Apple will allow customers to repair iPhones and Macs in 2022

Posted:
in iPhone edited November 17
Apple has conceded some of the battles it has been fighting with the Right to Repair movement, and for the first time will sell parts and tools directly to consumers with the new "Self Service Repair" program.




Announced on Wednesday, the new program will first launch in early 2022 with iPhone 12 and iPhone 13 parts. The company says that parts will expand soon to the Mac with M1 chips.

"Creating greater access to Apple genuine parts gives our customers even more choice if a repair is needed," said Jeff Williams, Apple's chief operating officer, in a statement. "In the past three years, Apple has nearly doubled the number of service locations with access to Apple genuine parts, tools, and training, and now we're providing an option for those who wish to complete their own repairs."

The initial launch period will focus on the most commonly serviced modules, such as the iPhone display, battery, and camera. Additional components will be available later in 2022, Apple says.

Self Service Repair procedure

Apple will make repair manuals available too. Following a user's self-diagnosis, the customer places an order for the parts and tools using a special online store.

Consumers will have to return "core" parts the same as repair shops do now, to receive a credit towards the initial part purchase price.

The company also says that the new repair store will offer more than 200 individual parts and tools, enabling customers to complete the most common repairs on iPhone 12 and iPhone 13.

Apple still recommends that most consumers seek repairs at either Apple Stores, one of over 5000 service provides, or the 2800 locations that are taking advantage of Apple's Independent Repair Provider program.

This new program does come with hidden costs, not all of which are known yet. But it's likely to be of more direct benefit to small repair shops, rather than individuals.

Previously Apple has objected to the principles of the Right to Repair movement. The company has argued that consumer safety and device security could be at risk, although internal documents show Apple has privately debated the issue at length.

Read on AppleInsider
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 88
    crowleycrowley Posts: 9,124member
    Crikey, didn't see that coming.  Bravo Apple!
    harry wildwilliamhrepressthismuthuk_vanalingamrandominternetpersonMplsPbyronlcuriousrun8watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 88
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 5,959member
    On the face of it, a great move and much needed option.

    I'm not sure about the requirement to return core parts but that's a minor quibble in the grand scheme of things. 

    Now they (and everybody else) need to design for repair. 
    muthuk_vanalingamMplsPbyronlcuriousrun8
  • Reply 3 of 88
    Hopefully, Apple will either have the parts or their parts supplier can sell them to the owner or third party repair business.  Without the replacement parts readily available, it just words!  Sound pretty in the storyline!
    edited November 17 williamlondon
  • Reply 4 of 88
    I’ve never been a fan of the right to repair movement because I think it’s totally fine for Apple to want to protect their reputation by trying to ensure some level of repair quality.

    But for some reason I’m totally in favour of this! Genuine Apple parts and presumably cheaper than taking it to an Apple Store.
    ikirrandominternetperson
  • Reply 5 of 88
    avon b7 said:
    I'm not sure about the requirement to return core parts but that's a minor quibble in the grand scheme of things. 

    Requirements to return parts are common in many industries. The auto parts industry for example. You can buy an alternator, car battery, etc, and will receive credit back if you send them the old damaged one. It is not REQUIRED, but you are losing money if you don't. In most cases they will try to repair it and resell it as refurbished, or will adequately recycle it.

    Which they included older models at the same time. I mean, who wants to open up their $1000 1 or 2-year-old phone, which might still be under warranty?
    stompymuthuk_vanalingamrandominternetpersonbyronlwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 88
    AppleZuluAppleZulu Posts: 1,273member
    I wonder what their approach to warranties, Apple Care, etc. will be for self-repair. While many can do repairs successfully themselves, there will be a non-trivial number of people who attempt it and royally screw things up. People will not only fail to follow instructions on the actual repair, but will also damage other things while they have the proverbial hood up, and either not know what they did, or won’t mention the huge static discharge they let off inside the device while they had it open. Then, “I followed the instructions for replacing the battery and now the phone doesn’t work at all! The instructions must’ve been no good, so Apple needs to give me a new iPhone!” Does Apple then assume the same responsibility for ongoing warranties as they would if they had done the repairs in-house?
    lkruppviclauyycwilliamlondonbyronlmaximarawatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 88
    muchomac said:
    avon b7 said:
    I'm not sure about the requirement to return core parts but that's a minor quibble in the grand scheme of things. 

    Requirements to return parts are common in many industries. The auto parts industry for example. You can buy an alternator, car battery, etc, and will receive credit back if you send them the old damaged one. It is not REQUIRED, but you are losing money if you don't. In most cases they will try to repair it and resell it as refurbished, or will adequately recycle it.

    Which they included older models at the same time. I mean, who wants to open up their $1000 1 or 2-year-old phone, which might still be under warranty?
    No they are nor requirement. You have wrong information. You get discount if you do. In fact, I demand repairman to return some of old parts to me. Those parts belong to me - not to manufacturer. For example battery replacement will be cheaper if you return old core, but there is no requirement. Yes I know many shops do not like it, but I do not give damn. I own the care - i own the old parts - i do what I want and you cannot require me to return them if I do not want to. Want to have conversation with repair shop manager - meet me... or my lawyer.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 8 of 88
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,321administrator
    muchomac said:
    avon b7 said:
    I'm not sure about the requirement to return core parts but that's a minor quibble in the grand scheme of things. 

    Requirements to return parts are common in many industries. The auto parts industry for example. You can buy an alternator, car battery, etc, and will receive credit back if you send them the old damaged one. It is not REQUIRED, but you are losing money if you don't. In most cases they will try to repair it and resell it as refurbished, or will adequately recycle it.

    Which they included older models at the same time. I mean, who wants to open up their $1000 1 or 2-year-old phone, which might still be under warranty?
    No they are nor requirement. You have wrong information. You get discount if you do. In fact, I demand repairman to return some of old parts to me. Those parts belong to me - not to manufacturer. For example battery replacement will be cheaper if you return old core, but there is no requirement. Yes I know many shops do not like it, but I do not give damn. I own the care - i own the old parts - i do what I want and you cannot require me to return them if I do not want to. Want to have conversation with repair shop manager - meet me... or my lawyer.
    You won't HAVE to return a "core" part -- but it will cost notably more if you don't. More on how this works for Apple a bit later today.
    williamlondonbyronlpscooter63
  • Reply 9 of 88
    muchomac said:
    avon b7 said:
    I'm not sure about the requirement to return core parts but that's a minor quibble in the grand scheme of things. 

    Requirements to return parts are common in many industries. The auto parts industry for example. You can buy an alternator, car battery, etc, and will receive credit back if you send them the old damaged one. It is not REQUIRED, but you are losing money if you don't. In most cases they will try to repair it and resell it as refurbished, or will adequately recycle it.

    Which they included older models at the same time. I mean, who wants to open up their $1000 1 or 2-year-old phone, which might still be under warranty?
    No they are nor requirement. You have wrong information. You get discount if you do. In fact, I demand repairman to return some of old parts to me. Those parts belong to me - not to manufacturer. For example battery replacement will be cheaper if you return old core, but there is no requirement. Yes I know many shops do not like it, but I do not give damn. I own the care - i own the old parts - i do what I want and you cannot require me to return them if I do not want to. Want to have conversation with repair shop manager - meet me... or my lawyer.
    You won't HAVE to return a "core" part -- but it will cost notably more if you don't. More on how this works for Apple a bit later today.
    I is not called "core" part . It is called battery core - proper name for it. Go to car store and check. Use proper naming. It was not accidental what I used. No double quotes required.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 10 of 88
    What is "core" part? The proper name is battery core in cars. Go check in the store.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 11 of 88
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,723member
    What is "core" part? The proper name is battery core in cars. Go check in the store.
    Where are you from? The term "core" is used by all sorts of automotive parts. It's the left over original part. It's a generic term not specific to a battery. As for your lawyer, get a grip. Automotive parts dealers recycle a lot of old parts, using new parts as well as smelting down iron and steel. Batteries are the number one recycled automotive part because most of the internal parts are easily recycled, turning them into new batteries. There's also hazardous waste requirements they have to deal with. Batteries are not allowed to be dumped anymore, at least in the US.

    As for Apple requiring original parts to be returned to them, I agree with them. Unscrupulous repair people would sell bad parts on ebay and other sites, trying to make a quick buck. 
    mike1williamlondonpscooter63roundaboutnowmaximaranapoleon_phoneapartwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 88
    In the not too distant past the Mac Pro (cheese grater) was modular and the owner could easily swap out parts. OWC I think still sells CPU upgrades for them where you can literally upgrade the CPU in a matter of minutes.
    That generation of Mac Pro was the best money I have ever spent on a computing device without exception.
    edited November 17 dewmewilliamlondonelijahgwatto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 88
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,298member
    muchomac said:
    avon b7 said:
    I'm not sure about the requirement to return core parts but that's a minor quibble in the grand scheme of things. 

    Requirements to return parts are common in many industries. The auto parts industry for example. You can buy an alternator, car battery, etc, and will receive credit back if you send them the old damaged one. It is not REQUIRED, but you are losing money if you don't. In most cases they will try to repair it and resell it as refurbished, or will adequately recycle it.

    Which they included older models at the same time. I mean, who wants to open up their $1000 1 or 2-year-old phone, which might still be under warranty?
    No they are nor requirement. You have wrong information. You get discount if you do. In fact, I demand repairman to return some of old parts to me. Those parts belong to me - not to manufacturer. For example battery replacement will be cheaper if you return old core, but there is no requirement. Yes I know many shops do not like it, but I do not give damn. I own the care - i own the old parts - i do what I want and you cannot require me to return them if I do not want to. Want to have conversation with repair shop manager - meet me... or my lawyer.
    I’m cases of warranty replacements they are required to send back the part.  
    williamlondonpscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 88
    ikirikir Posts: 126member
    georgie01 said:
    I’ve never been a fan of the right to repair movement because I think it’s totally fine for Apple to want to protect their reputation by trying to ensure some level of repair quality.

    But for some reason I’m totally in favour of this! Genuine Apple parts and presumably cheaper than taking it to an Apple Store.
    Right, the risk is the dumb users will destroy things and blame Apple as always.
    lkruppmaximarawatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 88
    crowleycrowley Posts: 9,124member
    lkrupp said:
    Anyone who attempts to repair their device while still under warranty needs a brain transplant. You tinker with your device you void the warranty, period. That’s universal with warranties as far as I know. Witness the guy who broke the screen of his brand new iMac Pro taking it apart and then bitched about Apple refusing to repair it even if he was willing to pay for it. My response to those assholes is a big Fick Dich!
    They fixed it eventually, at a fairly reasonable price, much less than Apple would have charged.  So I imagine they won't give a fig about your "response" and the only real outcome is Apple's reputation got raked for a few weeks by a YouTube channel with 14m subscribers.  

    Thankfully Apple seem to be on a new track here
    muthuk_vanalingamelijahg
  • Reply 16 of 88
    mike1mike1 Posts: 2,813member
    avon b7 said:
    On the face of it, a great move and much needed option.

    I'm not sure about the requirement to return core parts but that's a minor quibble in the grand scheme of things. 

    Now they (and everybody else) need to design for repair. 
    Returning of original parts is usually a requirement for warranty repairs. It helps in determining root causes of problems and it keeps the bad parts off the street. You know darn well, there are those who will take the new part and try to sell off the old, bad part to some unsuspecting person.

    Proper process is to charge for the shipped parts and credit them back after the old parts are returned.
    edited November 17 williamlondonpscooter63maximarawatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 88
    peteopeteo Posts: 400member
    rob53 said:
    What is "core" part? The proper name is battery core in cars. Go check in the store.


    As for Apple requiring original parts to be returned to them, I agree with them. Unscrupulous repair people would sell bad parts on ebay and other sites, trying to make a quick buck. 
    Its only required if you want the discount. You 100% can keep the bad parts. Comes down to how much the discount is. Also its good that apple is doing this because they can properly reuse/recycle the parts
    randominternetpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 88
    peteopeteo Posts: 400member

    georgie01 said:
    I’ve never been a fan of the right to repair movement because I think it’s totally fine for Apple to want to protect their reputation by trying to ensure some level of repair quality.

    But for some reason I’m totally in favour of this! Genuine Apple parts and presumably cheaper than taking it to an Apple Store.
    Right, the risk is the dumb users will destroy things and blame Apple as always.
    Users should be able to do what ever they want with the hardware they purchased. Does apple have to support this? No, but apple should not "lock" things to make it impossible to fix like they were trying to do with the iPhone 13 screen & faceID lock.
    pscooter63elijahg
  • Reply 19 of 88
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,303member
    It seems to me that Apple is working hard now to get out ahead of pending antitrust actions by opening things up a bit. (Google is too)

    For years many Apple users here have e said there was little to no danger in 3rd party repairs, while another group of commenters here loudly proclaimed that because of "security and privacy", and needed training, and the specialized tools needed to do it properly, that of course even 3rd party experienced tech shops can't be trusted to do so. Apple is the only qualified party.

     Apple appears now to agree with the ones claiming that there's little downside to allowing it, and goes even further to say even a private device owner is capable. it's not rocket science.

    IMO it's not the only Apple platform restrictions that are blamed on "privacy and security" that really aren't. It's also not the only one that Apple will open up before a court mandates it, and an agency issues rules governing it. Squeeze as much profit from it before it absolutely HAS to change. 

    Kudos to Apple for seeing the writing on the wall. 
    muthuk_vanalingambyronlMplsPelijahg
  • Reply 20 of 88
    lkrupp said:
    Anyone who attempts to repair their device while still under warranty needs a brain transplant. You tinker with your device you void the warranty, period. That’s universal with warranties as far as I know. Witness the guy who broke the screen of his brand new iMac Pro taking it apart and then bitched about Apple refusing to repair it even if he was willing to pay for it. My response to those assholes is a big Fick Dich!

    People with devices under warranty typically will use that warranty, unless its damage not covered by warranty. Then a repair kit for say, a broken screen, would be a nice option.

    As for the iMac Pro, I believe you are taking about Linus. You don't see anything wrong with Apple refusing to repair a broken machine when the owner is willing to pay for it? Bad things can happen to machines even when they're not being taken apart by a YouTube tech geek. How much would you appreciate it if Apple refused to repair your $5000 machine that fell off a table? I seem to recall that the underlying story behind that is Apple didn't actually have the parts or trained technicians in place to do a repair since it was a very new product at the time. Also they being vindictive pissants.
    MplsPelijahgmaximarawatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.