3 ms·

Seems much simpler than that to me: iFixit isn’t an advocacy group, they’re in the business of selling parts directly to consumers, and they’re calling out what

Seems much simpler than that to me: iFixit isn’t an advocacy group, they’re in the business of selling parts directly to consumers, and they’re calling out what looks to be an outrageous markup from the sole supplier. Any advocacy they do is in support of their business. They’re a free market solution demanding a freer market.

kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
The sole supplier is using the free market to set its pricing, limit its warehousing overhead, and drive sales of new products. Don't like it, buy something else.
- pixl97 2y ago
  There are multiple options that can be explored at the same time. Sticking with an absolutists idea is far more apt to end in failure. Support right to repair!
- edmundsauto 2y ago
  This results in less repair ability and more waste. It also probably boosts economic activity. Withholding any moral judgement, I do think these current incentives contribute to a direction we don’t want society to go. Feels like we should fix the incentives here to encourage reuse.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- Suppafly 2y ago
  >Don't like it, buy something else. Sure, but you're allowed to not be happy about it and to criticize the supplier.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  It sounds like you're saying "buy something else, and that's all you should do", but loudly discussing these things is part of making "buy something else" have a chance of being effective. Also, I like repairability laws here too even if some people don't.
- cloudsec9 2y ago
  > sole supplier > free market I'm sensing some contradiction in that. Pricing and packaging parts in a way that ensures its cheaper to buy a different phone is the opposite of a free market. Breaking your screen or wearing out your battery shouldn't mean you have to replace both, but it does if you own a Samsung and want genuine Samsung parts. Did this approach get disclosed when consumers bought the phones, or only when something happened?
  - thfuran 2y ago
    >Pricing and packaging parts in a way that ensures its cheaper to buy a different phone is the opposite of a free market Is there some regulation forcing them to act in this manner?

kevin_thibedeau 2y ago

The sole supplier is using the free market to set its pricing, limit its warehousing overhead, and drive sales of new products. Don't like it, buy something else.

pixl97 2y ago
There are multiple options that can be explored at the same time. Sticking with an absolutists idea is far more apt to end in failure. Support right to repair!
edmundsauto 2y ago
This results in less repair ability and more waste. It also probably boosts economic activity. Withholding any moral judgement, I do think these current incentives contribute to a direction we don’t want society to go. Feels like we should fix the incentives here to encourage reuse.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
Suppafly 2y ago
>Don't like it, buy something else. Sure, but you're allowed to not be happy about it and to criticize the supplier.
Dylan16807 2y ago
It sounds like you're saying "buy something else, and that's all you should do", but loudly discussing these things is part of making "buy something else" have a chance of being effective. Also, I like repairability laws here too even if some people don't.
cloudsec9 2y ago
> sole supplier > free market I'm sensing some contradiction in that. Pricing and packaging parts in a way that ensures its cheaper to buy a different phone is the opposite of a free market. Breaking your screen or wearing out your battery shouldn't mean you have to replace both, but it does if you own a Samsung and want genuine Samsung parts. Did this approach get disclosed when consumers bought the phones, or only when something happened?
- thfuran 2y ago
  >Pricing and packaging parts in a way that ensures its cheaper to buy a different phone is the opposite of a free market Is there some regulation forcing them to act in this manner?