3 ms·

> There is no such thing as "authorized repair" when it comes to Apple. I guess the authorised service centers I've taken Macs to since the late 90s were figme

> There is no such thing as "authorized repair" when it comes to Apple. I guess the authorised service centers I've taken Macs to since the late 90s were figments of my imagination then?

Nextgrid 5y ago
My point is, none of it is repair. It's blindly replacing parts, the same thing that the Apple Store would do, at the exact same prices. Given that Louis Rossmann appears to have made a successful business out of his "unauthorized" repair, consumers demand more cost-efficient options, which also happens to be better for the planet as it's less wasteful.
- stephenr 5y ago
  > My point is, none of it is repair. So your logic is: if a part is replaced, the thing isn't actually repaired. > It's blindly replacing parts Blindly? Really? Every repair I've had done - even the ones where the tech doesn't speak the same fucking language as me - have clearly identified what's at fault, and told me what's being done. Hardly seems "blind". > at the exact same prices. If the genuine parts cost the same, why are you surprised the labour costs the same? > which also happens to be better for the planet as it's less wasteful Based on what? Have you really never heard of Repair/Refurbish for sale?
  - stale2002 5y ago
    > if a part is replaced, the thing isn't actually repaired. No.... His logic is that he should have the freedom to hire someone to fix a device, instead of replace the part completely, if he chooses to do so. > If the genuine parts cost the same If people were free to do repairs differently, then it would be possible to do a repair more cheaply. I am not sure how you could be misinterpreting what they are saying this much.
  - Nextgrid 5y ago
    > So your logic is: if a part is replaced, the thing isn't actually repaired. If you have a flat tire and the garage replaces the entire car, both you and I wouldn't call that repair. If you have a problem caused by a $0.01 resistor on the logic board and they replace the entire board I wouldn't call that repair either, and that's exactly what Apple is doing. > have clearly identified what's at fault, and told me what's being done So let me guess, the fault was the logic board, which is basically the entire computer, and what would be done is to replace it (which again is equivalent to replacing the entire computer, and costs about the same)? This is the main problem with Apple's repair. Outside of physical, visible damage to the computer, everything else will basically be a logic board fault, regardless of whether the entire board is burnt or broken in half (in which case a replacement is justified) or a 1c passive component being defective (in which case a replacement is overkill, but Apple's monopoly allows them to do it and extract a generous profit out of it). > If the genuine parts cost the same, why are you surprised the labour costs the same? 2 problems here: 1) I have a problem with paying for whole new mainboard (=entire computer) when the problem is a single resistor or broken trace on the existing board. 2) The retail price of an Apple computer includes a significant margin to account for R&D and software development. The actual cost of the hardware is probably 30% and the rest is essentially a "license". When repairing an existing device, I expect the parts to be sold at-cost (as I've already paid the "license" when originally buying the machine) instead of costing basically the same as buying a new machine. > Based on what? Common sense. Between repairing the device on-site by replacing a 1c faulty part and returning it to the customer immediately, or shipping parts across the globe back and forth, what's the most efficient, both in terms of time, money and carbon footprint?
novok 5y ago
That 30 yr old program is not the current program he is describing.
- stephenr 5y ago
  I've taken a Mac to one such authorised repair centre in the last 3 years.
  - Nextgrid 5y ago
    There are 2 repair programs: Apple Authorized Service Provider - the existing one, which has significant barriers to entry and doesn't seem profitable on its own (most of the ones I see around town either sell refurbished computers on the side or provide IT support), though I believe they can at least stock parts as they advertise same-day turnaround on some common repairs. This is the one you're talking about. The Independent Repair Program, for smaller shops to be able to obtain genuine parts and perform authorized repairs on Apple devices. These don't allow you to stock parts and have a lot of ridiculous restrictions (Louis did a video on it) and is purely a PR thing when the whole "right to repair" idea started taking off and regulators were started to look closer.
gskj 5y ago
I'll bet the following happened, which Louis is actively fighting against... 1) you didn't get your data back if it was a hard drive issue 2) the service center replaced an entire part, not a .50cent component, and may have charged you for the full part. 3) it was not really authorized, because the third party authorized service center is new within 18months, and you can only replace screens and in few cases, batteries. With today's devices, it's really just about getting your data back. If the machine can be repaired enough for even 15min with just a simple popped capacitor change, that's enough to rescue your latest photos, and that's what Louis is fighting for. While publishing schematics would be a bonus, the big thing is don't strongarm manufacturers with legal constraints so they can't sell that 50 cent part to other parties so repair shops/individuals can get those 15min.

> There is no such thing as "authorized repair" when it comes to Apple. I guess the authorised service centers I've taken Macs to since the late 90s were figments of my imagination then?

Nextgrid 5y ago

My point is, none of it is repair. It's blindly replacing parts, the same thing that the Apple Store would do, at the exact same prices. Given that Louis Rossmann appears to have made a successful business out of his "unauthorized" repair, consumers demand more cost-efficient options, which also happens to be better for the planet as it's less wasteful.

stephenr 5y ago
> My point is, none of it is repair. So your logic is: if a part is replaced, the thing isn't actually repaired. > It's blindly replacing parts Blindly? Really? Every repair I've had done - even the ones where the tech doesn't speak the same fucking language as me - have clearly identified what's at fault, and told me what's being done. Hardly seems "blind". > at the exact same prices. If the genuine parts cost the same, why are you surprised the labour costs the same? > which also happens to be better for the planet as it's less wasteful Based on what? Have you really never heard of Repair/Refurbish for sale?
- stale2002 5y ago
  > if a part is replaced, the thing isn't actually repaired. No.... His logic is that he should have the freedom to hire someone to fix a device, instead of replace the part completely, if he chooses to do so. > If the genuine parts cost the same If people were free to do repairs differently, then it would be possible to do a repair more cheaply. I am not sure how you could be misinterpreting what they are saying this much.
- Nextgrid 5y ago
  > So your logic is: if a part is replaced, the thing isn't actually repaired. If you have a flat tire and the garage replaces the entire car, both you and I wouldn't call that repair. If you have a problem caused by a $0.01 resistor on the logic board and they replace the entire board I wouldn't call that repair either, and that's exactly what Apple is doing. > have clearly identified what's at fault, and told me what's being done So let me guess, the fault was the logic board, which is basically the entire computer, and what would be done is to replace it (which again is equivalent to replacing the entire computer, and costs about the same)? This is the main problem with Apple's repair. Outside of physical, visible damage to the computer, everything else will basically be a logic board fault, regardless of whether the entire board is burnt or broken in half (in which case a replacement is justified) or a 1c passive component being defective (in which case a replacement is overkill, but Apple's monopoly allows them to do it and extract a generous profit out of it). > If the genuine parts cost the same, why are you surprised the labour costs the same? 2 problems here: 1) I have a problem with paying for whole new mainboard (=entire computer) when the problem is a single resistor or broken trace on the existing board. 2) The retail price of an Apple computer includes a significant margin to account for R&D and software development. The actual cost of the hardware is probably 30% and the rest is essentially a "license". When repairing an existing device, I expect the parts to be sold at-cost (as I've already paid the "license" when originally buying the machine) instead of costing basically the same as buying a new machine. > Based on what? Common sense. Between repairing the device on-site by replacing a 1c faulty part and returning it to the customer immediately, or shipping parts across the globe back and forth, what's the most efficient, both in terms of time, money and carbon footprint?

novok 5y ago

That 30 yr old program is not the current program he is describing.

stephenr 5y ago
I've taken a Mac to one such authorised repair centre in the last 3 years.
- Nextgrid 5y ago
  There are 2 repair programs: Apple Authorized Service Provider - the existing one, which has significant barriers to entry and doesn't seem profitable on its own (most of the ones I see around town either sell refurbished computers on the side or provide IT support), though I believe they can at least stock parts as they advertise same-day turnaround on some common repairs. This is the one you're talking about. The Independent Repair Program, for smaller shops to be able to obtain genuine parts and perform authorized repairs on Apple devices. These don't allow you to stock parts and have a lot of ridiculous restrictions (Louis did a video on it) and is purely a PR thing when the whole "right to repair" idea started taking off and regulators were started to look closer.

gskj 5y ago

I'll bet the following happened, which Louis is actively fighting against... 1) you didn't get your data back if it was a hard drive issue 2) the service center replaced an entire part, not a .50cent component, and may have charged you for the full part. 3) it was not really authorized, because the third party authorized service center is new within 18months, and you can only replace screens and in few cases, batteries. With today's devices, it's really just about getting your data back. If the machine can be repaired enough for even 15min with just a simple popped capacitor change, that's enough to rescue your latest photos, and that's what Louis is fighting for. While publishing schematics would be a bonus, the big thing is don't strongarm manufacturers with legal constraints so they can't sell that 50 cent part to other parties so repair shops/individuals can get those 15min.