iFixit can’t be happy. They sell all-in-one repair kits for all sorts of common repairs (like batteries).
When do we see the antitrust case against Apple for harming competitors like iFixit by entering their market?
On the contrary, I think they are thrilled about it. It’s sort of like how smartphones won over feature phones when Android phones came out and flooded the market. In short, this move makes iFixit look even better than before.
At least in the AI article, I didn't read anywhere that Apple won't be charging you for parts (and tools). I expect the program will be something like this...
You need a new screen for an iPhone 12. The cost is $XX. The tools we suggest you use are "a" costing $Y, "b" costing $Z, and this manual (https://...). You can purchase now using your Apple Card or credit card, blah, blah, blah. If you return the screen to us using the prepaid shipping label that accompanies your replacement part, and you are covered by AppleCare+, your screen cost of $XX will be credited back to you. If you are not covered by AppleCare+ (out of warranty) and return the screen, you will receive a 50% credit on the cost of the new screen ($XX). It is your choice whether or not to return the screen to Apple for proper recycling.
So, Apple now generates a piddly profit selling tools, and perhaps some more money on non-returned parts.
All likely true. But with AppleCare+ it would likely be cheaper to let Apple Repair it than to buy the parts and then disassemble the phone yourself -- at which point, if / when you hose it up, Apple likely won't touch it even under AppleCare+ because that would not be "accidental damage".
The first generation iMac G5 had a modular design, and user service program. The second generation…didn't.
If shall be interesting to see if this initiative works as well as that one did…not very well…and if Apple will apply lessons from that one, or unintentionally learn even more from this one.
Especially considering it includes iPhones. Some "handy" people I know can't manage to remove and install a Phillips screw without stripping the screw, or the driver.
If ham-fisted users like that are going to be tackling their own iPhone repairs, let the fun begin. And the department processing the core returns will probably find a lot of perfectly-functional parts that were either unnecessarily replaced, or too damaged as a result of the repair to be salvageable.
This is brilliant, well done Apple. Hopefully the prices aren't too sky high to "compensate" for that customer not buying a new device.
I see my usual prediction that the obsessives here who gloat over Apple refusing to enact a policy that may lead to reduced profits despite that policy's popularity, are doing their usual act when Apple does exactly what they say Apple shouldn't: calling everyone who might benefit or use the new policy stupid, idiots, freaks etc. It's amazing how bitter some people can be about something that has exactly zero adverse effect on them.
It amuses me that the manufactured reasons why Apple wouldn't sell parts to customers like "repair quality", "security", "responsibility for device damage", etc are all blown away. It's comical watching the squirming, when Apple has done the right thing.
That's a good start. Now let us install any software we want to on the iOS devices we own as long as we agree to take the risks, just like we do on our Macs, PCs and many other devices.
@OutdoorAppDeveloper Oh, stop it. That isn’t even about repairs or restoring the device to its initial condition. It’s all about software tinkering, and you can do exactly what you ask for by jailbreaking. So you already have that. Case closed
The basic principle of DIY repairs is sound, I guess. But I personally won’t buy any secondhand Apple devices without warranty anymore. The risk that they have been improperly repaired just went through the roof.
I think this may have hurt prices on the secondhand market, which in turn is bad from sustainability perspectives — quite contrary to what people believe.
Why would lower prices on the second-hand market hurt sustainability?
@crowley This is sustainability-101 knowledge. The faster you devalue a product, the lower its sustainability.
And if you put some realistic figures on these DIY-repairs you’ll see that very few tinkerers will benefit from this, but the whole secondhand market of Apple devices will be devalued — not just the repaired units. Then also read the comment by @lonestar1 in here.
This is brilliant, well done Apple. Hopefully the prices aren't too sky high to "compensate" for that customer not buying a new device.
I see my usual prediction that the obsessives here who gloat over Apple refusing to enact a policy that may lead to reduced profits despite that policy's popularity, are doing their usual act when Apple does exactly what they say Apple shouldn't: calling everyone who might benefit or use the new policy stupid, idiots, freaks etc. It's amazing how bitter some people can be about something that has exactly zero adverse effect on them.
It amuses me that the manufactured reasons why Apple wouldn't sell parts to customers like "repair quality", "security", "responsibility for device damage", etc are all blown away. It's comical watching the squirming, when Apple has done the right thing.
As is so common these days, much of it is simply "My side against Your side".
Also, many are more concerned about Apple's stock price than its long term future.
The basic principle of DIY repairs is sound, I guess. But I personally won’t buy any secondhand Apple devices without warranty anymore. The risk that they have been improperly repaired just went through the roof.
I think this may have hurt prices on the secondhand market, which in turn is bad from sustainability perspectives — quite contrary to what people believe.
Why would lower prices on the second-hand market hurt sustainability?
@crowley This is sustainability-101 knowledge. The faster you devalue a product, the lower its sustainability.
And if you put some realistic figures on these DIY-repairs you’ll see that very few tinkerers will benefit from this, but the whole secondhand market of Apple devices will be devalued — not just the repaired units. Then also read the comment by @lonestar1 in here.
I think you have your reasoning backwards. The user-repairability may lead to second hand products being less attractive and selling less, hence prices fall. Sustainability could take a hit because there is less reuse on the second hand market and more waste or need for recycling, not because of the lower prices. Same cause, different effect, no direct relationship.
If you can explain to me another reason why lower prices hurt sustainability then I'm happy to hear it, it doesn't make sense to me.
The basic principle of DIY repairs is sound, I guess. But I personally won’t buy any secondhand Apple devices without warranty anymore. The risk that they have been improperly repaired just went through the roof.
I think this may have hurt prices on the secondhand market, which in turn is bad from sustainability perspectives — quite contrary to what people believe.
Why would lower prices on the second-hand market hurt sustainability?
@crowley This is sustainability-101 knowledge. The faster you devalue a product, the lower its sustainability.
And if you put some realistic figures on these DIY-repairs you’ll see that very few tinkerers will benefit from this, but the whole secondhand market of Apple devices will be devalued — not just the repaired units. Then also read the comment by @lonestar1 in here.
I think you have your reasoning backwards. The user-repairability may lead to second hand products being less attractive and selling less, hence prices fall. Sustainability could take a hit because there is less reuse on the second hand market and more waste or need for recycling, not because of the lower prices. Same cause, different effect, no direct relationship.
If you can explain to me another reason why lower prices hurt sustainability then I'm happy to hear it, it doesn't make sense to me.
Very interesting arguments on both sides. Personally, if I was looking for a used or reconditioned product I’d be exclusively looking at products that were serviced by Apple authorized repair shops, and specifically Apple directly, at least in the near term (next 5+ years).
We really don’t know how this experiment will actually play out in practice. Will “used” iPhone buyers (or are we going to go upmarket with “Pre Owned” moniker?) now have prospective units inspected for cold solder joints, battery kinks, poorly executed repairs, knock-off parts, and maybe even Bondo when they consider a used iPhone? A CarFax service for used iPhones?
I’m looking forward to seeing how this plays out over time, but my expectation is that it won’t change a thing for the vast majority of end users. It’ll probably open up a small market for third party repair services, some of which will be decent and some of which will be horrible. The one’s that don’t measure up will of course redirect their failures to Apple.
Finally, even though the longevity of smartphones is better than it was a decade ago, these are still products that become obsolete very quickly. The economics of selling repair parts and the desire to repair older devices is not working in favor of this market. But we will see.
The reality is that the days of shade-tree car and computer mechanics aren't coming back. You can't have a pocket-sized (and smaller) portable computing device that is waterproof and keeps working even though keep dropping it and banging it into things, and also have something that's easy to open up and swap out components.
The issue isn't really about users' rights to do whatever they want versus greedy companies that want to charge big bucks for simple repairs. It's about users demanding increasingly powerful computing devices in small packages that are consistently reliable and tolerate a lot of abuse without needing to be repaired in the first place. I have opted for minimalist cases since my first iPhone 3G. I am not an unusually graceful person and have dropped and done plenty of other clumsy things with my iPhones over the years. The only physical repair I have ever required was a battery replacement on one iPhone before I transferred it to a relative for its second life. It's also true that new Apple devices are built with the headroom to take on several years of 'free' OS updates that actually add new features to a device that you've already paid for. It is unquestionably better to not need repairs or hardware upgrades in the first place, even at the cost of making any repairs that are needed more complicated and costly.
So yeah, Apple's new repair program looks like it's designed to be a deflection to allow those who simply insist on having a DIY repair option, while steering most people back to the more advisable Apple store or authorized repair location.
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.
Yes they recycle. No need to mention, but the fact is you are not required to give them for recycle. They have obligation to give it back to you as it belongs to you. You may forfeit it. What part I am from is irrelevant I have lived in the US for 26 years and executed this procedure for repairs of my cars (I do a lot of my own besides IT). There is no "core" parts and you are wrong. Tell me what is core in case of car brakes (I repaired for fun Mazda, Honda, Land Rovers, BMW e.t.c)? Have you ever even approached car repair or you just play with cable to hook up your iPhone in car? I also replaced old iPod batteries and Android phone with available components (back doors with sensors, batteries) as well as older MacBook's and Mac Minis. You know they did not require me to return "core" CPU when I replaced it with upgrade pulled out of old Dell laptop and installed into Mac Mini to make it dual core 64-bit circa 2006 model. Have you done those things? Any other questions I might help with so you know your rights and do not spread misinformation? BTW in California you may have restrictions on doing those things, but I couldn't care less what's in California. I live near New York City and plan to move to healthy south.
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.
Yes they recycle. No need to mention, but the fact is you are not required to give them for recycle. They have obligation to give it back to you as it belongs to you. You may forfeit it. What part I am from is irrelevant I have lived in the US for 26 years and executed this procedure for repairs of my cars (I do a lot of my own besides IT). There is no "core" parts and you are wrong. Tell me what is core in case of car brakes (I repaired for fun Mazda, Honda, Land Rovers, BMW e.t.c)? Have you ever even approached car repair or you just play with cable to hook up your iPhone in car? I also replaced old iPod batteries and Android phone with available components (back doors with sensors, batteries) as well as older MacBook's and Mac Minis. You know they did not require me to return "core" CPU when I replaced it with upgrade pulled out of old Dell laptop and installed into Mac Mini to make it dual core 64-bit circa 2006 model. Have you done those things? Any other questions I might help with so you know your rights and do not spread misinformation? BTW in California you may have restrictions on doing those things, but I couldn't care less what's in California. I live near New York City and plan to move to healthy south.
Sorry mate, but rob's right and you are wrong. A core charge is a monetary incentive to return the old part you're replacing so that it can be remanufactured or recycled. You are free to keep the old part, but the store will then keep your core charge fee.
The term actually started out as an acronym, COR, which stands for "Cash On Return." People started calling it "core" because it also seems like a word that could refer to the central or "core" part of a component that is useful for remanufacture or recycling. Please see the link below for one common car parts store's explanation, referencing various car parts as examples of things that have a core charge. If you've actually done lots of car maintenance and failed to return the parts that had a core charge, you must have quite a collection of useless, worn out automotive parts and a tidy sum of money you've left on the table. Also, your reference to brake pads is not a good example, because a core charge is only going to exist for parts that have a market for remanufacture or recycling.
Also, have you ever approached internet search "or you just play with cable to hook up your iPhone in car?" This information I've provided to you here is easily found via any common internet search engine. "Any other questions I might help with so you know your rights and do not spread misinformation?"
I may be missing this information but I have not seen it in any announcement, this program is only for consumers, not third party repair services. I think Apple just put buy the parts and take it to someone to do the work. It looks like third part repair service can not line up at Apple's door and buy a case of parts and sell and make the repairs on their own.
I am glad Apple is offering the parts for repairs, and it was smart on Apple's part to do this verse being forces to do this. Apple can now say they offer the parts and it is up to the consumer how they want to handle the repair. Apple does not have to support third parties, and if they screw up they can not come back to Apple. This is smart since I think most people will find out it is better to have apple do the work. Will not stop me from doing the work since I have done it many times in the past when my Daughter who had a habit of breaking the displays and we did not want to pay to replace for her. Now that she buys her own phones it amazing no broken displace in the last 3 yrs.
Comments
All likely true. But with AppleCare+ it would likely be cheaper to let Apple Repair it than to buy the parts and then disassemble the phone yourself -- at which point, if / when you hose it up, Apple likely won't touch it even under AppleCare+ because that would not be "accidental damage".
I see my usual prediction that the obsessives here who gloat over Apple refusing to enact a policy that may lead to reduced profits despite that policy's popularity, are doing their usual act when Apple does exactly what they say Apple shouldn't: calling everyone who might benefit or use the new policy stupid, idiots, freaks etc. It's amazing how bitter some people can be about something that has exactly zero adverse effect on them.
It amuses me that the manufactured reasons why Apple wouldn't sell parts to customers like "repair quality", "security", "responsibility for device damage", etc are all blown away. It's comical watching the squirming, when Apple has done the right thing.
I hope Apple makes a good profit in the end though.
And if you put some realistic figures on these DIY-repairs you’ll see that very few tinkerers will benefit from this, but the whole secondhand market of Apple devices will be devalued — not just the repaired units. Then also read the comment by @lonestar1 in here.
If you can explain to me another reason why lower prices hurt sustainability then I'm happy to hear it, it doesn't make sense to me.
We really don’t know how this experiment will actually play out in practice. Will “used” iPhone buyers (or are we going to go upmarket with “Pre Owned” moniker?) now have prospective units inspected for cold solder joints, battery kinks, poorly executed repairs, knock-off parts, and maybe even Bondo when they consider a used iPhone? A CarFax service for used iPhones?
I’m looking forward to seeing how this plays out over time, but my expectation is that it won’t change a thing for the vast majority of end users. It’ll probably open up a small market for third party repair services, some of which will be decent and some of which will be horrible. The one’s that don’t measure up will of course redirect their failures to Apple.
Finally, even though the longevity of smartphones is better than it was a decade ago, these are still products that become obsolete very quickly. The economics of selling repair parts and the desire to repair older devices is not working in favor of this market. But we will see.
The issue isn't really about users' rights to do whatever they want versus greedy companies that want to charge big bucks for simple repairs. It's about users demanding increasingly powerful computing devices in small packages that are consistently reliable and tolerate a lot of abuse without needing to be repaired in the first place. I have opted for minimalist cases since my first iPhone 3G. I am not an unusually graceful person and have dropped and done plenty of other clumsy things with my iPhones over the years. The only physical repair I have ever required was a battery replacement on one iPhone before I transferred it to a relative for its second life. It's also true that new Apple devices are built with the headroom to take on several years of 'free' OS updates that actually add new features to a device that you've already paid for. It is unquestionably better to not need repairs or hardware upgrades in the first place, even at the cost of making any repairs that are needed more complicated and costly.
So yeah, Apple's new repair program looks like it's designed to be a deflection to allow those who simply insist on having a DIY repair option, while steering most people back to the more advisable Apple store or authorized repair location.
The term actually started out as an acronym, COR, which stands for "Cash On Return." People started calling it "core" because it also seems like a word that could refer to the central or "core" part of a component that is useful for remanufacture or recycling. Please see the link below for one common car parts store's explanation, referencing various car parts as examples of things that have a core charge. If you've actually done lots of car maintenance and failed to return the parts that had a core charge, you must have quite a collection of useless, worn out automotive parts and a tidy sum of money you've left on the table. Also, your reference to brake pads is not a good example, because a core charge is only going to exist for parts that have a market for remanufacture or recycling.
Also, have you ever approached internet search "or you just play with cable to hook up your iPhone in car?" This information I've provided to you here is easily found via any common internet search engine. "Any other questions I might help with so you know your rights and do not spread misinformation?"
https://www.napaonline.com/en/what-is-a-core
I am glad Apple is offering the parts for repairs, and it was smart on Apple's part to do this verse being forces to do this. Apple can now say they offer the parts and it is up to the consumer how they want to handle the repair. Apple does not have to support third parties, and if they screw up they can not come back to Apple. This is smart since I think most people will find out it is better to have apple do the work. Will not stop me from doing the work since I have done it many times in the past when my Daughter who had a habit of breaking the displays and we did not want to pay to replace for her. Now that she buys her own phones it amazing no broken displace in the last 3 yrs.