11 ms·

iFixit and Google Are Launching a Genuine Pixel Parts Program

270 points by TangerineDream 5y ago

rasz 5y ago
>Starting later this year So not launching anything after all. This, Samsung announcement (overpriced half a clamshell with integrated LCD for only two flagship models, no batteries at all) and Apple pathetic IRP (cant buy anything, only parts exchange 1:1, spying on your company books for a couple of years etc) is a sign manufacturers already see that Right to Repair legislation is coming no matter how much money they keep throwing at lobbyists, and are desperately trying to limit its scope by claiming they already offer everything advocates want (spare parts) while offering almost nothing (screens only at the price of fully working unit at a second hand market).
- cookiengineer 5y ago
  The real reason I liked the pinephone so much was not the price tag, but the replacement parts [1]. I didn't go for the librem cause it's an overexpensive bet with no sight of any repair parts. Before that I only bought android phones where I knew that I can find either scrapped parts or replacement parts on ebay. [1] https://pine64.com/product-category/smartphone-spare-parts/ https://pine64.com/product-category/smartphone-spare-parts/
- onion2k 5y ago
  So not launching anything after all. If I say "I am having a 50th birthday party" that means I'm talking about an event that's happening in the future. It doesn't mean I'm having it immediately. It's a statement that's in the "future perfect" tense. Besides, people would be very confused. I'm 45. If Google say they are launching something, the same thing applies. It means they're launching it at some point. That doesn't have to be right now. They're using the future perfect tense.
  - meragrin_ 5y ago
    Everything I'm seeing regarding future perfect tense seems to indicate both 'will' and 'have' are required. Saying "I am having a 50th birthday party" is not talking about an event that's happening in the future. You can say that and be referring to a party which is presently happening.
    - wcfields 5y ago
      The word "Starting" is the real lawyer'd up word there. Starting has so many meanings. In my work life I've started hundreds of projects, and a few actually make it beyond a line in a planning document!
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- kwiens 5y ago
  I promise, this is real—I've got parts in the bulding—and it's going to launch soon.
  - rjmunro 5y ago
    Why not hold off the announcement until actual launch day? Big bang, lots of publicity, lots of sales. I've got a Pixel 3a XL with a cracked screen. I'm coping with it cracked, but if I'd seen this announcement and was able to order, I probably would have ordered right now. As it is I just see "coming soon", and will probably forget about it by the time it's actually live.
    - CivBase 5y ago
      What you say makes perfect sense from an engineering perspective. From a marketing and legal perspective, this is a feature to advertise for perspective buyers and ammunition for their anti-R2R lobbying so best to announce it as soon as possible.
galoisscobi 5y ago
Kudos to Google for doing this but this could be even more effective if Google committed to say, 15 years of security updates or something along those lines.
- runnerup 5y ago
  A bit extreme but I empathize your position. I’m okay with the PalmOS phones from 2005 not working anymore. Their 2G/EDGE data doesn’t work and the Wi-Fi standard they used aren’t compatible with anything anymore either. Not to mention they were incredibly slow and unwieldy even when they were new.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
    On the other hand, my desktop is from 2011 and it works fine and Linux happily supports it; 15 years isn't that impractical any more. As time goes on, the pace of change slows and longer life is reasonable; early Android devices may well have been genuinely obsolete inside a year, but current devices aren't even that slow after 4-5 years.
    - kllrnohj 5y ago
      For current phones I think 5 years is a good support window, the batteries don't last much longer than that. But if replaceable batteries make a comeback (and I hope they do with the push from the EU), then I definitely agree that more like 10 years should be demanded as reasonable. Especially for something like Android where if you compare a flagship from 5-7 years ago with a brand new Android Go phone the level of performance & feature set is not really that different. So it's not like the OS gets to actually start expecting things like a high end Vulkan capable GPU & neural net accelerators or anything. It still has to work with what is essentially old hardware anyway just in a brand new body.
      - saidinesh5 5y ago
        Batteries and flash storage too wears off on modern day phones imo. So anything beyond 5 years is asking for a lot on a typical smartphone where people share lots of memes and videos everyday.
mikece 5y ago
Don't mistake this as a sign of altruism by Google: they can see that the Right To Repair movement is getting stronger, more organized, more funded, and is hiring legislative consultants to draft, submit, and pass legislation. While the main thrust for now is the right to repair agricultural tractors and cars, as this gains momentum it will eventually apply to iPhones and MacBook Pros as well. Google is just getting ahead of what is coming -- and trying to flex for PR points as well, because why not?
- runnerup 5y ago
  It also adds energy to push the right to repair movement forward. It may not be altruistic but it’s not just riding coattails either.
- metacritic12 5y ago
  Definitely not altruistic. The Pixel phone was always a defensive position, not Google's profit center. From the position of Apple, the Google Pixel was always a poison in the profit pool so that the monopoly would be held in a different part of the value chain (the Search versus the Hardware). In this regard, Apple's loss is the consumers' gain. By making the Pixel really repairable and parts exchangeable, the Pixel can be shown as a shining beacon of right-to-repair. Techies will applaud how great it is, and have an object to contrast the iPhone with. However, if the iPhone is forced to go the same path via right-to-repair laws (or due to consumer sentiment), their profits will be a lot lower. People won't need to replace iPhones as much. They couldn't price discriminate using different size SSD drives as much, etc. And that's the whole game to Google -- again to reduce the hardware part of the profit chain, and to increase the search part of the profit chain. It's basic MBA stuff / Michael Porter's 5 Forces.
  - londons_explore 5y ago
    > , not Google's profit center. Google of 2022 is run by more MBA's than ever... Everything is now a profit center. They don't do anything big 'just because it's cool/useful/good for society'.
scohesc 5y ago
This is simply silicon valley companies trying to get a foothold in the "right to repair" market - they want to dominate and control what is good intentions by society to extend the lives of older devices. Of course Google wants to get their grubby hands in the pie by getting these systems/programs in place so they can tell legislators "See, you don't need to have that pesky right to repair stuff, we supply the parts for the users!" - while completely ignoring the actual reasons and benefits of RtR. I hope we don't see Google pulling an Apple and using the US government as an enforcement arm to make sure "bootleg" screens don't make it into the hands of people trying to save a buck in this economy.
sdo72 5y ago
This looks like a PR stunt for the Right to Repair. Google phones are very difficult to fix and they break easily when fixing. Screens and parts easily break when open. I have failed twice with Pixel phones and the cost to replace those are quite expensive. iPhones on the other hand are easier to open and replace parts even though Apple mostly doesn't allow 3rd party parts.
- MerelyMortal 5y ago
  Anyone want to take bets that they push it to next year because of "supply chain issues"?
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
> Google already provides the software required to calibrate new fingerprint sensors upon installation to the public for free. Neat. Can I buy every part needed to assemble a phone from scratch yet?
- kube-system 5y ago
  This likely won't ever happen because this would make for an easy and viable way to evade theft protections.
mingus314 5y ago
Another place where shareholders also got involved ... because Right to Repair is obviously a smart thing overall. (source: https://uspirg.org/blogs/blog/usp/examining-google%E2%80%99s-repair-track-record-shareholders-call-change https://uspirg.org/blogs/blog/usp/examining-google%E2%80%99s... )
hda2 5y ago
The pessimist in me is inclined to believe that this is just another empty gesture to ward off the specter of right-to-repair legislation that's looming over tech giants. Louis Rossmann made a grate video about why these programs are almost useless (samsung) to downright harmful (apple). I think the only reason Google and their friends are doing this is to remain in control (how, when, if). They don't want to end up like the car industry. I hope regulators don't fall for this trap.
- brogrammernot 5y ago
  I read it the exact opposite way. Google sees the writing on the wall that this is coming sooner rather than later to the US so with a “bit” more work they can have their common components of the phone be manufactured as OEM parts essentially & provide that direct line to iFixIt. They give great pricing to iFixIt and there you go, the margin they may lose on the phones through this is off-set to an extent via the common parts they’re now supplying. They also know if they don’t provide the parts, which is to say they need to produce the top 5-10 components in a single fashion instead of an assembly line, someone else will so they seem to be getting ahead of the game. They are actually modeling the car industry because folks are insanely specific about wanting OEM parts to the extent you have to specify in many contracts you can use OEM or equal quality 3rd party parts. There are even some warranties (which cost more) that specify they will only use OEM parts so Google probably also sees they can charge a premium for “OEM” similar to the auto industry. (I work in Auto)
- hackernewds 5y ago
  Thought the Louis Rossmann video was too cheesy to grate to be honest
- M4v3R 5y ago
  I watch Louis regularly and this seems different from what Samsung and Apple are doing, in a good way. First of all it seems to include more parts - they’ve mentioned batteries, camera modules, etc. Second - they provide it to a range of devices, starting with Pixel 2 so that’s great. And third - they are also providing software for calibrating the fingerprint reader after replacing it. Seems like a pretty good start to me. Of course we need to be skeptical of programs that are just designed to look like they promote repair while being useless. But we also should give credit where credits is due.

rasz 5y ago

>Starting later this year So not launching anything after all. This, Samsung announcement (overpriced half a clamshell with integrated LCD for only two flagship models, no batteries at all) and Apple pathetic IRP (cant buy anything, only parts exchange 1:1, spying on your company books for a couple of years etc) is a sign manufacturers already see that Right to Repair legislation is coming no matter how much money they keep throwing at lobbyists, and are desperately trying to limit its scope by claiming they already offer everything advocates want (spare parts) while offering almost nothing (screens only at the price of fully working unit at a second hand market).

cookiengineer 5y ago
The real reason I liked the pinephone so much was not the price tag, but the replacement parts [1]. I didn't go for the librem cause it's an overexpensive bet with no sight of any repair parts. Before that I only bought android phones where I knew that I can find either scrapped parts or replacement parts on ebay. [1] https://pine64.com/product-category/smartphone-spare-parts/ https://pine64.com/product-category/smartphone-spare-parts/
onion2k 5y ago
So not launching anything after all. If I say "I am having a 50th birthday party" that means I'm talking about an event that's happening in the future. It doesn't mean I'm having it immediately. It's a statement that's in the "future perfect" tense. Besides, people would be very confused. I'm 45. If Google say they are launching something, the same thing applies. It means they're launching it at some point. That doesn't have to be right now. They're using the future perfect tense.
- meragrin_ 5y ago
  Everything I'm seeing regarding future perfect tense seems to indicate both 'will' and 'have' are required. Saying "I am having a 50th birthday party" is not talking about an event that's happening in the future. You can say that and be referring to a party which is presently happening.
  - wcfields 5y ago
    The word "Starting" is the real lawyer'd up word there. Starting has so many meanings. In my work life I've started hundreds of projects, and a few actually make it beyond a line in a planning document!
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
kwiens 5y ago
I promise, this is real—I've got parts in the bulding—and it's going to launch soon.
- rjmunro 5y ago
  Why not hold off the announcement until actual launch day? Big bang, lots of publicity, lots of sales. I've got a Pixel 3a XL with a cracked screen. I'm coping with it cracked, but if I'd seen this announcement and was able to order, I probably would have ordered right now. As it is I just see "coming soon", and will probably forget about it by the time it's actually live.
  - CivBase 5y ago
    What you say makes perfect sense from an engineering perspective. From a marketing and legal perspective, this is a feature to advertise for perspective buyers and ammunition for their anti-R2R lobbying so best to announce it as soon as possible.

galoisscobi 5y ago

Kudos to Google for doing this but this could be even more effective if Google committed to say, 15 years of security updates or something along those lines.

runnerup 5y ago
A bit extreme but I empathize your position. I’m okay with the PalmOS phones from 2005 not working anymore. Their 2G/EDGE data doesn’t work and the Wi-Fi standard they used aren’t compatible with anything anymore either. Not to mention they were incredibly slow and unwieldy even when they were new.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
  On the other hand, my desktop is from 2011 and it works fine and Linux happily supports it; 15 years isn't that impractical any more. As time goes on, the pace of change slows and longer life is reasonable; early Android devices may well have been genuinely obsolete inside a year, but current devices aren't even that slow after 4-5 years.
  - kllrnohj 5y ago
    For current phones I think 5 years is a good support window, the batteries don't last much longer than that. But if replaceable batteries make a comeback (and I hope they do with the push from the EU), then I definitely agree that more like 10 years should be demanded as reasonable. Especially for something like Android where if you compare a flagship from 5-7 years ago with a brand new Android Go phone the level of performance & feature set is not really that different. So it's not like the OS gets to actually start expecting things like a high end Vulkan capable GPU & neural net accelerators or anything. It still has to work with what is essentially old hardware anyway just in a brand new body.
    - saidinesh5 5y ago
      Batteries and flash storage too wears off on modern day phones imo. So anything beyond 5 years is asking for a lot on a typical smartphone where people share lots of memes and videos everyday.

mikece 5y ago

Don't mistake this as a sign of altruism by Google: they can see that the Right To Repair movement is getting stronger, more organized, more funded, and is hiring legislative consultants to draft, submit, and pass legislation. While the main thrust for now is the right to repair agricultural tractors and cars, as this gains momentum it will eventually apply to iPhones and MacBook Pros as well. Google is just getting ahead of what is coming -- and trying to flex for PR points as well, because why not?

runnerup 5y ago
It also adds energy to push the right to repair movement forward. It may not be altruistic but it’s not just riding coattails either.
metacritic12 5y ago
Definitely not altruistic. The Pixel phone was always a defensive position, not Google's profit center. From the position of Apple, the Google Pixel was always a poison in the profit pool so that the monopoly would be held in a different part of the value chain (the Search versus the Hardware). In this regard, Apple's loss is the consumers' gain. By making the Pixel really repairable and parts exchangeable, the Pixel can be shown as a shining beacon of right-to-repair. Techies will applaud how great it is, and have an object to contrast the iPhone with. However, if the iPhone is forced to go the same path via right-to-repair laws (or due to consumer sentiment), their profits will be a lot lower. People won't need to replace iPhones as much. They couldn't price discriminate using different size SSD drives as much, etc. And that's the whole game to Google -- again to reduce the hardware part of the profit chain, and to increase the search part of the profit chain. It's basic MBA stuff / Michael Porter's 5 Forces.
- londons_explore 5y ago
  > , not Google's profit center. Google of 2022 is run by more MBA's than ever... Everything is now a profit center. They don't do anything big 'just because it's cool/useful/good for society'.

scohesc 5y ago

This is simply silicon valley companies trying to get a foothold in the "right to repair" market - they want to dominate and control what is good intentions by society to extend the lives of older devices. Of course Google wants to get their grubby hands in the pie by getting these systems/programs in place so they can tell legislators "See, you don't need to have that pesky right to repair stuff, we supply the parts for the users!" - while completely ignoring the actual reasons and benefits of RtR. I hope we don't see Google pulling an Apple and using the US government as an enforcement arm to make sure "bootleg" screens don't make it into the hands of people trying to save a buck in this economy.

sdo72 5y ago

This looks like a PR stunt for the Right to Repair. Google phones are very difficult to fix and they break easily when fixing. Screens and parts easily break when open. I have failed twice with Pixel phones and the cost to replace those are quite expensive. iPhones on the other hand are easier to open and replace parts even though Apple mostly doesn't allow 3rd party parts.

MerelyMortal 5y ago
Anyone want to take bets that they push it to next year because of "supply chain issues"?

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

> Google already provides the software required to calibrate new fingerprint sensors upon installation to the public for free. Neat. Can I buy every part needed to assemble a phone from scratch yet?

kube-system 5y ago
This likely won't ever happen because this would make for an easy and viable way to evade theft protections.

mingus314 5y ago

Another place where shareholders also got involved ... because Right to Repair is obviously a smart thing overall. (source: https://uspirg.org/blogs/blog/usp/examining-google%E2%80%99s-repair-track-record-shareholders-call-change https://uspirg.org/blogs/blog/usp/examining-google%E2%80%99s... )

hda2 5y ago

The pessimist in me is inclined to believe that this is just another empty gesture to ward off the specter of right-to-repair legislation that's looming over tech giants. Louis Rossmann made a grate video about why these programs are almost useless (samsung) to downright harmful (apple). I think the only reason Google and their friends are doing this is to remain in control (how, when, if). They don't want to end up like the car industry. I hope regulators don't fall for this trap.

brogrammernot 5y ago
I read it the exact opposite way. Google sees the writing on the wall that this is coming sooner rather than later to the US so with a “bit” more work they can have their common components of the phone be manufactured as OEM parts essentially & provide that direct line to iFixIt. They give great pricing to iFixIt and there you go, the margin they may lose on the phones through this is off-set to an extent via the common parts they’re now supplying. They also know if they don’t provide the parts, which is to say they need to produce the top 5-10 components in a single fashion instead of an assembly line, someone else will so they seem to be getting ahead of the game. They are actually modeling the car industry because folks are insanely specific about wanting OEM parts to the extent you have to specify in many contracts you can use OEM or equal quality 3rd party parts. There are even some warranties (which cost more) that specify they will only use OEM parts so Google probably also sees they can charge a premium for “OEM” similar to the auto industry. (I work in Auto)
hackernewds 5y ago
Thought the Louis Rossmann video was too cheesy to grate to be honest
M4v3R 5y ago
I watch Louis regularly and this seems different from what Samsung and Apple are doing, in a good way. First of all it seems to include more parts - they’ve mentioned batteries, camera modules, etc. Second - they provide it to a range of devices, starting with Pixel 2 so that’s great. And third - they are also providing software for calibrating the fingerprint reader after replacing it. Seems like a pretty good start to me. Of course we need to be skeptical of programs that are just designed to look like they promote repair while being useless. But we also should give credit where credits is due.