7 ms·

There are several way different groups are viewing right to repair Consumer: right to repair means fixing my broken display will be a DIY job for $50? Sweet!

There are several way different groups are viewing right to repair Consumer: right to repair means fixing my broken display will be a DIY job for $50? Sweet! Repair shop: right to repair means I can source a display from lowest bidder, charge $150 for broken screen, and make $120 in profit? Let’s go! Apple: right to repair means you must buy $275 display module to fix a broken display. So we can keep some nice nice profit. Samsung seems to be there with Apple. Looking at the price of display module I am worried iFixit is also there with Apple. And iFixit and Samsung couldn’t find a good split on who gets to keep the profits. It is crazy that an iPhone display module from iFixit appears to cost more than Apple 1st party repair.

kevingadd 2y ago
Based on the post, the high price of parts from iFixit was Samsung's fault.
- Iulioh 2y ago
  And to be fair high end samsung phones have the best display in the market, period. I would really dubt thwt they sell the best stuff to Apple (possible but...)
  - throwaway48476 2y ago
    Apple only uses old cheap technology. They resisted putting OLEDs in the iPhone for many years.
- epakai 2y ago
  The high price is probably just reality. Samsung's display assemblies have always been expensive. I've seen the real inventory values back in the Note 6 era, and the component cost at repair time. Repair services were probably getting a few dollars from their markup. I'm not even sure the the consumer facing part of their repair operations was profitable. It seemed like most of the focus was on bulk refurbishment where they rebuilt hundreds of $model at once. Building a 500ppi 120Hz AMOLED display with a hole punched in it, and bonded perfectly to fancy glass is just expensive.
  - EasyMark 2y ago
    i think the point is that you start with repairability from the start, otherwise you are just reverse engineering how to take it apart.
    - dialup_sounds 2y ago
      I'm skeptical that you could design a repairability-first phone without introducing more ways for it to break in the first place.
      - MostlyStable 2y ago
        I realize that I'm a non-central example of a phone customer, but I'd be more than willing to give up thinness for more repairability, and I loathe hole punch/cutout screens, so I would actively pay more money to get the simpler rectangular screen, which would presumably come with ease of repair benefits (assuming that were an option. Unfortunately, it appears that almost no one except Sony still makes rectangle displays for phones anymore). It's absoultely true that making a phone more repairable comes with tradeoffs. Thinness being the most obvious one, but It's also likely true that a truly repairable phone would be more expensive. I do not think that performance, reliability, or longevity are necessary tradeoffs though.
      - fransje26 2y ago
        In a moment of reflection, transpose that idea to cars or planes. Commercial aircraft fly for 30 years or more, (with some flying since WW2) because they are repairable, not despite the fact that they are repairable. The case could also be made for consumer white goods. Let's not confuse enshitification with reliability.
        dialup_sounds 2y ago
        Nobody wants a phone with the utilization rate or maintenance cost proportional to a commercial airliner. They do not "fly for 30 years": they fly for a few thousand hours a year at most, amidst hundreds of man-hours of maintenance. A high level of repairability is a requirement for them to even operate for their intended purpose. Phones are not aircraft. (Or cars, etc.)
newaccount74 2y ago
iFixit parts are expensive because they offer top notch service and quality control, at least in my experience. I bought a couple of parts from them, and was always very happy. The fix kits are fantastic. Once a package was lost, they just sent it again (i ended up receiving it twice). I've bought parts from other websites, and while they were cheaper, they were not always good quality. A battery seemed to have way less capacity than the oem part, screwdriver bits were so soft they broke on first use, etc. It sucks that spare parts are so expensive. All those supply chain optimisations don't work if you need to keep parts stocked all over the world....
- nebula8804 2y ago
  This is obviously anecdotal: I keep wanting to support iFixit and I still come back to them despite their increased cost + shipping compared to Amazon because I believe in good QC from a reputable company and I believe in their mission. Unfortunately I have been burned twice. First iPod batteries: They seems like they are sitting around forever and are of the same quality as what you'd find on Amazon (they look the same as well). Secondly I was super excited for their magnetic mat with marker. All the youtubers were promoting it and I snatched it up despite it seeming quite pricy for what you get. The marker failed after 1-2 uses. In both the iPod battery + marker case, they were willing to ship replacements but it takes time and is a hassle and by then the enthusiasm is gone. I walked away thinking what did I pay extra for? Also after using their toolkits for a while, I don't consider their tools top tier quality anymore, just middle of the road and does not seem worth the price (maybe during their black friday deals it is more palatable).
  - the_biot 2y ago
    I've had the same impression, unfortunately. You have to like them because of their dedication to the mission, and they've achieved a lot. But I bought a laptop battery from them that didn't last long at all, and (at least at first) their bit sets stripped themselves on first use, and the spudgers might as well have been made out of butter.
    - 2y ago
xnyan 2y ago
> Looking at the price of display module I am worried iFixit is also there with Apple They mentioned in the article that one of the reasons they ended the partnership with Samsung was over the high cost of repair parts.
follower 2y ago
On the subject of replacement parts cost vs total Apple 1st party repair cost, a recent video I watched by UK YouTuber "Mrwhosetheboss" did a comparison of cost, turnaround time and other aspects between three different iPhone repair options and highlighted some of the dynamics at play: * "Phone repairs are getting ridiculous - Here's why.": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oreZytDYoEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oreZytDYoEU From my admittedly biased outside perspective, the repair process he experienced (and previous coverage by multiple other outlets about "DIY repair with official Apple tools") certainly strongly suggests that Apple is trying to do as little as possible in terms of pricing & availability to support 3rd party or DIY repairs to meet their legal/PR obligations. So, if official 1st party parts pricing isn't competitive with total 1st party repair cost I'm going to assume it's intentionally obstinate behaviour and that the blame lies wholly at Apple's feet.
fransje26 2y ago
> It is crazy that an iPhone display module from iFixit appears to cost more than Apple 1st party repair. Probably because Apple is selling it to them with a sizeable markup?
CivBase 2y ago
> Repair shop: right to repair means I can source a display from lowest bidder, charge $150 for broken screen, and make $120 in profit? Let’s go! This is a pretty hostile take. A more generous take would be that repair shops can consistently source quality parts without skirting the law, allowing them to compete with manufacturers on service, turnaround time, and possibly even price.

kevingadd 2y ago

Based on the post, the high price of parts from iFixit was Samsung's fault.

Iulioh 2y ago
And to be fair high end samsung phones have the best display in the market, period. I would really dubt thwt they sell the best stuff to Apple (possible but...)
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  Apple only uses old cheap technology. They resisted putting OLEDs in the iPhone for many years.
epakai 2y ago
The high price is probably just reality. Samsung's display assemblies have always been expensive. I've seen the real inventory values back in the Note 6 era, and the component cost at repair time. Repair services were probably getting a few dollars from their markup. I'm not even sure the the consumer facing part of their repair operations was profitable. It seemed like most of the focus was on bulk refurbishment where they rebuilt hundreds of $model at once. Building a 500ppi 120Hz AMOLED display with a hole punched in it, and bonded perfectly to fancy glass is just expensive.
- EasyMark 2y ago
  i think the point is that you start with repairability from the start, otherwise you are just reverse engineering how to take it apart.
  - dialup_sounds 2y ago
    I'm skeptical that you could design a repairability-first phone without introducing more ways for it to break in the first place.
    - MostlyStable 2y ago
      I realize that I'm a non-central example of a phone customer, but I'd be more than willing to give up thinness for more repairability, and I loathe hole punch/cutout screens, so I would actively pay more money to get the simpler rectangular screen, which would presumably come with ease of repair benefits (assuming that were an option. Unfortunately, it appears that almost no one except Sony still makes rectangle displays for phones anymore). It's absoultely true that making a phone more repairable comes with tradeoffs. Thinness being the most obvious one, but It's also likely true that a truly repairable phone would be more expensive. I do not think that performance, reliability, or longevity are necessary tradeoffs though.
    - fransje26 2y ago
      In a moment of reflection, transpose that idea to cars or planes. Commercial aircraft fly for 30 years or more, (with some flying since WW2) because they are repairable, not despite the fact that they are repairable. The case could also be made for consumer white goods. Let's not confuse enshitification with reliability.
      - dialup_sounds 2y ago
        Nobody wants a phone with the utilization rate or maintenance cost proportional to a commercial airliner. They do not "fly for 30 years": they fly for a few thousand hours a year at most, amidst hundreds of man-hours of maintenance. A high level of repairability is a requirement for them to even operate for their intended purpose. Phones are not aircraft. (Or cars, etc.)

newaccount74 2y ago

iFixit parts are expensive because they offer top notch service and quality control, at least in my experience. I bought a couple of parts from them, and was always very happy. The fix kits are fantastic. Once a package was lost, they just sent it again (i ended up receiving it twice). I've bought parts from other websites, and while they were cheaper, they were not always good quality. A battery seemed to have way less capacity than the oem part, screwdriver bits were so soft they broke on first use, etc. It sucks that spare parts are so expensive. All those supply chain optimisations don't work if you need to keep parts stocked all over the world....

nebula8804 2y ago
This is obviously anecdotal: I keep wanting to support iFixit and I still come back to them despite their increased cost + shipping compared to Amazon because I believe in good QC from a reputable company and I believe in their mission. Unfortunately I have been burned twice. First iPod batteries: They seems like they are sitting around forever and are of the same quality as what you'd find on Amazon (they look the same as well). Secondly I was super excited for their magnetic mat with marker. All the youtubers were promoting it and I snatched it up despite it seeming quite pricy for what you get. The marker failed after 1-2 uses. In both the iPod battery + marker case, they were willing to ship replacements but it takes time and is a hassle and by then the enthusiasm is gone. I walked away thinking what did I pay extra for? Also after using their toolkits for a while, I don't consider their tools top tier quality anymore, just middle of the road and does not seem worth the price (maybe during their black friday deals it is more palatable).
- the_biot 2y ago
  I've had the same impression, unfortunately. You have to like them because of their dedication to the mission, and they've achieved a lot. But I bought a laptop battery from them that didn't last long at all, and (at least at first) their bit sets stripped themselves on first use, and the spudgers might as well have been made out of butter.
  - 2y ago

xnyan 2y ago

> Looking at the price of display module I am worried iFixit is also there with Apple They mentioned in the article that one of the reasons they ended the partnership with Samsung was over the high cost of repair parts.

follower 2y ago

On the subject of replacement parts cost vs total Apple 1st party repair cost, a recent video I watched by UK YouTuber "Mrwhosetheboss" did a comparison of cost, turnaround time and other aspects between three different iPhone repair options and highlighted some of the dynamics at play: * "Phone repairs are getting ridiculous - Here's why.": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oreZytDYoEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oreZytDYoEU From my admittedly biased outside perspective, the repair process he experienced (and previous coverage by multiple other outlets about "DIY repair with official Apple tools") certainly strongly suggests that Apple is trying to do as little as possible in terms of pricing & availability to support 3rd party or DIY repairs to meet their legal/PR obligations. So, if official 1st party parts pricing isn't competitive with total 1st party repair cost I'm going to assume it's intentionally obstinate behaviour and that the blame lies wholly at Apple's feet.

fransje26 2y ago

> It is crazy that an iPhone display module from iFixit appears to cost more than Apple 1st party repair. Probably because Apple is selling it to them with a sizeable markup?

CivBase 2y ago

> Repair shop: right to repair means I can source a display from lowest bidder, charge $150 for broken screen, and make $120 in profit? Let’s go! This is a pretty hostile take. A more generous take would be that repair shops can consistently source quality parts without skirting the law, allowing them to compete with manufacturers on service, turnaround time, and possibly even price.