Internal Apple communications show debate, uncertainty about 'right to repair'
Internal emails provided to the House Judiciary Committee as part of its antitrust probe indicate that there is some debate and uncertainty surrounding Apple's position on the "right to repair."
Credit: Apple
Apple has historically opposed "right to repair" legislation, which would force manufacturers to provide repair manuals and parts to the public, across the globe. The company cites concerns about consumer safety and device security.
As part of its compliance with a U.S. House antitrust investigation, Apple handed over a slew of internal emails and discussions. Although Apple CEO Tim Cook wasn't questioned about repairs, those emails do show some internal division on the subject over in Cupertino.
In March 2019, Apple published two extensive repair manuals for the 21.5-inch iMac 4K and the 27-inch iMac 5K. Repair vendor iFixit writer Whitson Gordon noticed the manuals at the time, and reached out to Apple to clarify if their publication meant anything.
Although Apple didn't respond to Gordon's request for comment, the inquiry apparently sparked a debate within Apple, as noted by internal memos and communications unearthed by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee and spotted by repair site iFixit.
"What's our repair strategy?" reads one Apple PR memo. "Right now, it's pretty clear things are happening in a vacuum and there is not an overall strategy. Plus, with one hand we are making these changes and the other is actively fighting Right to Repair legislation moving in 20 states without real coordination for how updated policies could be used to leverage our position."
Those two repair manuals, were were uncharacteristically in-depth and extensive, were reportedly published so that Apple could earn points on an EPEAT green certification. The company's Environmental Technology team even wanted to release other manuals, including one for the iPhone, down the road.
As of a result of Gordon's inquiry, Apple PR mulled taking those manuals down, internal communications show. One PR spokesperson said "we think it's important to have a decision about what our strategy is and executive against that direction."
That internal right to repair memo concludes by asking a question: "How should our public position on Right to Repair change to take into account the updates we are making - should we connect the dots or try to keep everything separate?"
Other internal discussions were sparked a month after that when The New York Times began investigating Apple's stance on "right to repair."
"The larger issue is that our strategy around all of this is unclear. Right now we're talking out of both sides of our mouth and no one is clear on where we're headed," wrote Apple's vice president of communications.
Apple's VP of marketing, Kaiann Drance, eventually spoke with the Times' Binyamin Appelbaum. Apple PR eventually wrote that Drance "did a great job and emphasized the need for a thoughtful approach to repair policy because of how important it is to balance customer safety with access to more convenient repairs."
The Times eventually published an editorial that concluded that "there ought to be a law" against companies forcing consumers to repair devices only at their own facilities.
Apple's position on the matter may be undecided because of the company's other public stances, including its focus on sustainability. In Apple's latest Environmental Progress Report, for example, the company writes about the importance of repair, reuse and serviceability.
In recent years, the company has taken steps toward making repairs easier to obtain for consumers. In 2019, Apple launched a new repair program for independent shops, and has offered subsidies and other resources for Authorized Service Providers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Credit: Apple
Apple has historically opposed "right to repair" legislation, which would force manufacturers to provide repair manuals and parts to the public, across the globe. The company cites concerns about consumer safety and device security.
As part of its compliance with a U.S. House antitrust investigation, Apple handed over a slew of internal emails and discussions. Although Apple CEO Tim Cook wasn't questioned about repairs, those emails do show some internal division on the subject over in Cupertino.
In March 2019, Apple published two extensive repair manuals for the 21.5-inch iMac 4K and the 27-inch iMac 5K. Repair vendor iFixit writer Whitson Gordon noticed the manuals at the time, and reached out to Apple to clarify if their publication meant anything.
Although Apple didn't respond to Gordon's request for comment, the inquiry apparently sparked a debate within Apple, as noted by internal memos and communications unearthed by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee and spotted by repair site iFixit.
"What's our repair strategy?" reads one Apple PR memo. "Right now, it's pretty clear things are happening in a vacuum and there is not an overall strategy. Plus, with one hand we are making these changes and the other is actively fighting Right to Repair legislation moving in 20 states without real coordination for how updated policies could be used to leverage our position."
Those two repair manuals, were were uncharacteristically in-depth and extensive, were reportedly published so that Apple could earn points on an EPEAT green certification. The company's Environmental Technology team even wanted to release other manuals, including one for the iPhone, down the road.
As of a result of Gordon's inquiry, Apple PR mulled taking those manuals down, internal communications show. One PR spokesperson said "we think it's important to have a decision about what our strategy is and executive against that direction."
That internal right to repair memo concludes by asking a question: "How should our public position on Right to Repair change to take into account the updates we are making - should we connect the dots or try to keep everything separate?"
Other internal discussions were sparked a month after that when The New York Times began investigating Apple's stance on "right to repair."
"The larger issue is that our strategy around all of this is unclear. Right now we're talking out of both sides of our mouth and no one is clear on where we're headed," wrote Apple's vice president of communications.
Apple's VP of marketing, Kaiann Drance, eventually spoke with the Times' Binyamin Appelbaum. Apple PR eventually wrote that Drance "did a great job and emphasized the need for a thoughtful approach to repair policy because of how important it is to balance customer safety with access to more convenient repairs."
The Times eventually published an editorial that concluded that "there ought to be a law" against companies forcing consumers to repair devices only at their own facilities.
Apple's position on the matter may be undecided because of the company's other public stances, including its focus on sustainability. In Apple's latest Environmental Progress Report, for example, the company writes about the importance of repair, reuse and serviceability.
In recent years, the company has taken steps toward making repairs easier to obtain for consumers. In 2019, Apple launched a new repair program for independent shops, and has offered subsidies and other resources for Authorized Service Providers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Comments
Seriously? You want to use Linus as an example? LOL!!!!
Spend some time in a high-volume service bay, and get back to me afterwards. There is no way that you feel the same way afterwards. I've been there, and heard all the lies.
Or my personal favorite: "No, I'm not a smoker, why does that matter" when the interior surfaces are covered in an eighth of an inch of tobacco smoke deposition.
I have a few more. Good ones include "No, that's the RAM that Apple used and I got with the computer" and "Why would you think I tried to repair this myself? Oh, the torn cable or pulled out surface mount? No idea how that happened!"
Soldering stuff down has cut down on repairs needed per capita, by a lot. And, that 10 years encompasses GPU issues, and keyboard problems.
(And this makes even more sense going forward with Apple Silicone chips.)
Under RtR, Apple would be no more liable for the iPhone/iPad/iMac repaired by the independent than Audi would be if I went to Al's Discount Auto repair and got a faulty alternator installed.
This also has an effect on Apple's reputation as well though. If someone buys a used Apple product and it had shitty work done by a non-apple tech, possibly also using non-genuine Apple parts then this shines a bad light toward Apple for that person.
You dented my computer! Pull up surveillance footage and show him where he dropped it on his way out the door…
On the other hand, we had a "It just stopped working, I have no idea why" and she wasn't surprised it was full of milk. Her son was acting very strangely when she came down that morning…
Frankly, I don’t understand why this is even a public issue. If Apple allocated even a fraction of the attention it gives to third party service providers on the (pre sales) supplier side to the product lifecycle to third party service providers on the post sales support side of the lifecycle this issue would be nonexistent. Most widget companies are sadly deficient in their customer support over the total product lifecycle, i.e., cradle to grave, and while Apple is somewhat better they can do much better.
While I agree that the AI user base is more likely to do RAM upgrades, drive replacements and the like, the reality of the situation is that the vast majority of computer users never did this, even in the G4, G5, and original Mac Pro tower heydays.
Balancing repairability and environmental impact is tricky. Apple has chosen what it has in regards to soldered-down components and the like for its own reasons, and as I've discussed above, this has cut way down on failure rates in the last decade. They say that this is more sustainable. Other folks disagree, and both can be right, given their own criteria. This isn't a zero-sum game.
Companies like Rossman's do good work. But, they also seem to think, or put forth, that Apple will take these motherboards that are replaced and toss them in a woodchipper, when that's not the case. As I've discussed before, Apple takes the core part back from the repair shop, repairs it on the circuit level, and returns it to the repair supply chain.