iFixit Lauds Apple's New Self Service Repair Program, Calls It a 'Remarkable Concession'

[Space Butler]

Why shouldn't the company be allowed to tell me where and how the product is serviced?

Do you own the product or do you just want to buy a license to use the product? It seems like you want to lease rather than own.

I'm shocked at the people here actually arguing against consumer protection and desiring more opaque, expensive to repair and disposable electronic items.

 

[Aoligei]

Do you own the product or do you just want to buy a license to use the product? It seems like you want to lease rather than own.

I'm shocked at the people here actually arguing against consumer protection and desiring more opaque, expensive to repair and disposable electronic items.

Because they gonna tell you:
1) Apple has copyright of all the hardware, only Apple can service you because of copyrights.

2) Right to repair will hurt Apple’s profit and Apple shouldn’t be punished.

3) You should only services your iPhone with Apple, regardless the cost, for your own safety and privacy. You should ONLY trust Apple in the world, not other company and your own government.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

Do you own the product or do you just want to buy a license to use the product? It seems like you want to lease rather than own.

I'm shocked at the people here actually arguing against consumer protection and desiring more opaque, expensive to repair and disposable electronic items.

This is silly.

I own the product. I can sell it. I can destroy it. I can give it away.

I just don't really care about who fixes it.

That doesn't mean I am "leasing it."

 

[IllinoisCorn]

Because they gonna tell you:
1) Apple has copyright of all the hardware, only Apple can service you because of copyrights.

2) Right to repair will hurt Apple’s profit and Apple shouldn’t be punished.

3) You should only services your iPhone with Apple, regardless the cost, for your own safety and privacy. You should ONLY trust Apple in the world, not other company and your own government.

Yep, there's what I was looking for.

You said "punished."

I believe many people just want to "punish" the rich, megacorporation.

There's a tremendous amount of envy, class warfare and politics baked into this little issue.

 

[Jubadub]

This is silly.

I own the product. I can sell it. I can destroy it. I can give it away.

I just don't really care about who fixes it.

That doesn't mean I am "leasing it."

You can't fix your product.

Without Right to Repair legislation, you don't have full ownership of the product you bought, because although the parts required to fix it are still being produced by the manufacturer, you are legally-barred from obtaining them.

Try obtaining parts for your device. Then come back here and talk. Provide citations.

 

[Space Butler]

There's a tremendous amount of envy, class warfare and politics baked into this little issue.

I guess some people have so much money they don't care about cheaper repairs. Is that what you mean?

It still doesn't explain why people feel the need to defend some of the richest corporations on the planet. Are billionaires posting on here?

 

[Xiaojohn]

You can't fix your product.

Without Right to Repair legislation, you don't have full ownership of the product you bought, because although the parts required to fix it are still being produced by the manufacturer, you are legally-barred from obtaining them.

Try obtaining parts for your device. Then come back here and talk. Provide citations.

Why can’t? You can fix and modify it as what you want.

 

[Xiaojohn]

You can't fix your product.

Without Right to Repair legislation, you don't have full ownership of the product you bought, because although the parts required to fix it are still being produced by the manufacturer, you are legally-barred from obtaining them.

Try obtaining parts for your device. Then come back here and talk. Provide citations.

Based on your theory, people in China is going on the right track. But they don’t need to force the Apple to give the “right”. But why America?

 

[Xiaojohn]

You can't fix your product.

Without Right to Repair legislation, you don't have full ownership of the product you bought, because although the parts required to fix it are still being produced by the manufacturer, you are legally-barred from obtaining them.

Try obtaining parts for your device. Then come back here and talk. Provide citations.

Also you are confused with a product and a service. You can call it after sales service, but repair is a service job, not a product. Ofcos you can get the service outside or the modification, but it is weird you force the company to accept your own service conditions. Not logic.

 

[Xiaojohn]

You should choose other smaller brand instead of Apple. Nobody force you to buy Apple products.

Xiaomi is good too. Or maybe ZTE or Huawei, they are in your needs and requirements.

I guess some people have so much money they don't care about cheaper repairs. Is that what you mean?

It still doesn't explain why people feel the need to defend some of the richest corporations on the planet. Are billionaires posting on her

 

[Analog Kid]

If two people are debating how a black hole functions, and in the middle of it one of them says "I think you are just trying to become famous", it's as useless as yelling "penis!" in the middle of the discussion.

Or holding up your middle finger to the camera?

Keep in mind that nobody is saying "I think you just want to become famous". You inserted yourself into a conversation that was happening before you joined. What people were saying is "Louis Rossmann's videos are necessarily dramatic because that's what it takes to win against the The Algorithm, and his opinions may be colored by the fact that he makes a very comfortable living holding his middle finger up to the camera and from the repair business his videos popularize". The point is to focus on the arguments and not just accept the loudest voice in the room as canon.

I understand it feels personal to you, but delete yourself as a person and pretend you don't exist. "Consider the source" is sound advice. There is no reason why we should consider the profit motive and PR objectives of Apple, but not the profit motives and PR objectives of Louis Rossmann Inc.

I am not the point with any of this. Delete me as a person, pretend I don't exist - people still want an option other than the manufacturer for repair and don't like being artificially restricted. Address that.

I did, but you carefully removed that from the portions of my responses you chose to engage with and then removed any link back to the comments you were addressing because strawmen are easier to take down if they don't have names or context.

The first video I did criticizing Apple's policies was in 2013 - I had about 20 subscribers and the video got 3 views

in 2013, when I had under 20 subscribers and 2 views per video

Nobody is talking about 2013 here but you, and the argument that "before I had 1.7m subscribers, I had less" doesn't bring any new information to the conversation. Nor does "everything I did was wrong" when you have clearly succeeded.

You have more subscribers than MacRumors has members. That qualifies as Internet Famous. There is nothing wrong with your being successful at what you do, and I imagine that success is due to a combination of interest in the services you provide and the entertainment of watching your vignettes. Your fame brings your message to more people and the attitude you present resonates with people in different ways-- some positively and some negatively.

The entire reason a law was placed muzzling people who entered IRP was so that word would not get out what a farce it was. If it were a legitimate program there would be no need for such a restrictive NDA on the basic procedures involved to do a repair.

There is no law muzzling people. There is law that says if you agree to a contract you are expected to uphold the terms of that contract. Your friend wanted it both ways-- they wanted the benefits of signing the contract but didn't want to hold to their obligations under the contract. There are consequences. Maybe it will turn out to be the revelation that changes the entire tech industry and the trouble will be worth it.

Your statement that a legitimate program wouldn't need an NDA is simply wrong. Repair means sharing details of the product that a company like Apple will be concerned about controlling for competitive reasons. Details you may consider uninteresting, Apple (and their competitors) may perceive as valuable. You and Apple may have a difference of opinion on what details should be public domain, but that doesn't mean an NDA is evidence if illegitimacy.

The reality is a lot of people are looking to dismiss ideas they dislike if they suggest a company, politician, etc. they dislike might not be perfect. People don't just vote for someone or buy a product from a company anymore. It becomes a part of their identity, and anything that criticizes that company or politician isn't a criticism of the company, it's a criticism of them personally. and it isn't. You can vote for someone who is flawed, or buy a product from an imperfect company. We all do it.

This looks like an opportunity for some introspection. You are a company.

 

[Analog Kid]

People watch rossman cuz they agree w him

I prefer his own choice of language here: he resonates with them.

 

[Analog Kid]

So, you want companies to restrict access to informations and consider breaking their terms as "breaking the law" but you don't want them to be told anything about their practices.

Well, i also think that the only force behind change SHOULD be free market, as the story of the 737 max teaches us about restrictions causing more damage than good as the company does even worst tryng to avoid regulations, but as government and politicians are all parts of the world we live in, they also take their sides.

I want contracts to remain binding under law. We'd have chaos if they aren't.

I don't mind people telling a company what they think of their practices, but I don't want government to mandate technical decisions. Motivate outcomes? Sure, maybe, but not means to those ends. If you want to reduce ewaste, make that the target of legislation, don't say people need to be able to repair their own devices because you think that will reduce ewaste. You will almost never get what you want if you want one thing but regulate another.

 

[Analog Kid]

Thank goodness this has ZERO to do with Right to Repair. Did you ever stop to look at the proposed legislation? I ask rhetorically.

Right to repair - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The right to repair for electronics refers to the concept of allowing end users [...] to repair electronic devices [...]without any [...] technical restrictions. [...]the device should be constructed and designed in a manner that allows repairs to be made easily;[...] repairs should be possible by design and not hindered by software programming [...] The right to repair movement tries to address these issues by proposing legislation obligating manufacturers to design devices in a manner that allows easy repair with the goal of favouring repair over replacement.

That's more than zero. Just as importantly, changing design practices is embedded in the rhetoric I see around this topic. "Apple intentionally designed it that way so it couldn't be repaired". I'm quite happy with the capabilities and reliability of my devices, I would like companies to continue making capable and reliable devices rather than focus on what some first term congressman looking for votes thinks "repairable" means.


Did you stop to read the rest of my comment where my point was that I'm fine with most of the initiatives, and this would be my only real concern? I ask rhetorically.

People, like myself, and also most likely you, are going to need their devices repaired. The less the cost, the better.

Reuse = zero pollution, zero waste, zero expenses
Repair = zero pollution, zero waste, small expenses
Recycle = great generation of pollution and waste, recycled product bought anew (expensive)
None = same as above, but heightened

Right to Repair legislation = parts directly available = repair is possible and becomes cheaper
Right to Repair legislation = schematics available = repair is possible and becomes cheaper

This "well obviously it will be cheaper and produce less waste" argument seems to be based on an overly simplistic mental model of what it takes to design and maintain a product line that ships 200M units a year.

I'll quote myself:

I really don't understand the argument that this has any environmental impact at all, let alone a positive one.

Lots of people buying repair equipment that only a few qualified techs would need, having parts individually packaged and driven to peoples homes rather than shipped in quantity to a few centralized repair centers, unqualified users opening delicate electronics leading to more damaged products to dispose of, replaced components being individually driven back to Apple for recycling if the users bother to recycle it at all, products reassembled less reliably leading to repeat failures...

It would sound like an ecological disaster if I thought a significant fraction of the 200 million people buying these things each year were going to actually try to repair them-- but fortunately they won't and the overall impact is going to get lost in the noise. On the other hand, if Apple makes an effort to make them easier to repair at home, replacing solder connections with connectors, for example, we'll likely see a decline in product reliability.

I feel like the people making environmental arguments about Apple's repairability really don't understand, which is why they keep using analogies like car tires and spark plugs.

An essentially identical argument can be made for the expense.

And this is all assuming the repairs go as expected. Save 20% on a $100 part and you only need less than 1% of repairs to cause greater damage to a $1000 device before the overall expense goes up.

But of course everyone thinks they'll do it right, and everyone will think the latent problems they introduce that show up months later are due to something unrelated to their work. Just like people are more afraid to fly than to drive to the airport because accidents happen to other people.

This is not a matter of "disagreeing" or "agreeing". Whether you need oxygen to live or not is, likewise, not up to you to decide.

Hmm. Ok. So this is like oxygen and we should all just stop discussing it? That seems like a rather draconian way to curtail debate.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

You can't fix your product.

Without Right to Repair legislation, you don't have full ownership of the product you bought, because although the parts required to fix it are still being produced by the manufacturer, you are legally-barred from obtaining them.

Try obtaining parts for your device. Then come back here and talk. Provide citations.

I can absolutely repair my product.

I can roll into Apple, confirm Apple Care and have my problem fixed.

Or I pay the out of warranty cost and have my problem fixed.

Or I can buy a different product.

Do people who buy Ferraris get upset because only a Ferrari dealer can fix it?

Guess what? MOST iPhone owners don't care about this issue.

 

[IllinoisCorn]

I guess some people have so much money they don't care about cheaper repairs. Is that what you mean?

It still doesn't explain why people feel the need to defend some of the richest corporations on the planet. Are billionaires posting on here?

This is exactly it. You nailed it. Look at what you wrote---"so much money" "richest corporations" "billionaires."

What does that have to do with Apple selling you tools or parts or whatever?

It doesn't, but it drives your animosity, as if Apple owes you (the royal you, not you personally) something "because they have enough money already" or some other inane argument.

 

[JosephAW]

It’s a trap, people will destroy their device and will have to buy another one.

 

[PC_tech]

People who cheer for it normally the one who get benefit. Usually they are businessman. I don’t think they really care about my rights like Apple do. They just want some cut from Apple, otherwise they will sue Apple for monopoly. Tim sweetney is one of this kind.

He is software seller, he can’t speak on behalf of consumers!

Apple doesn’t care about your rights ????

 

[Luposian]

LMAO, asians have been doing things better than Americans for a long time. What do you expect?


I’ve seen a lot of peeps who don’t care about cracked screen and keep using the iphone / ipad until it breaks and those aren’t poor people. I guess there are 2 types of people: the ones who see phones as tools and the ones who see phones as fashion accessories

My son being one of them... fortunately, it's just the tempered glass protector and not the actual screen... but he keeps breaking them, so I think he figures why bother...

 

[Xiaojohn]

Apple doesn’t care about your rights ????

Are you sure?

 

[PC_tech]

Are you sure?

I’m sure ?

 

[Xiaojohn]

I’m sure ?

Then you can try Samsung, Nokia, huawei phone….i still like Apple because they protect my rights

 

[Kronekerdelta]

I just don't really care about who fixes it.

I do because not all repair services are made equal and as far as Apple certified repairs go, they are expensive, charge you for unnecessary things, low quality and in a few cases, they'll even flat out refuse as was documented by Linus Sebastian.

 

[Kronekerdelta]

[...] but it is weird you force the company to accept your own service conditions. Not logic.

Why should I accept their service conditions if I'm the one who owns the product?

 

[Kronekerdelta]

I'm quite happy with the capabilities and reliability of my devices, I would like companies to continue making capable and reliable devices rather than focus on what some first term congressman looking for votes thinks "repairable" means.

I don't see how intentionally messing your products after repairs and having a monopoly on spare parts helps your product be more capable or reliable, if anything, it makes them less so...