1: laws are very specific in this. Defect= not working as advertised and presented. Any defect within 6 months the manufacturer must prove the customer is responsible, then up to 3-5~ years depending on eu region you as a customer must prove it’s a design defect (very easy to do) such as same computer model known to have the exact same problem after some time or repair shop can prove it. Battery having 80% before 1000 cycles, component breaking, buggy software, bad paint quality etc is all defects. Anything less than exactly what you expect from a new or similar product is by law a defect.
However, none of what you say is written into law, as far as I can tell, but rather your interpretation of what a defect constitutes. IFAICT, the law places the burden on the consumer to prove an item is defective after a fixed period, which means a manufacturer can claim those ae not defects and leave it up to the consumer to prove otherwise.
For example, batteries lose capacity as they age. Apple sets 80% as its threshold, probably because most Mac batteries will stay at that level for at least 3 years so AppleCare need not cover them in most cases. Mine reached <80% 1 month before AC ran out so they replace it (and the entire top case) for free.
Paint? The machine is still fit for purpose and paint does wear.
Software? Well, reformat the drive to the latest version of the OS. If it works as delivered then, there is no defect. If it fails when you add another program, then it's an issue with that program, not the machine.
My point is there is a lot of grey areas for a shop (as the seller who is often liable for repairs) to claim the defect did not exist at sale, as many laws require in order for it to be covered. Good sellers will take care of issues, but you still are relying on the goodwill of the seller in the end. My experience with Apple has been great, which is one reason I stick with them. YMMV
2: this benefits everyone who ever goes to an independent repair shops. How does it ad complexity? Me having a schematic, heatgun, pliers and magnifying glass to replace a bad chip. I can objectively show you any repair by apple is many times more expensive than actually fixing the problem with a chip swap.
To d the repairs you describe means designing for sockets, etc, which increases size, introduces more wiring since you won't have all in one chips, etc to do IC level repairs.
3:why not? Why should apple forbid Samsungs from selling their flash memory or Texas Instruments chips used in my phone? Uneque parts should still be available for everyone on the free market to purchase instead of tearing apart already broken computers. How is this beneficial to customers to put it behind artificial walls?
If a company contracts out a unique chip design they own the IP and should be free to decide how it can be sold. As for generic parts, those can be bought.
4:it is board schematics showing what chip does what and goes where, also known as an electro diagram, not a blueprint how it’s constructed. Nothing confidential.
In general, yes. Bt in some case companies may want to obfuscate certain parts for whatever reason and should not be forced to reveal their designs.
5: it’s extremely easy and you need only a few tools and steady hands to literally swap every part on an iPhone 12 plus. Only problem is some parts are artificially locked behind a verification window only apple does for batteries and camera etc. apple is making it extremely expensive by making parts hard to get, instead of buying 1$ chip I might need to use an already broken phone and cost me 100$ In comparison.
That is not a board level repair, but simply swap and hope the problem is fixed.
you can today build an iPhone from almost scratch with donor phones and “illegal” original parts from the factories, but it’s hard because apple tries to make it as difficult as possible.
Nothing new there. I added bluetooth to my BMW with donor parts, a wiring pinout swap, and some coding.
If spare parts were readily available, I bet the cost of rolling your own will exceed buying a new one; as it does in other industries, such as automotive, where yo can in they do just that. If it didn't the phone market would be flooded with 100% functional phones that compete with the manufacturers phones; although with no warranty or assurances they were actually properly assembled. My guess is, if you could get the mother board, knockoffs with cheap screes, shells, and cameras would start appearing. Those knockoffs, many of which would be sold as genuine, would hurt Apple's reputation; especially when people come in for service and are told, Sorry, you've been fooled.
I'm not against repairability, in fact I like fixing my stuff instead of throwing it out, often to the chagrin of my wife when she finds the washer torn apart in the laundry room as I replace a faulty valve for 30Euros instead of spring a 1000 for a new machine. However, the drive to smaller, faster, cheaper electronics has made repairability difficult; to the point where doing so would require consumers to accept radically different products, which most consumers would complain about.
6: how do you do when your screen breaks during a video editing? Or as you write your essay the power delivery IC fries. Do you just say tough luck as nobody is allowed to replace that chip instead of complete motherboard swap? Should you backup every second?
Yup. I do, to multiple drives in case one fails. If your work and time is that valuable you should have a robost backup schema.
If repairs are too expensive, the manufacturer can supply a replacement of equivalent performance and features from their current (or more recent) range, which for cheap androids is quite a plausible option.
They do that now. Apple has twice replaced MacBook Pros for me with newer models due to defects ratehr than ty to repair.
Companies could also simply refund the purchase price if new models are significantly more expensive.
Depends how good they are at phoenixing without getting prosecuted.
Never underestimate the ability of fly by night companies to take the money and run.
Its impressive how the reaction to this is in other American forums and websites is totally the opposite. Here people talk about EU attacking American companies as a reaction … crazy crazy world. How poisoned is the discussion here around anything that may provoke a change in Apple practices. So much poison that stinks.
While some have, others have argued that such laws are not necessarily pro consumer in that they raise prices, don't really add that much protection, can act to protect the duopoly by erecting barriers to entry, and may have other unforeseen but negative side effects.
Do not confuse having a different viewpoint with attacking the EU. Even within the EU, people from one member state attack the other when they disagree with something they do, it's not just a US phenomena.
