A very fair and even-handed article that doesn't excuse Apple's recent deceptive trajectory (though I would argue that, given the blatant cluelessness demonstrated daily from the policymakers on these sorts of topics, it's probably a very effective approach) AS WELL AS highlighting the areas where "Right to Repair" -- which actually originated from the farmer/agricultural sector wrt to tractors and similar equipment -- have a valid point that should be embraced.
Hopefully Apple will further pursue the "Apple Genuine Parts and Training" pilot idea, as that sounds like a reasonable middle ground for technology products (other sorts of products may require a different approach).
My iPhone 6 Plus is so far out of warranty that any repairs aren't covered.
The "Warranty" argument sounds like a red herring to me. It really doesn't make sense to me.
Plus, what about the iPhone owners who can't afford costly repairs? Are you going to strap them with a John Deere repair scheme?
Right-to-Repair opens up the choices and options for everyone. Why, after buying a $600-$700 phone, do I have to pay rent to Apple for needed repairs?
Additionally, Apple has something to gain (or keep) by selling repair parts. A replaced iPhone battery is not an Apple part but if the battery fails, who gets the blame -- Apple. Continuing that idea, how many more repair shops will stock Apple parts to use in repairs of iPhones -- a lot more than there are today.
Anecdotal, I know, but the few times I've had devices repaired by Apple they were repaired perfectly and last years!
The few time I've had screens replaced, by third parties, the repairs were noticeably subpar. So bad in fact, that I replaced/recycled the repaired devices within a month or two.
Unfortunately this article overlooks that "right to repair" doesn't really mean right to repair. It means forcing a manufacturer to reduce both the functionality and aesthetics of their product by adding unnecessary compartments, removable batteries, giant screws, etc., all for the sake of the .01% of consumers would even entertain opening up a $1,000 phone at the risk of bricking the entire thing.
Nobody said anything about changing the design or engineering of the devices. Like we said, there needs to be a middle ground.
The problem is defining the middle ground. What if the state of CA decided that Apple would have to protect the enclosure of an iPhone battery, and require iPhones sold and serviced in CA contain a battery with a protective cover that the user could replace?
What do you think Apple would do?
If they did agree to making parts for user repairs, who would protect Apple from counterfeiters who would eventually sell knock offs parts online as actual Apple parts?
the fact that most out of warranty repairs are in line in cost as other repair shops makes the right to repair unnecessary for most people.
This is for iOS devices, Macs are a different story.
Im not happy that memory and storage are SOLDERED to the portables now and the Mac mini. It was not necessary to do that and IMHO they did it just to prevent you from replacing those items.
There are lots of elements to this question. Back before Apple had its own retail stores, Apple Authorized Service Providers used to sell and repair Macs using Apple trained technicians, using genuine Apple parts. While Apple has never been particularly good to those folks, they are now downright nasty, because they would prefer that you bring all Apple products in-house for repair. Profits all go back to Apple and control, something Apple has always cared deeply about, is maintained.
As Apple continues to miniaturize components, it gets harder to work on devices. Even as far back as the G4 cube, and the early iBooks, it was getting to the point that installing an Airport card, RAM, a hard drive, etc. increased the chance of breaking something. Often when separating a case, you could pull a wire out of its socket, or break a plastic clip if you weren't careful or didn't have the right tool. Products have gotten so small that now glue is used in many places where tiny screws used to suffice. This isn't just laziness; it's cheaper, and easier when you need to keep slimming down the product, but the trade-off is ease of repair.
Finally there are some cases where Apple would just prefer to lock you out of the box by adding security screws, glue, heat sensors and other proprietary components that make using off the shelf parts difficult or impossible, even though this is not a design problem because they used to allow it on machines whose form factor has barely changed (iMac, Mac Mini) in a decade. At least to some extent, this is just being done for profit. By preventing you from upgrading your RAM or SSD later, you are forced to pay more up front to Apple, at the expense of great upgrade vendors like OWC.
I think a good general rule should be that if the box is big enough to make it possible, end-users should be able to swap the RAM and SSD at minimum. This is a great place for a distinction between consumer grade and pro grade machines. Make the pro-grade machines bigger, heavier, thicker, but with more expansion options. Make the consumer grade machines cheaper, slimmer, less user serviceable, more disposable. I'd be ok with that.
Unfortunately this article overlooks that "right to repair" doesn't really mean right to repair. It means forcing a manufacturer to reduce both the functionality and aesthetics of their product by adding unnecessary compartments, removable batteries, giant screws, etc.
Are ordinary screws really larger than pentalobe screws? Does the Power Mac look worse than Mac Pro "trash" - a machine so badly designed that Phill Schiller said "the machine's design restricted its (Apple) ability to upgrade it" - for 6 years running! Do new keyboards work better than the old - or are they just badly designed, glued, and require replacing the battery to fix a single key at extra cost to customers and environment? Is the Mac Mini better than Intel NUC "Hades Canyon" where customers can add memory + storage?
It is kind of odd that the country of "rights to" doesn't protect customers. Apple should sell parts to others at fair prices, make upgrades/repairs of easier, and it really is all about design. The classic Jobs quote: "You’ve got to make the back of the fence, that nobody will see, just as good looking as the front of the fence".
I believe one item not in this discussion that makes the John Deere repair argument an apple to orange comparison is one fact. Many people use their iPhones as a hub for everything they do, social life, Finance, communications, and so much more. Many of the comparisons of repairs do not have the same capabilities to impact your life like your iPhone being compromised. I do believe that Apple has indicated that the direction they are leading to with the iPhone is that it will be what identifies you as you. A unique device that handles and identifies you to the digital world. Having a third party that may put something between you and the trusted connections without you knowing through some 3rd party repair job should be a consideration of a risk that I think people are overlooking or minimizing its risk.
Unfortunately this article overlooks that "right to repair" doesn't really mean right to repair. It means forcing a manufacturer to reduce both the functionality and aesthetics of their product by adding unnecessary compartments, removable batteries, giant screws, etc.
Are ordinary screws really larger than pentalobe screws? Does the Power Mac look worse than Mac Pro "trash" - a machine so badly designed that Phill Schiller said "the machine's design restricted its (Apple) ability to upgrade it" - for 6 years running! Do new keyboards work better than the old - or are they just badly designed, glued, and require replacing the battery to fix a single key at extra cost to customers and environment? Is the Mac Mini better than Intel NUC "Hades Canyon" where customers can add memory + storage?
It is kind of odd that the country of "rights to" doesn't protect customers. Apple should sell parts to others at fair prices, make upgrades/repairs of easier, and it really is all about design. The classic Jobs quote: "You’ve got to make the back of the fence, that nobody will see, just as good looking as the front of the fence".
You are missing the point of flydogs post.
When you have the battery glued in that means you don't need to have an assembly to hold in the battery with a back and screws. When the SSD is attached directly to the MLB, you don't need a socket or a mounting point to screws it down. When the memory is attached directly to the MLB, you don't need a socket to slide a SO-DIMM into.
If you add in replaceable components, it requires mounting points. That means you need more space to have those points added. That means you need to change the look/size of the device.
D0gg - it surely will change the design of all products. Just like safety changed the look of cars. Apple will just have to provide better designs and after 18 years with the current design language now might be the time
In 2017 the HDMI port of my 2012 MacBookPro was defect. I brought it to the nearest official Apple repair center (1 hour driving) to get it repaired. They did the job as it should. 6 weeks later, when I submitted the tax declaration of my company, I discovered that the repair center made an administrative error on the invoice and so I called repair center. They acknowledged they made a mistake but they refused to correct it because it was "too late". This refusal costed me 90 Euro. I don't have to tell you that I was not pleased.
In December 2018 an SSD failed on one of my macs and I brought it to a repair center in my neighborhood (but not an Apple certified one) . They were very friendly and professional, they fixed it in 20 minutes and they made no administrative error. And I did not have to experience the arrogant "Who do you think you are that you dare to complain about our service" attitude of the official repair center
This is what right to repair is about. Giving the end customer a choice. Although I graduated as a electronics engineer, I am not intending to repair hardware myself, I leave it to professionals. Choice is a fundamental factor in any capitalistic system
Okay, I’ll accept the concept of being able to order parts from Apple much like walking into a Ford dealer’s parts department and ordering a genuine Ford part. But there should be iron clad protections to prevent Apple from being sued for a repair gone wrong or an injury from such failed repair. And it should be clearly declared that Apple is NOT responsible to provide warranty repairs on a device in which a third party or individual repair was attempted but not successful. If you buy a genuine Apple battery and it blows up on your face as you try to wedge it in your self-disassembled device it’s not Apple’s fault unless you can prove the battery was defective to being with. Somehow, though, I think the right-to-repair crowd wants to have its cake and eat it too. I broke my iMac trying to take it apart, now fix it Apple or else.
Not that someone wouldn't try, but this would seem to fall under the same reasoning that you can't sue Ford if you have your alternator replaced at Jimbo's Garage and he messes it up. Do you ever hear of car makers getting sued for 3rd party repairs?
Or the complete car's warranty being void if Jimbo messes up the alternator goes bad? Ford: It seems that Jimbo put a bad alternator in your car, and that means that your windshield wiper motor isn't covered under the 10 year 120,000 mile warranty.
Anecdotal, I know, but the few times I've had devices repaired by Apple they were repaired perfectly and last years!
The few time I've had screens replaced, by third parties, the repairs were noticeably subpar. So bad in fact, that I replaced/recycled the repaired devices within a month or two.
Just say'n. I'm with Apple on this.
I just had a bad experience with Apple. It seems that the iPhone X isn't waterproof as alleged in their advertisements, and when the FaceID camera stopped working, the repair would be $600 for essentially a whole (repair returned) new iPhone X. The FaceID camera is probably about a $20 part (I'm stretching it here... it's probably cheaper), and another $80 for labor.
If I could have the $20 part, I'd just do it myself, after buying $40 toolkit for taking apart the iPhone.
In the end I think a middle ground is for the best of all, allowing those who want the option to fix the phone themselves and other who don't want to or can't is obviously for the best. However in a business standpoint I don't see apple changing this without being forced to since that some money they will no longer see. In the end they are a business.
Unfortunately this article overlooks that "right to repair" doesn't really mean right to repair. It means forcing a manufacturer to reduce both the functionality and aesthetics of their product by adding unnecessary compartments, removable batteries, giant screws, etc., all for the sake of the .01% of consumers would even entertain opening up a $1,000 phone at the risk of bricking the entire thing.
Nobody said anything about changing the design or engineering of the devices. Like we said, there needs to be a middle ground.
There is no middle ground. If you have regulators deciding what “repairable” means then there WILL be design restrictions imposed. Regulators could indeed mandate removable batteries, disallow any security screws preventing disassembly, disallow glued assemblies and the like.
I had a microwave oven that had security screws to prevent do-it-yourselfers from getting to the magnetron tube, a really dangerous thing to do. Of course I drilled out the security screws so I could get to the magnetron tube.
Unfortunately this article overlooks that "right to repair" doesn't really mean right to repair. It means forcing a manufacturer to reduce both the functionality and aesthetics of their product by adding unnecessary compartments, removable batteries, giant screws, etc., all for the sake of the .01% of consumers would even entertain opening up a $1,000 phone at the risk of bricking the entire thing.
Nobody said anything about changing the design or engineering of the devices. Like we said, there needs to be a middle ground.
There is no middle ground. If you have regulators deciding what “repairable” means then there WILL be design restrictions imposed. Regulators could indeed mandate removable batteries, disallow any security screws preventing disassembly, disallow glued assemblies and the like.
I had a microwave oven that had security screws to prevent do-it-yourselfers from getting to the magnetron tube, a really dangerous thing to do. Of course I drilled out the security screws so I could get to the magnetron tube.
Right. That's why Apple and RTR proponents should work it out, instead of unilateral legislation.
Anecdotal, I know, but the few times I've had devices repaired by Apple they were repaired perfectly and last years!
The few time I've had screens replaced, by third parties, the repairs were noticeably subpar. So bad in fact, that I replaced/recycled the repaired devices within a month or two.
Just say'n. I'm with Apple on this.
I just had a bad experience with Apple. It seems that the iPhone X isn't waterproof as alleged in their advertisements, and when the FaceID camera stopped working, the repair would be $600 for essentially a whole (repair returned) new iPhone X. The FaceID camera is probably about a $20 part (I'm stretching it here... it's probably cheaper), and another $80 for labor.
If I could have the $20 part, I'd just do it myself, after buying $40 toolkit for taking apart the iPhone.
Unfortunately this article overlooks that "right to repair" doesn't really mean right to repair. It means forcing a manufacturer to reduce both the functionality and aesthetics of their product by adding unnecessary compartments, removable batteries, giant screws, etc., all for the sake of the .01% of consumers would even entertain opening up a $1,000 phone at the risk of bricking the entire thing.
Nobody said anything about changing the design or engineering of the devices. Like we said, there needs to be a middle ground.
True, the article does not mention changing the design, but in reality, that is one of the obstacles implied is the increasing complexity of the design that prevents easier repairs.
Ignoring that fact, there is the point that a very very very small percentage of users as he noted that would even ponder trying to work on their own devices. I've replaced items in the 2012 Mac Mini and its not easy to change the HD or memory because of the number of items that need to be disassembled to do that and its of course a much larger device then the extremely small items used to assemble an iPhone. Even then one error, and you can inadvertently break a connector, specially that lame wifi antenna connector.
So I am one that would never ponder trying to work on an iPhone as I do not have a lot of faith in third party repairs yet, specially if my device is still under an Apple Warranty or AppleCare. That said, Apple should probably find ways to authorize places other than its stores for some repairs, like batteries and screens.. component level repairs I think should be avoided because of security and complexity. What is the failure rate of these repairs when those that think they can do them do fail, or those that have done it perhaps successfully on some devices, have bricked others with no real replacement options other than to buy a new one.
Comments
Hopefully Apple will further pursue the "Apple Genuine Parts and Training" pilot idea, as that sounds like a reasonable middle ground for technology products (other sorts of products may require a different approach).
The few time I've had screens replaced, by third parties, the repairs were noticeably subpar. So bad in fact, that I replaced/recycled the repaired devices within a month or two.
Just say'n. I'm with Apple on this.
What do you think Apple would do?
If they did agree to making parts for user repairs, who would protect Apple from counterfeiters who would eventually sell knock offs parts online as actual Apple parts?
the fact that most out of warranty repairs are in line in cost as other repair shops makes the right to repair unnecessary for most people.
This is for iOS devices, Macs are a different story.
Im not happy that memory and storage are SOLDERED to the portables now and the Mac mini. It was not necessary to do that and IMHO they did it just to prevent you from replacing those items.
As Apple continues to miniaturize components, it gets harder to work on devices. Even as far back as the G4 cube, and the early iBooks, it was getting to the point that installing an Airport card, RAM, a hard drive, etc. increased the chance of breaking something. Often when separating a case, you could pull a wire out of its socket, or break a plastic clip if you weren't careful or didn't have the right tool. Products have gotten so small that now glue is used in many places where tiny screws used to suffice. This isn't just laziness; it's cheaper, and easier when you need to keep slimming down the product, but the trade-off is ease of repair.
Finally there are some cases where Apple would just prefer to lock you out of the box by adding security screws, glue, heat sensors and other proprietary components that make using off the shelf parts difficult or impossible, even though this is not a design problem because they used to allow it on machines whose form factor has barely changed (iMac, Mac Mini) in a decade. At least to some extent, this is just being done for profit. By preventing you from upgrading your RAM or SSD later, you are forced to pay more up front to Apple, at the expense of great upgrade vendors like OWC.
I think a good general rule should be that if the box is big enough to make it possible, end-users should be able to swap the RAM and SSD at minimum. This is a great place for a distinction between consumer grade and pro grade machines. Make the pro-grade machines bigger, heavier, thicker, but with more expansion options. Make the consumer grade machines cheaper, slimmer, less user serviceable, more disposable. I'd be ok with that.
It is kind of odd that the country of "rights to" doesn't protect customers. Apple should sell parts to others at fair prices, make upgrades/repairs of easier, and it really is all about design. The classic Jobs quote: "You’ve got to make the back of the fence, that nobody will see, just as good looking as the front of the fence".
When you have the battery glued in that means you don't need to have an assembly to hold in the battery with a back and screws.
When the SSD is attached directly to the MLB, you don't need a socket or a mounting point to screws it down.
When the memory is attached directly to the MLB, you don't need a socket to slide a SO-DIMM into.
If you add in replaceable components, it requires mounting points. That means you need more space to have those points added. That means you need to change the look/size of the device.
Or the complete car's warranty being void if Jimbo messes up the alternator goes bad?
Ford: It seems that Jimbo put a bad alternator in your car, and that means that your windshield wiper motor isn't covered under the 10 year 120,000 mile warranty.
I just had a bad experience with Apple. It seems that the iPhone X isn't waterproof as alleged in their advertisements, and when the FaceID camera stopped working, the repair would be $600 for essentially a whole (repair returned) new iPhone X. The FaceID camera is probably about a $20 part (I'm stretching it here... it's probably cheaper), and another $80 for labor.
If I could have the $20 part, I'd just do it myself, after buying $40 toolkit for taking apart the iPhone.
I had a microwave oven that had security screws to prevent do-it-yourselfers from getting to the magnetron tube, a really dangerous thing to do. Of course I drilled out the security screws so I could get to the magnetron tube.
Ignoring that fact, there is the point that a very very very small percentage of users as he noted that would even ponder trying to work on their own devices. I've replaced items in the 2012 Mac Mini and its not easy to change the HD or memory because of the number of items that need to be disassembled to do that and its of course a much larger device then the extremely small items used to assemble an iPhone. Even then one error, and you can inadvertently break a connector, specially that lame wifi antenna connector.
So I am one that would never ponder trying to work on an iPhone as I do not have a lot of faith in third party repairs yet, specially if my device is still under an Apple Warranty or AppleCare. That said, Apple should probably find ways to authorize places other than its stores for some repairs, like batteries and screens.. component level repairs I think should be avoided because of security and complexity. What is the failure rate of these repairs when those that think they can do them do fail, or those that have done it perhaps successfully on some devices, have bricked others with no real replacement options other than to buy a new one.