4 ms·

The success of the whole story is going to depend on whether they will be able to push it on everyone else. Otherwise we're going to have normal phones for ever

by oytis 7y ago

The success of the whole story is going to depend on whether they will be able to push it on everyone else. Otherwise we're going to have normal phones for everyone except EU, and bulky, outdated, but repairable "europhones" in Europe. Probably good for local producers though.

emiliobumachar 7y ago
I'd think the EU market is big enough to foment enough competition for cutting-edge-within-the-constraints europhones, if it comes to that.
VBprogrammer 7y ago
I don't think the right to repair is about the design being specifically repairable (i.e. uses exclusively sockets and through-hole components), rather it's about avoiding things which are deliberately constructed to prevent repairing them and legal barriers to reverse engineering items in order to repair them. Examples are components which, while identical to the component requiring replacement, will refuse to work until coded to match the intended device with some proprietary cable (which is really a normal cable with a couple of wires reversed or some other dick move).
- yakovdk 7y ago
  It could have other interesting implications. Like, no more grinding labels off of chips so a customer has a fighting chance of replacing things. That would be a nice world to live in, I think.
- oytis 7y ago
  The "dick moves" can probably be tracked and forbidden, but IMO it's not the main reason why modern gadgets are hard to repair. Rather if you optimize for size, price, power consumption, performance, security, IP protection, development time etc., and just don't prioritize repairability, it naturally grows up this way.
  - hermitdev 7y ago
    Regarding cables: it would be nice if it was mandated to use an internationally recognized spec from certain designated bodies, such as IEEE. If someone such as Apple wants to use Lightning because they find existing specs to be deficient, they should get the spec standardized before theyre allowed to implement a device using it. Specifications should ideally be unencombered by patents or for a fair and reasonable license. Additionally implementers of a spec should be required to have their implementations verified that they adhere to the spec by an independent lab, such as UL (Underwriters Lab), and be fined into nonexistence if they forge the lab's marks. This should also cut down on the snake oil cables, such as $90 gold plated HDMI cables.
yakovdk 7y ago
I'm serious enough about libre principles, though, that I'd be happy to buy weird europhones if I knew I had more control of my technology.

by oytis 7y ago

emiliobumachar 7y ago

I'd think the EU market is big enough to foment enough competition for cutting-edge-within-the-constraints europhones, if it comes to that.

VBprogrammer 7y ago

I don't think the right to repair is about the design being specifically repairable (i.e. uses exclusively sockets and through-hole components), rather it's about avoiding things which are deliberately constructed to prevent repairing them and legal barriers to reverse engineering items in order to repair them. Examples are components which, while identical to the component requiring replacement, will refuse to work until coded to match the intended device with some proprietary cable (which is really a normal cable with a couple of wires reversed or some other dick move).

yakovdk 7y ago
It could have other interesting implications. Like, no more grinding labels off of chips so a customer has a fighting chance of replacing things. That would be a nice world to live in, I think.
oytis 7y ago
The "dick moves" can probably be tracked and forbidden, but IMO it's not the main reason why modern gadgets are hard to repair. Rather if you optimize for size, price, power consumption, performance, security, IP protection, development time etc., and just don't prioritize repairability, it naturally grows up this way.
- hermitdev 7y ago
  Regarding cables: it would be nice if it was mandated to use an internationally recognized spec from certain designated bodies, such as IEEE. If someone such as Apple wants to use Lightning because they find existing specs to be deficient, they should get the spec standardized before theyre allowed to implement a device using it. Specifications should ideally be unencombered by patents or for a fair and reasonable license. Additionally implementers of a spec should be required to have their implementations verified that they adhere to the spec by an independent lab, such as UL (Underwriters Lab), and be fined into nonexistence if they forge the lab's marks. This should also cut down on the snake oil cables, such as $90 gold plated HDMI cables.

yakovdk 7y ago

I'm serious enough about libre principles, though, that I'd be happy to buy weird europhones if I knew I had more control of my technology.