Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You won't make me change my mind about the "Right to repair" bill. Microsoft is following Apple's lead on the malpractice to glue everything up and make it irreparable. (AKA, Surface laptop).

Same goes for John Deere locking up repairs at software level and folk having to rely on Ukranian hacked software to make work again their repaired machines.
Ok. I’m just spouting my views on the correct role of government and individual liberty (I think the irony of this is lost on most).

To touch on your comments though... you mentioned 3 companies in particular that you have a problem with. Do any of them have that market locked up in a monopoly? I assume not considering off the top of my head:

PCs:
Dell, HP, Lenovo, Apple, Asus, Acer, Vaio, Samsung, Vizio, Razer and on and on

Farm Equipment:
John Deere, Kubota, Case IH, Mahindra and I’m sure many others that are not known to the general consumer.
 
Ok. I’m just spouting my views on the correct role of government and individual liberty (I think the irony of this is lost on most).

To touch on your comments though... you mentioned 3 companies in particular that you have a problem with. Do any of them have that market locked up in a monopoly? I assume not considering off the top of my head:

PCs:
Dell, HP, Lenovo, Apple, Asus, Acer, Vaio, Samsung, Vizio, Razer and on and on

Farm Equipment:
John Deere, Kubota, Case IH, Mahindra and I’m sure many others that are not known to the general consumer.

Should all these companies follow exactly the same malpractice... What you gonna say? I put on my "big-boy pants" and build my own company and produce up to my own spec?

Get real.
 
PCs:
Dell, HP, Lenovo, Apple, Asus, Acer, Vaio, Samsung, Vizio, Razer and on and on

I agree with your general point on free market and lack of government interference. At the same time, zero of the above brands make documentation available to third party service centers for any dollar value. Some make parts available, most don't.

Apple is targeted more than most because the products are far more expensive and thus viewed as "less disposable", so it is a larger shock when they die. Apple is also more often targeted due to the anti-repair decisions made in design. Apple is also targeted because the repair programs in place often pale in comparison. But the same general principle applies.
[doublepost=1520631292][/doublepost]
Should all these companies follow exactly the same malpractice... What you gonna say? I put on my "big-boy pants" and build my own company and produce up to my own spec?

Get real.

Honestly, I'd love to see that. Check out what is going on with the fairphone. https://www.fairphone.com/en/our-goals/

I think it would be cool to see this occur with laptops as well - although very few wish to put the effort in. Cellphone/laptop manufacturing outside of the premium devices like Apple is a very very low profit margin industry even for companies that have been involved for 10-20 years. You'd have to produce something considerably more expensive than what else is on the market, and perhaps this is why these companies take offense to what is being clamored for in Right to Repair. Look at the profit margins involved. Would you want to be in this business? I wouldn't. I would laugh at anyone that expected any sort of support/service at a profit margin of $15 when $15 in profit is what I get for giving them a world class computing device. https://www.theguardian.com/technol...windows-chrome-hp-dell-lenovo-asus-acer#img-4
 
Should all these companies follow exactly the same malpractice... What you gonna say? I put on my "big-boy pants" and build my own company and produce up to my own spec?

Get real.
What is the malpractice? Are the companies colluding? Are there laws already in place to handle it? Have the existing laws and regulations possibly helped create the situation by imposing barriers to entry from other companies or those who might put on their “big-boy pants”? I find it’s usually not always as simple as an emotional response.

Let’s say these laws are passed. Do the instructions appear out of thin air? In which countries are they supported? Who creates the translations? How are those distributed? Who determines which parts need to be supplied? Who sets up the supply chain for them? Do special tools need to be created? Is there secondary support for the third party repair? Do designs require repairability? To what extent? Who determines this? Who polices this? More government departments and agencies?

These and many MANY other questions are never considered. We only hear emotional arguments and platitudes. In reality, only large companies with the structures and lawyers in place to deal with all these regulations can survive. Thus, you never even have the chance to put on those big-boy pants. My positions aren’t the ones that foster situations where startups are an impossibility... so don’t tell me to get real. In the end, we are all forced to pay the cost of all the answers to those questions, and for what? So that the meddlers can pound their chests and tell everyone that they are sticking up for the little guy? More like sticking it TO
 
What is the malpractice? Are the companies colluding? Are there laws already in place to handle it? Have the existing laws and regulations possibly helped create the situation by imposing barriers to entry from other companies or those who might put on their “big-boy pants”? I find it’s usually not always as simple as an emotional response.

Let’s say these laws are passed. Do the instructions appear out of thin air? In which countries are they supported? Who creates the translations? How are those distributed? Who determines which parts need to be supplied? Who sets up the supply chain for them? Do special tools need to be created? Is there secondary support for the third party repair? Do designs require repairability? To what extent? Who determines this? Who polices this? More government departments and agencies?

These and many MANY other questions are never considered. We only hear emotional arguments and platitudes. In reality, only large companies with the structures and lawyers in place to deal with all these regulations can survive. Thus, you never even have the chance to put on those big-boy pants. My positions aren’t the ones that foster situations where startups are an impossibility... so don’t tell me to get real. In the end, we are all forced to pay the cost of all the answers to those questions, and for what? So that the meddlers can pound their chests and tell everyone that they are sticking up for the little guy? More like sticking it TO

Can't prove they are colluding. I'm no juorno nor a member of law enforcement. Not all of them are doing the same also, so far, so it's not like the DRAM price fixing from back in 2002.

Apple and other companies could try to reach an agreement with lawmakers on how to set this all up. How and what exactly OEM parts are made available, in which languages repair manuals ought to be available, etc. Also, should this law only affect US, just make the manuals available in English? Make English the "Universal Repair Language"? Like programming languages, all in English. Not so hard. Just takes a little bit of cooperative willingness.

What could actually become an issue for these tech companies is going on full denial instead of helping shape the law. This could lead to US lawmakers doing whatever and then European Union pulling a similar move, screwing up the industry entirely.
 



California is preparing to join several other states with a new Right to Repair bill, which will require smartphone manufacturers to provide repair information, replacement parts, and diagnostic tools to product owners and independent repair shops.

California Assemblymember Susan Talamantes Eggman this afternoon announced plans to introduce the new California Right to Repair Act. Eggman says the bill will provide consumers with the freedom to choose a repair shop of their choice.

iphone-x-teardown-800x614.jpg

iPhone X image via iFixit
Mark Murray, Executive Director of Californians Against Waste said smartphone manufacturers and home appliance makers are "profiting at the expense of our environment and our pocketbooks" while Kit Walsh, Senior Staff Attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the new bill is "critical to protect independent repair shops and a competitive market for repair," which will lead to "better service and lower prices."

In addition to California, 17 other states have already introduced similar Right to Repair legislation, including Washington, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Virginia.

Several states began introducing Right to Repair legislation early last year, and the Right to Repair movement has continued on since then, spurred by Apple's iPhone throttling controversy.

Since last year, Apple has been lobbying against Right to Repair bills in various states, as have several other technology companies. In Nebraska, for example, Apple said approving Right to Repair would turn the state into a "mecca for bad actors" making it "easy for hackers to relocate to Nebraska." Other arguments from tech companies and appliance manufacturers have suggested Right to Repair bills would compromise device security and safety.

Right to Repair bills are heavily endorsed by repair outlets like iFixit, independent repair shops, and consumer advocacy groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

In California specifically, the Right to Repair bill is particularly interesting because as Motherboard points out, there are strong repairability laws already in place. California Civil Code Section 1793.03 states that companies must offer parts for repair for at least seven years after a product is released, which is why on Apple's vintage and obsolete products list, it lists California as the sole state where consumers can continue to get repairs on vintage products.

Apple currently requires customers who have Apple products in need of repair to visit an Apple retail store, mail a product to an Apple repair facility, or visit an Apple Authorized Service Provider to receive support for their devices. Repairs from third-party repair shops that are not Apple Authorized Service Providers can void a device's warranty.

Apple's current flagship iPhone, the iPhone X, earned a repairability score of 6 from repair site iFixit. Repairs on the device require a special Apple-specific screw driver, delicate cables are often in the way and are difficult to replace, and Apple's waterproofing makes repairs complicated. Other Apple products, like MacBooks, have much lower repairability scores.

Article Link: California to Introduce 'Right to Repair' Bill Requiring Smartphone Manufacturers to Offer Repair Info and Parts

About time.
 
some items are hard to repair and third party shops do damages and use low quality parts
This is RIGHT ABOUT THAT! The Right To Repair means guaranteed access to quality parts & repair equipment / tech & whatever is needed to get it done the RIGHT WAY.

I think everyone should go the official way
Every time I hear something like that I recall all those historical precedents with "one 'smart' guy dictating the others their way of living". Don't you feel you take too much upon yourself?

I work as tech support and repair, I have many costumers which went to unofficial repair center, damaged their phones and then blame Apple
You should have started with this. Everything above that now renderes meaningless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Onexy
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.