spacerays

About

Username
spacerays
Joined
Visits
20
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
4
Badges
0
Posts
116

Reactions

5Like0Informative

  • Android Xiaomi Mi 8 shamelessly copies iPhone X

    spaceraysspacerays
    Apple had sued Samsung and now Samsung is the one company which is not ripping off the notch and other elements of iPhone X design.

    Conclusion? Time for Apple to sue the hell out of Xiaomi. Not sure if it is even worth suing them in China, but sue them wherever possible.

    This is not about being pro-Apple, but about being anti-ripping off. These shameless rippers dont even have the decency to atleast not mock the very company they are ripping off. What a depraved culture these companies have. It would be wrong not to sue them.
    radarthekat

  • Apple lobbies against 'right to repair' proposal in Nebraska

    spaceraysspacerays
    macplusplus said:
    elijahg said:
    macplusplus said:
    dysamoria said:
    Fake parts from China. Fake logic boards, fake circuits with espionage backdoors, giant botnets built with home-repaired phones and computers...
    What you're describing is a RESULT of companies blockading the business of legit repair companies. There used to be tons of repair businesses decades ago.
    Apple does not blockade the business of legit repair companies. They have Authorized Service Centers everywhere in the world. The proposed legislation might make service centers mandatory for every city and town but apparently their concern is not repair availability. That could be achieved easily with a mandatory service network.
    Other than by favouring their own repair centres inside Apple Stores, and delaying sending components to second party repair centres. AI has reported that they've been reducing service (and upping prices) at Apple Authorised Resellers too. 

    I think the right to repair legalisation is a good thing. Apple's green credentials for long term use of their products is complete crap, due to the non-repairability but no one (Greenpeace) seems to care about that. Using superglue for batteries for example is completely unnecessary. Glueing iMac screens on just to shave off another 5% thickness is unnecessary. This will force Apple to allow third party repairs, quite possibly leading to a reduction in first and second party repair costs. 
    Right to repair already exists for people. Can anyone prevent you from DIY repairs? No. That proposed legislation strives to kill OEMs' exclusive "right monopoly to repair, using good parts" their own products !..
    Fixed that for you.
    Look, the legislation wants manufacturers to supply spare parts, to USERS too.
    As a user, I know that certain repairs are charged way too much.
    And for NEBRASKA, with its scarcity of Apple or ANY manufacturers' service centers, it does make sense to have this option.
    It is a freaking option. One which will relieve a user of having to discard a product which can actually function longer, with less repair cost.

    Read LB67, please. 

    It is such a waste of time, commenters going mad out of ignorance and incomplete, twisted knowledge.
    elijahg

  • Apple lobbies against 'right to repair' proposal in Nebraska

    spaceraysspacerays
    rogifan_new said:
    To all those complaining...everyone knows what they get when they buy an Apple device. You are not forced to own a Mac or iOS device. If this bothers you so much buy something that is user repairable and upgradeable. 
    Dumb train of thought, frequently being used by apologists?

    This legislation applies to all, repeat ALL manufacturers.

    We are having a discussion regarding the impact regardless of manufacturer. Replace Apple with Samsung or anything, and it makes no difference.

    Get out of Apple mania. Read LB67. Increase reading comprehension.
    elijahg

  • Apple lobbies against 'right to repair' proposal in Nebraska

    spaceraysspacerays
    chasm said:
    You guys who are complaining about Apple being against repairs should try reading *the entire article* next time. QUOTE "Apple told Brasch it would not oppose LB67 if phones were excepted from the legislation."
    And why would Apple be against including phones in the legislation?



    That's why.

    Including iPhones can help them last longer. That will hurt new iPhone sales, some at Apple think.
    Forget solar power, or recyclable bodies. Every phone thats last longer saves a lot more of the environment from the toxins released.
    Not every phone or device is disposed in environmentally friendly ways. Those kind of programs arent present everywhere.

    Apple decision makers of now thus seems comparatively more worried about revenue, than the environment or the customer's savings. 
    It might hurt their billion dollar revenues a bit, but the goodwill generated in the customers, and the positive environment impact is more than worth it.
    elijahg

  • Indian court orders Apple to stop using 'Split View' name in trademark case

    spaceraysspacerays
    This is ridiculous
    jbdragon