and I'm glad it didn't turn into 'The iPhone only has $200 worth of parts in', which would then lead to the discussion of whether 'it should only cost $210 to buy except Apple is sooooo greedy.'
The parts might only cost $200 but there are other cost which have to be factored in. R&D, marketing, return on investment come to mind straight away. It may well be that Apple are making an excessive profit on their phones but selling at $210 would mean them selling at a loss.
Return on investment isn't a cost really, but yeah so many people simply look at the actual cost of the components and expect a company to make pittance of a profit simply because they can't afford it.
Return on investment could be described as an opportunity cost.