Industry reviewers specializing in device repair recently analyzed the iPhone 15 Pro Max and issued a notably low repairability score for Apple’s flagship. The evaluation, captured in a detailed disassembly video, is available on the official iFixit YouTube channel and has drawn attention from technicians and enthusiasts alike.
Observers highlighted a structural shift in Apple’s design philosophy. The base electronics have been reorganized in a way that makes accessing crucial components depend on removing the display rather than the back cover, a departure from the approach used on the iPhone 15 and older generations. This redesign means that even tasks unrelated to screen replacement or display repair carry a higher risk of unintended damage to the display, flex cables, or nearby connectors during routine service work. In practice, minor adjustments or inspections performed by technicians could inadvertently impact the display assembly or its associated cables, raising the stakes for any field repair.
The evaluation also critiques Apple’s stance on using non‑authorized or non‑ Apple-certified parts. When components that Apple has not approved are installed, iOS may display warnings about the use of gray-market parts. This policy can affect not only third-party repair shops but also official parts exchanged between donor devices in legitimate service workflows. iFixit argues that such restrictions could limit the ability of small, independent repair centers to operate efficiently and profitably, particularly in markets that rely on accessible, cost‑effective service options.
On its scale, iFixit assigned the iPhone 15 Pro Max a repairability score of 4 out of 10, explaining that the primary issue lies in Apple’s new requirement for component access. The same reasoning prompted a retroactive re‑scoring of all iPhone 14 models, which were previously rated higher but were reclassified to 4 out of 10 after the policy change was taken into account. The result is a revised narrative about repair complexity across recent iPhone generations, emphasizing how policy and design choices can influence practical maintenance and end‑user outcomes.
In related news, Apple has previously issued guidelines aimed at sellers that touch on component durability and the perishable nature of certain accessories, such as specific cover materials. This broader policy context underscores ongoing tensions between product integrity, accessory lifecycle, and the realities of repair work in the field. Service professionals and consumers alike are left weighing the trade‑offs between device resilience, ease of service, and the availability of replacement parts in a rapidly evolving ecosystem. Marked findings from the iFixit analysis contribute to the ongoing public discussion about how design decisions shape repairability and long‑term device sustainability, a topic that remains highly relevant for residents and technicians across Canada and the United States (Source: iFixit).