Germany Urges EU to Require 7 Years of Updates and Repairs for iOS Devices

[ericwn]

Well, in a capitalist country, failure to continue to be as profitable leads to a failure of the company.....as in a company that fails to provide the best ROI that it can will have shareholders selling off the stock, therefore killing the company., just kind of the way it is,

Yup getting both capitalism and sustainability satisfied is a challenge, but one that would at least equally apply to all manufacturers.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I doubt the EU has the courage to impose these laws to ANY Chinese tech company like Huawei or Xiaomi..... they'd be bankrupted if they were legally forced to "support" (tech support, material support, parts and labor repairs) their old devices from 4 years past.

Again, the EU being selective hypocrites... they are singling out the big successful US companies. No surprise here.

Oh please, show me one Chinese company who aren’t covered by eu laws. If apple is covered it means every company is covered

 

[jlc1978]

Companies can still stay in business but they need to think differently on product design and sustainability. For example, mobile phone standards change, 2G to 3G to 4G to now 5G. Why couldn't manufacturers design their phones for future proofing? If someone wants to keep their old phone but use it on the latest network offering, why not build a phone so it's transmitter and reciever parts can be upgraded to accept the latest mobile standards. Give the consumer the choice, either upgrade the old phone or purchase a new one. Bosses do not do this because they are educated and trained to have a one track mind, and that is to make as much money as possible and the current way to do that is to keep on making new and expensive things. This mindset has to change.

Television standards changes. Therefore instead of changing the whole TV because it's not compatible with the new standard, just change relevants parts inside the TV so it is compatible.

A couple of problems I see:

1. New standards often means entirely new electronics, so modularity would mean replacing virtually all of teh device except for perhaps a power supply, assuming the same power demand, and the screen. Of course, if screen tech changed you'd now have an old screen trying to show the new tech.
2. There would be a benefit to limiting changes in a new standard so backwards compatibility is easier to maintain, slowing innovation.

I think your wrong on that poiint. Where modularity has existed, the consumer has cared. The biggest area of technology for modularity has been computers. Consumers and businesses around the world have enjoyed upgrading their computer with modular parts because it has allowed them to use updated parts and thus save money. Whilst maintaining the core funcationality of a computer, it could be vastly improved which having to making any changes or modifications to the core funtionality of the computer. Power supplies, sound cards, cd drives, graphic cards, all could be udpated to the latest versions.

However, the people who actually did that are no doubt a small percentage of teh actual installed base, most of whom bough a box, used it and replaced the entire thing when it became too cumbersome to lose. At best they may swap a HD, if anything.

There are many good examples in this forum, members complaining of wanting the old ways back of being able to upgrade your computer/laptop. members in the car forum complaining of not being able to upgrade parts in their car due to the way the car manufacturer has designed the car.

We are a tiny fraction of the user base, whether for computers or cars, and our complaints are just noise in the overall signal.

I'll give you a car example - how many people know you can change the build code in an MB or BMW to add features such as CarPlay, bluetooth, etc.? Or even care?

 

[subi257]

Yup getting both capitalism and sustainability satisfied is a challenge, but one that would at least equally apply to all manufacturers.

Very true and I think Apple would have the easiest change compared to all of the Android vendors.

 

[usagora]

Never really understood the hatred of laws that look after the consumer interests. I guess I fail at capitalism greed 101.

Because this is government overreach into the affairs of private companies. Companies should be free to decide their own warranty terms and customers should be free to make purchase decisions based on that, if they so choose.

 

[subi257]

Doesn’t Apple mostly do this already? Especially compared to other companies. But idk about forcing devices to be easy to repair. Device boards are going to get insanely tiny in the coming years as phones will be mostly batteries inside. We’ll be moving to 2nm CPUs before long. How reasonable is it to expect to provide parts for something that complex? How many people or shops would be equipped to handle such a repair? I don’t want to hold back innovation at the expense of cheaper repairs, especially if we’re moving towards an iPhone that can unfold into a really thin iPad Mini, and beyond that another 15 or so years, AR computer vision in contact lenses. Imagine if they had to design that to be repairable. It would never happen. There are limits to everything.

Beyond that, Apple forces things like the camera module to be securely updated so that people don’t have to worry about their phones cameras being hacked and spying on them after repairs or if some nation state was trying to hack devices used by senior officials in a rival government by intercepting them at some point and quickly making pre-fabbed replacements.

That is completely true that as technology keeps moving forward, it will simply get to the point that there will be less small, independent places that can handle the repairs for one reason or another. Cars and trucks are getting into that same area too. The important thing imho will be that there needs to be a formal correct and environmental way of recycling them.

 

[subi257]

I'll almost be impressed if Apple is confident enough to pull out of an annual $68bn market, to avoid having to provide a few security patches and refurbished parts for old devices. I doubt investors would be equally so impressed as me.

Exactly, tack on a few extra dollars to the sales price and they are covered. Investors would most likely be happy.

 

[fischersd]

This could also have ramifications for the cellular providers themselves. Not that long ago, we still had a couple CDMA carriers kicking around in North America (and a few elsewhere in the world). Protections such as this could also force handset makers to put pressures on carriers to keep legacy networks alive for the duration of the lifespan of the phone.
7 years is too long. 5 is more than reasonable.

 

[amaze1499]

Apple already provide 5 years of software updates so they are doing well already.

Technically even more than that: iOS 12.5.4 was released 14 Jun 2021 for even an iPhone 5s running iOS12. iPhone 5s was released September 2013. iOS 15 will run on iPhone 6s, with security updates even this phone will be covered well over 7 years already.

Apple security releases - Apple Support

This document lists security updates and Rapid Security Responses for Apple software.

support.apple.com

 

[visusomanchi]

Security, yes. Repair parts, maybe not so much. Apple could probably do it, but android makers don’t build in the same quantity that Apple does.

I really dislike the EU dictating to American companies.

Lol! Let Apple restrict its products to US market. If its needs access to other markets just play by the rules of those respective markets

 

[ksec]

In that case, much of rest of the world, based on Apple's pricing, is paying for US lawsuits as well as local regulations given the higher prices on average. The American consumer thanks you for paying for their lawsuits.

Higher price on average are also due to import tax in other areas not just VAT. It is rather obvious you dont know how all these works.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I'm not sure setting arbitrary warranty periods is in the consumers best interests when compared to the price hikes. I'd wager a significant percent of the problems people experience are due to normal wear and tear or damage, not product flaws. Even poorly designed products, like Apple's scissor keyboard, don't fail in quantities requiring large scale replacement. Manufacturers may also change what they consider failure. Apple replaces batteries under warranty at a relatively high remaining capacity, they could very well lower that to 50% for warranty purposes and significantly reduce warranty costs; arguing that is the normal expected performance drop over 5 years.



Yea, when cheap disposable phones disappear people will no doubt be upset.



I suspect you'll see companies selling cheap phones to go out of business and be replaced by a new shell for the OEM. Cheaper and easier than complying with the law.

people no doubt will complain.

Quite meaningless what the manufacturer considers to be covered by warranty. It can never be lower than the legal requirements

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Or maybe the real innovation would be to produce these spare parts on demand in a few days?

Why would to do that? If you already have a stock of spare parts expected to last about the legal requirements in house, you can just sell of the rest to DIY shops. No need to manufacture new parts within days when you just need to post it in the mail…

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Because this is government overreach into the affairs of private companies. Companies should be free to decide their own warranty terms and customers should be free to make purchase decisions based on that, if they so choose.

Or the government mandated a minimum requirement to make stupid contracts illegal. Such as forbidding class action lawsuits or not covering manufacturing defects

 

[Sophisticatednut]

A couple of problems I see:

1. New standards often means entirely new electronics, so modularity would mean replacing virtually all of teh device except for perhaps a power supply, assuming the same power demand, and the screen. Of course, if screen tech changed you'd now have an old screen trying to show the new tech.
2. There would be a benefit to limiting changes in a new standard so backwards compatibility is easier to maintain, slowing innovation.



I'll give you a car example - how many people know you can change the build code in an MB or BMW to add features such as CarPlay, bluetooth, etc.? Or even care?

Modularity in practice would mean, upgradable ram and storages. And no artificial locking of components allowing people if they want to just order a spare part, de-solder a chip and replace it with an OEM part. Demanding the manufacturer not being allowed to sell the manufactured parts to individuals and repair shops should be illegal. And open and free access to schematics allowing easy diagnostics and chip replacement instead of trying to wait for a leak or figure it out themselves…

and it doesn’t matter if the user don’t know, it makes repairs thousand times easier and cheaper for the consumer as they can have repairs done in 10 minutes instead of 5-10 days and loose your data as the memory is soldered on

 

[slooksterPSV]

Don't just require Apple or Google. Require all of them, don't just use the big players. You know how many LG, Blu, Samsung, etc. phones I've had that once you buy it that's it? No more updates? Too many to count. Ugh. I get Apple is huge and Google is.... well.... hmm..... but require all companies if you're going to enforce that. I'm still shocked the SE is still updated.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

I'm not sure setting arbitrary warranty periods is in the consumers best interests when compared to the price hikes. I'd wager a significant percent of the problems people experience are due to normal wear and tear or damage, not product flaws.

Don’t know. Most failures I had with Apple hardware beyond warranty weren’t driven due to wear and tear. All beyond one. Still I believe what I suggested would have a series of ripple effects beyond.

Anyway, don’t think this German suggestion applies to Apple as much. Even today we can find say a display replacement dom an iPhone 5S in the aftermarket. I think this is way more directed to Android phones.

Yet I think Apple practices should be checked. Such as refusing to fix their own devices due to wear a tear problems that are totally fixable. This happened to me with my iPhone X. Don’t know why, the port got damaged. Found out this when went to a Certified Apple Service Center to replace the battery. They refused to replace the battery given the port was not working, and refused to fix the port (they did not refuse as such, they said it was not fixable). The only way was for me to pay 530 euros for a refurb iPhone X and leave mine with them. So I went to another place, got the port fixed for 40 euros … came back to the Apple Service Center … they replace the battery for 70 euros … total expense 110 euros.

There is a movement called Right to Repair that has a gigantic file with these kinds of practice from Apple. They seam to be misleading their customers over some issues. They certainly tried to mislead me. By the way, one Apple founder is supportive of this movement … guess who.

 

[Xenden]

The arrogance of this comment is staggering!!!!

Easy solution! Don't likeit? Move out! You want access to the EU and the 445 million people in it, then you follow the EU's rules. The EU, thankfully, grants it's citizens more rights than the US does and as a consumer, I'm extremely glad it does.

I don’t want to get in a pissing contest, but in the US you can say any terrible, horrible, racist thing and not worry about the government coming to arrest you.

On topic, I don’t see the EU picking on non American companies to the degree they do American companies.

 

[Xenden]

Lol, absolute ********. Apple and Spotify is competing in EU markets. EU have no jurisdiction in USA. But EU can force apple App Store to comply within European borders or apple can chose not to sell apps in EU. Apple being an America company have no relevance to European laws

Apple is an American company, Spotify is competing in America. Instead of filing complaints in the US, the chose the perceived more friendly venue.

If they thought that their problem was legit, they would have filed in the US.

 

[siddavis]

So you are angry that the EU could force a company to offer you spare part for your broken phone?

Interesting.

You have absolutely no idea what other consequences come as a result of that dictate. Supply chains can be incredibly complex. Perhaps the supplier of a component that is single sourced (unique) goes out of business. How can the company enforce the supply of that as a spare? Redesign? Who's going to do it? How many people and how much overhead is going to go into this X year support requirement? How much of the cost of all that overhead is passed on to the consumer (YOU!!). This doesn't happen for free! All because we wanted to force them to offer a replacement component instead of a replacement unit. This is just more feel good crap that the government has no business being in.

 

[siddavis]

Is anyone in the EU smart enough to realize that older, less capable devices with little memory cannot run the newer OS?
Why should newer, more capable OS be required to be dumbed down to run on outdated hardware?

Because government bureaucrats are definitely the smartest of the bunch and should be dictating how companies should operate in their markets. /s

 

[subi257]

Wonder if Germany and others will provide 7 year updates for software for their cars particularly self-driving ones. Also will they provide all the manuals, parts (including chips) for cars and other products that they make.
We will all pay for these - although I guess they could charge a surcharge in the EU etc.
What will happen when a repair shop doing their own thing produces phones that are hacked and all the resulting damage - who will pay for that?
People who say don't need new phones for XX years - so you don't want 5G, better cameras etc.

That is true...will we here in the US be able to buy parts, manuals, support for 7 years on all VW, Audi, MB, Porsche, Mini, etc? That should be mandatory....given how overly complicated and over engineered they are.

 

[jlc1978]

Quite meaningless what the manufacturer considers to be covered by warranty. It can never be lower than the legal requirements

Yes, but most laws don't state what specifically is a defect so manufacturers have leeway as to what is fit for purpose.

Modularity in practice would mean, upgradable ram and storages. And no artificial locking of components allowing people if they want to just order a spare part, de-solder a chip and replace it with an OEM part.

Which would add complexity and benefit a tiny fraction of the user base, so it's a bad tradeoff.

Demanding the manufacturer not being allowed to sell the manufactured parts to individuals and repair shops should be illegal.

Why? Especially for custom parts that are unique to one company.

And open and free access to schematics allowing easy diagnostics and chip replacement instead of trying to wait for a leak or figure it out themselves…

I doubt companies want to give up the details of their design to competitors.

and it doesn’t matter if the user don’t know, it makes repairs thousand times easier and cheaper for the consumer as they can have repairs done in 10 minutes instead of 5-10 days and

I doubt board level repairs would be easy or cheap, considering the tools and skill required. If you're good enough to do them you are going to charge appropriately and not target the folks that want a new screen for $50.

loose your data as the memory is soldered on

If you don't do regular backups that's your fault.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

I don’t want to get in a pissing contest …

Well you just got into one …

If if your countryman stance alluding that EU was somewhat anti-apple check this: The EU is the second largest market last time I’ve checked. On another note … 67% of Apple revenue is generated outside the US.

So its totally and fundamentally absurd that line of thought.

But it does seam that some US citizens have a hard time dealing with the fact that other countries have their own legal system, their own systems of governance that US based companies need to comply with. Just because something is admissible in US does not make it universally good by any means.

 

[theLedger]

More importantly, why don’t they mandate car manufacturers update their electronic systems for up to six years with several OS updates?

Providing parts for so many years is not a bad idea. I’ve had repairs by Apple and by non-authorized shops and Apple has been the best experience (though not always perfect) but if we could eliminate some eco waste by extending the life of a device, that’s good.

However, in terms of OS updates, that’s a much bigger challenge and it can harm consumers by slowing development to maintain backwards compatibility. And it’s not always easy to compartmentalize features, especially if it is threaded throughout the entire interface. And when you add functionality, older devices will inevitably slow down - maybe not as much as the iPhone 6 debacle. My wife’s 2011 MacBook Air is still running even though I haven’t been able to update it for the past few years. Those who hacked the MacOS to run on older machines soon discovered that it made the computers unusable.