It is a valid issue. Frankly Apple is late to the game here, companies like Caterpillar, John Deer and others have really pissed off their customer base by trying to force machine repairs at dealers or other authorized methods. Any legislation though has to apply to all businesses, you really can't have a law focused solely on Apple. Frankly it is just another way big business tries to screw over the very customers they are trying to maintain.
This is the kind of thing that looks intelligent, but in fact is utterly moronic. People have no clue how the internals of these things are packed... They want it all, a slab of supercomputer/phone/tv/dvr/pc/camera/etc in 7mm and want to make it easy to fix too!!
These are incompatible goals.
This isn't really the point, sure they are packed tight but at the same time you are dealing with subassemblies that can easily be replaced. That being said people are too focused on iPhone here, these bills target the right to repair for all sorts of things. In the case of Apple this would include laptops and desktop machines. A reasonable question here is why shouldn't you be able to buy a replacement SSD from Apple or an independent vendor. That is an Apple branded part with the same performance specs.
Honestly I don't understand why people defend Apple here. Repairing electronics isn't that difficult, frankly there are many "simple" repairs on cars that are more difficult to accomplish. A timely example here is my Chevy truck which had a relay in the ignition circuit fail late one night. An equivalent of that really is easy to buy and plug in or I can get one from a Chevy dealer. Not really a big deal. If I needed to replace a fan, an SSD, or a power supply on a Mac mini I'm in though shape. With Apple people seem to want to punt and give up on an sort of DIY fix. There really needs to be an explanation.
Look if everyone and there brother start buying cheap replacement parts from China and trying to make repairs themselves I can assure you that their iPhones will stop working very quickly and Apple will end up dealing with that mess. The connections are so small and fragile really only skilled technicians should be repairing iPhones. Laptops aren't so bad to make simple repairs or SSD replacements.
People need to get over this nonsense that the law is all about iPhone. It isn't it is about the right to repair things that we have been commonly doing for years. Even in the case of iPhone you need to understand that much of the assembly is one buy humans, as such a human ought to be able to repair it. As for Apple they have the right to deny warranty claims on all repairs done by third parties.
I'm somewhere in the middle with this.... I own two BMW motorcycles and it just irks the f**k out of me that BMW charges literally thousands of dollars for parts that would cost only a few hundred on a Japanese bike, and - like Apple - one cannot get those parts in the 3rd-party world, and not even from the OEM manufacturer that supplies that part to BMW. They essentially have a lock on parts.
I think it similar with Apple, but with a caveat though... I can easily see people/shops damaging something in the process of saving a few bucks, then turn right around and expect Apple to replace their iPhone. There are just too many people that will take any opportunity to take screw Apple, or better yet post their whine on Twitter - edited for context of course - to make it sound like Apple is the big bad wolf here.
Will be interesting to see this being played out.
Which parts can't you get for your BMW?
I'm generally against Right to Repair acts, but they do kinda make sense for automobiles. Though they're not really needed as there's a very healthy aftermarket parts supply system in place for just about every vehicle out there (save for some exotics or high-end luxury cars).
The reason you can get parts for cars has a lot to do with federal legislation.
So many conservatives popping up on this usually liberal site when this topic comes up. Down with too much government regulation!
Ha ha... I don't see this site's forum posters as majority liberal at all. I see it as being largely populated by libertarians. They're really common among tech people...
I'm somewhere in the middle with this.... I own two BMW motorcycles and it just irks the f**k out of me that BMW charges literally thousands of dollars for parts that would cost only a few hundred on a Japanese bike, and - like Apple - one cannot get those parts in the 3rd-party world, and not even from the OEM manufacturer that supplies that part to BMW. They essentially have a lock on parts.
I think it similar with Apple, but with a caveat though... I can easily see people/shops damaging something in the process of saving a few bucks, then turn right around and expect Apple to replace their iPhone. There are just too many people that will take any opportunity to take screw Apple, or better yet post their whine on Twitter - edited for context of course - to make it sound like Apple is the big bad wolf here.
Will be interesting to see this being played out.
Which parts can't you get for your BMW?
I'm generally against Right to Repair acts, but they do kinda make sense for automobiles. Though they're not really needed as there's a very healthy aftermarket parts supply system in place for just about every vehicle out there (save for some exotics or high-end luxury cars).
ABS module, and fornt/rear shot for the K1200S bike for example.... No OEM, an in the case of the shocks, they are not rebuildable and because the are part of the electronic-assist suspension, BMW charges $3,500 just for the rears shock alone and the company that makes the shock won't sell individually.
Those are just two examples. For some strange reason, BMW appears to not allow 3rd-parties (including the actual manufacturers) to make the replacement pieces.
I'm not referring to automobiles. BMW cars certainly need to have a healthy aftermarket of parts due to the never-ending repairs their cars have to go through.
The iPhones though are different. I grew up fixing motors. I have no problem fixing my motorcycles. iPhones though... I'm a software engineer and even with my skill level at fixing things, even I would hesitate to open up and repair something as complex and intricate as an iPhone.
How many times have we read about iPhones catching fire and the user crying foul on Apple, only to find out it was a 3rd-party cable/charger, or unauthorized repair shop that contributed to it? I can see why Apple doesn't want that kind of exposure.
What does BMW charge for those parts in Germany? Ever thought of either getting someone to get them for you and ship them or taking a holiday in Germany and going home with the parts? I took some parts to the US some years ago for a R100RS. The guy was finding it difficult to get them in the US. I picked the bits up at a dealer on the way to catch my flight. Even with me paying the VAT, they ended up being cheaper than his local dealer was wanting to charge.
BMW repairs and servicing are expensive here as well. I rode BMW's for 20+ years but five years ago, I put up the white flag and went back to Triumph. I ride a 2106 Trophy SE now. Very impressed indeed.
The last 6 years? ... well, let me see .... faulty battery, replacement of a charger and a faulty cable ... they made tons of money with me .... Oh no, wait, Apple actually replaced that for free.
I seriously question that Apple makes a significant amount on repairs. I have a few friends that had virtually every major component in their MBPs replaced for something like $320, including next day shipping.
I need new up and down arrow keys for my Touch Bar Macbook Pro. I can replace them myself. Apple says they'll replace the entire keyboard for ~$500, that's it.
Although I usually side with Apple on their consumer policy stuff, I'm a bit sore on this thing.
I'm calling BS. It's under a year old. Other than something you damage, Apple will repair/replace under the 1 year warranty.
If you're so frustrated with software you're using, causing you to slam those keys, stop using Micro$oft and Scroogle apps. It makes like easier.
It is a valid issue. Frankly Apple is late to the game here, companies like Caterpillar, John Deer and others have really pissed off their customer base by trying to force machine repairs at dealers or other authorized methods. Any legislation though has to apply to all businesses, you really can't have a law focused solely on Apple. Frankly it is just another way big business tries to screw over the very customers they are trying to maintain.
It may be, but we've already beat this horse to death about 50 times now.
"Right to repair" is (as usual with these things) is a misnomer. It's your stuff, go ahead and try to repair it. This bill doesn't cover that at all. It's "force companies to retail parts that they choose not to." If you don't like Apple (or BMW motorcycles) for their repair lock-in, don't buy an iPhone. Problem solved.
And, no libertarians are not "liberals" in the modern American sense--only in the classical (Locke, Jefferson) sense.
It is a valid issue. Frankly Apple is late to the game here, companies like Caterpillar, John Deer and others have really pissed off their customer base by trying to force machine repairs at dealers or other authorized methods. Any legislation though has to apply to all businesses, you really can't have a law focused solely on Apple. Frankly it is just another way big business tries to screw over the very customers they are trying to maintain.
It may be, but we've already beat this horse to death about 50 times now.
Name a topic on this site where that's not the case?
I don't see Apple's goal as trying to squeeze an extra dime from repairs. This seems to fall squarely on user security through a poorly named bill.
If you look how much Apple is charging for extending the RAM in e.g. a Mac Mini, compared to the market prices of well established RAM suppliers like Crucial, you must unbelievable naive to assume that Apple is not charging repairs above the market place. The fact that Apple is against such law just proves that Apples wants to hide these surcharges from the end customer. Such a law can only open your eyes. Even if I knew the prices of the so called low cost repair centers, I would still probably go to an official Apple Repair Center, but at least I am not so naive.
I don't see Apple's goal as trying to squeeze an extra dime from repairs. This seems to fall squarely on user security through a poorly named bill.
If you look how much Apple is charging for extending the RAM in e.g. a Mac Mini, compared to the market prices of well established RAM suppliers like Crucial, you must unbelievable naive to assume that Apple is not charging repairs above the market place. The fact that Apple is against such law just proves that Apples wants to hide these surcharges from the end customer. Such a law can only open your eyes. Even if I knew the prices of the so called low cost repair centers, I would still probably go to an official Apple Repair Center, but at least I am not so naive.
Give me prices. I guess I am naive since I didn't even know Crucial would install RAM in a Mac mini for you. I also thought it being soldered meant it couldn't be done, but that they reduced repairs, not added a way to nickel-and-dime for more repairs.
Ha ha... I don't see this site's forum posters as majority liberal at all. I see it as being largely populated by libertarians.
Well, libertarians are liberals, even if they don’t consider themselves such. Your point stands, though.
Libertarians are the "drunk uncle" at a liberal wedding. Libertarians are the opposite of liberals, libertarians believe in "dog eat dog" and "every man for himself" they also tend to be white and middle aged men.
Libertarians are the "drunk uncle" at a liberal wedding.
I really like that metaphor; just remember that they were invited to the wedding.
Libertarians are the opposite of liberals, libertarians believe in "dog eat dog" and "every man for himself" they also tend to be white and middle aged men.
How does that old libertarian proverb go, again… “Get your fist out of my wallet and into my butt!” It’s far less ‘dog eat dog’ these days and far more ‘live and let live’, which is a core tenet of liberal policy and makes libertarians as degenerate a group as the liberals who steamroll over them. It’s true that simply making something illegal doesn’t stop it from occurring, but keep in mind that not all law enforcement is about addressing injustice. Government is a tool for organizing and structuring society which encompasses more than just the judicial aspect. In this case it works like a subsidy versus a tax. You tax things you want to discourage (or, more often than not, the government just wants a reason to take money from people), and you subsidize things you want more of (or, more often than not, the government is bribed into providing free money for things we don’t need more of, like corn subsidies). Anyway, law enforcement against prostitutes, for example, and those that buy them, discourages the behavior. If you disagree with that, you can at least agree that it discourages people from conducting this business out in the open where decent folks would have to look at it.
Either way, it is a net good to severely punish prostitutes and johns just for the fact that it is unwelcome, indecent behavior in an ideal society. As others have already pointed out, it also gives men a way to obtain sex that is easier than taking the route of becoming a respectable man of good character. It also gives women an easy out for earning an income while wasting any potential they may have otherwise had in terms of motherhood or a career. It also normalizes degenerate behavior, which as an influence should be actively suppressed in society. It’s pretty easy to understand, really. One problem with libertarians is they’re pseudo-ethicists and attempt to justify why we morally ought to want to create better conditions in society. They place unnecessary barriers between themselves and action, intentionally to disable a moral actor from engaging and dispensing with degeneracy and evil.
The fact of the matter is that libertarians can’t admit that their ideology is dying because people are realizing how stupid and ineffectual it is and can’t admit to themselves that it was invented and perpetuated by people who want to live in a world where the only thing that matters is economics, everything is openly owned by private entities, and all of their degeneracy and sociopathic criminality is not only impossible to speak out against without violating their “freedoms” but institutionally encouraged and rewarded. Libertarianism is a desire to cherrypick what works out of traditionalism and classic conservatism while still permitting culture to be as libertine as possible. It is the movement of people who want to fix the world but don’t want to go through the pain of changing themselves. They want to believe that you can solve these problems by shuffling laws around and giving people more freedom than they already have.
Giving people the freedom to destroy themselves and their societies and not enforcing any sort of culture that shames them for doing this is exactly what got us into this mess to begin with, and libertarianism has absolutely no answer to it. It is a failed ideology and it has completely failed to provide any sort of compelling argument for why it should exist and why it is worth perpetuating or propping up. To the libertarian, every man lives in his own little self-contained universe and the things he does mostly only effect himself. It’s hopelessly solipsistic and narcissistic. People don’t live in self-contained microcosms. If I do heroin, I’m not “just” hurting myself. I’m hurting my community. I’m hurting my fellow taxpayers who are paying to subsidize my bad decisions. I’m hurting my nation and my people by not only failing to live up to my true potential but by becoming an active burden that they need to take care of.
Libertarians refuse to see this or pretend that it is not relevant. Their entire ideology is based off of a deeply-rooted blend of “Me-ism” and materialism. That is why it will never work and will always fail whenever attempts are made to implement it. The only reason libertarians are less dangerous than communists is because communists will always start killing people to try and force their ideology to work while libertarians will just collapse inwards and be fiscally ruined and culturally scrubbed by competitors less burdened by a sense of morality and fair play.
Ha ha... I don't see this site's forum posters as majority liberal at all. I see it as being largely populated by libertarians.
Well, libertarians are liberals, even if they don’t consider themselves such. Your point stands, though.
Libertarians are the "drunk uncle" at a liberal wedding. Libertarians are the opposite of liberals, libertarians believe in "dog eat dog" and "every man for himself" they also tend to be white and middle aged men.
Republicans at the wedding are the cranky old people who refer to the wait staff at the reception as "the help."
Comments
This isn't really the point, sure they are packed tight but at the same time you are dealing with subassemblies that can easily be replaced. That being said people are too focused on iPhone here, these bills target the right to repair for all sorts of things. In the case of Apple this would include laptops and desktop machines. A reasonable question here is why shouldn't you be able to buy a replacement SSD from Apple or an independent vendor. That is an Apple branded part with the same performance specs.
Honestly I don't understand why people defend Apple here. Repairing electronics isn't that difficult, frankly there are many "simple" repairs on cars that are more difficult to accomplish. A timely example here is my Chevy truck which had a relay in the ignition circuit fail late one night. An equivalent of that really is easy to buy and plug in or I can get one from a Chevy dealer. Not really a big deal. If I needed to replace a fan, an SSD, or a power supply on a Mac mini I'm in though shape. With Apple people seem to want to punt and give up on an sort of DIY fix. There really needs to be an explanation.
People need to get over this nonsense that the law is all about iPhone. It isn't it is about the right to repair things that we have been commonly doing for years. Even in the case of iPhone you need to understand that much of the assembly is one buy humans, as such a human ought to be able to repair it. As for Apple they have the right to deny warranty claims on all repairs done by third parties.
The reason you can get parts for cars has a lot to do with federal legislation.
I took some parts to the US some years ago for a R100RS. The guy was finding it difficult to get them in the US. I picked the bits up at a dealer on the way to catch my flight. Even with me paying the VAT, they ended up being cheaper than his local dealer was wanting to charge.
BMW repairs and servicing are expensive here as well. I rode BMW's for 20+ years but five years ago, I put up the white flag and went back to Triumph. I ride a 2106 Trophy SE now. Very impressed indeed.
And, no libertarians are not "liberals" in the modern American sense--only in the classical (Locke, Jefferson) sense.
The fact that Apple is against such law just proves that Apples wants to hide these surcharges from the end customer.
Such a law can only open your eyes. Even if I knew the prices of the so called low cost repair centers, I would still probably go to an official Apple Repair Center, but at least I am not so naive.
How does that old libertarian proverb go, again… “Get your fist out of my wallet and into my butt!” It’s far less ‘dog eat dog’ these days and far more ‘live and let live’, which is a core tenet of liberal policy and makes libertarians as degenerate a group as the liberals who steamroll over them. It’s true that simply making something illegal doesn’t stop it from occurring, but keep in mind that not all law enforcement is about addressing injustice. Government is a tool for organizing and structuring society which encompasses more than just the judicial aspect. In this case it works like a subsidy versus a tax. You tax things you want to discourage (or, more often than not, the government just wants a reason to take money from people), and you subsidize things you want more of (or, more often than not, the government is bribed into providing free money for things we don’t need more of, like corn subsidies). Anyway, law enforcement against prostitutes, for example, and those that buy them, discourages the behavior. If you disagree with that, you can at least agree that it discourages people from conducting this business out in the open where decent folks would have to look at it.
Either way, it is a net good to severely punish prostitutes and johns just for the fact that it is unwelcome, indecent behavior in an ideal society. As others have already pointed out, it also gives men a way to obtain sex that is easier than taking the route of becoming a respectable man of good character. It also gives women an easy out for earning an income while wasting any potential they may have otherwise had in terms of motherhood or a career. It also normalizes degenerate behavior, which as an influence should be actively suppressed in society. It’s pretty easy to understand, really. One problem with libertarians is they’re pseudo-ethicists and attempt to justify why we morally ought to want to create better conditions in society. They place unnecessary barriers between themselves and action, intentionally to disable a moral actor from engaging and dispensing with degeneracy and evil.
The fact of the matter is that libertarians can’t admit that their ideology is dying because people are realizing how stupid and ineffectual it is and can’t admit to themselves that it was invented and perpetuated by people who want to live in a world where the only thing that matters is economics, everything is openly owned by private entities, and all of their degeneracy and sociopathic criminality is not only impossible to speak out against without violating their “freedoms” but institutionally encouraged and rewarded. Libertarianism is a desire to cherrypick what works out of traditionalism and classic conservatism while still permitting culture to be as libertine as possible. It is the movement of people who want to fix the world but don’t want to go through the pain of changing themselves. They want to believe that you can solve these problems by shuffling laws around and giving people more freedom than they already have.
Giving people the freedom to destroy themselves and their societies and not enforcing any sort of culture that shames them for doing this is exactly what got us into this mess to begin with, and libertarianism has absolutely no answer to it. It is a failed ideology and it has completely failed to provide any sort of compelling argument for why it should exist and why it is worth perpetuating or propping up. To the libertarian, every man lives in his own little self-contained universe and the things he does mostly only effect himself. It’s hopelessly solipsistic and narcissistic. People don’t live in self-contained microcosms. If I do heroin, I’m not “just” hurting myself. I’m hurting my community. I’m hurting my fellow taxpayers who are paying to subsidize my bad decisions. I’m hurting my nation and my people by not only failing to live up to my true potential but by becoming an active burden that they need to take care of.
Libertarians refuse to see this or pretend that it is not relevant. Their entire ideology is based off of a deeply-rooted blend of “Me-ism” and materialism. That is why it will never work and will always fail whenever attempts are made to implement it. The only reason libertarians are less dangerous than communists is because communists will always start killing people to try and force their ideology to work while libertarians will just collapse inwards and be fiscally ruined and culturally scrubbed by competitors less burdened by a sense of morality and fair play.
...