3 ms·

By logical extension they should have no objection to right to repair now, correct? Since this undermines the very arguments they've been making for years ("ba

By logical extension they should have no objection to right to repair now, correct? Since this undermines the very arguments they've been making for years ("batteries are too dangerous for small repair shops," "they will perform sub-optimal repairs even with the manuals/correct tools!"). I'm glad this is here, legitimately. It is good for users and repair vendors alike. The questions I have is: What next? Have they "seen the light" and fully support R2R, will remain silent/stay out, or still oppose and this is meant to placate.

danaris 7y ago
As I understand it, another important part of (at least some proposed) right-to-repair laws involves changing the manufacture of items to be more easily accessible to repair, in ways that make them thicker, more expensive to manufacture, or both. Whether or not you or I believe those are good tradeoffs to make, they are also reasons Apple would oppose such legislation.
dpkonofa 7y ago
>"they will perform sub-optimal repairs even with the manuals/correct tools!" This is exactly what the required certification aims to address. It's exactly what they've always said with regard to their authorized repair programs. The only difference is that the program is now more accessible because the certification is free. Businesses that want to run the full authorized repair program still have to pay for the rest of the certifications.
- labawi 7y ago
  I believe it (should be) my right to have my neighbor Joe do a shoddy repair/replacement with genuine parts on a mass-market device, in exchange for parts cost and a piece of pie.
  - dpkonofa 7y ago
    And I believe that it should be your right also but I also believe that it's Apple's right to not sell you parts, if they don't want to. I also believe that if they're willing to sell your neighbor Joe the parts to do the repair under the condition that he does the repair according to their standards, then that's fair for all parties involved. Your option is unfair to Apple because their brand is damaged by Joe's shitty repair. I don't think it's unfair to Joe for Apple to refuse to sell him a part without certification.

danaris 7y ago

As I understand it, another important part of (at least some proposed) right-to-repair laws involves changing the manufacture of items to be more easily accessible to repair, in ways that make them thicker, more expensive to manufacture, or both. Whether or not you or I believe those are good tradeoffs to make, they are also reasons Apple would oppose such legislation.

dpkonofa 7y ago

>"they will perform sub-optimal repairs even with the manuals/correct tools!" This is exactly what the required certification aims to address. It's exactly what they've always said with regard to their authorized repair programs. The only difference is that the program is now more accessible because the certification is free. Businesses that want to run the full authorized repair program still have to pay for the rest of the certifications.

labawi 7y ago
I believe it (should be) my right to have my neighbor Joe do a shoddy repair/replacement with genuine parts on a mass-market device, in exchange for parts cost and a piece of pie.
- dpkonofa 7y ago
  And I believe that it should be your right also but I also believe that it's Apple's right to not sell you parts, if they don't want to. I also believe that if they're willing to sell your neighbor Joe the parts to do the repair under the condition that he does the repair according to their standards, then that's fair for all parties involved. Your option is unfair to Apple because their brand is damaged by Joe's shitty repair. I don't think it's unfair to Joe for Apple to refuse to sell him a part without certification.