Right to Repair Advocate on Apple's Program: 'Still Too Many Hoops to Jump Through' to Fix iPhones

[MacRumors]

Apple's new Self Service Repair program leaves iPhone owners with too many hoops to jump through to successfully fix their own devices, right to repair advocate Nathan Proctor said in a statement today. Proctor leads the U.S. PIRG's right to repair campaign, working to pass legislation that would allow consumers to repair their own electronics.

Proctor said that the program is encouraging because Right to Repair is "breaking through," but Apple is exerting too much control by locking parts to a specific device and requiring Apple verification during the repair process.

"We are really pleased to see public access to Apple service guides for the first time in decades. However, it's clear that Apple is doubling down on requiring each part be encoded to a specific phone, and then requiring a connection to Apple to verify the part before it gains full functionality. I don't see how locking parts to a specific device and requiring manufacturer approval to install it offers any benefit to the product owner, but it does allow Apple to maintain a lot of control over the repair process. It also means that Apple can decide to stop supporting repairs. If Apple decides that a phone is too old, they can effectively put an expiration date on any product needing repair, defeating one of the most important aspects of repair -- minimizing toxic electronic waste.

"While this is a start, there are still too many hoops to jump through to fix phones. As it's becoming clear that Apple and other manufacturers can give us the Right to Repair, we should require them to. And we should have more options. Not just one set of parts. Not just a few manufacturers. No product should be tossed in the scrap heap, wasting money and adding to our toxic electronic waste problem, because the manufacturer doesn't properly support repair."

Proctor believes that Apple and other tech companies should give consumers more options and better access to parts from different manufacturers rather than requiring parts supplied by the company itself.

Repair outlet iFixit expressed similar thoughts on the program, and said that it is a "great step" forward, but restrictive because of the part verification requirements that tie new components to serial numbers.

Apple's new Self Service Repair program launched this morning, and customers can currently opt to receive repair kits to fix the battery, bottom speaker, camera, display, SIM Tray, or Taptic Engine of an iPhone 12 or iPhone 13 device.

Initiating a repair requires a serial number or IMEI, and after some of the repairs are complete, customers will need to initiate System Configuration with Apple. Repairs can be done with the rental toolkit from Apple, which costs $49 to rent for a seven day period.

Apple's rental toolkit includes all of the tools necessary to get into an iPhone, but the actual replacement components are a separate charge. Apple's toolkit is massive at a total weight of 79 pounds, and kits must be returned to a UPS location when a repair is complete.

The toolkit rental and return process, the cost of replacement parts, and the verification may be more effort than some users want to put into iPhone repair, so it is unclear how popular Apple's program will be with iPhone users. On the plus side, repairs do not have labor costs associated, and all of the parts and tools are genuine Apple components, which isn't always the case with third-party repairs from companies other than Apple.

Article Link: Right to Repair Advocate on Apple's Program: 'Still Too Many Hoops to Jump Through' to Fix iPhones

 

[emmab2006]

Well Duh….

 

[Macative]

Translation: It's still difficult and still costs money to fix them, so right to repair people will never be happy.

Right to repair is just a smokescreen for people who don't want to pay what Apple charges for repairs. Until they find out that buying OEM parts and renting the tools is still going to cost almost as much. Suddenly they won't want to repair them anymore.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Apple should have patterned up with iFixit instead of coming up with a self-to-repair option. I know for a fact my mom is not feeling comfortable opening up her personal iPhone and changing the battery herself. She still prefers going to an actual Apple store and having it done that way.

 

[apparatchik]

Well, the idea behind locking parts to a device is to discourage phone stealing, if someone steals or tries to sell a stolen iPhone it shouldn’t be worth the parts.

 

[CWallace]

As others have mentioned on the other threads today about Apple's program, the likely reason for Apple's "control" is to prevent stolen iOS devices from being harvested for spare parts. Yes, the cynic can (rightly) say that it's just to protect Apple's cut of the spare parts revenue stream, but it also helps curb the appeal of stealing iOS devices to feed an "underground parts network" and this should hopefully suppress the risk of iOS device theft significantly increasing.

 

[Macintosh TV]

Person who makes money on repairs wants it easier to make money on repairs. Imagine that. I don't need their hot take.

 

[now i see it]

What did people expect?
It’s Apple after all

 

[LoveTo]

With Apple’s approach, you are essentially only saving labor costs. You’re tightening the screws instead of Apple tech. Apple still controls all the parts. Also, that huge heavy self repair kit outweighs any stated environmental benefits, figuratively and literally. It’s a total lose-lose scenario.

 

[GMShadow]

Apple should have patterned up with iFixit instead of coming up with a self-to-repair option. I know for a fact my mom is not feeling comfortable opening up her personal iPhone and changing the battery herself. She still prefers going to an actual Apple store and having it done that way.

What does your anecdote have to do with your initial claim that Apple should partner with iFixit?

As others have mentioned on the other threads today about Apple's program, the likely reason for Apple's "control" is to prevent stolen iOS devices from being harvested for spare parts. Yes, the cynic can (rightly) say that it's just to protect Apple's cut of the spare parts revenue stream, but it also helps curb the appeal of stealing iOS devices to feed an "underground parts network" and this should hopefully suppress the risk of iOS device theft from significantly increasing.

Underground parts, plus simple "Oh we can't fix your phone, sorry, thanks for letting us keep it so we can reuse those parts for free and still charge other customers the same amount".

 

[jtkiley]

It seems telling that the new "this isn't good enough" complaint is that people can't just use whatever parts they want. It's almost as if the whole point of "right to repair" is to boost margins by substituting cheaper parts for original ones.

A lot of Apple's moves in this area (and others, e.g., the App Store) seem to revolve around one idea: if things break on a product used by hundreds of millions of people (the vast majority of whom aren't tech enthusiasts), Apple thinks they'll be blamed for it. They're probably right about that.

 

[gsurf123]

Why would someone want to attempt this with or without Apple's parts, much less their toolkit. If I need a new battery I will just have them replace it. No fuss, no muss and if something goes wrong it is on them. Were I to break a more expensive part I'd probably just get a new phone if it was out of AppleCare.

I will add that I have opened and replaced batteries in an iPhone 6s and while it was doable, it was not worth the hassle and it took some finagling to get it back together as close to perfect as I could.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Just had a look and including the repair kit rental it costs exactly the same to repair it yourself vs getting apple to do it. So either they don’t charge labour on repairs or they’re over charging here lol

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Just had a look and including the repair kit rental it costs exactly the same to repair it yourself vs getting apple to do it. So either they don’t charge labour on repairs or they’re over charging here lol

It seems like they are over-charging it over here. Sometimes Apple will let you get away with labor costs but this seems not to be the case anymore.

 

[jtkiley]

Just had a look and including the repair kit rental it costs exactly the same to repair it yourself vs getting apple to do it. So either they don’t charge labour on repairs or they’re over charging here lol

I think it's more like the costs of the repair kits (which will be much less efficiently used than ones in an Apple Store or service provider) plus two-way shipping for 60 lbs. of gear (every time it's used) offset the labor cost in a store doing these replacements much more efficiently at scale.

 

[Elcuria]

Part of me things that some RTR people want products designed differently to make repairs easier.

That may be possible, but Apple needs to be able to be able to design in a way that ultimately maximizes profit for shareholders and 2) that people want to buy.

 

[hasanahmad]

So their argument is that they should use cheap third party products with hazy screens, touch issues built on bad quality and batteries that might explode because they are cheaper than the products Apple provide which are the OEM quality themselves.

All this statement has proven is that it was really never about right to repair, it was right to use lower quality parts for cheaper repair

 

[jlc1978]

Part of me things that some RTR people want products designed differently to make repairs easier.

That's the whole flaw in RTR; it doess not mean easy or cheap to repair. Unless something is designed for repair it often cannot be repaired without special tools or equipment.

I like to work on cars, and but today's vehicles, even though I can get any part I want, are often unfixable without access to specialized computer software. My e92 required reseting the computer after a battery was replaced, necessitating the purchase of a special tool to do that. Granted, it gives me a lot of other diagnostic and repair functions, but at over $200 is was an investment. Once I got rid of the e92 it is now a fancy box in my garage.

 

[ocnitsa]

Part of me things that some RTR people want products designed differently to make repairs easier.

That may be possible, but Apple needs to be able to be able to design in a way that ultimately maximizes profit for shareholders and 2) that people want to buy.

Part of me thinks that Apple has purposefully made some decisions in order to make repairs harder for people to do on their own.

Maximizing profit and serving people with stuff they want is important but always under a philosophy of the company that prioritizes certain concepts…privacy, different way of thinking, climate consciousness, social consciousness.

I think that there is a balance Apple has yet to achieve between making simple fixes simple and easy while still profiting from bigger fixes.

 

[hasanahmad]

"Proctor believes that Apple and other tech companies should give consumers more options and better access to parts from different manufacturers rather than requiring parts supplied by the company itself."

this statement right here proves that right to repair movement is more about cheaper lower quality parts for users than the right to repair itself. the movement was called right to repair, not right to fix it for cheap

 

[jtkiley]

Part of me things that some RTR people want products designed differently to make repairs easier.

That may be possible, but Apple needs to be able to be able to design in a way that ultimately maximizes profit for shareholders and 2) that people want to buy.

Beyond that, designing without modular parts enables a lot of miniaturization and removal of connectors that could otherwise cause reliability issues, and definitely increases weight and material costs for every single purchaser. Why incur expense, weight, and bulk for every single customer for problems that are statistically quite unlikely to affect them?

 

[Mousse]

Malicious compliance. Apple is sticking it to the Gub'ment. Gub'ment needs to chance the law so that Apple can't bind a specific part to a specific device, otherwise this law has no teeth.

 

[erikkfi]

Ideally Apple's role here would be to remove roadblocks to repair and make devices more repairable. Other companies should provide parts, tools, and so on. I'm a happy capitalist but this feels a little like a cynical attempt to seize another angle on device-related profits. There are legitimate concerns -- especially around price, my goodness -- that go beyond the knee-jerk "you can't please everyone" commentary.

 

[Bonte]

Well, the idea behind locking parts to a device is to discourage phone stealing, if someone steals or tries to sell a stolen iPhone it shouldn’t be worth the parts.

That indeed is a good reason for it, also necessary to prevent hardware hacking. Apple is really going all-in on security.

 

[contacos]

So their argument is that they should use cheap third party products with hazy screens, touch issues built on bad quality and batteries that might explode because they are cheaper than the products Apple provide which are the OEM quality themselves.

All this statement has proven is that it was really never about right to repair, it was right to use lower quality parts for cheaper repair

People don’t seem to mind it actually. There is a Turkish phone repair shop on almost every corner here in Berlin