We'll see what comes of it but it is about time that manufacturers began improving their designs to make things easier to repair or upgrade.
Oh, don’t forget easier to hack, plunder and sabotage. I’m very satisfied that Apple builds highly secure products that others can’t easily access even in their physical possession. The focus of the US Government should be on encouraging companies to more fully lock down their hardware and software.
I don't see why you are trying to refocus the debate.
The conclusions were clear. Current policy is harming consumers and the manufacturers themselves weren't able to provide clearcut reasons to defend the current situation.
I doubt you can either because you have offered nothing to support your claim.
What does 'easier' even mean in this context?
Easier than a brand new product from Apple shipping with a x.0.0 release?
Quantitative data is easy to prove or disprove.
Qualitative data (such as reputation) is not. Which is likely why 'the manufacturers themselves weren't able to provide clearcut reasons to defend the current situation."
I for one eagerly look forward to an iPhone that has socketed RAM, CPU, a wire wrapped backplane, and six user replaceable D-cell batteries to make it through until lunch, when I can attach a pair of jumper cables to recharge it from my car so it will have enough charge to last until I get home. If it breaks at least I know I’ll be able to take it down to the local Firestone garage and have them check the alternator and weld on some new shocks.
Relating sockets for RAM & SSDs to D cell batteries?
I think the debate should include more input from people who engineer and design devices. Since these people can provide better insight into why certain decisions are made.
Take iFixIt for example - they bemoan "glue", because to them everything that isn't a mechanically based fixation is "glue" - but adhesives are chosen for very good reasons other than cost or to "reduce repairability". The glue in your airpods is part of the acoustic design. It provides dampening, shock resistance and reliability it's why you can drop them and they keep working instead of turning into expensive rattles. It also plays an important role in the water resistance of the interior electronics.
Earlier in the comments was a repairer who spoke of numerous design choices that they felt were for the sake of reducing repairability - but a casual review is able to provide meaningful reasons why such choices were made. It's that cluelessness which is not useful in the debate, it's unqualified posturing from people who look at every change as a personal attack on their livelihood. Even the pentalobe screws have an obvious function beyond aesthetics: because we can't expect manufacturers to live up to warranty claims such as moisture ingress, while making the device trivial to open.
Speaking of debate, it doesn't seem that anyone here is against the idea of device repairability - it seems more that people have legitimate concerns that holistic repair legislation will have some obvious unintended consequences - especially with device security (at a time when this same government is constantly attempting to reduce access to personal encryption.)
Wow, looks like a whole herd of industry shills! Just so you know, you arguments are pure bullshit and anyone with a head will see through them. For the record, I'm an "Uncle Joe" who owns a 3rd party repair company. I have 25 years experience fixing Apple products. I've worked for a number of dealerships in the past and even had my own Apple Authorized Dealership. I choose to do third party repairs after the corporate stores opened up so I could help more customers. I always direct customers to Apple for warranty situations, but for clients out of warranty, I can offer more economical yet completely safe repairs for more things then any "authorized" dealer could or would. My business is also able to help customers with much older products that Apple simply doesn't have the parts for. Because the Apple Store are often hand tied because of reasons, I'm able to help customers out in a bind.. for instance if they screw up and lodge a SIM card in their port.. Apple would make them buy a new phone, I can have it out of there in 5 minutes. I agree fully there are fly by night repair joints out there, I fix several issues from these fools, but don't get in your head that Apple is the only people able to fix them, and don't think for a second is there to help you to the absolute best of their abilities.
I think the debate should include more input from people who engineer and design devices. Since these people can provide better insight into why certain decisions are made.
Take iFixIt for example - they bemoan "glue", because to them everything that isn't a mechanically based fixation is "glue" - but adhesives are chosen for very good reasons other than cost or to "reduce repairability". The glue in your airpods is part of the acoustic design. It provides dampening, shock resistance and reliability it's why you can drop them and they keep working instead of turning into expensive rattles. It also plays an important role in the water resistance of the interior electronics.
Earlier in the comments was a repairer who spoke of numerous design choices that they felt were for the sake of reducing repairability - but a casual review is able to provide meaningful reasons why such choices were made. It's that cluelessness which is not useful in the debate, it's unqualified posturing from people who look at every change as a personal attack on their livelihood. Even the pentalobe screws have an obvious function beyond aesthetics: because we can't expect manufacturers to live up to warranty claims such as moisture ingress, while making the device trivial to open.
Speaking of debate, it doesn't seem that anyone here is against the idea of device repairability - it seems more that people have legitimate concerns that holistic repair legislation will have some obvious unintended consequences - especially with device security (at a time when this same government is constantly attempting to reduce access to personal encryption.)
The idea should be to design for repair.
No engineering input here in this thread is an absolute requirement.
The goal should not be to 'justify' designs that already harm the consumer in terms of repair. The goal should be to design products that meet more repairability criteria from the get go.
I've said it a few times here and it was mentioned various times in the article iyself. Manufacturers have failed to convince the authorities with their claims.
Is there any reason that phones need waterproofing for example, especially if the warranty doesn't even guarantee what the IP rating is? The two are not linked in any way so no one should be jumping into pools with phones to take underwater photos. All phones need is splash proofing but anyway, nano coatings have been available for years and make gaskets or sealants unnecessary.
Pentalobe screws do not serve any valid purpose other than making it harder to access the internals. Users should be able to get into phones but why would anyone want to get into an under warranty phone? I dare say almost no one has that much curiosity. A tiny fragment of the population maybe. The exact same fragment who probably already have pentalobe screwdrivers anyway, or can get one on Amazon in less than 24 hours.
There is no valid reason why AirPods cannot come with replaceable batteries. The problem is that was never a consideration in the first place.
If legislation existed that forced manufacturers to make earbud batteries replaceable, they would make it happen. They wouldn't say 'it's impossible' and move away from true wireless designs. Of course not. Hearing aids have come with removable batteries for years.
What we need is a wholesale shift away from the current 'disposable' electronics culture.
Sugar was tolerated for far too long due to lobbying. Even though it was the known direct cause of a huge amount of health problems.
Finally, some countries are taxing sugared beverages for example in the same way they tax tobacco.
The mindset has to change and sooner or later manufacturers (tech or otherwise) will get the message but it might be forced compliance that is needed.
The EU has already implemented WEEE and RoHS with success. It is about to turn its attention to the issue of manufacturing in CE products. It is long overdue.
A lot of people commenting don’t fully understand or know the scope of what this actually means for consumers. As a person who has been repairing iPhones for years, I have a lot of experience with Apple’s anti-repair tactics.
With the iPhone 7, apple made Touch ID (as always) be disabled if the home button was replaced due to damage, but they also disabled the 3D input so the button wouldn’t register. It took years to finally come up with a work-around.
When the iPhone 8/8plus came out, Apple has it coded into iOS that those devices would disable touchscreen capabilities unless the lcd panel was OEM. This was later “fixed” because it was ridiculous and infuriated many.
With the iPhone X-present, apple disabled FaceID if the earpiece/proximity sensor flex cable SN doesn’t match what is hard-coded to the motherboard, same as they did with TouchID except the cameras that actually read your face aren’t part of that cable. It requires going to apple so they can hook it up to a machine (“Horizons”) or their new cloud software to recode it for a HEFTY price. I also vaguely remember something about the wireless charging coil causing problems sofware-locked when replaced.
Since the iPhone 8, Apple disabled TrueTone on the device if the screen SN doesn’t match the original screen SN, even if it’s OEM and even though the ambient light sensor is a separate module.
When the iPhone 11 was released, Apple started having the phone display a message that says the phone needs service due to a non original apple screen, even if the screen is in fact OEM. That same year, Apple also started making the devices have SN paired batteries as well, meaning another prompt would nag you saying that the battery isn’t original even if it is indeed OEM. The batteries also stopped reporting battery health and will only say Service; every prior iPhone will still tell you the battery health regardless if the replacement battery is OEM or aftermarket.
With the iPhone 12 series, Apple added the cameras to the list of SN locked parts that stop functioning when replaced. I haven’t worked on any 12’s yet since they’re so new still (and Ceramic Shield really is amazing), so I don’t know if this is still the case or not.
Apple is also just petty in the repairs department, every now and then adding new screw types into the mix(tristar), making it more annoying to repair.
For everyone making the “security” argument, this paragraph is for you: If you don’t want repair shops accessing your data, don’t give them your passcode. Apple leads the way in device security, so if you don’t give it to them, there’s no way they can hack into your device. There is currently only one type of machine that can hack an iPhone in the world, it’s called GreyKey and it was made in Israel; it currently costs $50k for government officials only to be able to purchase this machine. Also, when this machine was made aware to apple, they implemented an update that fixes this issue: the lightning port won’t transmit data unless the phone has had the passcode typed into it within an hour timeframe. Before you hand your phone over, either hit the lock button 5 times or reboot your phone and there’s nothing anybody on the planet can do to get into it. As a side note to the open-software debate: open software increases the security of a program exponentially. Linux is open software and has virtually no bugs whatsoever. Linux can run on a device for years without having to be rebooted because it has so many eyes and minds constantly searching to fix and improve it.
I understand Apple wanting to keep their quality top notch and wanting to preserve secrets and user security, but their repair practices hurt the consumer. Unless you’re getting a battery replacement or screen repair from Apple, you’re going to be paying the full “Other Damage (Out of Warranty)” fee, which is $719 for the iPhone 12 Pro and $599 for the iPhone 12 (to put it in perspective). Other damage includes anything besides the screen or battery, so that price is INSANE. At the shop I work at, repairs for a charge port replacement are $45, cameras are $60, back glass is $70, loudspeaker is $45, battery is $45, etc, all including labor. In short, Apple is exponentially and unethically profiting off of consumers in this aspect. If they don’t want repair shops reproducing their parts and repairing phones, the answer is to make it affordable and expand their price list to include the small-parts, and to lower the prices. Part costs are very cheap for these types of parts.
Despite all of this though, Apple does actually have competitive screen repair costs for the quality of their screens. Also, many repair shops skimp out on screens and get the cheapest parts available but still charge full price. Even worse, a lot of shops order LCD panels instead of OLED for phones that use OLED screens, yet still charge the very expensive OLED price. (Also, OLED phones aren’t meant to power LCD screens, so there’s a lot wrong with people doing that in the first place.) Anyways, I made my case. Apple needs to reform their repair policies, either by amending the pricing or by not locking down every component they can any chance they get.
Everything you posted about you "As a person who has been repairing iPhones for years", indicates you have no clue what you're doing, or why some things didn't work as expected when you "repaired" them. Some things need paring - you probably didn't have the know how/software/hardware to do that (because you are not trained/authorized by Apple), so they don't work as expected. Some things need calibrated (screen color) - you probably didn't have the know how/software/hardware (because you are not trained/authorized by Apple), so things don't work as expected. This is why allowing just anyone to do repairs is not a good idea.
And then you blame all of this on Apple... Yeah...
We'll see what comes of it but it is about time that manufacturers began improving their designs to make things easier to repair or upgrade.
Can’t wait for removable battery, upgradable ram, flimsy case on my iPhone!!
Cant wait for every pawn shop in the country to have a dark iPhone/iPad repair shop in the back!!
There was no problem with removable batteries in the first place. Give me cheap recycled plastic over glass any day.
These are situations that can be designed for. There is no requirement for glass backed phones, and nano coatings for internal components have been around for years. Technically speaking gaskets aren't even necessary.
They aren't even a guarantee of water ingress protection either.
Phones don't need to be waterproof anyway. Splash proof is more than enough.
Glad you know what everyone needs & doesn't need...
I’m a strong believer that the parts that are easy to replace in the phones are only there to make it easier for apple’s own technicians, they have made it abundantly clear they only approve of certified repairs.
But this, on its own, SHOULD be a perfectly sufficient reason alone to make these things much more serviceable! When a company doesn’t, that shows what their real interests are: throw it away & buy a new one (while putting the cost of all the materials waste on the customer). Apple keeps telling us how environmentally sound they want to be, but they keep showing us they aren’t as interested in that as they want us to think.
It also shows what they think of their service workers’ quality of life at work: not much. I worked in IT for many years and there’s a definite difference between the build of machines meant for ease of servicing and everything else. Many manufacturers of desktop PCs started out building their computers in asinine ways (requiring disassembly of entirely unrelated parts just to replace one more likely to fail part that should’ve been more accessible), only to make things easier to service over the following years because of their own need to shorten the time spent on their own service jobs.
Companies that are serious about the service contracts they provide (for their machines installed & serviced by the thousands per day) will build with the ease & speed of their own service jobs in mind. Yeah, Dells are “cheap plastic”, not silent, and they may rattle & creak as they flex, but they’re very easy to service. This ideology could be executed in a much more elegant fashion and we’ve seen Apple do it themselves at times (the original “cheese grater” Mac Pro was very serviceable). There’s no reason why small equipment can’t be engineered with this ideology in place. It just requires the will. Apple isn’t there yet, but maybe we can all pressure them to be... if we don’t offer endless special pleading excuses for them, bowing and scraping in ridiculous cult-like fanaticism.
Ease of servicing can have a positive impact on environmental issues (if the removed parts are then sent out for proper rebuild or material collection), because the parts aren’t all stuck effectively permanently together, and aren’t demanding $800 worth of materials be replaced when only a $30 component has failed.
This is a good result for the FTC investigation. Companies should be serving the public good, not damaging it while using every possible way to exploit us and the environment just so they can try to maintain the unsustainable and pathological pursuit of perpetual growth that’s demanded of “investors” and shareholders.
This sounds like the government is getting into the business of telling manufacturers how to design their products so that others can make a living repairing them. So much for innovations and trade secrets!
When apple charges $400 to "repair" a laptop that has a blown fuse then yes something needs to be done. As for trade secrets the electronics industry went for years with easy availability of schematics for their hardware, which enabled easy repair. The only reason such schematics are nto available to day is to keep the repair business in house.
I don't fancy big government at all, however I don't like being screwed over by big business at all. If Apple needs the government to come down hard on them and clean up their practices then I really thing Apple needs to suffer significantly. A $50 billion dollar fine wouldn't be out of question considering the harm they have caused.
Until Uncle Joe’s repair shop starts messing up everyone’s iPhones while voiding the warranties.
Then these “right to repair” idiots will blame Apple for Uncle Joe’s failures.
Actually current law requires that Apple not you, prove that the iPhone was messed up by a third party repair. If you where a lawyer you could easily take Apple to court and win if they don't have a good technical case proving that a third party repair caused a problem. The problem for most individuals is that they can't justify the expense of hiring a lawyer to compel Apple to honor their warranty. Apple knows this and is why they can skip their responsibility under the law.
...companies like Apple negatively impact consumers and small businesses. ...
The report, "Nixing the Fix: An FTC Report to Congress on Repair Restrictions (PDF link)," was fulfilled at the direction of Congress and takes an in-depth look at the right to repair issue with a concentration on phone manufacturers and carmakers. Findings were issued to Congress with unanimous consent from the FTC.
... the report reads. "Repairs today often require specialized tools, difficult-to-obtain parts, and access to proprietary diagnostic software. Consumers whose products break then have limited choices. Furthermore, the burden of repair restrictions may fall more heavily on communities of color and lower-income communities. Many Black-owned small businesses are in the repair and maintenance industries, and difficulties facing small businesses can disproportionately affect small businesses owned by people of color."
So the FTC has unanimously stated that Apple's (and other companies') restrictions on third party repair "may fall more heavily on communities of color and lower-income communities." So the FTC has unanimously declared that Apple's restrictions are racist. Wow. The FTC has opened my eyes.
Yeah that was fairly stupid to include in a public statement. Apples unfair practices impact all people equally.
We'll see what comes of it but it is about time that manufacturers began improving their designs to make things easier to repair or upgrade.
Can’t wait for removable battery, upgradable ram, flimsy case on my iPhone!!
Cant wait for every pawn shop in the country to have a dark iPhone/iPad repair shop in the back!!
There was no problem with removable batteries in the first place. Give me cheap recycled plastic over glass any day.
These are situations that can be designed for. There is no requirement for glass backed phones, and nano coatings for internal components have been around for years. Technically speaking gaskets aren't even necessary.
They aren't even a guarantee of water ingress protection either.
Phones don't need to be waterproof anyway. Splash proof is more than enough.
Glad you know what everyone needs & doesn't need...
The logic here is simple. If phones needed to be waterproof - they would be.
Currently, no iPhone is waterproof. Hence there is clearly no need for it. They have IP ratings. They are not the same thing and plenty of people have found out the hard way.
The vast majority of users never get their phones submerged. It does not happen because the vast majority of people know the risks involved. Accidents happen with water. The phones even get submerged sometimes. My cousin realised her iPhone was in the washing machine and even though she got it out before the machine had finished filling with water, it didn't survive. Bad luck.
If iPhones aren't designed to be waterproof and the standard warranty doesn't cover damage from water damage, it is clear that there is no need for it.
Now, splashproofing is a different story but splashproofing isn't the same as waterproofing. It wouldn't be acceptable nowadays for a phone not to be able to resist some rain but this is like dropping your phone. You never know if you will get lucky or not.
Apple is clear on the subject:
"Splash, water, and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Liquid damage is not covered under warranty"
It goes so far as to warn users:
"To prevent liquid damage, avoid these:
Swimming or bathing with your iPhone
Exposing your iPhone to pressurized water or high velocity water, such as when showering, water skiing, wake boarding, surfing, jet skiing, and so on
Using your iPhone in a sauna or steam room
Intentionally submerging your iPhone in water"
Of course it's not a particularly 'in your face' communication.
Until Uncle Joe’s repair shop starts messing up everyone’s iPhones while voiding the warranties.
Then these “right to repair” idiots will blame Apple for Uncle Joe’s failures.
Actually current law requires that Apple not you, prove that the iPhone was messed up by a third party repair. If you where a lawyer you could easily take Apple to court and win if they don't have a good technical case proving that a third party repair caused a problem. The problem for most individuals is that they can't justify the expense of hiring a lawyer to compel Apple to honor their warranty. Apple knows this and is why they can skip their responsibility under the law.
In the US, you don't have to hire a lawyer to go to court.
I'm an IT guy and have successfully managed multiple court cases myself (no attorney). In general, the law is logical, and tries to be fair. It has worked for me. If I had a warranty claim denied without proof a "repair" or customization caused the issue, I'd be glad to manage it myself in court.
In fact, Western Digital tried to deny a warranty claim on an external USB 8TB drive, because I removed the drive from the USB chassis. The drive was used in a server for 6-8 months and started developing bad sectors. The drive was obviously failing. When they tried to deny the warranty claim due to removal from the USB chassis, I explained I was aware of my rights, and they had to prove the removal from the chassis was related to the failure. They honored the warranty by replacing the drive with a new retail boxed USB 8TB drive. The drive SMART info showed it had performed acceptably for several months after removal form the USB chassis, before developing the bad sectors...
We'll see what comes of it but it is about time that manufacturers began improving their designs to make things easier to repair or upgrade.
Can’t wait for removable battery, upgradable ram, flimsy case on my iPhone!!
Cant wait for every pawn shop in the country to have a dark iPhone/iPad repair shop in the back!!
There was no problem with removable batteries in the first place. Give me cheap recycled plastic over glass any day.
These are situations that can be designed for. There is no requirement for glass backed phones, and nano coatings for internal components have been around for years. Technically speaking gaskets aren't even necessary.
They aren't even a guarantee of water ingress protection either.
Phones don't need to be waterproof anyway. Splash proof is more than enough.
Glad you know what everyone needs & doesn't need...
The logic here is simple. If phones needed to be waterproof - they would be.
Going to cut you short here.
Because something does not exist, does not indicate it is not needed or desired. Corelation does not indicate causation. Period.
Well there goes Apple’s satisfaction rating down the tube. These jack legs are going to create huge problems and blame Apple for the device failure after supposed repairs.
As opposed to the dissatisfaction that customers have with Apple outrageous repair costs. Apple often charges 2X the cost of a motherboard to repair something that could have been fixed by a capable technician replacing a cheap component.
I'm certain that the perception of Apples service practices being so good is the result of people simply being ignorant of the electronics industry. I don't mean ignorant in a bad way here but rather people simply not knowing what is involved in many failures in modern electronics and the relative costs to set things right. I base this on decades of experience in the field of industrial automation so I do have an idea as to the costs involved in buying parts and servicing electronics. Apple has setup its business to rip off the customer at every turn. They charge massive fees for Apple Care even when the statistics highlight how stupid, for the consumer, such services are! The charges for Apple care often cover the cost of an entire device to Apple so effectively the consumer ends up buying two devices, with one held in the bank by Apple. To make all of this look good to the consumer they don't even try to fix the simple things and instead do a motherboard swap. That way they can show the poor sap that just had a motherboard swap what he is getting for his money.
In a nut shell everything about Apple's repair business is BS. The real stinky BS that is hard to wash off.
We'll see what comes of it but it is about time that manufacturers began improving their designs to make things easier to repair or upgrade.
Upgrading is a different issue. I don't see a good reason why a company should have to make "upgradeable hardware", in fact in my estimation it makes little sense to have mandatory upgradeability. However if you look at repair, that is a different story, as Apple has done much to make its electronics not repairable. This includes buying slightly modified chips and then preventing the sale of such chips to the repair businesses that could actually save consumers huge dollars. Often it is the difference between selling a $4 chip to the repair shop or Apple charging somebody $400 for a new mother board. This has nothing to do with trade secrets; it is simply a way for Apple to keep consumers locked into their services even if they are grossly over priced.
I do my own maintenance and repairs on my own stuff, like cars, and generally support the principle of repairable goods. There is a lot of stuff that's disposable nowadays because consumers only look at price, not quality, and that discourages well-engineered, durable, and repairable products which would have higher costs.
On the flip side, I also recognize that there are limits to what can feasibly repaired, and this movement, particularly as it relates to electronic devices, has veered into dogma, not unlike the zealotry surrounding open source software a while back, lacking both nuance and pragmatism.
Baloney!! This is about easily repaired items being made difficult by Apple because they purposefully restrict trade in the required parts to do the job. Ask your self this, why is it so difficult to buy an OEM battery for Apples devices. Or why should you have to pay Apple $400 for a motherboard swap when all it needs its a fuse? You have it rather backwards, the pragmatic would most certainly take the least expensive and low impact way to fix a device..
by the way I'm not saying I agree with everything the FTC has to say here. High integration has given us incredibly powerful electronics in very compact form factors. So I'm not at all upset over in package RAM and everything on one huge SoC. That however does not mean that something built this way is not repairable to an extent and that repair-ability should not be hindered by predatory practices similar to what Apple engages in.
As a side note to the open-software debate: open software increases the security of a program exponentially. Linux is open software and has virtually no bugs whatsoever. Linux can run on a device for years without having to be rebooted because it has so many eyes and minds constantly searching to fix and improve it.
Also, the camera has never been a part of the screen? It stopped being screwed into the display since the X, but even before then you just simply had to unscrew the shielding.
Obvious troll is obvious.
As you are evidently unaware, Apple makes more than just phones. Their laptops' cameras are all integrated into the screen assembly. If you close the laptop on the charge cable (I've seen three people do this), the screen breaks, and you have to replace the camera, even though it's still perfectly functional. Replacing the camera involves an AST2 run.
And open-source doesn't intrinsically result in better security. It lets you personally do a security audit, which you would not be able to do on a closed-source product, but if you personally don't do that, chances are really high nobody else has either. As concrete proof of this, consider CVE-2014-0160 (Heartbleed; unnoticed for over two years), CVE-2014-6271 (BASH through 4.3 allows arbitrary code execution via environment variables; unnoticed for about two decades), CVE-2021-3156 (sudo privilege escalation vulnerability; unnoticed for over a decade)
I'm not saying closed-source is better, I'm just saying open-source only provides better opportunity for you to do it yourself. If you simply trust someone else has done the review, closed- and open-source are identical.
Until Uncle Joe’s repair shop starts messing up everyone’s iPhones while voiding the warranties.
Then these “right to repair” idiots will blame Apple for Uncle Joe’s failures.
The law states warranties are not voided by outside repair unless the company can prove it cause the issue that currently needs repair. It’s the Magnussen-Moss Act. The burden is on the company to PROVE it.
This is the thing; Magnussen-Moss Act, was signed into law in 1975 I believe, probably befor many posting here where even born. Apple has been thumbing their nose at the act for decades now. I suspect that they do this because people don't know their rights and if they do know their rights it becomes cost prohibitive to fight Apple in court over a $500 item.
It is really sad that so many people have posted already to this thread that don't know their rights under existing law. It is fundamentally illegal for Apple to refuse warranty repair on an item unless it is provable that the last work done on the device caused the problem. It is that simple. Frankly the warranty void stickers that many manufactures put on hardware is also not enforceable.
The problem with right to repair is that people are not asking for something new here. Rather they simply want Apple held accountable with respect to current law and they want the obstructions that Apple puts into place for third party repair torn down.
I suspect that more people would understand how stupid Apple position is if they wanted their car serviced and the only place to buy an Air filter for the car was Ford and that filter cost 100X the cost of a third party filter of equivalent construction. Long sentence but the point is Apple has constructed its hardware to force consumers into highly expensive repairs.
Comments
Take iFixIt for example - they bemoan "glue", because to them everything that isn't a mechanically based fixation is "glue" - but adhesives are chosen for very good reasons other than cost or to "reduce repairability". The glue in your airpods is part of the acoustic design. It provides dampening, shock resistance and reliability it's why you can drop them and they keep working instead of turning into expensive rattles. It also plays an important role in the water resistance of the interior electronics.
Earlier in the comments was a repairer who spoke of numerous design choices that they felt were for the sake of reducing repairability - but a casual review is able to provide meaningful reasons why such choices were made. It's that cluelessness which is not useful in the debate, it's unqualified posturing from people who look at every change as a personal attack on their livelihood. Even the pentalobe screws have an obvious function beyond aesthetics: because we can't expect manufacturers to live up to warranty claims such as moisture ingress, while making the device trivial to open.
Speaking of debate, it doesn't seem that anyone here is against the idea of device repairability - it seems more that people have legitimate concerns that holistic repair legislation will have some obvious unintended consequences - especially with device security (at a time when this same government is constantly attempting to reduce access to personal encryption.)
No engineering input here in this thread is an absolute requirement.
The goal should not be to 'justify' designs that already harm the consumer in terms of repair. The goal should be to design products that meet more repairability criteria from the get go.
I've said it a few times here and it was mentioned various times in the article iyself. Manufacturers have failed to convince the authorities with their claims.
Is there any reason that phones need waterproofing for example, especially if the warranty doesn't even guarantee what the IP rating is? The two are not linked in any way so no one should be jumping into pools with phones to take underwater photos. All phones need is splash proofing but anyway, nano coatings have been available for years and make gaskets or sealants unnecessary.
Pentalobe screws do not serve any valid purpose other than making it harder to access the internals. Users should be able to get into phones but why would anyone want to get into an under warranty phone? I dare say almost no one has that much curiosity. A tiny fragment of the population maybe. The exact same fragment who probably already have pentalobe screwdrivers anyway, or can get one on Amazon in less than 24 hours.
There is no valid reason why AirPods cannot come with replaceable batteries. The problem is that was never a consideration in the first place.
If legislation existed that forced manufacturers to make earbud batteries replaceable, they would make it happen. They wouldn't say 'it's impossible' and move away from true wireless designs. Of course not. Hearing aids have come with removable batteries for years.
What we need is a wholesale shift away from the current 'disposable' electronics culture.
Sugar was tolerated for far too long due to lobbying. Even though it was the known direct cause of a huge amount of health problems.
Finally, some countries are taxing sugared beverages for example in the same way they tax tobacco.
The mindset has to change and sooner or later manufacturers (tech or otherwise) will get the message but it might be forced compliance that is needed.
The EU has already implemented WEEE and RoHS with success. It is about to turn its attention to the issue of manufacturing in CE products. It is long overdue.
And then you blame all of this on Apple... Yeah...
It also shows what they think of their service workers’ quality of life at work: not much. I worked in IT for many years and there’s a definite difference between the build of machines meant for ease of servicing and everything else. Many manufacturers of desktop PCs started out building their computers in asinine ways (requiring disassembly of entirely unrelated parts just to replace one more likely to fail part that should’ve been more accessible), only to make things easier to service over the following years because of their own need to shorten the time spent on their own service jobs.
Companies that are serious about the service contracts they provide (for their machines installed & serviced by the thousands per day) will build with the ease & speed of their own service jobs in mind. Yeah, Dells are “cheap plastic”, not silent, and they may rattle & creak as they flex, but they’re very easy to service. This ideology could be executed in a much more elegant fashion and we’ve seen Apple do it themselves at times (the original “cheese grater” Mac Pro was very serviceable). There’s no reason why small equipment can’t be engineered with this ideology in place. It just requires the will. Apple isn’t there yet, but maybe we can all pressure them to be... if we don’t offer endless special pleading excuses for them, bowing and scraping in ridiculous cult-like fanaticism.
Ease of servicing can have a positive impact on environmental issues (if the removed parts are then sent out for proper rebuild or material collection), because the parts aren’t all stuck effectively permanently together, and aren’t demanding $800 worth of materials be replaced when only a $30 component has failed.
This is a good result for the FTC investigation. Companies should be serving the public good, not damaging it while using every possible way to exploit us and the environment just so they can try to maintain the unsustainable and pathological pursuit of perpetual growth that’s demanded of “investors” and shareholders.
Actually current law requires that Apple not you, prove that the iPhone was messed up by a third party repair. If you where a lawyer you could easily take Apple to court and win if they don't have a good technical case proving that a third party repair caused a problem. The problem for most individuals is that they can't justify the expense of hiring a lawyer to compel Apple to honor their warranty. Apple knows this and is why they can skip their responsibility under the law.
Yeah that was fairly stupid to include in a public statement. Apples unfair practices impact all people equally.
Currently, no iPhone is waterproof. Hence there is clearly no need for it. They have IP ratings. They are not the same thing and plenty of people have found out the hard way.
The vast majority of users never get their phones submerged. It does not happen because the vast majority of people know the risks involved. Accidents happen with water. The phones even get submerged sometimes. My cousin realised her iPhone was in the washing machine and even though she got it out before the machine had finished filling with water, it didn't survive. Bad luck.
If iPhones aren't designed to be waterproof and the standard warranty doesn't cover damage from water damage, it is clear that there is no need for it.
Now, splashproofing is a different story but splashproofing isn't the same as waterproofing. It wouldn't be acceptable nowadays for a phone not to be able to resist some rain but this is like dropping your phone. You never know if you will get lucky or not.
Apple is clear on the subject:
"Splash, water, and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Liquid damage is not covered under warranty"
It goes so far as to warn users:
"To prevent liquid damage, avoid these:
- Swimming or bathing with your iPhone
- Exposing your iPhone to pressurized water or high velocity water, such as when showering, water skiing, wake boarding, surfing, jet skiing, and so on
- Using your iPhone in a sauna or steam room
- Intentionally submerging your iPhone in water"
Of course it's not a particularly 'in your face' communication.I'm an IT guy and have successfully managed multiple court cases myself (no attorney). In general, the law is logical, and tries to be fair. It has worked for me. If I had a warranty claim denied without proof a "repair" or customization caused the issue, I'd be glad to manage it myself in court.
In fact, Western Digital tried to deny a warranty claim on an external USB 8TB drive, because I removed the drive from the USB chassis. The drive was used in a server for 6-8 months and started developing bad sectors. The drive was obviously failing. When they tried to deny the warranty claim due to removal from the USB chassis, I explained I was aware of my rights, and they had to prove the removal from the chassis was related to the failure. They honored the warranty by replacing the drive with a new retail boxed USB 8TB drive. The drive SMART info showed it had performed acceptably for several months after removal form the USB chassis, before developing the bad sectors...
Because something does not exist, does not indicate it is not needed or desired. Corelation does not indicate causation. Period.
Upgrading is a different issue. I don't see a good reason why a company should have to make "upgradeable hardware", in fact in my estimation it makes little sense to have mandatory upgradeability. However if you look at repair, that is a different story, as Apple has done much to make its electronics not repairable. This includes buying slightly modified chips and then preventing the sale of such chips to the repair businesses that could actually save consumers huge dollars. Often it is the difference between selling a $4 chip to the repair shop or Apple charging somebody $400 for a new mother board. This has nothing to do with trade secrets; it is simply a way for Apple to keep consumers locked into their services even if they are grossly over priced.
As you are evidently unaware, Apple makes more than just phones. Their laptops' cameras are all integrated into the screen assembly. If you close the laptop on the charge cable (I've seen three people do this), the screen breaks, and you have to replace the camera, even though it's still perfectly functional. Replacing the camera involves an AST2 run.
And open-source doesn't intrinsically result in better security. It lets you personally do a security audit, which you would not be able to do on a closed-source product, but if you personally don't do that, chances are really high nobody else has either. As concrete proof of this, consider CVE-2014-0160 (Heartbleed; unnoticed for over two years), CVE-2014-6271 (BASH through 4.3 allows arbitrary code execution via environment variables; unnoticed for about two decades), CVE-2021-3156 (sudo privilege escalation vulnerability; unnoticed for over a decade)
I'm not saying closed-source is better, I'm just saying open-source only provides better opportunity for you to do it yourself. If you simply trust someone else has done the review, closed- and open-source are identical.