5 ms·

>Your complaint seems rather imagined to me. Please show me a source where Apple sued someone (either an individual or a third-party repair center) simply for

>Your complaint seems rather imagined to me. Please show me a source where Apple sued someone (either an individual or a third-party repair center) simply for repairing their own device or a user's device on behalf of that user. You won't find it because that's not what Apple's complaint is here. People are conflating Apple's refusal to provide manuals and replacement parts without cost (and outside of their certification program) with the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. That's not true in the slightest and it's straight-up misinformation.

ksk 9y ago
>Please show me a source where Apple sued someone (either an individual or a third-party repair center) simply for repairing their own device or a user's device on behalf of that user. You won't find it because that's not what Apple's complaint is here. That would be inefficient and a waste of their money in most cases. >People are conflating Apple's refusal to provide manuals and replacement parts without cost (and outside of their certification program) with the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. Apple uses various methods - Updates that brick repaired phones, and copyright/patent law to block others from supplying parts. Here they can choke the repair shops much more easily. I don't want to be forced to go to Subaru to repair my car either. I prefer to have an option of which tires to buy, which oil to use, which stereo I use, etc. I also don't want the car to be welded together to the point where nobody can repair it. YMMV. Sometimes the good guys win. https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/25/iphone-warranty-third-party-screen/ https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/25/iphone-warranty-third-party-s... http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/06/technology/apple-australia-lawsuit-error-53-iphone-brick/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/06/technology/apple-australia-l... >the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. People don't want to repair the phones themselves. They want to use services available in almost every other consumer industry to service their phones. Apple insists that they should be the sole arbiter of who is and isn't allowed to do that. People are trying to fight Apple on that. And thats what its all about. Apple does produce some very high quality products and I have enjoyed many of them over the years. That doesn't make them a saint on all fronts. Fairs fair, Praise where praise is due, and criticism when they do something purely out of greed/control.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  Your problem is that Apple is not Microsoft. Microsoft effectively has to support literally any combination of things someone might try to do to their Windows PC, because they know nobody will blame the author of the crappy driver or the manufacturer of the peripheral. They'll blame Microsoft. Apple, by tightly controlling its hardware ecosystem, avoids a lot of that. But also gets to build software that's tested for far fewer configurations, meaning that if you do step outside that configuration, you have to accept that they're not testing for it and aren't guaranteeing the next version of their software will continue to work for you. But rather than understand this, you attribute it to Tim Cook twirling his mustache and cackling over how he's going to deliberately brick all those phones that people repaired themselves! Soon, he will rule the world! BWAHAHAHA! Except you know as soon as you think about it that you have no evidence of this and that the kind of "Apple bricks your phone to punish you for repairing it" narrative you're pushing here is completely false. Apple might not like losing out on some more of your money, but figuring out ways to push updates that will break your phone while not breaking someone else's is just not worth the time and money for them. So the simplest explanation -- that they don't have staff thoroughly test every type of repair you might do to your phone with every update they push -- is the likeliest, and you know that too. This, for the record, is my problem with the "right to repair" people. You ignore real problems to peddle conspiracies.
  - ksk 9y ago
    What in the world are you on about? Sorry dude, I can make no sense of anything in your rambling comment.
    - ubernostrum 9y ago
      You appear to be claiming that Apple deliberately develops software updates to break user- or third-party-repaired devices. This requires Apple to have a team studying how third parties repair their devices, and working on ways to modify their software to break such devices while leaving all others unaffected. That's a not-insignificant challenge. The likelier explanation is that Apple does not invest in developing updates that will deliberately break your phone as retaliation for you repairing it in ways they don't like. The likelier explanation is that Apple simply doesn't test the interaction between their updates and your repairs, and doesn't much care if your phone breaks as a result. They test for the interaction with their stock devices, and devices repaired through their advocated channels, and don't seem to want the "absolutely everything everybody might do must be supported" approach Microsoft historically took (with good reason -- one of the advantages of tight ecosystem control is getting to avoid Microsoft's nightmare).

ksk 9y ago

>Please show me a source where Apple sued someone (either an individual or a third-party repair center) simply for repairing their own device or a user's device on behalf of that user. You won't find it because that's not what Apple's complaint is here. That would be inefficient and a waste of their money in most cases. >People are conflating Apple's refusal to provide manuals and replacement parts without cost (and outside of their certification program) with the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. Apple uses various methods - Updates that brick repaired phones, and copyright/patent law to block others from supplying parts. Here they can choke the repair shops much more easily. I don't want to be forced to go to Subaru to repair my car either. I prefer to have an option of which tires to buy, which oil to use, which stereo I use, etc. I also don't want the car to be welded together to the point where nobody can repair it. YMMV. Sometimes the good guys win. https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/25/iphone-warranty-third-party-screen/ https://9to5mac.com/2017/02/25/iphone-warranty-third-party-s... http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/06/technology/apple-australia-lawsuit-error-53-iphone-brick/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/06/technology/apple-australia-l... >the idea that Apple is trying to prevent people from repairing their own devices. People don't want to repair the phones themselves. They want to use services available in almost every other consumer industry to service their phones. Apple insists that they should be the sole arbiter of who is and isn't allowed to do that. People are trying to fight Apple on that. And thats what its all about. Apple does produce some very high quality products and I have enjoyed many of them over the years. That doesn't make them a saint on all fronts. Fairs fair, Praise where praise is due, and criticism when they do something purely out of greed/control.

ubernostrum 9y ago
Your problem is that Apple is not Microsoft. Microsoft effectively has to support literally any combination of things someone might try to do to their Windows PC, because they know nobody will blame the author of the crappy driver or the manufacturer of the peripheral. They'll blame Microsoft. Apple, by tightly controlling its hardware ecosystem, avoids a lot of that. But also gets to build software that's tested for far fewer configurations, meaning that if you do step outside that configuration, you have to accept that they're not testing for it and aren't guaranteeing the next version of their software will continue to work for you. But rather than understand this, you attribute it to Tim Cook twirling his mustache and cackling over how he's going to deliberately brick all those phones that people repaired themselves! Soon, he will rule the world! BWAHAHAHA! Except you know as soon as you think about it that you have no evidence of this and that the kind of "Apple bricks your phone to punish you for repairing it" narrative you're pushing here is completely false. Apple might not like losing out on some more of your money, but figuring out ways to push updates that will break your phone while not breaking someone else's is just not worth the time and money for them. So the simplest explanation -- that they don't have staff thoroughly test every type of repair you might do to your phone with every update they push -- is the likeliest, and you know that too. This, for the record, is my problem with the "right to repair" people. You ignore real problems to peddle conspiracies.
- ksk 9y ago
  What in the world are you on about? Sorry dude, I can make no sense of anything in your rambling comment.
  - ubernostrum 9y ago
    You appear to be claiming that Apple deliberately develops software updates to break user- or third-party-repaired devices. This requires Apple to have a team studying how third parties repair their devices, and working on ways to modify their software to break such devices while leaving all others unaffected. That's a not-insignificant challenge. The likelier explanation is that Apple does not invest in developing updates that will deliberately break your phone as retaliation for you repairing it in ways they don't like. The likelier explanation is that Apple simply doesn't test the interaction between their updates and your repairs, and doesn't much care if your phone breaks as a result. They test for the interaction with their stock devices, and devices repaired through their advocated channels, and don't seem to want the "absolutely everything everybody might do must be supported" approach Microsoft historically took (with good reason -- one of the advantages of tight ecosystem control is getting to avoid Microsoft's nightmare).