9 ms·

Which part is a lie? Parts are available - yes. Screens, modules, etc. Tools are available - sure. Pentalobe screwdrivers, etc. Manuals are available - yes the

Which part is a lie? Parts are available - yes. Screens, modules, etc. Tools are available - sure. Pentalobe screwdrivers, etc. Manuals are available - yes they are. You call their quality sub-par, but none of that is a lie. Component-level repair is probably prohibited by AASPs because it'd have very variable quality outcomes compared to module swaps, and they're putting their name to the quality of the repair.

jasonjayr 5y ago
But that's the thing. If it's self-service repair; then Apple's name is not on the quality of the repair, that's 100% clear. Apple's name is, however, on the quality and availability of the parts, instructions, and repairability.
- cr3ative 5y ago
  I agree with you there, the parent was decrying the nature of AASP repairs.
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
I've argued this in another post recently, but I almost feel that we need a new word that means "so gross a misrepresentation that your average person would have a completely different view of the reality of the situation." I feel like (especially on the Internet) it's pretty easy to deliberately mislead, and then when people call out a statement as BS, it turns into this game of "But see, screens are parts, a screwdriver is a tool!" Yes, I understand Apple is not technically lying here, but they are deliberately misrepresenting the repairability of their products. It's almost like that game kids play of "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you" when they sit half an inch from their siblings to annoy them.
- varjag 5y ago
  People who are able to reflow BGA chips are not the market of this. There isn't a magic, hidden tool to get your way around fairly advanced skills.
- IncRnd 5y ago
  Lie Deceive Misrepresent Prevaricate Equivocate Palter
- lodi 5y ago
  Motte-and-bailey? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy
- haspoken 5y ago
  paltering - lying and deceiving with true statements.
  - vipa123 5y ago
    This needs more votes, and more attention in the world at large...
    - clarge1120 5y ago
      Agreed, and I think this very thing is happening. I've never heard of the word "paltering", but will be using it going forward. Knowledge of this word has exposed my use of such a wicked practice. More people are catching on, but we need more still.
- cr3ative 5y ago
  Ha, well, define average person in this case. HN is of course a very technical audience who might be interested in replacing a bad memory chip on a board, but it could easily be argued that your average person would consider a dock replacement, microphone replacement, screen replacement to be the first thing which comes to mind when you say "phone parts".
- rz2k 5y ago
  "Paltering" Here[1] is a discussion about how Exxon uses paltering in NY Times ads in contravention of NYT's claims that they prevent misleading ads. [1] https://heated.world/p/how-exxon-duped-the-daily https://heated.world/p/how-exxon-duped-the-daily
  - pbronez 5y ago
    Great word, thanks! Here it is in context: Exxon’s ad in The Daily used a common climate misinformation technique called “paltering.” No individual sentence was 100 percent false, but together they created a misleading impression of the company and its climate efforts. If the Times’ fact-checks are only legal in nature, paltering would easily and always slip through. Oil companies would always be able to pay the Times to misrepresent themselves.
  - rootsudo 5y ago
    New word added to my internal dictionary. Thank you! :)
  - hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
    Agree, thank you! New favorite word!
- iicc 5y ago
  It's a deception. Apple is not technically lying, but they are being deceitful. It's about the bigger picture - the purpose of the communication. As much what it leaves out as what it leaves in, instead of it's technical correctness - the press release fits into the definition of propaganda. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda >Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented.
- arrrg 5y ago
  Is that a reasonable expectation to have? It‘s funny, when I started reading your text I first assumed that “so gross a misrepresentation that your average person would have a completely different view of the reality of the situation“ was actually in reference to people expecting and clamoring for parts enabling component level repair in a move targeted at, well, just anyone who bought an Apple product. You see, from my point of view your sentence makes sense in the completely different direction. Can you understand that viewpoint? I can understand yours, I can understand your disappointment, but it also seems quite weird to me to expect Apple to provide component level repair capabilities to consumers.
  - hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
    But the point is that it's not dependent on any particular viewpoint. I'd argue it would have been much easier, shorter, and clearer, for Apple to simply have said "We now let you change your battery and fix a broken screen." (Don't get me started on the fact that changing a dead battery is now considered a "repair", but that's a whole separate issue). Apple could have easily been very straightforward in what they are doing, in a way that leaves no ambiguity regardless of what your personal viewpoint is. The fact that they expended more effort to make the reality of the situation less clear leads me to conclude they were deliberately misleading.
dogleash 5y ago
>it'd have very variable quality outcomes compared to module swaps, and they're putting their name to the quality of the repair That's a deflection. Apple _chooses_ to put their name on those 3rd party repairs.
- cmorgan31 5y ago
  They are choosing not to put their name on it due to the variable outcomes and lack of quality control. It looks straightforward to me.
  - dogleash 5y ago
    Sure, that part is straightforward. But it's also tied to the mechanism by which a repair shop would get parts... which gets us back to the business decisions at the heart of the conflict between AASP and Right to Repair. Therefore bringing up Apple attaching their name to the repair as a justification when someone is criticizing the AASP's design is a deflection.
    - cmorgan31 5y ago
      I guess I am out of touch on the topic. Why would Apple ever want to engage with this unless forced to do so by an external entity? There looks to be zero benefit except for power users who can self repair and repair shops. Would it be fair to say these changes are primarily to get ahead of legal concerns and any tangible gains are vapor?
      - dogleash 5y ago
        >Why would Apple ever want to engage with this unless forced to do so by an external entity? You're right, this gets to the heart of the way manufacturers exert control over goods after sale. Apple is far on the restrictive end of the spectrum regarding consumer electronics. [Insert your own speculation about business reasons behind the obviously deceptive and incomplete public justifications here.] >Would it be fair to say these changes are primarily to get ahead of legal concerns Yes, nakedly so. >any tangible gains are vapor? Anyone with passing awareness of Apple's previous aftermarket repair stance would have to be blindly optimistic to see this press release as anything but expanding the customer base of a program that let select shops do a limited number of fixes, often at might-as-well-buy-new cost of goods. I don't mean to be standoffish to people like yourself that don't have the context. But when it's just us chuckleheads talking shop on the internet, I'm no fan of the people who are informed on context kidding themselves that PR statements shouldn't be read as critically as possible.
baybal2 5y ago
That is something which is supposed to be a norm, not a pity from the vendor.
hnlmorg 5y ago
Ok, it's not a lie. It is deliberately misleading to the extent that the reader interprets that sentence in a way that in untrue. Somehow that doesn't feel any better than a lie though.
fuzzer37 5y ago
> Component-level repair is probably prohibited by AASPs because it'd have very variable quality outcomes compared to module swaps, and they're putting their name to the quality of the repair. It's my device. Apple can suck it.

jasonjayr 5y ago

But that's the thing. If it's self-service repair; then Apple's name is not on the quality of the repair, that's 100% clear. Apple's name is, however, on the quality and availability of the parts, instructions, and repairability.

cr3ative 5y ago
I agree with you there, the parent was decrying the nature of AASP repairs.

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

I've argued this in another post recently, but I almost feel that we need a new word that means "so gross a misrepresentation that your average person would have a completely different view of the reality of the situation." I feel like (especially on the Internet) it's pretty easy to deliberately mislead, and then when people call out a statement as BS, it turns into this game of "But see, screens are parts, a screwdriver is a tool!" Yes, I understand Apple is not technically lying here, but they are deliberately misrepresenting the repairability of their products. It's almost like that game kids play of "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you" when they sit half an inch from their siblings to annoy them.

varjag 5y ago
People who are able to reflow BGA chips are not the market of this. There isn't a magic, hidden tool to get your way around fairly advanced skills.
IncRnd 5y ago
Lie Deceive Misrepresent Prevaricate Equivocate Palter
lodi 5y ago
Motte-and-bailey? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy
haspoken 5y ago
paltering - lying and deceiving with true statements.
- vipa123 5y ago
  This needs more votes, and more attention in the world at large...
  - clarge1120 5y ago
    Agreed, and I think this very thing is happening. I've never heard of the word "paltering", but will be using it going forward. Knowledge of this word has exposed my use of such a wicked practice. More people are catching on, but we need more still.
cr3ative 5y ago
Ha, well, define average person in this case. HN is of course a very technical audience who might be interested in replacing a bad memory chip on a board, but it could easily be argued that your average person would consider a dock replacement, microphone replacement, screen replacement to be the first thing which comes to mind when you say "phone parts".
rz2k 5y ago
"Paltering" Here[1] is a discussion about how Exxon uses paltering in NY Times ads in contravention of NYT's claims that they prevent misleading ads. [1] https://heated.world/p/how-exxon-duped-the-daily https://heated.world/p/how-exxon-duped-the-daily
- pbronez 5y ago
  Great word, thanks! Here it is in context: Exxon’s ad in The Daily used a common climate misinformation technique called “paltering.” No individual sentence was 100 percent false, but together they created a misleading impression of the company and its climate efforts. If the Times’ fact-checks are only legal in nature, paltering would easily and always slip through. Oil companies would always be able to pay the Times to misrepresent themselves.
- rootsudo 5y ago
  New word added to my internal dictionary. Thank you! :)
- hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  Agree, thank you! New favorite word!
iicc 5y ago
It's a deception. Apple is not technically lying, but they are being deceitful. It's about the bigger picture - the purpose of the communication. As much what it leaves out as what it leaves in, instead of it's technical correctness - the press release fits into the definition of propaganda. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda >Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented.
arrrg 5y ago
Is that a reasonable expectation to have? It‘s funny, when I started reading your text I first assumed that “so gross a misrepresentation that your average person would have a completely different view of the reality of the situation“ was actually in reference to people expecting and clamoring for parts enabling component level repair in a move targeted at, well, just anyone who bought an Apple product. You see, from my point of view your sentence makes sense in the completely different direction. Can you understand that viewpoint? I can understand yours, I can understand your disappointment, but it also seems quite weird to me to expect Apple to provide component level repair capabilities to consumers.
- hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  But the point is that it's not dependent on any particular viewpoint. I'd argue it would have been much easier, shorter, and clearer, for Apple to simply have said "We now let you change your battery and fix a broken screen." (Don't get me started on the fact that changing a dead battery is now considered a "repair", but that's a whole separate issue). Apple could have easily been very straightforward in what they are doing, in a way that leaves no ambiguity regardless of what your personal viewpoint is. The fact that they expended more effort to make the reality of the situation less clear leads me to conclude they were deliberately misleading.

dogleash 5y ago

>it'd have very variable quality outcomes compared to module swaps, and they're putting their name to the quality of the repair That's a deflection. Apple _chooses_ to put their name on those 3rd party repairs.

cmorgan31 5y ago
They are choosing not to put their name on it due to the variable outcomes and lack of quality control. It looks straightforward to me.
- dogleash 5y ago
  Sure, that part is straightforward. But it's also tied to the mechanism by which a repair shop would get parts... which gets us back to the business decisions at the heart of the conflict between AASP and Right to Repair. Therefore bringing up Apple attaching their name to the repair as a justification when someone is criticizing the AASP's design is a deflection.
  - cmorgan31 5y ago
    I guess I am out of touch on the topic. Why would Apple ever want to engage with this unless forced to do so by an external entity? There looks to be zero benefit except for power users who can self repair and repair shops. Would it be fair to say these changes are primarily to get ahead of legal concerns and any tangible gains are vapor?
    - dogleash 5y ago
      >Why would Apple ever want to engage with this unless forced to do so by an external entity? You're right, this gets to the heart of the way manufacturers exert control over goods after sale. Apple is far on the restrictive end of the spectrum regarding consumer electronics. [Insert your own speculation about business reasons behind the obviously deceptive and incomplete public justifications here.] >Would it be fair to say these changes are primarily to get ahead of legal concerns Yes, nakedly so. >any tangible gains are vapor? Anyone with passing awareness of Apple's previous aftermarket repair stance would have to be blindly optimistic to see this press release as anything but expanding the customer base of a program that let select shops do a limited number of fixes, often at might-as-well-buy-new cost of goods. I don't mean to be standoffish to people like yourself that don't have the context. But when it's just us chuckleheads talking shop on the internet, I'm no fan of the people who are informed on context kidding themselves that PR statements shouldn't be read as critically as possible.

baybal2 5y ago

That is something which is supposed to be a norm, not a pity from the vendor.

hnlmorg 5y ago

Ok, it's not a lie. It is deliberately misleading to the extent that the reader interprets that sentence in a way that in untrue. Somehow that doesn't feel any better than a lie though.

fuzzer37 5y ago

> Component-level repair is probably prohibited by AASPs because it'd have very variable quality outcomes compared to module swaps, and they're putting their name to the quality of the repair. It's my device. Apple can suck it.