Whichever option makes the most people keep their devices for the longest would be preferred, but we simply don't have this data because virtually no manufactur

Whichever option makes the most people keep their devices for the longest would be preferred, but we simply don't have this data because virtually no manufacturer provides parts. If repairs are so expensive that people avoid them, you have failed to help Earth. If repairs are so shitty because the parts are bad, so people end up having to buy more parts or just never repair again, you also failed. Ideal scenario, manufacturers being forced to provide all parts at close to cost plus distribution, the Fairphone way (or better). If non repairable phones are still deemed necessary because repairable ones are too expensive, then we also need a repairability score on all devices like in France. > I would argue that having these devices live for close to 10 years in someone else’s pocket, even if a potential repair was a bit more expensive is more important. I didn't understand the point you were trying to make. Why would my phone go to someone else's pocket?