4 ms·

But the story is totally vague. All he says is that there's a shortage, and that ability to repair could help. How exactly? Would it help in a comprehensive

But the story is totally vague. All he says is that there's a shortage, and that ability to repair could help. How exactly? Would it help in a comprehensive view of things? Certain aspects of making hardware affordable (for a given design) is being integrated and somewhat harder to repair. If manufacturers were required to make their stuff repairable, would that increase the costs of production and the price of laptops? Would fewer people be able to afford them? Would the specs of computers have to change in order to fit/enable removable parts? Are people likely to buy refurbed old computers at $200 versus $300 for a new one? Would the price of new computers go from $300 to $400 if this were required? None of these things are answered. The article/author is otherwise just advocating for something he desires (and I could go so far as to say using Covid as an cover, given the lack of detail) without being responsible for its implementation or feasibility. If the details were addressed, I could get on board with requiring companies to do so.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
> If manufacturers were required to make their stuff repairable, would that increase the costs of production and the price of laptops? No. The difference in the manufacturing cost would be trivial, because the primary costs are in the high value components, e.g. CPU and display. > Would fewer people be able to afford them? No, because the costs would not materially increase. Moreover, the people for whom cost is a primary concern buy from the second hand market anyway, and increasing availability there would reduce prices by supply and demand. > Would the specs of computers have to change in order to fit/enable removable parts? We have some good evidence of this already, because repairable devices do exist even though they don't represent the majority of the market, and the specs are... basically identical. > Are people likely to buy refurbed old computers at $200 versus $300 for a new one? Yes, that's kind of the point. > Would the price of new computers go from $300 to $400 if this were required? Does increased competition usually result in higher prices? If anything they would need to take thinner margins in order to compete with the refurbished market. Which is why they don't want to do it.
- supernova87a 6y ago
  I don't know that most of your blanket assertions are true. Just taking one example, the cost of manufacturing electronics is not just the raw cost of the component. And you seem just fine to have increased costs passed along to manufacturers and not believe it would have an effect on them, but then state that such small $ differences would have a big effect on people buying the stuff. But anyway, why should companies be required by law to build a product a certain way, for a feature that's not safety/public health/deceptive advertising related? If your statements are true, go out there and offer such a great product, and let it take the market. Otherwise, I don't agree with the logic of having laws intrude into the design choices of products that are voluntarily manufactured and purchased.
  - pbhjpbhj 6y ago
    Repairability is public health related, unless you can live in 40°C winters and breath under water. /s You know the resources of the planet aren't limitless.
    - sokoloff 6y ago
      What isn’t public health related by that measure? Should everything be subject to government mandate?
  - ben-schaaf 6y ago
    Right to repair isn't about forcing companies to build stuff a certain way, it's about forcing companies to give open access to everything you need to repair the device. They can do this at close to no extra cost: Just publish their existing internal repair manuals, publish their existing internal schematics, don't force your manufacturers to exclusively sell components to you, don't cryptographically make components non-replaceable by just you.
- wongarsu 6y ago
  > We have some good evidence of this already, because repairable devices do exist even though they don't represent the majority of the market, and the specs are... basically identical. In 2018, Apple has a 7% market share for laptops [1]. Dell has twice that, and every Dell laptop I've had was easy to repair. Sure, you now have to remove a few skrews to change the battery, but it's built with servicability in mind and the service manual is in the official downloads. Parts are all over ebay, or you buy new from a reseller (which I've done in the past). I've heard the same from Lenovo owners (22% market share). I also don't think anyone but Apple does Activation locks. As far as I can tell the majority of sold devices are repairable with easily sourced parts, partly because there is market pressure to be repairable (from enterprise IT). I really don't see why legislation would be nessesary in this instance. 1: https://fortunly.com/blog/lap-top-market-share/ https://fortunly.com/blog/lap-top-market-share/

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

> If manufacturers were required to make their stuff repairable, would that increase the costs of production and the price of laptops? No. The difference in the manufacturing cost would be trivial, because the primary costs are in the high value components, e.g. CPU and display. > Would fewer people be able to afford them? No, because the costs would not materially increase. Moreover, the people for whom cost is a primary concern buy from the second hand market anyway, and increasing availability there would reduce prices by supply and demand. > Would the specs of computers have to change in order to fit/enable removable parts? We have some good evidence of this already, because repairable devices do exist even though they don't represent the majority of the market, and the specs are... basically identical. > Are people likely to buy refurbed old computers at $200 versus $300 for a new one? Yes, that's kind of the point. > Would the price of new computers go from $300 to $400 if this were required? Does increased competition usually result in higher prices? If anything they would need to take thinner margins in order to compete with the refurbished market. Which is why they don't want to do it.

supernova87a 6y ago
I don't know that most of your blanket assertions are true. Just taking one example, the cost of manufacturing electronics is not just the raw cost of the component. And you seem just fine to have increased costs passed along to manufacturers and not believe it would have an effect on them, but then state that such small $ differences would have a big effect on people buying the stuff. But anyway, why should companies be required by law to build a product a certain way, for a feature that's not safety/public health/deceptive advertising related? If your statements are true, go out there and offer such a great product, and let it take the market. Otherwise, I don't agree with the logic of having laws intrude into the design choices of products that are voluntarily manufactured and purchased.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  Repairability is public health related, unless you can live in 40°C winters and breath under water. /s You know the resources of the planet aren't limitless.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    What isn’t public health related by that measure? Should everything be subject to government mandate?
- ben-schaaf 6y ago
  Right to repair isn't about forcing companies to build stuff a certain way, it's about forcing companies to give open access to everything you need to repair the device. They can do this at close to no extra cost: Just publish their existing internal repair manuals, publish their existing internal schematics, don't force your manufacturers to exclusively sell components to you, don't cryptographically make components non-replaceable by just you.
wongarsu 6y ago
> We have some good evidence of this already, because repairable devices do exist even though they don't represent the majority of the market, and the specs are... basically identical. In 2018, Apple has a 7% market share for laptops [1]. Dell has twice that, and every Dell laptop I've had was easy to repair. Sure, you now have to remove a few skrews to change the battery, but it's built with servicability in mind and the service manual is in the official downloads. Parts are all over ebay, or you buy new from a reseller (which I've done in the past). I've heard the same from Lenovo owners (22% market share). I also don't think anyone but Apple does Activation locks. As far as I can tell the majority of sold devices are repairable with easily sourced parts, partly because there is market pressure to be repairable (from enterprise IT). I really don't see why legislation would be nessesary in this instance. 1: https://fortunly.com/blog/lap-top-market-share/ https://fortunly.com/blog/lap-top-market-share/