4 ms·

Although what you say isn’t wrong … Apple really can’t win. Oppose RtR. Gets criticized. Complies with RtR. Also gets criticized. LOL

bogwog 3y ago
That's called skepticism because people (rightly) don't trust Apple. Thats especially true when it comes to this, which is something they've been aggressively fighting against for years.
trashburger 3y ago
"Complies" is an overstatement. The independent repair program they released was so restrictive and missed so many key parts that it felt like intentional sabotage/poisoning of the well. "We helped independent repair shops but they can't even do basic stuff, see?" The self-repair program is a step in the right direction but it's also kind of disingenuous because it provides parts specifically to you, i.e. you can't just have an independent repairman order the parts for you. Which is still unhelpful if you're not adept at hardware repair/soldering.
- tomjakubowski 3y ago
  Can't you bring the parts to a skilled technician and have them do the labor?
simion314 3y ago
>Apple really can’t win. Oppose RtR. Gets criticized. Complies with RtR. Also gets criticized. LOL Wrong, they can just do i - publish schematics for everyone (not only approved partners) - publish diagnostic software for everyone - sell repair tools and spare parts to everyone - allow legit users to use their broken devices parts for spare parts by providing ways for the owner to transfer ownership or renounce ownership claim over the device. - actually offer repair services instead of pretending soem small issue is unfix able and the user should buy a new device sicne repalcing the motherboard costs as much as a new device. - admit immediately where there is an hardware problem not only after they are forced by the justice system (at least we would avoid those annoying HN Apple fanboys that were rudely accusing people with the keyboard problem that they are putting food or drink on those keyboards and claimed Apple super paid engineers would have caught any problem with their SciFi robot hands that they use to test their keyboards, no joke, so many fanboys were defending Apple in that period)
- galangalalgol 3y ago
  One legal thing mobile equipment manufacturers point at to support closed designs, is that the FCC requires that no "simple" software change can make an approved device violate its approved operating parameters. Many wifi and 4g/5g radios could be turned into very general purposes software defined radios if they were completely open about the software. Primarily because they want to be able to comply with standard changes if they occur after the chips are designed, but before the point of peak sales for the chip. Parameterizing things like channel width, and even band limits to some extent are insurance against being left with a lot invested in an unsellable product. We need to remove the threat of that regulatory stick and add another atick threatening them for lack of openness. Then there is the carrot hobbyists will find a use for their chips that creates a secondary market like rtlsdr or rpi back when. Let the FCC go after people actually breaking the law rather than making sure the world is safe from things a few people might use for breaking the law.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > Many wifi and 4g/5g radios could be turned into very general purposes software defined radios if they were completely open about the software. Which is why those things are usually independent subsystems. You can be completely open about everything else and still keep tight control over those things.
  - simion314 3y ago
    Nobody asks Apple to open source the drivers or firmware. I do not think that the "apple approved partners" have access to software that can at the same time diagnose a hardware issue and change the bandwidth or other parameters to illegal values. I remember one other issue , maybe it was fixed, but if you were a partner with Apple and someone had a broken product that needed a new part you had to first send the broken part to Apple and then they would send a replacement , so a customer would have to wait for days. It is a system that encourages the user not to repair and just give more money to Apple.
dotnet00 3y ago
They put themselves in this position, it isn't the first time they've come out in support of right to repair, only to push a maliciously compliant repair program. So everyone's going to be highly skeptical of them until they see the results.
realusername 3y ago
Because until now, they "complied" with right to repair in bad faith by providing an unusable platform which is basically just there for PR purposes & helping them in lawsuits. It makes sense people are skeptical now when they were already fooled once. Personally I'm going to believe it when I see it.
marcosdumay 3y ago
They are not complying. They never came any close to complying. If they started complying all the discussion here would be of confused people trying to make sense of something they never thought Apple could ever do. All they did is some PR pretending to support a law they will clearly refuse to obey. There is no explanation for this except that it's a Machiavellian act.

bogwog 3y ago

That's called skepticism because people (rightly) don't trust Apple. Thats especially true when it comes to this, which is something they've been aggressively fighting against for years.

trashburger 3y ago

"Complies" is an overstatement. The independent repair program they released was so restrictive and missed so many key parts that it felt like intentional sabotage/poisoning of the well. "We helped independent repair shops but they can't even do basic stuff, see?" The self-repair program is a step in the right direction but it's also kind of disingenuous because it provides parts specifically to you, i.e. you can't just have an independent repairman order the parts for you. Which is still unhelpful if you're not adept at hardware repair/soldering.

tomjakubowski 3y ago
Can't you bring the parts to a skilled technician and have them do the labor?

simion314 3y ago

>Apple really can’t win. Oppose RtR. Gets criticized. Complies with RtR. Also gets criticized. LOL Wrong, they can just do i - publish schematics for everyone (not only approved partners) - publish diagnostic software for everyone - sell repair tools and spare parts to everyone - allow legit users to use their broken devices parts for spare parts by providing ways for the owner to transfer ownership or renounce ownership claim over the device. - actually offer repair services instead of pretending soem small issue is unfix able and the user should buy a new device sicne repalcing the motherboard costs as much as a new device. - admit immediately where there is an hardware problem not only after they are forced by the justice system (at least we would avoid those annoying HN Apple fanboys that were rudely accusing people with the keyboard problem that they are putting food or drink on those keyboards and claimed Apple super paid engineers would have caught any problem with their SciFi robot hands that they use to test their keyboards, no joke, so many fanboys were defending Apple in that period)

galangalalgol 3y ago
One legal thing mobile equipment manufacturers point at to support closed designs, is that the FCC requires that no "simple" software change can make an approved device violate its approved operating parameters. Many wifi and 4g/5g radios could be turned into very general purposes software defined radios if they were completely open about the software. Primarily because they want to be able to comply with standard changes if they occur after the chips are designed, but before the point of peak sales for the chip. Parameterizing things like channel width, and even band limits to some extent are insurance against being left with a lot invested in an unsellable product. We need to remove the threat of that regulatory stick and add another atick threatening them for lack of openness. Then there is the carrot hobbyists will find a use for their chips that creates a secondary market like rtlsdr or rpi back when. Let the FCC go after people actually breaking the law rather than making sure the world is safe from things a few people might use for breaking the law.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > Many wifi and 4g/5g radios could be turned into very general purposes software defined radios if they were completely open about the software. Which is why those things are usually independent subsystems. You can be completely open about everything else and still keep tight control over those things.
- simion314 3y ago
  Nobody asks Apple to open source the drivers or firmware. I do not think that the "apple approved partners" have access to software that can at the same time diagnose a hardware issue and change the bandwidth or other parameters to illegal values. I remember one other issue , maybe it was fixed, but if you were a partner with Apple and someone had a broken product that needed a new part you had to first send the broken part to Apple and then they would send a replacement , so a customer would have to wait for days. It is a system that encourages the user not to repair and just give more money to Apple.

dotnet00 3y ago

They put themselves in this position, it isn't the first time they've come out in support of right to repair, only to push a maliciously compliant repair program. So everyone's going to be highly skeptical of them until they see the results.

realusername 3y ago

Because until now, they "complied" with right to repair in bad faith by providing an unusable platform which is basically just there for PR purposes & helping them in lawsuits. It makes sense people are skeptical now when they were already fooled once. Personally I'm going to believe it when I see it.

marcosdumay 3y ago

They are not complying. They never came any close to complying. If they started complying all the discussion here would be of confused people trying to make sense of something they never thought Apple could ever do. All they did is some PR pretending to support a law they will clearly refuse to obey. There is no explanation for this except that it's a Machiavellian act.