6 ms·

I think you are misconstruing the aims of the right to repair movement. Its nothing to do with forcing companies to make it "easy" to repair, but rather about p

I think you are misconstruing the aims of the right to repair movement. Its nothing to do with forcing companies to make it "easy" to repair, but rather about preventing companies from including "features" which serve no purpose besides preventing third party repair. An example would be a tractor that is designed to be cheaply serviceable, but has a feature which disables any replaced parts until a message signed by the the original equipment manufacturer and authorizing the replacement part has been received.

kevinherron 8y ago
You're right, I remember this initially, but many discussions about right to repair get hijacked and center around topics like iFixit and their blatantly self-serving anti-Apple campaigns.
- mfoy_ 8y ago
  All ad campaigns are blatantly self-serving... so what's the point?
- isoskeles 8y ago
  As self-serving as it is, iFixit is doing a social good IMO. If it weren't for them, I would have spent more money replacing or having someone else repair my iPhone. So I don't care if they make money off of it, they save me more money in the long-run, and they prevent a larger number of phones and other devices being cycled through the economy before necessary. If that means punching up at Apple, so be it. Apple can take the hit. Planned obsolescence is a very shitty and cynical strategy on the part of manufacturers, and anyone fighting against it is on the right side.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    > iFixit is doing a social good IMO Agree. > anyone fighting against it is on the right side Don't. For example, Louis Rossmann recently kicked up a storm when he claimed that Apple used the customs to seize his "genuine" battery shipments (which was widely reported in the media and gave him significant publicity), except it turned out that he left out the fact that the parts were unauthorized: https://old.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/9pow06/louis_rossmann_admits_to_using_parts_from_a/ https://old.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/9pow06/louis_rossman.... Self-serving PR stunts that consist of misinformation and depend on the subsequent media outrage don't help "the right side".
    - lightedman 8y ago
      "Unauthorized" flies in the face of the anti-tying provisions of the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act. Go read our laws and do try to keep up with them, eh? You're one of the reasons things like this are happening.
    - isoskeles 8y ago
      Hah, I should clarify that I don't think gratuitous lying is an acceptable way to fight.
    - brokenmachine 8y ago
      What exactly does "unauthorized" mean in the context of spare parts?
      - saagarjha 8y ago
        It means that the batteries were made without Apple's approval, but carried Apple's branding and were intended to be sold as genuine Apple batteries.
    - mindslight 8y ago
      That reddit post you linked to also does its best to avoid focusing on the actual situation. There's no such thing as an "unauthorized" battery. If factories are producing batteries with a default Apple logo (ie to Chinese standards), and he's instructing them to cross it out, that also seems completely legitimate.
      - saagarjha 8y ago
        > That reddit post you linked to also does its best to avoid focusing on the actual situation. No, it doesn't. In fact, I think it's pretty explicit in making the situation clear: > First of all, let me start by saying, I am not defending Apple's terrible stance towards Right to Repair. > I think Apple's R2R policy is awful - It sucks that once the device you buy is on the "obsolete" list, you can no longer get 1st party service from Apple. Not only that, but there are no legal ways to obtain parts. IMO this is something all of us should be putting pressure on Apple to change. I'd love it if there was a law on the books that forced companies to make spare parts for products available to customers for x amount of years after the warranty expires. That would allow people to continue using the devices they buy. > In closing, I'm going to continue supporting Louis, iFixit, and their attempts to secure our rights to repair the products we own. But it is also very obvious that Louis Rossman was clearly dishonest. Actually, I don't quite understand your argument: > If factories are producing batteries with a default Apple logo (ie to Chinese standards), and he's instructing them to cross it out, that also seems completely legitimate. How is this "completely legitimate"? Apple is (quite understandably) annoyed that some factories decided to make batteries that Louis could peddle as genuine Apple batteries, when it's clear that they are in fact not these at all (they're crossing out the logos to pass customs, for heaven's sake). Of course they're going to be seized, because they're counterfeit: Apple probably wasn't even involved here. I'm surprised he has the gall to try to make this a huge PR issue by claiming that Apple was trying to stop him from repairing Macs with genuine batteries that he bought when he knows they're just shady batteries from China he's trying to bring into the country.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  iFixit would have fewer specialized parts to sell if Apple stopped making it so difficult to open. They seem to be pretty genuine about wanting things to be fixable.
- ihuman 8y ago
  Not sure why you're being downvoted. Until recently I also thought that's what the "right to repair" movement/legislation was about.
blhack 8y ago
Lots of the things people don't like about apple are likely just to make their manufacturing process simpler.
- m463 8y ago
  pentalobe screws?
  - blhack 8y ago
    Batteries which are soldered to the board instead of using a connector, motherboard is all one assembly including the keyboard, fewer ports, nothing user serviceable. That all seems like measures to make manufacturing easier from my perspective.
    - JetSpiegel 8y ago
      How is soldering components simpler than using connectors? It's more expensive for diminishing returns.
      - craftyguy 8y ago
        Connectors are also soldered as well and they add to the BOM costs.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      Sure, it gives them both the benefit of optimized manufacturing and the benefit from screwing the customers. It's not a law of nature that making things better for yourself will make them better for your customers. In fact, the opposite is usually true.
  - eridius 8y ago
    Measure that make it harder (but not impossible) for users to disassemble their devices serves to avoid people doing accidental damage (and voiding their warrantee). It's possible to get a pentalobe screwdriver, and anyone not willing to get one probably has no business opening up an Apple product.
christkv 8y ago
There is that but also access to spare parts. Louis Rossman talks about how it’s hard to get replacement chips to fix motherboards because Apple locks down the distribution channels so they have to relay on harvested components from failed boards or chips who fell of the back off a truck.
- neuralRiot 8y ago
  Also not sending ICE to raid small shops who istall aftermarket parts would help too.
erikpukinskis 8y ago
Also providing documentation? I think technicians sometimes have to seek internal documents through illicit means.
- dwild 8y ago
  > Also providing documentation? It's also important to specify that we don't ask for MORE documentation (although that wouldn't hurt), just access to the documentation they give to the authorized technician, or their own staff.
mises 8y ago
Where do you draw the line at repair-hostile vs. secure? I agree many things are hostile to repair, but let's take the new T2. It's awful for repair, but actually does have security benefits against evil maid attacks, a serious security risk. Stuff like this also applies to unrootable androids (a major pet peeve of mine). I think we all would do well to remember that it's always easier to say something is wrong than to create a solution. It's also worth noting that governments are arguably worse than anyone else at determining such edge cases as secure vs. user-hostile.
- chii 8y ago
  A device is repair hostile if repairing requires the permission of a third party instead of the device owner. Security is different because a device can be made secure without it being repair hostile - e.g, the owner of the device has the private keys in a signed code update. So a maid can't just Willy Nilly change your baby monitor, but you can.
  - mises 8y ago
    > has the private keys How do you store these? It's not really user friendly for the average consumer, and certainly has little recourse if you lose them all. How well does it usually go when people are told to keep track of, say, a dongle? What if each device needs one?
    - 12298765 8y ago
      The point isn't that every user will know how to repair their own products, rather that they could if they choose. Think about your lawnmower. If the engine won't run, maybe you can figure out through a bit of research that it's probably the spark plug. So you can go buy a spark plug and swap it yourself. You don't need the manufacturer to authorize your new spark plug. However, many people would not know anything about where to begin replacing their spark plug, and don't want the hastle to learn, so they bring it to the manufacturer and pay a premium to have it done for them. But if they someday decided to learn, they could learn themselves. Or even take their lawnmower to a friend who can help them. To take away those option entirely, only leaving the one option -- paying the manufacturer a premium to do it for you -- is what I have an issue with. Bonus: the lawnmower manufacturer could include a type of safety lock that does not allow you to work on your lawnmower, to prevent a user from hurting themselves. However, the manufacturer should also give the user the ability to remove that lock, positively asserting that they know what they're doing (like giving the private keys, or allowing a motherboard switch to be toggled which unlocks the system, etc)

kevinherron 8y ago

You're right, I remember this initially, but many discussions about right to repair get hijacked and center around topics like iFixit and their blatantly self-serving anti-Apple campaigns.

mfoy_ 8y ago
All ad campaigns are blatantly self-serving... so what's the point?
isoskeles 8y ago
As self-serving as it is, iFixit is doing a social good IMO. If it weren't for them, I would have spent more money replacing or having someone else repair my iPhone. So I don't care if they make money off of it, they save me more money in the long-run, and they prevent a larger number of phones and other devices being cycled through the economy before necessary. If that means punching up at Apple, so be it. Apple can take the hit. Planned obsolescence is a very shitty and cynical strategy on the part of manufacturers, and anyone fighting against it is on the right side.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  > iFixit is doing a social good IMO Agree. > anyone fighting against it is on the right side Don't. For example, Louis Rossmann recently kicked up a storm when he claimed that Apple used the customs to seize his "genuine" battery shipments (which was widely reported in the media and gave him significant publicity), except it turned out that he left out the fact that the parts were unauthorized: https://old.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/9pow06/louis_rossmann_admits_to_using_parts_from_a/ https://old.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/9pow06/louis_rossman.... Self-serving PR stunts that consist of misinformation and depend on the subsequent media outrage don't help "the right side".
  - lightedman 8y ago
    "Unauthorized" flies in the face of the anti-tying provisions of the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act. Go read our laws and do try to keep up with them, eh? You're one of the reasons things like this are happening.
  - isoskeles 8y ago
    Hah, I should clarify that I don't think gratuitous lying is an acceptable way to fight.
  - brokenmachine 8y ago
    What exactly does "unauthorized" mean in the context of spare parts?
    - saagarjha 8y ago
      It means that the batteries were made without Apple's approval, but carried Apple's branding and were intended to be sold as genuine Apple batteries.
  - mindslight 8y ago
    That reddit post you linked to also does its best to avoid focusing on the actual situation. There's no such thing as an "unauthorized" battery. If factories are producing batteries with a default Apple logo (ie to Chinese standards), and he's instructing them to cross it out, that also seems completely legitimate.
    - saagarjha 8y ago
      > That reddit post you linked to also does its best to avoid focusing on the actual situation. No, it doesn't. In fact, I think it's pretty explicit in making the situation clear: > First of all, let me start by saying, I am not defending Apple's terrible stance towards Right to Repair. > I think Apple's R2R policy is awful - It sucks that once the device you buy is on the "obsolete" list, you can no longer get 1st party service from Apple. Not only that, but there are no legal ways to obtain parts. IMO this is something all of us should be putting pressure on Apple to change. I'd love it if there was a law on the books that forced companies to make spare parts for products available to customers for x amount of years after the warranty expires. That would allow people to continue using the devices they buy. > In closing, I'm going to continue supporting Louis, iFixit, and their attempts to secure our rights to repair the products we own. But it is also very obvious that Louis Rossman was clearly dishonest. Actually, I don't quite understand your argument: > If factories are producing batteries with a default Apple logo (ie to Chinese standards), and he's instructing them to cross it out, that also seems completely legitimate. How is this "completely legitimate"? Apple is (quite understandably) annoyed that some factories decided to make batteries that Louis could peddle as genuine Apple batteries, when it's clear that they are in fact not these at all (they're crossing out the logos to pass customs, for heaven's sake). Of course they're going to be seized, because they're counterfeit: Apple probably wasn't even involved here. I'm surprised he has the gall to try to make this a huge PR issue by claiming that Apple was trying to stop him from repairing Macs with genuine batteries that he bought when he knows they're just shady batteries from China he's trying to bring into the country.
Dylan16807 8y ago
iFixit would have fewer specialized parts to sell if Apple stopped making it so difficult to open. They seem to be pretty genuine about wanting things to be fixable.
ihuman 8y ago
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Until recently I also thought that's what the "right to repair" movement/legislation was about.

blhack 8y ago

Lots of the things people don't like about apple are likely just to make their manufacturing process simpler.

m463 8y ago
pentalobe screws?
- blhack 8y ago
  Batteries which are soldered to the board instead of using a connector, motherboard is all one assembly including the keyboard, fewer ports, nothing user serviceable. That all seems like measures to make manufacturing easier from my perspective.
  - JetSpiegel 8y ago
    How is soldering components simpler than using connectors? It's more expensive for diminishing returns.
    - craftyguy 8y ago
      Connectors are also soldered as well and they add to the BOM costs.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    Sure, it gives them both the benefit of optimized manufacturing and the benefit from screwing the customers. It's not a law of nature that making things better for yourself will make them better for your customers. In fact, the opposite is usually true.
- eridius 8y ago
  Measure that make it harder (but not impossible) for users to disassemble their devices serves to avoid people doing accidental damage (and voiding their warrantee). It's possible to get a pentalobe screwdriver, and anyone not willing to get one probably has no business opening up an Apple product.

christkv 8y ago

There is that but also access to spare parts. Louis Rossman talks about how it’s hard to get replacement chips to fix motherboards because Apple locks down the distribution channels so they have to relay on harvested components from failed boards or chips who fell of the back off a truck.

neuralRiot 8y ago
Also not sending ICE to raid small shops who istall aftermarket parts would help too.

erikpukinskis 8y ago

Also providing documentation? I think technicians sometimes have to seek internal documents through illicit means.

dwild 8y ago
> Also providing documentation? It's also important to specify that we don't ask for MORE documentation (although that wouldn't hurt), just access to the documentation they give to the authorized technician, or their own staff.

mises 8y ago

Where do you draw the line at repair-hostile vs. secure? I agree many things are hostile to repair, but let's take the new T2. It's awful for repair, but actually does have security benefits against evil maid attacks, a serious security risk. Stuff like this also applies to unrootable androids (a major pet peeve of mine). I think we all would do well to remember that it's always easier to say something is wrong than to create a solution. It's also worth noting that governments are arguably worse than anyone else at determining such edge cases as secure vs. user-hostile.

chii 8y ago
A device is repair hostile if repairing requires the permission of a third party instead of the device owner. Security is different because a device can be made secure without it being repair hostile - e.g, the owner of the device has the private keys in a signed code update. So a maid can't just Willy Nilly change your baby monitor, but you can.
- mises 8y ago
  > has the private keys How do you store these? It's not really user friendly for the average consumer, and certainly has little recourse if you lose them all. How well does it usually go when people are told to keep track of, say, a dongle? What if each device needs one?
  - 12298765 8y ago
    The point isn't that every user will know how to repair their own products, rather that they could if they choose. Think about your lawnmower. If the engine won't run, maybe you can figure out through a bit of research that it's probably the spark plug. So you can go buy a spark plug and swap it yourself. You don't need the manufacturer to authorize your new spark plug. However, many people would not know anything about where to begin replacing their spark plug, and don't want the hastle to learn, so they bring it to the manufacturer and pay a premium to have it done for them. But if they someday decided to learn, they could learn themselves. Or even take their lawnmower to a friend who can help them. To take away those option entirely, only leaving the one option -- paying the manufacturer a premium to do it for you -- is what I have an issue with. Bonus: the lawnmower manufacturer could include a type of safety lock that does not allow you to work on your lawnmower, to prevent a user from hurting themselves. However, the manufacturer should also give the user the ability to remove that lock, positively asserting that they know what they're doing (like giving the private keys, or allowing a motherboard switch to be toggled which unlocks the system, etc)