3 ms·

I don't understand how Apple starting to do exactly what the "right to repair" people appear to be asking for is in bad faith or in any way trying to prevent it

by bradfa 4y ago

I don't understand how Apple starting to do exactly what the "right to repair" people appear to be asking for is in bad faith or in any way trying to prevent it. Can you clarify? I understood right to repair to be that people want access to parts, tools, and information on how to repair their things. This seems to be the beginning of exactly that. I'm clearly misunderstanding some side of this.

Nextgrid 4y ago
Well my problem is that knowing Apple's (and the tech industry in general) bad faith regarding repair (and any kind of "ownership" users might gain on their devices), I don't think this is a "beginning". I think this is just a PR piece designed to slow down right to repair legislation efforts that will be left to rot as soon as that objective is achieved, or the experience being so terrible that it's unusable to begin with. In fact, in my case it's already unusable - I keep spares for commonly broken parts for my phone (screen, case, battery & all the seals needed to reassemble) so that I can quickly repair it in a couple hours if I break it. This program would make it impossible as I'd need to ship the old parts back which means I can only order them when I actually need to do the repair and then wait for shipping - it turns a "I have a couple hours this evening, let me fix my phone so it doesn't look like shit" into a thing I have to explicitly schedule. As of now not only is the selection of parts laughable (where can I buy a genuine new housing or mainboard, or proprietary mainboard components that Apple explicitly prohibits their vendors from selling to the public?) but there's extra BS such as the "system configuration" which has to be done via Apple Support instead of releasing the software or the protocol (so open-source tools can be built) in the open or even making devices be able to perform the configuration directly (new part detected -> a new option appears in Settings to do the initial config).
jjoonathan 4y ago
There is a little dance that Apple has done a dozen times. It starts with "Apple supports independent repair*!" and ends with terms of the asterisk that completely preclude independent repair. Not in a half-assed way, either, but in a carefully crafted airtight trap. Grandparent post might be jumping the gun, but Apple has shot this gun so many times and hit the RtR crowd so many times that I have a very hard time blaming them for jumping. It may turn out that this program is good, in which case the correct path forward is to codify it into law. Apple should have a seat at the table when deciding terms. However, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should they be allowed to dictate terms, because they have abused that privilege time and time again. Otherwise, the moment the press looks away, they'll bring back the killer asterisks. They've done it before and they'll do it again if we let them.
CogitoCogito 4y ago
If Apple sells any parts for any phone for any reason without unjustifiable markups to anyone without requiring registration of phone serial number (mentioned here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31180032 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31180032 ) or any other random unnecessary requirements whose only purpose is to get in the way of there being a market for parts, well then and only then will I believe that Apple actually is trying to support right to repair. If they're not doing that, then I'm only lead to believe that they are putting this up to deflect criticism and continue their hold on the parts market.
- s17n 4y ago
  Apple takes a >50% margin on everything else they sell, why should parts be any different?
  - Nextgrid 4y ago
    I understand a large margin on the device itself because that includes various software licenses and IP. Auxiliary parts that can't be used to rebuild a full device (as the mainboard is missing) shouldn't carry that markup as you've already paid for those licenses when you originally bought the device.
    - colejohnson66 4y ago
      Yes, but that depends on if the licensing fees are per board or per device. And even if your contract says “per device”, you could still be taken to court by the IP owner.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    Not being different, as in the spare parts having the same margin as the full device, is good enough. In the past they've had some very big and unreasonable markups on replacement parts.
  - CogitoCogito 4y ago
    You seem to be putting words in my mouth. Maybe you think I said that a 50% margin is unjustifiable? Well I'm not sure what to say other than please read my post again and note that I did not.
baisq 4y ago
Because many people who say they support the right to repair just hate big corporations and want to see them forced to do things that hurt them.
kxrm 4y ago
I used to live in a major Texas city that refused to implement a bus service. After several years of criticism, they decided to finally trial a bus service. They setup bus stops around the city to gather data and determine if this would be a service residents would use. Several bus stop started to appear about 2 miles from my home basically on a main parkway next to an open field. There were no bus stops next to the largest shopping mall in the community, nor in or around any of the growing suburbs that were forming during this time. Of course their trial failed because of lack of demand. They used this lack of demand to justify shutting down the service within a year of starting it. This is what Apple is doing. Setting a bus stop up next to an open field which will inevitably create data proving their narrative. A genuine attempt would certainly utilize their own branding. Creating a clear intent to bridge the trust their customers have gained for their brand to this service. Additionally, they would at least attempt to sell parts a lower cost since their own repair service is just a few dollars more. I think it is fairly clear what their intentions are with this service based on how they are incentivizing it's use.

by bradfa 4y ago

Nextgrid 4y ago

Well my problem is that knowing Apple's (and the tech industry in general) bad faith regarding repair (and any kind of "ownership" users might gain on their devices), I don't think this is a "beginning". I think this is just a PR piece designed to slow down right to repair legislation efforts that will be left to rot as soon as that objective is achieved, or the experience being so terrible that it's unusable to begin with. In fact, in my case it's already unusable - I keep spares for commonly broken parts for my phone (screen, case, battery & all the seals needed to reassemble) so that I can quickly repair it in a couple hours if I break it. This program would make it impossible as I'd need to ship the old parts back which means I can only order them when I actually need to do the repair and then wait for shipping - it turns a "I have a couple hours this evening, let me fix my phone so it doesn't look like shit" into a thing I have to explicitly schedule. As of now not only is the selection of parts laughable (where can I buy a genuine new housing or mainboard, or proprietary mainboard components that Apple explicitly prohibits their vendors from selling to the public?) but there's extra BS such as the "system configuration" which has to be done via Apple Support instead of releasing the software or the protocol (so open-source tools can be built) in the open or even making devices be able to perform the configuration directly (new part detected -> a new option appears in Settings to do the initial config).

jjoonathan 4y ago

There is a little dance that Apple has done a dozen times. It starts with "Apple supports independent repair*!" and ends with terms of the asterisk that completely preclude independent repair. Not in a half-assed way, either, but in a carefully crafted airtight trap. Grandparent post might be jumping the gun, but Apple has shot this gun so many times and hit the RtR crowd so many times that I have a very hard time blaming them for jumping. It may turn out that this program is good, in which case the correct path forward is to codify it into law. Apple should have a seat at the table when deciding terms. However, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should they be allowed to dictate terms, because they have abused that privilege time and time again. Otherwise, the moment the press looks away, they'll bring back the killer asterisks. They've done it before and they'll do it again if we let them.

CogitoCogito 4y ago

If Apple sells any parts for any phone for any reason without unjustifiable markups to anyone without requiring registration of phone serial number (mentioned here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31180032 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31180032 ) or any other random unnecessary requirements whose only purpose is to get in the way of there being a market for parts, well then and only then will I believe that Apple actually is trying to support right to repair. If they're not doing that, then I'm only lead to believe that they are putting this up to deflect criticism and continue their hold on the parts market.

s17n 4y ago
Apple takes a >50% margin on everything else they sell, why should parts be any different?
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  I understand a large margin on the device itself because that includes various software licenses and IP. Auxiliary parts that can't be used to rebuild a full device (as the mainboard is missing) shouldn't carry that markup as you've already paid for those licenses when you originally bought the device.
  - colejohnson66 4y ago
    Yes, but that depends on if the licensing fees are per board or per device. And even if your contract says “per device”, you could still be taken to court by the IP owner.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  Not being different, as in the spare parts having the same margin as the full device, is good enough. In the past they've had some very big and unreasonable markups on replacement parts.
- CogitoCogito 4y ago
  You seem to be putting words in my mouth. Maybe you think I said that a 50% margin is unjustifiable? Well I'm not sure what to say other than please read my post again and note that I did not.

baisq 4y ago

Because many people who say they support the right to repair just hate big corporations and want to see them forced to do things that hurt them.

kxrm 4y ago

I used to live in a major Texas city that refused to implement a bus service. After several years of criticism, they decided to finally trial a bus service. They setup bus stops around the city to gather data and determine if this would be a service residents would use. Several bus stop started to appear about 2 miles from my home basically on a main parkway next to an open field. There were no bus stops next to the largest shopping mall in the community, nor in or around any of the growing suburbs that were forming during this time. Of course their trial failed because of lack of demand. They used this lack of demand to justify shutting down the service within a year of starting it. This is what Apple is doing. Setting a bus stop up next to an open field which will inevitably create data proving their narrative. A genuine attempt would certainly utilize their own branding. Creating a clear intent to bridge the trust their customers have gained for their brand to this service. Additionally, they would at least attempt to sell parts a lower cost since their own repair service is just a few dollars more. I think it is fairly clear what their intentions are with this service based on how they are incentivizing it's use.