And I guess these rules are fixed and cannot be flexible. I have seen first hand where inflexible school rules are bad. I have family that work in schools. I also have family where inflexible school rules have caused medical issues.
Except here, the third party sellers are not the target beneficiaries. Does Apple owe anything to them? I imagine any new rules or policies would be primarily designed around Apple and their stakeholders (app developers, customers and so on), while everybody else is an afterthought because the more considerations and variables you have, the more complicated any policy would be.
It feels to me like Apple’s love / hate relationship with jailbreakers. On one hand, how they modify the iPhone is none of Apple’s concern but on the other hand, the manner in which they go about it represents a security threat from Apple’s perspective. So when Apple issues a security patch which disables jailbreaking, it’s not because Apple deliberately sets out to screw them over, but because there is a legitimate security flaw which warrants attention. These jailbreakers are just the collateral damage.
Apple may not set out to deliberately screw their customers. But Apple makes the rules and the effect is that Apple does indeed screw over a given percentage of their customers. Louis Rossman says he gets 30 customers a day coming to him where Apple have placed a high repair cost due to their practices. Any company that uses a script like that is going to screw over their customers. If you have your wits about you or if you luckily get the right genius, then the outcome can be changed in to a positive one.
Apple has clearly prioritised quick turnover rate over pricing and maybe their own data shows that their customers by and large don’t mind paying for this convenience?
I mean, running a repair service, of course Louis Rossman is only going to see the negative cases. The problem then comes when you assume that just because a few people are unhappy means that everyone is unhappy. What about the rest of the users who are satisfied with the level of support that Apple is providing?
Personally, the few times I have needed to get my Apple products serviced, Apple ultimately came through for me, so I am fine by and large.
I recently took my Apple watch in to an Apple store. It was 2.5 years old and the touch functionality on the screen stopped working.
They said it was out of warranty. I told them that a screen should not fail in an unreasonable amount of time. Apple agreed with me and proceeded with the process.
The second line they gave me was that the Apple watch was not like other products and had to be sent away to be worked on and it could take weeks. This is not what I usually expect when I take things in to an apple store (which happens more often than it should). The next thing they said was that if it was water damage then it was not covered. Way to go Apple, you make obscene amount of profits that you cannot cover a few "waterproof" (note the inverted comments before people start to decry my choice of word) devices for water damage.
Time goes on and the watch comes back and my Apple watch is replaced. Didn't tell me what was wrong. Simply replaced the watch.
Same thing happened to me. My watch had chipping issues but it took three visits to the Apple store before they acknowledged it was a problem and issued me a replacement. It took a week though.
This is simply FUD. Cars have been repaired by third party repair companies for years. If a mechanic can safely work on a killing machine, then I have no qualms about a third party repair company working on my out of warranty products, especially since Apple will not do repairs.
Again FUD. People have eyes.
Nothing is stopping you from having a third party service your Apple products. Apple just isn’t making it easy for them.
That is one example, but no it was not the one I had in mind. I was thinking more like parts that are related to security.
Apple will flick the kill switch rather than reducing security. Apple wants the control rather than giving up said control to the customer. The customer must be the person in control of products that they purchase.
I think that for most users, this really isn’t a problem for them. If you don’t need to run windows or Linux on your Mac, having a T2 chip in your device simply means better security for you, at no discernible drawback.
Again, this feels like Apple doing something to benefit 80% of their users, possibly at the expense of the minority who might want such versatility, and it’s a trade off they are fine with making.
FUD, I have all sorts of products. I have all sorts of service needs. I also go to restaurants. Use taxis and so on the list is endless. There are shoddy people and practices the world over yet the cogs still keep turning and I can get good repairs and service If I am wise enough. Give customers the credit they deserve to be able to choose the appropriate service in the same way they go about making choices elsewhere. The world won't end if Apple gives up control of the right to repair.
I guess this comes down to Apple’s philosophy about wanting to dictate the user experience from start to end. I don’t see this changing anytime soon. If anything, I expect Apple to get even more closed in the future.
I don't think you are, but the consequences are the same.
[doublepost=1541899786][/doublepost]
All of what you say about the right to repair is FUD. I am not going to spend a lot of time refuting all your claims. Perhaps if you start with one point then I might.
The fuse example was a relevant example of how Apple does not want to give up control. You can replace the fuse with any part you like.
[doublepost=1541899837][/doublepost]
So you think it is good for shareholders not to see the unit sales? Why is this?
Not that it’s good, but that it isn’t necessary. I do believe that Apple choosing to do this now means they expect unit sales to either stay flat or even drop down the road, but the higher ASPs will likely still result in higher revenue figures overall, and that’s really all they need to know.
Just look at the uproar that ensued earlier this year over rumoured lower sales of the iPhone X. Imagine the pandemonium if and when iPhone sales do start falling for real, even as Apple is clearly transitioning to wearables and services and continuing to grow their install base via the grey market.
Apple is correct in saying that unit sales don’t tell the whole story, and it’s better that they do so now (while sales still look fine) than later (after sales start dropping).
But I do think we are digressing.
My bad.
My bad.
