5 ms·

> Factories will often overproduce Apple parts like screens then sell the excess to independent vendors. In fairness to Apple, that’s not fair at all. I hope

> Factories will often overproduce Apple parts like screens then sell the excess to independent vendors. In fairness to Apple, that’s not fair at all. I hope right to repair keeps gaining traction. If I need to buy a laptop any time soon it’s going to be a Framework. I replaced a DIMM in my current laptop (ThinkPad) and would have been pretty upset if I had to throw it away because of soldered RAM. My fear with authorized repair programs as the only option is the risk of changing what’s considered fact. After a (people) generation where all training and education says “this is impossible,” people will believe it. The manufacturers get to dictate the new reality with no pushback from knowledgeable opponents because those opponents won’t exist anymore. I’ve personally fixed many vehicle problems, a hot tub, a stove, a dishwasher, a fridge, a furnace, etc.. I’m 100% positive the manufacturers are lying about the complexity of everything and confident in saying that a lot of the complexity is intentionally engineered to be complex. People want to fix their own stuff and they’ll try no matter what. The manufacturers like to tout the risks of DIY repair, but the biggest risk, by far IMO, is a lack of official schematics and docs. The manufacturers are literally creating the risk by withholding repair resources and forcing everyone to trust random internet strangers. Learn how to discharge capacitors if you’re going to DIY fix anything :-)

vlovich123 5y ago
> In fairness to Apple, that’s not fair at all. Why? Apple really pressures manufacturers to squeeze out its profit margin as much as possible. If the consequence of that is that factories make up the difference on their profit needs by overproducing & reselling those components, that seems like a natural penalty for Apple in the way it conducts business.
- FuckButtons 5y ago
  At best that’s a naive interpretation, Chinese manufacturing firms don’t do this to “make up the difference” they do it because they can. They don’t just do it to apple, it’s standard practice, in spite of international ip protections.
  - vlovich123 5y ago
    Then go manufacture where this isn’t an issue? It’s hard to feel bad for Apple here, especially since they don’t offer an official way to buy their parts that’s not also serviced by them.
- donmcronald 5y ago
  > Why? Apple really pressures manufacturers to squeeze out its profit margin as much as possible. When they say "overproduce Apple parts" that's implying they're overproducing genuine Apple parts. The factory doing that isn't going to have any of the expenses associated with designing and testing that part, because Apple is paying for that, and they'll be able to sell the "extra" parts for less money or with a larger margin than what Apple could. It's like selling photocopies of a book and claiming it's ok. If the factories want to use their tooling to manufacture competing parts that have been reverse engineered from Apple's parts, I'm fine with that. If they're actually manufacturing and selling genuine Apple parts to third parties that's not ok IMO.
duskwuff 5y ago
> I replaced a DIMM in my current laptop (ThinkPad) and would have been pretty upset if I had to throw it away because of soldered RAM. Right to repair wouldn't change that. It isn't a mandate for manufacturers to change product designs to appease hobbyists. > Learn how to discharge capacitors if you’re going to DIY fix anything :-) Honestly, this advice has passed its "use-by" date. With CRTs and linear power supplies both rare, not many products have large, high-voltage capacitors, and most of the ones that do will include bleeder resistors.
chuckee 5y ago
> In fairness to Apple, that’s not fair at all. Does Apple hold patents that those factories are infringing by making those parts? Companies are not in general entitled to forbid manufacture of compatible (or identical!) parts. And when it comes to fairness, profiting off of repairing your own broken products is dubious to begin with. As far as I'm concerned, removing that source of revenue is perfectly fair, and reduces the perverse incentives companies have to make their products prone to break (isn't it strange how manufacturers choose to make phones 0.5mm thinner instead of more impact resistant?).
- Someone 5y ago
  _If_ Apple sends a design they made to a factory to have it mass-produced, and that factory makes more of the exact same parts and then sells them at lower price, that isn’t fair to Apple, just as it wouldn’t be fair if that manufacturer did the same for some Kickstarter campaign. Similarly, _if_ third parties make lower quality products that intentionally look so much like Apple’s ones that it deceives customers, I think Apple has a point that that dilutes the value of their brand.
  - chuckee 5y ago
    Suppose Audi has a cog wheel mass produced in some factory in China. The cog wheel has to be made with very specific dimensions, or it won't fit into the Audi. Now that cog wheel in my Audi breaks, and I need a new one. What makes Audi the only one with the right to make a cog wheel that will fit my car? What you're trying to do is expand the patent system even further, without calling it a patent system. If on the other hand those factories are infringing patents, then Apple may have a legitimate case ("may" because the quality of many patents is questionable at best, even if they're legally valid). > that intentionally look so much like Apple’s ones that it deceives customers But this is literally the opposite of what the training videos are about. They're about persuading customers that knowingly want to buy non-Apple parts, to buy Apple instead.

vlovich123 5y ago

> In fairness to Apple, that’s not fair at all. Why? Apple really pressures manufacturers to squeeze out its profit margin as much as possible. If the consequence of that is that factories make up the difference on their profit needs by overproducing & reselling those components, that seems like a natural penalty for Apple in the way it conducts business.

FuckButtons 5y ago
At best that’s a naive interpretation, Chinese manufacturing firms don’t do this to “make up the difference” they do it because they can. They don’t just do it to apple, it’s standard practice, in spite of international ip protections.
- vlovich123 5y ago
  Then go manufacture where this isn’t an issue? It’s hard to feel bad for Apple here, especially since they don’t offer an official way to buy their parts that’s not also serviced by them.
donmcronald 5y ago
> Why? Apple really pressures manufacturers to squeeze out its profit margin as much as possible. When they say "overproduce Apple parts" that's implying they're overproducing genuine Apple parts. The factory doing that isn't going to have any of the expenses associated with designing and testing that part, because Apple is paying for that, and they'll be able to sell the "extra" parts for less money or with a larger margin than what Apple could. It's like selling photocopies of a book and claiming it's ok. If the factories want to use their tooling to manufacture competing parts that have been reverse engineered from Apple's parts, I'm fine with that. If they're actually manufacturing and selling genuine Apple parts to third parties that's not ok IMO.

duskwuff 5y ago

> I replaced a DIMM in my current laptop (ThinkPad) and would have been pretty upset if I had to throw it away because of soldered RAM. Right to repair wouldn't change that. It isn't a mandate for manufacturers to change product designs to appease hobbyists. > Learn how to discharge capacitors if you’re going to DIY fix anything :-) Honestly, this advice has passed its "use-by" date. With CRTs and linear power supplies both rare, not many products have large, high-voltage capacitors, and most of the ones that do will include bleeder resistors.

chuckee 5y ago

> In fairness to Apple, that’s not fair at all. Does Apple hold patents that those factories are infringing by making those parts? Companies are not in general entitled to forbid manufacture of compatible (or identical!) parts. And when it comes to fairness, profiting off of repairing your own broken products is dubious to begin with. As far as I'm concerned, removing that source of revenue is perfectly fair, and reduces the perverse incentives companies have to make their products prone to break (isn't it strange how manufacturers choose to make phones 0.5mm thinner instead of more impact resistant?).

Someone 5y ago
_If_ Apple sends a design they made to a factory to have it mass-produced, and that factory makes more of the exact same parts and then sells them at lower price, that isn’t fair to Apple, just as it wouldn’t be fair if that manufacturer did the same for some Kickstarter campaign. Similarly, _if_ third parties make lower quality products that intentionally look so much like Apple’s ones that it deceives customers, I think Apple has a point that that dilutes the value of their brand.
- chuckee 5y ago
  Suppose Audi has a cog wheel mass produced in some factory in China. The cog wheel has to be made with very specific dimensions, or it won't fit into the Audi. Now that cog wheel in my Audi breaks, and I need a new one. What makes Audi the only one with the right to make a cog wheel that will fit my car? What you're trying to do is expand the patent system even further, without calling it a patent system. If on the other hand those factories are infringing patents, then Apple may have a legitimate case ("may" because the quality of many patents is questionable at best, even if they're legally valid). > that intentionally look so much like Apple’s ones that it deceives customers But this is literally the opposite of what the training videos are about. They're about persuading customers that knowingly want to buy non-Apple parts, to buy Apple instead.