13 ms·

Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws

holmesworcester 5y ago
One note: the article misses the connection between this and the current lawsuit between Epic and Apple. These companies are opposing right-to-repair in part because it undermines the ability to maintain control over what software people run on their devices, and where they install software from.
- holmesworcester 5y ago
  Also, I live in a state (Massachusetts) that has passed two right-to-repair laws via ballot initiative. Both passed over intense opposition from the auto industry; almost all advertising in the lead up to the vote was in opposition. But it passed in both cases because... it's common sense. If you buy a product, it's yours and you should be able to do what you want with it, whether that means modifying the hardware or running whatever software you want.
  - 3GuardLineups 5y ago
    inb4 all the Apple shills who will claim they only ever want a product in a completely sandboxed environment where the device manufacturer holds their hand every step of the way
    - katbyte 5y ago
      I live Apple and I want them to verify hardware, but I also want to ability to go “yes I k know this isn’t an apple screen/battery or said display has changed - use it anyways or register it”
      - simondotau 5y ago
        So then the dodgy repair shop just adds dismissal of that warning to their post-repair validation procedure and the consumer remains none the wiser.
    - judge2020 5y ago
      My personal preference is that I want a product that has the description 'can only run software trusted by Apple', but I also want a product that 'can also run untrusted software', mainly because I can afford having two products that independently fit those descriptions, and I need the utmost security for my phone (which I ensure by trusting Apple). That's my consumer preference, and that's why I buy an iPhone, and I realize it's not for everyone, but I would rather have the option of a phone that fits that description. Imagine the iPhone didn't take off and had 5% marketshare - we wouldn't even be having this conversation since anyone against it would just hear "go buy the other devices that don't have this restriction" - which is still an option nowadays.
  - oneplane 5y ago
    I suppose there are differences here, for example the root-of-trust of a car still isn't accessible to you; you can't run your own ECU firmware unless you jailbreak your ECU. Luckily, that is generally not the main 'feature' of the car, and for most people a car isn't a brain-extension with private and personal aspects. Keep in mind that this doesn't mean you shouldn't own or repair your stuff, but there are significant differences between products, and those differences aren't always clear.
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    > But it passed in both cases because... it's common sense. Yeah. I don't even understand why we have to argue in favor of stuff like this. Somehow we ended up living in such a fucked up world where the things we purchase don't actually belong to us and we actually have to fight tooth and nail to make it sane again.
- judge2020 5y ago
  Not all right to repair laws include 'device manufacturer must allow user to repair the software'.
- ashneo76 5y ago
  Yup. The business model is pushing new phones just so that can keep making money off that store and the addiction to the addictive apps.
formerly_proven 5y ago
Reduce reuse recycle is fundamentally against the business model of BigCorpos. Of course they will fight tooth and nail against legislation that impinges on their business model [1]. It goes to show how good Apple's PR department is that people view them as an eco-oriented company (hint: they're literally in the "producing consumer e-waste market"). But I mean people these days also think Microsoft are open-source friendly good guys, sooooo [1] Besides enabling reduce and reuse, right to repair also goes directly the business interests of these companies, because 3rd party repair shops exist under RTR instead of 100 % of the repair revenue going to their franchises or them directly.
- skohan 5y ago
  I don't see how this is not blatantly in violation of anti-trust laws. It seems to me it is clearly harming the best interest of the consumer to have less choice and more expensive repair options due to lack of RTR. I say this as someone who would still use Apple licenced repair shops. The standard of service quality is high, and the results are dependable and consistent. Why is it not enough to compete on quality, and why do they have to behave in an anti-competitive manner?
- com2kid 5y ago
  As someone who used to work in consumer electronics, I don't think HN readers understand exactly how harsh tech reviewers come down on devices that aren't as thin as possible. Add an extra millimeter and all of a sudden "tech companies yet again don't understand female audiences as they make yet another monstrously huge device that only men can use." or "this new version is unbelievably thick, and is another failure compared to Apple's amazing version" where Apple's version is 1 or 2 mm thinner. Laptops, same thing. Even here on HN I've seen multiple people talk about how the only reason they can even carry a laptop at all is because Apple's newest whatever is so amazingly thin and how even a single extra ounce would make the laptop completely unusable. So manufacturers have a choice. Glue everything together and make it unrepairable, or get dragged through the mud by reviewers and tech enthusiasts.
  - tweetle_beetle 5y ago
hawski 5y ago
I really like Thom Holwerda's from OSnews take on the article. Especially the "glorified toaster makers" part. https://www.osnews.com/story/133436/microsoft-and-apple-wage-war-on-gadget-rfight-to-repair-laws/ https://www.osnews.com/story/133436/microsoft-and-apple-wage... > What’s good enough for the car industry, is more than good enough for these glorified toaster makers. Cars are basically murder weapons we kind of screwed ourselves into being reliant on, but Apple and Microsoft make complicated toasters that you need to really screw up in order to hurt anyone with. Computer and device makers must be forced to make parts and schematics available to any independent repair shop, just like car makers have to do. > So many perfectly capable devices end up in dangerous, toxic landfills in 3rd world countries simply because Apple, Microsoft, and other toaster makers want to increase their bottom line. It’s disgusting behaviour, especially with how sanctimonious they are about protecting the environment and hugging baby seals.
- scrutinizer80 5y ago
  This is wonderfully accurate. :)
- ible 5y ago
  Other issues aside, "A is just a complicated B, so apply the same rules to A as B" is not a formula for good decision making. It's a common way to make bad mistakes though.
  - labster 5y ago
    A Rectangle is just a complicated Square, so let’s just subclass. That should work out okay. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle–ellipse_problem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle–ellipse_problem
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    The OP has a spesific and accurate statement about danger to life and limb. A generic sounbyte does not make a convincing counterpoint
  - j1elo 5y ago
fish45 5y ago
I just replaced my phone battery using an iFixit kit a few minutes ago. It's probably extended the life of my phone by a year.
- keanebean86 5y ago
  I have a garbage laptop from 2012 that's still enough for basic browsing. Thanks to a replacement battery and reasonably accessible internals it's still working fine. The case is all busted but whatever. Customers should be able to legally get parts. If the original company is done making them someone else should be allowed. I highly doubt repaired devices are massively cutting into sale. Most people don't want to deal with the hassle and would rather have something new anyways.
- amatecha 5y ago
  Yeah, I just recently replaced the battery in a family member's MacBook Air. Surprising that it was even possible to replace (thanks iFixit)! With this model the SSD is also replaceable, thankfully. Of course, once the logic board itself fails, that'll be a whole different story, but at least _some_ aspects of the system are repairable.
- hawski 5y ago
  With YouTube tutorials and iFixit instructions all I needed was a screwdriver and parts from AliExpress. I replaced 4 times a screen and 3 times a battery in my wife's BQ Aquaris X until the motherboard gave up. It still probably is repairable, but not as easy. The phone had seen too much water in it's life... I repaired in my time also: Moto G1, Nexus 5X and Pixel 1. It was all not difficult. Now I wonder how it will go with Moto G7 that my wife has when its time will come. That's one of the reasons I think about Fairphone, but with my experience I bought for myself Pixel 1 with a broken screen, that I repaired myself. Now my phone is all good except software and that makes me think about the Fairphone again. Can't wait until Linux phones will get better, maybe Pinephone 3 will be a good main phone. But I would like to see a small phone, like latest Unihertz Jelly, but without an awful Mediatek SoC.
- bogwog 5y ago
  My iPhone XS Max screen cracked a few weeks ago and I've been debating sending it in for repair. Apple charges $300 friggin dollars to "fix" the display (I think they just send you a new phone). Looking online, displays only cost around $50-$90. So I've considered doing that instead, but if I go down that route, my phone will no longer support the "True Tone" feature. This is because Apple burned the serial number of the display onto the motherboard, so if you try to replace it, they'll know and will disable features even though they work perfectly fine. So in addition to the cost of the screen, I'll also have to buy a screen reprogrammer, which is a device that can copy the serial number from my old display and write it into the new display, so that the phone doesn't realize I replaced the screen. The prices I've seen online for these are like $60+, so it's still cheaper than sending it to Apple. I don't understand how this isn't 100% illegal. How the hell can Apple get away with doing something so obviously malicious and detrimental to consumers and the environment? Those are some Scrooge McDuck levels of ridiculousness.
johncena33 5y ago
I have submitted this yesterday [1]. The submission didn't make the front page. The title of the article is "Microsoft and Apple Wage War on Gadget Right-to-Repair Laws". When the title was editoralized to insert Google, it made to front-page. Can someone explain why the editing of the title? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27225003 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27225003
- dang 5y ago
  It's largely random which submission of an article ends up getting traction. That's true across every topic, so I doubt that inserting Google into the title made the difference. As for why - perhaps the submitter felt that it was misleading for the title to pick on just MS and Apple when Google is also implicated in the article? That's a legit reason to edit a title on HN—it's one of the unlesses in "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - johncena33 5y ago
    Amazon was also included in the article. I don't see Amazon on the title. And the submitter even put Google in front of Microsoft. The submitter not only added Google, also changed the order. Probably not random. Since there is always _at least_ one anti-Google article makes to front page every day. And the quality of discussion on Google related is probably the lowest on HN. The mod team didn't seem very eager to moederate Google related threads so far.
    - dang 5y ago
      Well, I'm not going to make a kitchen-sink affair out of the title by stuffing Amazon up there as well, so I've reverted to the article title above. Now would you please stop posting this tedious off-topic stuff? Everyone who has preferences for one $Bigco over another thinks that HN and HN mods are biased against their favorite $Bigco and biased in favor of whatever $Bigco they don't like. You could substitute any other $Bigco for Google in your comment and it would be exactly what other commenters claim. This is tedious, as I mentioned; it is merely a projection of the commenter's own preferences. It's the same phenomenon by which zealous sports fans think the refs are totally biased. It's actually a cognitive bias rooted in the fact that the bad (what you dislike) stands out more than the good (what you agree with)—i.e. people heavily weight what they dislike, and underemphasize, or simply fail to notice, all the countervailing data points. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20dislike%20notice&sort=byDate&type=story&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20false%20feelings%20of%20generality&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
GuB-42 5y ago
Why Google? They sell very little hardware, and they could even benefit from the repair market. It is also one of their best weapon against Apple, in the same way that privacy is one the best weapon Apple has against Google.
- johncena33 5y ago
  Worst of it is Google was not even in the title of the article. The title was editorialized to include Google.
  - formerly_proven 5y ago
    Why is that the "worst of it"? Google is mentioned eleven times in the article and not in a "pro right to repair" kind of way. > But it was Google that surprised advocates with the vigor of its opposition.
  - dang 5y ago
    Please stop. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27240646 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27240646
- dang 5y ago
  I've taken Google out of the title now in an attempt to mute this tedious off-topic tangent. Not your fault; I'm referring to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27240366 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27240366.
neonate 5y ago
https://archive.is/gBwWE https://archive.is/gBwWE
- glenneroo 5y ago
  Alternately while the page is loading hit ESC and it will prevent the pop-up from opening :)
least 5y ago
My main complaint against right-to-repair laws is mostly to the extent that some people push for. I am not against manufacturers being forced to provide things like schematics or parts to third party repair shops. I don't think that companies like Apple should be able to decide who is allowed to or not allowed to access parts to repair their devices. I also don't think that Apple should place DRM on its parts to check in the software whether or not what is being used is a genuine part or not. A part is either within spec to work correctly or it's not. I am, however, against the idea of companies being forced to design products around being easily repairable. If a company wants to make a super thin device with basically no easy way to take it apart, that's their prerogative. If a company wants to solder on components to the device like RAM or the storage or the cpu or gpu, that's their prerogative. There are tradeoffs to both approaches to designing the products and you'll find in many markets you will absolutely find many options on the market to suit your own needs or wants. The government doesn't need to be involved in this respect.
- LegitShady 5y ago
  > am, however, against the idea of companies being forced to design products around being easily repairable. If a company wants to make a super thin device with basically no easy way to take it apart, that's their prerogative. If a company wants to solder on components to the device like RAM or the storage or the cpu or gpu, that's their prerogative. Totally agree. But they should be publicly labeled as extreme polluters whose devices aren't repairable and who design devices that way intentionally. They should be free to do it, and then free to be denounced for it. >The government doesn't need to be involved in this respect. The environmental aspect of unrepairable devices should probably be regulated like any other industry who makes the decisions to pollute because they want to.
  - enaaem 5y ago
    You get a strange situation where a custom gaming pc will be labeled greener than a thin laptop with integrated components. Although the GPU alone uses more material and electricity than the whole laptops logic board.
NullPrefix 5y ago
But Microsoft loves open source... They sure would love right to repair too.
squarefoot 5y ago
Then let's vote using our wallet when shopping for example for a laptop or a phone. Companies such as Purism and Pine64 already offer alternatives, the former in the higher end market, the latter in the more affordable one. Their devices are as much open as possible, and repairable. Hacking them is not only accepted but actually encouraged.
- techrat 5y ago
  I've been trying to import a FairPhone, myself. Why they're making it so difficult to get one in the states is beyond me.
Aunche 5y ago
The boring truth is that American consumers simply don't care about repairing their electronic devices. They're too rich and labor is too expensive here. You would have no problem with repairing just about any phone in China. I suppose the lax intellectual property laws help as well.
skybrian 5y ago
I'm wondering how this really works. It seems like the situation might be a lot worse with electronics than cars. The upstream vendor may discontinue a part so nobody could repair it if they didn't already buy enough inventory. Products sometimes have to get redesigned just to keep manufacturing them. To really make this work, they'd have to keep enough parts inventory for the expected lifetime of a product (beyond warranty repairs), and also resell them to whoever asks. I'd guess OEMs are reluctant to sell replacement parts so they don't get cleaned out and can't do their own repairs? A systematic fix for this might require more standardization and less churn in the industry. Cars get recycled by junkyards so that's another source for parts for older cars. There's probably a lot less money in that for electronics.
prepend 5y ago
Why is Microsoft against this? They don’t really make much that needs repairing. Is Xbox that big of a market for them?
- dwaite 5y ago
  Because a lot of the proposed legislation goes way farther than the right to repair (which you already have a la first sale doctrine) and access to parts/instructions
- scintill76 5y ago
  Surface systems? (tablets, laptops)
- totalZero 5y ago
  If I were Microsoft, I would want people to replace rather than repair computers. Chances are, the new computer will come with a Windows license.
- judge2020 5y ago
  If the right-to-repair includes making changes to the software it literally destroys the xbox business model and they might just have to start selling them at a reasonable profit instead of making money on the back-burner (to the tune of $600[0])[1]. 0: https://youtu.be/U7VwtOrwceo?t=703 https://youtu.be/U7VwtOrwceo?t=703 (I'm assuming that "we only protect against piracy when the attack costs less than 10 games" implies that Microsoft expects to make around this much in post-purchase profit) 1: https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-not-making-any-money-on-500-xbox-one-x https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-not-making-any-money-on...
totalZero 5y ago
My recent experience showed me the importance of right to repair laws. I took an 8yo MacBook Pro to an Apple Store to have the battery replaced. They did the service, but when I got the device back, the MagSafe charging port would overheat substantially while recharging. I brought it back to an Apple Store and asked them to take a look at the DC-in board under warranty because something obviously got messed up during the replacement battery installation. They gave it back to me several days later without having so much as cycled the battery to recreate the problem. I ferried the laptop to another Apple Store and they replaced the thermal paste and gave it back to me with the screws in the wrong place. They claimed the overheating issue was a pre-existing problem because the SMC had thrown an error due to my third-party SSD during the pre-repair diagnostic. At the time of dropoff, they also demanded that I wipe down the LCD with an isopropyl pad despite the Apple website saying to use a dry cloth or water. I returned to the second Apple Store and they finally ordered the DC-in board (part cost less than $3). The guy there tried to convince me that the SMC is not a chip, but just a theoretical concept that Apple uses to diagnose problems. They replaced it, but they told me over the phone that they had reversed the repair because it didn't work. When I went to pick up the laptop (they didn't offer to FedEx it out to me as the other store had), I saw that they had indeed replaced the DC-in board and that this solved the problem, but they tried to pass off the problem as a software issue for some reason. Also, they had forgotten to remove the plastic film from the part before installing so I had to open the laptop up and reinstall the DC-in board anyway. It turns out the DC-in board should be installed with the (unplugged) charging cable magnetically attached, so that it orients correctly and makes good contact when you tighten it down. I live two hours from the nearest Apple Store so this was a total pain in the butt. Apple could have simply sold me a DC-in board -- or at less than $3, they could have given it to me for free under warranty -- and I would have been happy. I had to do this song and dance to get a genuine replacement part, and in retrospect I could have paid ten times as much to get the part from iFixit instead of paying for gas and taking the time to drive out to the Apple Store. Apple's stranglehold on the parts supply only worsens the ownership experience for their devices. Almost every person I dealt with seemed unqualified to work on computer repair, yet I wasn't able to buy genuine parts to do the repair myself. If you're not going to let me buy the parts, then your staff should know to remove plastic film from parts before installing them. They should know what screws to place where. They should know what the SMC is. They should know that under Magnuson-Moss, a third-party SSD doesn't invalidate the warranty on a battery replacement. They should refrain from saying "it's an eight-year-old old laptop so we may not be able to repair it." But they don't. Either Apple has to train these people or they have to let us buy parts and circumvent their ignorance.
lsiebert 5y ago
I want both a repairability index and a recyclability index, with increased taxes on sales of items that are less repairable or recyclable. Those items are more costly to repair or recycle, and thus more wasteful and inefficient. I think it's better to align financial incentives.
- Guthur 5y ago
  And what will likely happen is that as with now Recycle will be the choice. It's the less efficient of the 3 Rs; Reduce, Reuse and Recycle. There was actually an order to those but we've tended to skip past the two meaningful actions and jumped straight to recycle which at times does nothing for environment and certainly not for our pockets.
- dehrmann 5y ago
  Repairability might not be interesting for something that people only own for three years. It's hard to measure for new devices, but reliability is just as important.
dehrmann 5y ago
> “It’s like Tiffany jewelry," said Nathan Proctor, a U.S. PIRG director. “They want control.” Is this something most people are familiar with? I know Tiffany sells luxury jewelry, but that's about it.
ur-whale 5y ago
https://archive.is/gBwWE https://archive.is/gBwWE
Too 5y ago
Trust is a thing that is becoming more and more important these days with more and more of users secrets going through our devices. Wouldn't want all your email or banking details to be sucked up by a cheap wifi-chip which could have backdoors either by design or by accident. This is also why one should stay away from cheap IoT-gimmicks. Another interesting aspect is reputation of quality in case repair shops don't restore the device to original performance, while customers still think they are running genuine parts, because it's very hard to visually inspect and understand what happens inside, as opposed to a toaster. Not saying i'm for all these locks but pointing out it's a lot more multi-faceted than the article presents it.
- jsiepkes 5y ago
  > Trust is a thing that is becoming more and more important these days with more and more of users secrets going through our devices. How many hardware backdoored PC's have you encountered in your life?
  - smolder 5y ago
    The GP included "accidentally backdoored", in which case that's probably all of them. Even if you exclude accidents, there are probably some deliberately created, not-yet-burned covert access techniques for many devices. We don't know what we don't know, but we do know there are agencies tasked with Total Information Awareness, and have some evidence of the type of stuff they get up to.
jimnotgym 5y ago
Maybe another angle on this is to tackle what it takes to become an 'approved' service centre. If you have basic diagnostic tools, and pay a nominal registration charge, why shouldn't anyone be allowed to become an approved repairer?
ekianjo 5y ago
It's funny that the right-to-repair is supposedly gaining momentum while at the same time consumers have had no problem buying new devices that are less and less open to be repaired, despite having the choice of phones with replaceable batteries for example
- noisy_boy 5y ago
  Maybe they needed to swing the thin, light and unserviceable way to experience for it themselves and have more perspective now.
botverse 5y ago
Mandatory mention to Louis Rossman right to repair campaign. https://www.fighttorepair.org/ https://www.fighttorepair.org/

One note: the article misses the connection between this and the current lawsuit between Epic and Apple. These companies are opposing right-to-repair in part because it undermines the ability to maintain control over what software people run on their devices, and where they install software from.

holmesworcester 5y ago
Also, I live in a state (Massachusetts) that has passed two right-to-repair laws via ballot initiative. Both passed over intense opposition from the auto industry; almost all advertising in the lead up to the vote was in opposition. But it passed in both cases because... it's common sense. If you buy a product, it's yours and you should be able to do what you want with it, whether that means modifying the hardware or running whatever software you want.
- 3GuardLineups 5y ago
  inb4 all the Apple shills who will claim they only ever want a product in a completely sandboxed environment where the device manufacturer holds their hand every step of the way
  - katbyte 5y ago
    I live Apple and I want them to verify hardware, but I also want to ability to go “yes I k know this isn’t an apple screen/battery or said display has changed - use it anyways or register it”
    - simondotau 5y ago
      So then the dodgy repair shop just adds dismissal of that warning to their post-repair validation procedure and the consumer remains none the wiser.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    My personal preference is that I want a product that has the description 'can only run software trusted by Apple', but I also want a product that 'can also run untrusted software', mainly because I can afford having two products that independently fit those descriptions, and I need the utmost security for my phone (which I ensure by trusting Apple). That's my consumer preference, and that's why I buy an iPhone, and I realize it's not for everyone, but I would rather have the option of a phone that fits that description. Imagine the iPhone didn't take off and had 5% marketshare - we wouldn't even be having this conversation since anyone against it would just hear "go buy the other devices that don't have this restriction" - which is still an option nowadays.
- oneplane 5y ago
  I suppose there are differences here, for example the root-of-trust of a car still isn't accessible to you; you can't run your own ECU firmware unless you jailbreak your ECU. Luckily, that is generally not the main 'feature' of the car, and for most people a car isn't a brain-extension with private and personal aspects. Keep in mind that this doesn't mean you shouldn't own or repair your stuff, but there are significant differences between products, and those differences aren't always clear.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  > But it passed in both cases because... it's common sense. Yeah. I don't even understand why we have to argue in favor of stuff like this. Somehow we ended up living in such a fucked up world where the things we purchase don't actually belong to us and we actually have to fight tooth and nail to make it sane again.
judge2020 5y ago
Not all right to repair laws include 'device manufacturer must allow user to repair the software'.
ashneo76 5y ago
Yup. The business model is pushing new phones just so that can keep making money off that store and the addiction to the addictive apps.

formerly_proven 5y ago

Reduce reuse recycle is fundamentally against the business model of BigCorpos. Of course they will fight tooth and nail against legislation that impinges on their business model [1]. It goes to show how good Apple's PR department is that people view them as an eco-oriented company (hint: they're literally in the "producing consumer e-waste market"). But I mean people these days also think Microsoft are open-source friendly good guys, sooooo [1] Besides enabling reduce and reuse, right to repair also goes directly the business interests of these companies, because 3rd party repair shops exist under RTR instead of 100 % of the repair revenue going to their franchises or them directly.

skohan 5y ago
I don't see how this is not blatantly in violation of anti-trust laws. It seems to me it is clearly harming the best interest of the consumer to have less choice and more expensive repair options due to lack of RTR. I say this as someone who would still use Apple licenced repair shops. The standard of service quality is high, and the results are dependable and consistent. Why is it not enough to compete on quality, and why do they have to behave in an anti-competitive manner?
com2kid 5y ago
As someone who used to work in consumer electronics, I don't think HN readers understand exactly how harsh tech reviewers come down on devices that aren't as thin as possible. Add an extra millimeter and all of a sudden "tech companies yet again don't understand female audiences as they make yet another monstrously huge device that only men can use." or "this new version is unbelievably thick, and is another failure compared to Apple's amazing version" where Apple's version is 1 or 2 mm thinner. Laptops, same thing. Even here on HN I've seen multiple people talk about how the only reason they can even carry a laptop at all is because Apple's newest whatever is so amazingly thin and how even a single extra ounce would make the laptop completely unusable. So manufacturers have a choice. Glue everything together and make it unrepairable, or get dragged through the mud by reviewers and tech enthusiasts.
- tweetle_beetle 5y ago

hawski 5y ago

I really like Thom Holwerda's from OSnews take on the article. Especially the "glorified toaster makers" part. https://www.osnews.com/story/133436/microsoft-and-apple-wage-war-on-gadget-rfight-to-repair-laws/ https://www.osnews.com/story/133436/microsoft-and-apple-wage... > What’s good enough for the car industry, is more than good enough for these glorified toaster makers. Cars are basically murder weapons we kind of screwed ourselves into being reliant on, but Apple and Microsoft make complicated toasters that you need to really screw up in order to hurt anyone with. Computer and device makers must be forced to make parts and schematics available to any independent repair shop, just like car makers have to do. > So many perfectly capable devices end up in dangerous, toxic landfills in 3rd world countries simply because Apple, Microsoft, and other toaster makers want to increase their bottom line. It’s disgusting behaviour, especially with how sanctimonious they are about protecting the environment and hugging baby seals.

scrutinizer80 5y ago
This is wonderfully accurate. :)
ible 5y ago
Other issues aside, "A is just a complicated B, so apply the same rules to A as B" is not a formula for good decision making. It's a common way to make bad mistakes though.
- labster 5y ago
  A Rectangle is just a complicated Square, so let’s just subclass. That should work out okay. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle–ellipse_problem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle–ellipse_problem
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  The OP has a spesific and accurate statement about danger to life and limb. A generic sounbyte does not make a convincing counterpoint
- j1elo 5y ago

fish45 5y ago

I just replaced my phone battery using an iFixit kit a few minutes ago. It's probably extended the life of my phone by a year.

keanebean86 5y ago
I have a garbage laptop from 2012 that's still enough for basic browsing. Thanks to a replacement battery and reasonably accessible internals it's still working fine. The case is all busted but whatever. Customers should be able to legally get parts. If the original company is done making them someone else should be allowed. I highly doubt repaired devices are massively cutting into sale. Most people don't want to deal with the hassle and would rather have something new anyways.
amatecha 5y ago
Yeah, I just recently replaced the battery in a family member's MacBook Air. Surprising that it was even possible to replace (thanks iFixit)! With this model the SSD is also replaceable, thankfully. Of course, once the logic board itself fails, that'll be a whole different story, but at least _some_ aspects of the system are repairable.
hawski 5y ago
With YouTube tutorials and iFixit instructions all I needed was a screwdriver and parts from AliExpress. I replaced 4 times a screen and 3 times a battery in my wife's BQ Aquaris X until the motherboard gave up. It still probably is repairable, but not as easy. The phone had seen too much water in it's life... I repaired in my time also: Moto G1, Nexus 5X and Pixel 1. It was all not difficult. Now I wonder how it will go with Moto G7 that my wife has when its time will come. That's one of the reasons I think about Fairphone, but with my experience I bought for myself Pixel 1 with a broken screen, that I repaired myself. Now my phone is all good except software and that makes me think about the Fairphone again. Can't wait until Linux phones will get better, maybe Pinephone 3 will be a good main phone. But I would like to see a small phone, like latest Unihertz Jelly, but without an awful Mediatek SoC.
bogwog 5y ago
My iPhone XS Max screen cracked a few weeks ago and I've been debating sending it in for repair. Apple charges $300 friggin dollars to "fix" the display (I think they just send you a new phone). Looking online, displays only cost around $50-$90. So I've considered doing that instead, but if I go down that route, my phone will no longer support the "True Tone" feature. This is because Apple burned the serial number of the display onto the motherboard, so if you try to replace it, they'll know and will disable features even though they work perfectly fine. So in addition to the cost of the screen, I'll also have to buy a screen reprogrammer, which is a device that can copy the serial number from my old display and write it into the new display, so that the phone doesn't realize I replaced the screen. The prices I've seen online for these are like $60+, so it's still cheaper than sending it to Apple. I don't understand how this isn't 100% illegal. How the hell can Apple get away with doing something so obviously malicious and detrimental to consumers and the environment? Those are some Scrooge McDuck levels of ridiculousness.

johncena33 5y ago

I have submitted this yesterday [1]. The submission didn't make the front page. The title of the article is "Microsoft and Apple Wage War on Gadget Right-to-Repair Laws". When the title was editoralized to insert Google, it made to front-page. Can someone explain why the editing of the title? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27225003 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27225003

dang 5y ago
It's largely random which submission of an article ends up getting traction. That's true across every topic, so I doubt that inserting Google into the title made the difference. As for why - perhaps the submitter felt that it was misleading for the title to pick on just MS and Apple when Google is also implicated in the article? That's a legit reason to edit a title on HN—it's one of the unlesses in "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- johncena33 5y ago
  Amazon was also included in the article. I don't see Amazon on the title. And the submitter even put Google in front of Microsoft. The submitter not only added Google, also changed the order. Probably not random. Since there is always _at least_ one anti-Google article makes to front page every day. And the quality of discussion on Google related is probably the lowest on HN. The mod team didn't seem very eager to moederate Google related threads so far.
  - dang 5y ago
    Well, I'm not going to make a kitchen-sink affair out of the title by stuffing Amazon up there as well, so I've reverted to the article title above. Now would you please stop posting this tedious off-topic stuff? Everyone who has preferences for one $Bigco over another thinks that HN and HN mods are biased against their favorite $Bigco and biased in favor of whatever $Bigco they don't like. You could substitute any other $Bigco for Google in your comment and it would be exactly what other commenters claim. This is tedious, as I mentioned; it is merely a projection of the commenter's own preferences. It's the same phenomenon by which zealous sports fans think the refs are totally biased. It's actually a cognitive bias rooted in the fact that the bad (what you dislike) stands out more than the good (what you agree with)—i.e. people heavily weight what they dislike, and underemphasize, or simply fail to notice, all the countervailing data points. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20dislike%20notice&sort=byDate&type=story&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20false%20feelings%20of%20generality&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

GuB-42 5y ago

Why Google? They sell very little hardware, and they could even benefit from the repair market. It is also one of their best weapon against Apple, in the same way that privacy is one the best weapon Apple has against Google.

johncena33 5y ago
Worst of it is Google was not even in the title of the article. The title was editorialized to include Google.
- formerly_proven 5y ago
  Why is that the "worst of it"? Google is mentioned eleven times in the article and not in a "pro right to repair" kind of way. > But it was Google that surprised advocates with the vigor of its opposition.
- dang 5y ago
  Please stop. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27240646 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27240646
dang 5y ago
I've taken Google out of the title now in an attempt to mute this tedious off-topic tangent. Not your fault; I'm referring to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27240366 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27240366.

neonate 5y ago

https://archive.is/gBwWE https://archive.is/gBwWE

glenneroo 5y ago
Alternately while the page is loading hit ESC and it will prevent the pop-up from opening :)

least 5y ago

My main complaint against right-to-repair laws is mostly to the extent that some people push for. I am not against manufacturers being forced to provide things like schematics or parts to third party repair shops. I don't think that companies like Apple should be able to decide who is allowed to or not allowed to access parts to repair their devices. I also don't think that Apple should place DRM on its parts to check in the software whether or not what is being used is a genuine part or not. A part is either within spec to work correctly or it's not. I am, however, against the idea of companies being forced to design products around being easily repairable. If a company wants to make a super thin device with basically no easy way to take it apart, that's their prerogative. If a company wants to solder on components to the device like RAM or the storage or the cpu or gpu, that's their prerogative. There are tradeoffs to both approaches to designing the products and you'll find in many markets you will absolutely find many options on the market to suit your own needs or wants. The government doesn't need to be involved in this respect.

LegitShady 5y ago
> am, however, against the idea of companies being forced to design products around being easily repairable. If a company wants to make a super thin device with basically no easy way to take it apart, that's their prerogative. If a company wants to solder on components to the device like RAM or the storage or the cpu or gpu, that's their prerogative. Totally agree. But they should be publicly labeled as extreme polluters whose devices aren't repairable and who design devices that way intentionally. They should be free to do it, and then free to be denounced for it. >The government doesn't need to be involved in this respect. The environmental aspect of unrepairable devices should probably be regulated like any other industry who makes the decisions to pollute because they want to.
- enaaem 5y ago
  You get a strange situation where a custom gaming pc will be labeled greener than a thin laptop with integrated components. Although the GPU alone uses more material and electricity than the whole laptops logic board.

NullPrefix 5y ago

But Microsoft loves open source... They sure would love right to repair too.

squarefoot 5y ago

Then let's vote using our wallet when shopping for example for a laptop or a phone. Companies such as Purism and Pine64 already offer alternatives, the former in the higher end market, the latter in the more affordable one. Their devices are as much open as possible, and repairable. Hacking them is not only accepted but actually encouraged.

techrat 5y ago
I've been trying to import a FairPhone, myself. Why they're making it so difficult to get one in the states is beyond me.

Aunche 5y ago

The boring truth is that American consumers simply don't care about repairing their electronic devices. They're too rich and labor is too expensive here. You would have no problem with repairing just about any phone in China. I suppose the lax intellectual property laws help as well.

skybrian 5y ago

I'm wondering how this really works. It seems like the situation might be a lot worse with electronics than cars. The upstream vendor may discontinue a part so nobody could repair it if they didn't already buy enough inventory. Products sometimes have to get redesigned just to keep manufacturing them. To really make this work, they'd have to keep enough parts inventory for the expected lifetime of a product (beyond warranty repairs), and also resell them to whoever asks. I'd guess OEMs are reluctant to sell replacement parts so they don't get cleaned out and can't do their own repairs? A systematic fix for this might require more standardization and less churn in the industry. Cars get recycled by junkyards so that's another source for parts for older cars. There's probably a lot less money in that for electronics.

prepend 5y ago

Why is Microsoft against this? They don’t really make much that needs repairing. Is Xbox that big of a market for them?

dwaite 5y ago
Because a lot of the proposed legislation goes way farther than the right to repair (which you already have a la first sale doctrine) and access to parts/instructions
scintill76 5y ago
Surface systems? (tablets, laptops)
totalZero 5y ago
If I were Microsoft, I would want people to replace rather than repair computers. Chances are, the new computer will come with a Windows license.
judge2020 5y ago
If the right-to-repair includes making changes to the software it literally destroys the xbox business model and they might just have to start selling them at a reasonable profit instead of making money on the back-burner (to the tune of $600[0])[1]. 0: https://youtu.be/U7VwtOrwceo?t=703 https://youtu.be/U7VwtOrwceo?t=703 (I'm assuming that "we only protect against piracy when the attack costs less than 10 games" implies that Microsoft expects to make around this much in post-purchase profit) 1: https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-not-making-any-money-on-500-xbox-one-x https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-not-making-any-money-on...

totalZero 5y ago

My recent experience showed me the importance of right to repair laws. I took an 8yo MacBook Pro to an Apple Store to have the battery replaced. They did the service, but when I got the device back, the MagSafe charging port would overheat substantially while recharging. I brought it back to an Apple Store and asked them to take a look at the DC-in board under warranty because something obviously got messed up during the replacement battery installation. They gave it back to me several days later without having so much as cycled the battery to recreate the problem. I ferried the laptop to another Apple Store and they replaced the thermal paste and gave it back to me with the screws in the wrong place. They claimed the overheating issue was a pre-existing problem because the SMC had thrown an error due to my third-party SSD during the pre-repair diagnostic. At the time of dropoff, they also demanded that I wipe down the LCD with an isopropyl pad despite the Apple website saying to use a dry cloth or water. I returned to the second Apple Store and they finally ordered the DC-in board (part cost less than $3). The guy there tried to convince me that the SMC is not a chip, but just a theoretical concept that Apple uses to diagnose problems. They replaced it, but they told me over the phone that they had reversed the repair because it didn't work. When I went to pick up the laptop (they didn't offer to FedEx it out to me as the other store had), I saw that they had indeed replaced the DC-in board and that this solved the problem, but they tried to pass off the problem as a software issue for some reason. Also, they had forgotten to remove the plastic film from the part before installing so I had to open the laptop up and reinstall the DC-in board anyway. It turns out the DC-in board should be installed with the (unplugged) charging cable magnetically attached, so that it orients correctly and makes good contact when you tighten it down. I live two hours from the nearest Apple Store so this was a total pain in the butt. Apple could have simply sold me a DC-in board -- or at less than $3, they could have given it to me for free under warranty -- and I would have been happy. I had to do this song and dance to get a genuine replacement part, and in retrospect I could have paid ten times as much to get the part from iFixit instead of paying for gas and taking the time to drive out to the Apple Store. Apple's stranglehold on the parts supply only worsens the ownership experience for their devices. Almost every person I dealt with seemed unqualified to work on computer repair, yet I wasn't able to buy genuine parts to do the repair myself. If you're not going to let me buy the parts, then your staff should know to remove plastic film from parts before installing them. They should know what screws to place where. They should know what the SMC is. They should know that under Magnuson-Moss, a third-party SSD doesn't invalidate the warranty on a battery replacement. They should refrain from saying "it's an eight-year-old old laptop so we may not be able to repair it." But they don't. Either Apple has to train these people or they have to let us buy parts and circumvent their ignorance.

lsiebert 5y ago

I want both a repairability index and a recyclability index, with increased taxes on sales of items that are less repairable or recyclable. Those items are more costly to repair or recycle, and thus more wasteful and inefficient. I think it's better to align financial incentives.

Guthur 5y ago
And what will likely happen is that as with now Recycle will be the choice. It's the less efficient of the 3 Rs; Reduce, Reuse and Recycle. There was actually an order to those but we've tended to skip past the two meaningful actions and jumped straight to recycle which at times does nothing for environment and certainly not for our pockets.
dehrmann 5y ago
Repairability might not be interesting for something that people only own for three years. It's hard to measure for new devices, but reliability is just as important.

dehrmann 5y ago

> “It’s like Tiffany jewelry," said Nathan Proctor, a U.S. PIRG director. “They want control.” Is this something most people are familiar with? I know Tiffany sells luxury jewelry, but that's about it.

ur-whale 5y ago

https://archive.is/gBwWE https://archive.is/gBwWE

Too 5y ago

Trust is a thing that is becoming more and more important these days with more and more of users secrets going through our devices. Wouldn't want all your email or banking details to be sucked up by a cheap wifi-chip which could have backdoors either by design or by accident. This is also why one should stay away from cheap IoT-gimmicks. Another interesting aspect is reputation of quality in case repair shops don't restore the device to original performance, while customers still think they are running genuine parts, because it's very hard to visually inspect and understand what happens inside, as opposed to a toaster. Not saying i'm for all these locks but pointing out it's a lot more multi-faceted than the article presents it.

jsiepkes 5y ago
> Trust is a thing that is becoming more and more important these days with more and more of users secrets going through our devices. How many hardware backdoored PC's have you encountered in your life?
- smolder 5y ago
  The GP included "accidentally backdoored", in which case that's probably all of them. Even if you exclude accidents, there are probably some deliberately created, not-yet-burned covert access techniques for many devices. We don't know what we don't know, but we do know there are agencies tasked with Total Information Awareness, and have some evidence of the type of stuff they get up to.

jimnotgym 5y ago

Maybe another angle on this is to tackle what it takes to become an 'approved' service centre. If you have basic diagnostic tools, and pay a nominal registration charge, why shouldn't anyone be allowed to become an approved repairer?

ekianjo 5y ago

It's funny that the right-to-repair is supposedly gaining momentum while at the same time consumers have had no problem buying new devices that are less and less open to be repaired, despite having the choice of phones with replaceable batteries for example

noisy_boy 5y ago
Maybe they needed to swing the thin, light and unserviceable way to experience for it themselves and have more perspective now.

botverse 5y ago

Mandatory mention to Louis Rossman right to repair campaign. https://www.fighttorepair.org/ https://www.fighttorepair.org/