[HN Gopher] Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT
        
       Author : eucalyptuseye
       Score  : 122 points
       Date   : 2023-11-07 16:06 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.lumafield.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.lumafield.com)
        
       | latchkey wrote:
       | My partner bought fake AirPods off ebay. We kind of had a feeling
       | they'd be fake but felt it was worth the risk. We got a refund
       | from the seller pretty quickly and they told us to keep them.
       | 
       | The pods themselves looked exactly the same. The case was the
       | real sign. It was clearly not the same as an original case. They
       | actually worked, but they were essentially just generic bluetooth
       | headphones.
       | 
       | We ended up listing them on FB Marketplace. Clearly marked them
       | as fake. Person came and picked them up and I said again that
       | they were fake. Got the same amount we paid for them. I don't
       | understand this world sometimes.
       | 
       | The fake sellers must make enough off of people who don't realize
       | that they are fake that they can just write off the few that do.
        
         | tomdeboer wrote:
         | Or buyer will try to resell as non-fake...
        
           | latchkey wrote:
           | I doubt it. Zero profit (since I charged the going rate) and
           | a real waste of time/gas to drive to my house to pick up a
           | single pair.
           | 
           | The fake sellers must buy them by the crate for cheap to see
           | any real profits.
        
             | dspillett wrote:
             | If you charged the going rate for pre-used, maybe the buyer
             | is planning to put them in official looking packaging
             | (likely really official packaging picked up elsewhere,
             | perhaps from their own purchase of an official product) and
             | sell them as new for a profit?
        
               | latchkey wrote:
               | Probably more likely:
               | 
               | 1. Buy a new pair off Amazon.
               | 
               | 2. Return the fake and get a refund from Amazon.
        
               | dspillett wrote:
               | That does seem a more reliable option. I need to update
               | my thinking of I want to be a good scammer!
        
               | UniverseHacker wrote:
               | Jokes on them... the Amazon ones will also be fake
        
         | frou_dh wrote:
         | Seems kinda like "kids eat free" at restaurants... fake-
         | spotters eat free at eBay.
        
           | AlecSchueler wrote:
           | But in this case they ended up with no product, the same
           | starting money and a bunch of time/energy lost.
        
             | poszlem wrote:
             | They ended up with twice the amount of money and some time
             | wasted.
        
             | mathematicaster wrote:
             | > We got a refund from the seller pretty quickly and they
             | told us to keep them.
             | 
             | So they made some? Spent time/energy for science of course
             | ...
        
             | Tade0 wrote:
             | The way I read it they ended up with double the starting
             | money, because they both got a refund and sold the
             | headphones.
        
               | AlecSchueler wrote:
               | Ah yes, apologies for the miscalculation.
        
           | everly wrote:
           | Until this happens a few times and their algorithm flags you
           | as an 'abuser' of the refund system (despite you doing
           | nothing besides correctly calling out fraud) and you're
           | banned or automatically ruled against in all disputes going
           | forward.
        
         | JCharante wrote:
         | > but they were essentially just generic bluetooth headphones.
         | 
         | I heard that there are fake airpods that will connect and
         | behave just like a normal airpod to iphones, as if they have a
         | fake H1 chip or something. Can anyone confirm?
        
           | thomasqbrady wrote:
           | Yes. I have a set that appear to my iPhone to be legit,
           | including auto-connect/disconnect, noise-canceling modes and
           | all, though the functionality isn't actually reliable. My
           | iPhone doesn't seem to know any difference between my real
           | AirPods Pro 2 and these fakes.
        
             | ewzimm wrote:
             | I got my first AirPods off eBay recently that I was
             | expecting might be fake, but they arrived new in the
             | package with all the usual Apple paperwork and pull tabs
             | and registered normally, even the Apple warranty, and
             | everything seems to work, except if I get a notification
             | when I'm playing audio, it just goes silent until I pause
             | and resume the audio. It seems like other people have the
             | same issue. Is this a real issue with genuine AirPods Pro
             | 2, or is this potentially an incredibly good fake?
        
             | thebigman433 wrote:
             | Feels like this could maybe be a pair from a fake/third
             | shift or something?
             | 
             | Seems like that level of functionality with (fake) Apple
             | products is super rare.
        
           | civilitty wrote:
           | Might not even technically be "fake". Apple has ghost shift
           | problems just like every other major manufacturer that
           | contracts out semiconductors to China.
           | 
           | I've heard that Apple drives such a hard bargain with some of
           | their suppliers that selling ghost shift parts and the parts
           | that fail QC to counterfeiters and repair shops is the only
           | way they make any profit. The Apple contract pays for the
           | factory and the bills but they make the real money on the
           | side.
        
         | dspillett wrote:
         | _> We got a refund from the seller pretty quickly and they told
         | us to keep them._
         | 
         | A good will gesture to reduce the chance of you reporting them
         | as selling fakes, and tarnishing their carefully manicured
         | feedback scores, if they were in the business of doing this
         | regularly.
        
           | latchkey wrote:
           | They asked for a positive review and we refused and
           | threatened to contact Ebay, so yes... exactly that.
        
         | pbhjpbhj wrote:
         | >Got the same amount we paid for them. I don't understand this
         | world sometimes.
         | 
         | Someone wants ear buds, they want to signal wealth so choose
         | expensive brand, but they want knockoffs because they're
         | actually poor[er].
         | 
         | The main risk with knock-offs is they arrive broken, or just
         | don't arrive, or... basically it's a scam of some sort.
         | 
         | So, you took on the risk of buying, assessed the earphones as
         | working, the earphones are now probably worth more as they've
         | been QC-ed (by you), moreover the buyer can actually see them
         | working and refuse them if they wish.
         | 
         | Within the context the buyer seems relatively rational.
        
           | hospitalJail wrote:
           | >signal wealth
           | 
           | >$100 product
           | 
           | It really boggles my mind that this works on anyone. We all
           | see the commercials for financing. We all see teenagers with
           | no jobs having them.
           | 
           | I'm a bit mind boggled that Apple was able to turn <$1000
           | tech products into 'luxury' products. Maybe it makes more
           | sense if you didn't get screwed by iTunes DRM and were more
           | open minded during iphone Era.
        
             | latchkey wrote:
             | When I lived in Vietnam, getting the latest iPhone (or
             | really any product), as soon as someone smuggled it into
             | the country (usually from Australia or Singapore), was a
             | national pastime for people there. That logo is everywhere.
        
               | tuankiet65 wrote:
               | I concur. My mom sometimes talked about how her friends /
               | coworkers just got the latest iPhone and that made her
               | want to get one herself. I guess part of it is just FOMO
               | but there's also something about the brand that drove
               | people to do "unusual" things (like you said, smuggling
               | phones from other countries just to be the first)
        
             | stronglikedan wrote:
             | Where I grew up, $100 sneakers were a signal of wealth.
             | Nothing new under the sun.
        
             | xattt wrote:
             | [delayed]
        
           | Projectiboga wrote:
           | The main risk is fire with the batteries.
        
             | arghwhat wrote:
             | The energy of such fire is directly correlated to the
             | battery capacity - airpods would probably just get hot and
             | smoke a bit. The case could do more, but still limited in
             | comparison to, say, a phone.
             | 
             | So I'd say the main risk of putting those things in your
             | ears is suffering the horrible audio quality.
        
         | heisenbit wrote:
         | Same here. My wife washed the old airpods so she got me some
         | new and "better" AirPod Pros. They looked perfect and since I
         | did not really care about getting other ones I did not much
         | research. In any case they looked genuine and worked for a
         | while until their flakiness got on my nerves and I went to a
         | slightly embarrassing Apple appointment where I was told there
         | were scores of service requests for this particular serial
         | number. She got her money back since at least in our country
         | EBay the company is now the seller and could not run away and
         | as it was bought with PayPal...
         | 
         | What convinced me that they were originals - packaging looked
         | genuine - paired out of the box without much hassle - showed up
         | as air pods with serial number
         | 
         | Lesson learned and bought the new ones and these were the
         | differences:
         | 
         | - print inside the lid was 20% larger in original
         | 
         | - packaging of original was not shrink wrapped
         | 
         | - slight off-colour white of the packaging
         | 
         | - the lightning port of the fake was not feeling right
         | 
         | - the button on the case did not click distinctly
         | 
         | - the button on the case did not enter the special mode after
         | 10 seconds like original
         | 
         | - ANC of original light years ahead. More modes displayed on
         | the menu.
         | 
         | With hindsight the biggest give-away probably were the
         | 
         | - shrink-wrap plastic around the package
         | 
         | - lightning port feel
         | 
         | - much, much lower microphone quality. But since I never
         | checked that out myself as I don't use them much for talking
         | and so complaints from others were not so frequent.
         | 
         | - imperfect find-my performance but since I did not care about
         | this feature much I suspected I mis-clicked somewhere and gave
         | up.
         | 
         | - transitions from case to ear to case with sometimes not
         | registering that it was back in case (contact issues in the
         | case?) not so reliable with impact on battery.
         | 
         | - battery erratic behaviour
         | 
         | I guess if I would have been in the market for them and then
         | bought them I may have found out immediately but so I just
         | started feeling Apple starts slipping on quality with new
         | products more complex but worse. As I got them as a replacement
         | and just wanted to get on with listening during my walks they
         | were able to fool me. They are certainly good enough to fool
         | casual buyers and they are certainly bad enough to hurt Apple's
         | reputation for quality products.
        
           | latchkey wrote:
           | Oh right, yea... the sn# gives it away immediately, you can
           | google it and see that it is fake.
           | 
           | Another pro tip for buying used stuff online... request a
           | photo of the sn#. Even a partial will get you a match in
           | google.
        
       | baz00 wrote:
       | I'd be interested in some fake airpods if they lasted twice as
       | long and sounded 80% as good. Literally I get perhaps a year out
       | of a set of genuine bought at Apple Store airpods before the case
       | gives up or one airpod goes muffled or craps out. After a year
       | Apple don't want to know or care unless you have AppleCare.
       | 
       | Decided I wasn't going to fish out for a fourth set, so I bought
       | some Sony ones for PS20 with a wire between them. Seem to work ok
       | and for that money, meh!
        
         | latchkey wrote:
         | It sounds like what you have found out is that not all Apple
         | hardware is worth the hype.
         | 
         | Personally, I have the beats fit pro. While still owned by
         | apple and benefiting from the same chip integrations, these
         | have held up just fine for me for a few years now of daily use.
        
           | baz00 wrote:
           | Yes I could write several pages of diatribe about my shitty
           | Apple experiences recently.
        
         | someotherperson wrote:
         | You can get high quality fake AirPods that sound just as good.
         | They pair with Apple products like the real thing and the
         | batteries are solid. The problem they usually have is with the
         | microphone. That's usually the case with a lot of this stuff.
         | I've had super cheap (i.e $10) wireless off-brand headphones
         | that sound even better than AirPods but the microphone is
         | almost always poop.
        
         | somehnguy wrote:
         | AirPods or AirPods pro? My current set of AirPods Pro have long
         | outlasted my original set of AirPods in terms of battery
         | longevity. Both very heavily used.
         | 
         | It seems the switch from pouch cell (in regular AirPods) to
         | button (in Pro) made a huge difference.
        
           | baz00 wrote:
           | I killed two sets of plain Airpods. The Pros I bought crapped
           | out after 14 months of ownership.
           | 
           | They do get used heavily but no excuse at that price.
        
             | ska wrote:
             | FWIW I have a pair of pros that crapped out around the same
             | time, 14ish months and the mics weren't working - apple
             | replaced them free (but not the charger) and they've gone
             | another year or so now without issue. Obviously YMMV.
        
             | somehnguy wrote:
             | My Pros are over 2 years old with an hour minimum per day
             | use, usually a few hours. Still working flawlessly.
        
         | kube-system wrote:
         | Maybe I don't use mine as hard, but I've had 3 pair and never a
         | single failure.
         | 
         | What you can always do is upgrade when the new versions come
         | out and sell your old ones before they die. They have a good
         | resale value.
        
         | nfriedly wrote:
         | I'm on my second pair of Sony LinkBuds, and these are starting
         | to go also.
         | 
         | The warranty covered the second pair because they lasted less
         | than a year. I'm not sure if it'll cover the third pair, but
         | I'll probably buy another if not, because I really like the
         | hear-through design, and no one else makes anything like it.
        
         | acomjean wrote:
         | Wired earbuds are back (Acording to some... and I've seen a few
         | more lately out and about). I'm still using full over the ear
         | headphones I bought 15 years ago. I had to get new pads but
         | other than that they still sound great.
         | 
         | https://www.wsj.com/articles/are-airpods-out-why-cool-kids-a...
         | 
         | https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/wired-earbuds-are-so...
        
           | baz00 wrote:
           | I do use wired ones when I'm at the PC. I have some
           | Sennheiser HD25's my ex wife bought me over 20 years ago.
        
             | fyloraspit wrote:
             | Great longevity as they tend to be for club / dj
             | environments but I find they have way too much pressure on
             | the ear to be comfortable as regular headphones for use at
             | a computer.
        
               | baz00 wrote:
               | They do a "lite" version known as the "SP" ones which
               | doesn't clamp your head. I've got those
        
           | threeseed wrote:
           | Those articles from 2 years ago.
           | 
           | And in that time I can't think of a single manufacturer who
           | has brought back 3.5mm headphone jacks.
           | 
           | Meanwhile Qualcomm recently announced WiFi-Audio which brings
           | lossless audio.
        
             | autoexec wrote:
             | A quick search shows that the Samsung Galaxy A14 5G and the
             | Sony Xperia 1 V both have headphone jacks. They've got
             | expandable storage too! If I had to get a cell phone today,
             | the Sony one is probably what I'd be looking at.
        
               | delecti wrote:
               | The Galaxy "A" series is their budget line, and so the
               | A14 didn't bring back headphones; the A line never lost
               | them to begin with. Because wireless headphones are a
               | signal of wealth, headphone jacks are often still present
               | on budget phones.
               | 
               | Sony's models are too inconsistent for me to figure out
               | what it's the successor to, so I can't say whether it's a
               | good example of bringing back headphone jacks.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | The Sony phone at least is certainly not a "budget"
               | model, it's their latest flagship and they want $1,400
               | for it (too much really).
               | 
               | Wireless headphones might be a feature that "signals"
               | wealth, but we should be careful not to confuse that with
               | quality or value. Features like headphone jacks and
               | expandable storage get removed because they save/make
               | money for the manufacturer, not because they offer better
               | value to consumers.
               | 
               | Many people like not having to deal with wires, but
               | bluetooth (in addition to being used extensively to track
               | you and reducing your security) is inferior in several
               | ways when it comes to headphones (audio quality, latency,
               | pairing issues, stuttering, disconnects, battery life,
               | expense) but thanks in large part to the power of
               | marketing, people can be made to feel good about being
               | forced to pay more while getting less.
        
               | isk517 wrote:
               | I had to replace phone last January and I went with the
               | Xperia 1 III. It is without a doubt a smartphone. Does
               | everything all the other smartphone do plus has the
               | headphone jack (that I more or less use daily) and has
               | expandable storage (or additional SIM card, my choice).
               | I'm comfortable in recommending the Xperia 1 V based on
               | my experience with the III.
        
         | RamblingCTO wrote:
         | Wow that's crazy, what are you doing with them? I have my
         | second pair (upgraded to pro) and I had them under water so
         | many times. I even jumped into a pool once and did a few laps
         | before noticing I have them in my pocket (without the case).
         | They fall down every 2 days. Both going strong for 2 years or
         | more.
        
         | Lio wrote:
         | They seem to be offering replacement batteries for PS49. That's
         | either the Airpods or the charging case of all models.
         | 
         | That's obviously more that wired earbuds but I'm OK with that
         | to have noise cancelling headphones I can always keep in little
         | pocket of my jeans wherever I go.
        
       | plugin-baby wrote:
       | > significant differences that have implications for performance
       | and safety
       | 
       | This seems to refer to charging safety, but the thing that makes
       | me fork out for genuine headphones is ear safety - I _assume_
       | Apple tries to protect from damaging sound levels and
       | frequencies, and could be held to account in a way that
       | counterfeiters could not.
        
         | user_7832 wrote:
         | > Apple tries to protect from damaging sound levels and
         | frequencies, and could be held to account in a way that
         | counterfeiters could not.
         | 
         | I doubt Apple tries this too much, or that they could be held
         | accountable. There is the volume alert thing, but that
         | (partially) works with 3rd party headphones too (though it's
         | likely much more inaccurate). Android phones too give a warning
         | if you set the volume very high for headphones. I don't think
         | using 3rd party ear/headphones really change much.
         | 
         | That said, it is important to keep volumes "reasonable". Ear
         | damage from high volumes is unfortunately very real.
        
           | kayodelycaon wrote:
           | There's a headphones safety section in the sound settings on
           | iPhones for reducing loud sounds and setting a maximum
           | decibel limit.
        
             | JCharante wrote:
             | I often accidentally set my phone volume to max by holding
             | the volume button for too long, so enabling this setting
             | earlier this year has been really helpful. 10/10 would
             | recommend everyone to set this.
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Some amount of volume limits are required by EU regulation I
           | think.
        
         | lazycouchpotato wrote:
         | There was this incident in the news last year.
         | 
         | > Apple Facing Lawsuit After AirPods Allegedly Ruptured Child's
         | Eardrums With Amber Alert
         | 
         | https://www.macrumors.com/2022/05/17/apple-airpods-pro-amber...
        
         | fortran77 wrote:
         | Well, I don't want a lithium battery exploding, leaking, or
         | catching fire in my ear, either.
        
       | stinos wrote:
       | This is really cool and kinda makes me want to put various things
       | I have under such scanner.
       | 
       | However several statements like
       | 
       |  _provide optimal power efficiently_
       | 
       | along with other assumptions made this a bit awkward to read.
       | What does it mean to provide 'optimal' power except making it
       | sound like a commercial? Maybe it's just me, after all I was
       | expecting a very technical article (as have been on HN
       | previously, also from CT scans IIRC).
        
         | kube-system wrote:
         | These critiques come up in every thread about a Lumafield post.
         | But these articles are really sales pitches for the CT scanner
         | and not a rigorous analysis of the item they put in it.
        
           | INGSOCIALITE wrote:
           | There has been an influx of social media "ads" for these CT
           | scanners - probably the worst (and obviously paid) example is
           | Adam Savage's YouTube channel where they just throw random
           | things into a CT scanner under the guise of "how does this
           | thing we're scanning function from the inside out" - but it
           | just ends up being an advertisement for "check out the
           | features of the scanner and the settings you can change" with
           | literally no investigation into the object being scanned
        
         | wetmore wrote:
         | I think they mean the space efficiency is optimal, since the
         | battery is using all of the space available (as opposed to the
         | counterfeit AirPod batteries which are a rectangular battery
         | that leaves unused space in the round housing).
        
       | keithxm23 wrote:
       | This is the second time inside a month I've seen Lumafield
       | portray Apple products engineering prowess. First time being when
       | they compared the USB-C cable (unfairly because they compared
       | against the wrong type of third party USB-C). Is this just
       | happenstance or is there a connection between the two companies?
        
         | dewey wrote:
         | The more likely explanation is that they saw that their content
         | marketing piece worked really well, so they did another one.
        
           | keithxm23 wrote:
           | That's fair. And it's probably more interesting to showcase
           | Apple products because they do produce relatively better
           | engineered products in general that would look great with
           | this kind of imaging technology.
        
         | SushiHippie wrote:
         | It would be even more interesting for me if they'd compare
         | these things against "real" competitors, i.e. in the same price
         | range or the same quality, and not just "here is the XXX$ apple
         | product vs this XX$ counterfeit". Otherwise these scans are
         | really cool
        
           | willtheperson wrote:
           | I would like to see comparisons for things in the same price
           | category too. Especially for something like usb-c cables
           | where it's hard to know if you are just paying for a brand or
           | actual quality.
           | 
           |  _Most_ of the time when you buy Apple you are buying a
           | better engineered product and maybe these scans are just
           | proving that it 's actually hard to match their quality for
           | the price.
        
       | filleokus wrote:
       | I really enjoy these scans that have been popping up lately, so
       | cool to see inside of things! Are there any intellectually
       | property issues related to publishing these?
       | 
       | I've had a piece of (probably false) information stuck in my mind
       | about how industrial design can be IP protected in some way,
       | making it problematic to publish x-rays without licensing. Which
       | I've thought of as another silly example of IP gone mad.
       | 
       | But apparently there is nothing to this, or has something changed
       | in that space?
        
         | SoftTalker wrote:
         | I would not think so. It's really no different from doing a
         | destructive tear-down of something you bought and making a
         | video about it.
        
         | EwanToo wrote:
         | I have a similar probably false memory of schematics having
         | copyrighted writing embedded in them so the layout can't be
         | reproduced without a breach of copyright.
        
           | LoganDark wrote:
           | Like this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
        
       | syntaxing wrote:
       | That updated viewer is a absolutely awesome, I like how you can
       | go through the part layer by layer.
        
         | lostlogin wrote:
         | Medical images are much like this - if you have any interest,
         | it's quite easy to get a DICOM viewer and get a few patient
         | scans.
         | 
         | I recommend Horos and Osirix, though I'm a Mac user. And MRI of
         | course, not CT!
        
           | figomore wrote:
           | I recommend InVesalius (multi platform).
        
             | lostlogin wrote:
             | Thanks for this, I'll explore.
             | 
             | Saying available for 'Apple Mac OS X platforms' isn't
             | encouraging _but_ auto segmentation and 3D printer support,
             | and screenshots look good.
             | 
             | There badly needs to be a cross section platform viewer
             | that gets full support on each platform. I'm using
             | InteleViewer currently and it's borderline abandonware on
             | its native platform (Windows) and it's creaking badly on
             | the Mac. Having copy and paste being the Windows default
             | keys (when in the Mac) is like a middle finger to the user
             | every time you use it.
        
           | fest wrote:
           | You can also convert the DICOM images to 3D model and print
           | it.
           | 
           | I did it with MRI scan of my head (isolated the brain
           | specifically) and kept it on my desk at work, ready to be
           | handed to whoever came by wanting to pick my brain.
        
       | mensetmanusman wrote:
       | What is the moral calculus of counterfeiters? Fake power adapters
       | can kill.
        
         | AlecSchueler wrote:
         | Poverty and desperation can often drive people to bend their
         | moral compass quite a bit.
        
           | askonomm wrote:
           | I tend to believe that a moral compass is a made-up social
           | invention. Children don't have it. We have to teach them
           | these made up rules, how you should feel when you do
           | something against those rules, etc. We ingrain it deep into
           | you much like how religion is ingrained deep into young
           | people, so that by the time you are an adult that's all you
           | know, and it seems to work well, most people never even
           | second guess these things.
        
             | mportela wrote:
             | As most things in life, it is more complicated than that.
             | While the environment plays a major role in people's moral
             | codes, there seems to be at least some innate development
             | happening too. I'm not a trained psychologist but I've seen
             | scientific evidence on some of these behaviors already
             | showing up in babies as young as a few weeks old,
             | suggesting some of the things we consider to be culturally
             | nurtured can actually be part of the species as a whole.
             | Netflix has an easy-to-digest docu-series called Babies and
             | episode S0204 talks about that, if you're interested.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.netflix.com/title/80117833
        
           | JCharante wrote:
           | How many people knowledgeable to mass produce fake chargers
           | are in poverty? My assumption is that it's greed.
        
             | autoexec wrote:
             | Wasn't it just two years ago that apple was caught using
             | slaves? And that was after years of their factories and
             | suppliers abusing children and keeping workers in inhumane
             | living and working conditions. I think we can pretty much
             | guarantee that a massive number of people who are
             | intimately familiar with making apple products, including
             | chargers, are living in poverty. Some people at Foxconn
             | were even caught selling genuine apple parts that failed QA
             | to be used in making counterfeit apple products.
        
         | JCharante wrote:
         | It would be cool if they could put a chip inside the chargers
         | and have the charger communicate over USB C whether it's
         | authentic or not. Of course you could still use third party
         | chargers that would lack this chip, but for people who like
         | first party chargers or buying chargers from reputable brands
         | (that would probably license this from Apple) it would be nice.
        
           | MereInterest wrote:
           | Anything that can be communicated by an authentic charger
           | could also be communicated by a counterfeit charger. You may
           | have raised the cost of the scam (e.g. by requiring another
           | chip), or delayed the start of a scam (e.g. until the
           | inevitable leak of hardward signing keys), but at the end of
           | the day you're trying to validate a device through a
           | communication channel controlled by that very same device.
           | 
           | It's the same problem as with the satirical "evil bit"
           | proposal for IPv4 [0]: Someone who is scamming you has
           | already shown no compunction against lying to you through
           | social means, and will lie to you through technical means as
           | well.
           | 
           | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_bit
        
           | permo-w wrote:
           | they did this with PS3 controllers and it just made it an
           | inconvenience to charge your remote that any counterfeiters
           | could bypass anyway
           | 
           | like great so I can't charge from the wall unless I buy a
           | sony-branded charger at a huge markup?
        
       | diimdeep wrote:
       | This AirPods scan is so unbelievably cool, there is cross section
       | view aligned along speaker battery and circuit board (click Slice
       | Place A on the left)
       | https://app.lumafield.com/project/b618e6f7-9a17-42bc-a2b4-a2...
        
       | rob74 wrote:
       | > _The counterfeit AirPods even resort to using internal weights
       | with no other function than to mimic the heft of the genuine
       | product_
       | 
       | That's ironic, as being lighter would actually be an advantage
       | (makes them less likely to fall out on sudden movements).
        
         | dewey wrote:
         | I'm not sure that's true, I'd assume gravity is doing _some_
         | kind of job in keeping them inside by pulling down. I think
         | losing them would be a lot easier if they were very light.
        
           | tbihl wrote:
           | In the sudden movement scenario, gravity is overcome by rapid
           | acceleration in the upward direction. In the no-dropped-item
           | scenario, friction within your pocket (presumably) comes to
           | the rescue to make up the difference between gravity and
           | upward acceleration so that the item doesn't make a
           | successful escape.
           | 
           | The friction in a pocket should be a function of tension (how
           | tight your pants are, especially around the item) and not, as
           | often is the case, proportional to the mass of the item. So
           | this particular method of losing the item should be less
           | common with something lighter.
        
         | hospitalJail wrote:
         | For B2B, a business would never pay for extra weight.
         | 
         | For B2C, monkey likes pink sparkles. Wow! I want.
        
       | MarkusWandel wrote:
       | On the real vs. fake Apple product front: I get a lot of my
       | electronic bric-a-brac from garage sales. The little iPhone cube
       | chargers are so cute and practical, but: Is it a real one, or a
       | dangerously cost-reduced fake? By comparison, less cute chargers
       | from other major brands, that aren't a target for counterfeiting,
       | are therefore more trustworthy. This is another "why we can't
       | have nice things" kind of problem.
        
         | civilitty wrote:
         | Now all you have to do is bring your $3,000/mo CT scanner
         | along!
        
           | projektfu wrote:
           | Or a magnifying glass. I bought a used iPhone and it included
           | a little cube charger labeled "Designed by Abble"
        
       | kajic wrote:
       | I just learned from this article that AirPods can be charged by
       | the Apple Watch charger. Wow, I had no idea.
        
         | JCharante wrote:
         | That's the airpods pro 2 case, which also features speakers at
         | the bottom (for help with locating). Airpods Pro 1 didn't have
         | this feature, but they did have wireless charging.
        
       | nunez wrote:
       | the driver in the fake earbuds is basically like a wired earbud,
       | which is crazy. i was expecting more sophistication there. no
       | wonder they sound like crap!
        
       | adamm255 wrote:
       | I got some AirPods Pro 2 knock offs from Temu for PS16.
       | 
       | Paired exactly like AirPods, was super shocked. Work great with
       | an Apple TV. They don't have multi connect though. But are
       | actually more comfortable than the real deal. I find the
       | originals hurt after about 45 mins.
        
         | permo-w wrote:
         | how is the sound?
        
           | stronglikedan wrote:
           | Curiously absent from OPs story, so we already know the
           | answer.
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | If it's AirPods Pro, you probably have the wrong size tips on
         | if they hurt. There's also some third party tips; I use them
         | because they sound a little different but they're also
         | different sizes.
        
           | tstrimple wrote:
           | And if the counterfeits are good enough, they will be
           | compatible with the existing ecosystem of 3rd party tips.
           | Foam tips were a huge upgrade to my AirPod Pro 2 experience.
        
       | permo-w wrote:
       | the tone of this article makes me question who paid for all this
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | They paid for it, they're selling CT scanners. (Leasing?)
        
       | karaterobot wrote:
       | > Lastly, the contrast in overall build quality is dramatic
       | between the genuine AirPods and their counterfeit counterparts.
       | 
       | That's undoubtedly true, but my anecdotal experience was that a
       | pair of $250(?) AirPods Pro broke after a couple of months, and
       | the $40 Chinese knockoff pair is still going after almost a year.
       | I'm sure that, on average, the Apple ones last longer, but it's
       | so hard for me to shell out another $250 on something that broke
       | so quickly just because it's from a company with a headquarters
       | that looks like a Lifesaver. And at about 1/5th the price, it's a
       | pretty easy decision to replace the ersatz airpods if (when) they
       | should break. Unless Apple comes out with something new and
       | exciting, I'll stick with the fakes.
        
         | dave84 wrote:
         | I'm on my third pair of AirPods Pro, two warranty replacements
         | and about to try for a third.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-11-07 23:01 UTC)