avon b7

tundraboy said:

Right to repair laws can get really dumb. I can understand its benefit when it comes to cars*, but for compact electronic devices, it just benefits a handful of people at a cost that is charged to all buyers of the device.  The worst effect of such a law is when it starts to interfere with product design, forcing the company to make design compromises that sacrifice cost, quality, and performance.

*And even with cars, nobody insists that the electronic modules be repairable down to the level that is demanded of iPhones.  When a volume control knob on your car stereo breaks, are auto manufacturers required to make that replaceable, or is just offering a replacement stereo good enough?  I've had that happen to me and a replacement knob is not available, the only solution offered is to replace the whole unit.  An electronic device should be repairable to the same standard as that car stereo, not to the standard applied to the whole car.

The opposite argument applies too because the goals don't have to coincide. 

Cost? At what price? 
Design? What sacrifices against what benefits? 
Performance? What performance metrics?

Companies should be designing for repair.

If they think their products truly last (and are built to last) why do companies like Apple offer such poor warranties out of the gate?

Often requiring external legislation to set minimum warranty periods. The Answer is that 'price' or 'cost' falls squarely on the consumer (both in and out of warranty). 'In warranty' via Applecare or similar systems and 'out of warranty' through poor design decisions that actually impede or dissuade repair due to complexity and/or price and parts availability (lack of, that is to say). 

Tradeoffs abound in any situation but things need to be re-thought to put the paying consumer centre stage. 

If you think IP68 protection is necessary - then back it up under warranty. Simple. Don't say 'you should be fine if it ever happens but your on your own if it fails'. The point here is that it almost always does not happen. I think I've only ever known of two cases of water immersion personally. 

IP68 ratings are questionable design choices at best. Water resistance is a better solution along with things like nano coatings which have been around for years. 

User replaceable batteries should not require a special suitcase full of tools and instructions.

Thickness you say? Take a look at this folding phone (it will be released next week) and imagine how 'thick' things would be if applied to some like an iPhone:

https://www.fonearena.com/blog/427645/honor-magic-v3-launch-date-magic-vs3-magicpad-2-magicbook-art-14.html

Performance is moot. Some would argue that a repairable phone 'performs' better because it can last longer between upgrades. 

And parts pairing should be authorised by the owner, not limited to Apple. 

The only reasonable way to reach these goals is through 'right to repair' legislation and that is what we are seeing. 

The EU directive is already making waves and surely being taken into consideration by manufacturers. Expect a lot of handwringing (and fines) if DMA compliance is anything to go by. Especially as the EU approach is actually part of a bigger initiative. 

shrave10 said:

araquen said:

I am skeptical. Apple Intelligence is not a product, and everyone gets that wrong. Apple Intelligence is functionality that is intended to enhance and improve the various platforms Apple has (macOS, iOS, iPadOS, etc). How do you monetize that without monetizing the OS? An OS Apple offers for free.

Bundling AI features as part of the OS encourages antitrust zealots like Vestegier to force Apple to give it away for free to third party developers who already enjoy making $ billions off of the Apple ecosystem for free.  Separating advanced features of Apple Intelligence out of the OS and as an optional add-on allows Apple to charge these rich freeloader developers without violating the DMA in EU or similar potential actions in other countries.  

There is zero issue with Apple trying to monetise whatever it wants as long as it doesn't involve abusing a dominant position, stifling competition or attempt to tip the playing field in its position. That applies to anyone in a similar situation. 

Then it will be up to users to decide. 

davidlewis54 said:

I’m at a loss to understand the EU position on any of its complaints.  Apple certainly does not have any sort of a monopoly over any aspect of any of its product range.  All tech companies offer different things in different regions.  No tech company has every application or product available in all regions at the same time and sometimes there are years apart, if at all.
Apple is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t.  MS Office, particularly Word is pretty much ubiquitous.  I’d much rather not use it but have to because every other business does.  There never seems to be any complaint about that. 

"any sort of monopoly"? 

Apple is on the hook for abusing dominant position. The same situation is playing out worldwide, including the US. 

Apple has been able to cut off web rendering engines from the internet on its devices, alternative app stores, NFC, wallets, apps Apple doesn't like.... It has applied anti steering methods and takes a cut of basically every transaction on the platform.

That is most definitely a 'sort of monopoly' and why it is being investigated around the world.

It has used those restrictions to stifle competition and eliminate choice. 

When it comes to its product range, Apple has an absolute monopoly. 

temperor said:

PS: the solution is simpel, and it will het the EU where it hits hard, just make a US Apple ID, all will work and all the revenue you spent will benefit the US government as taxes will land in the US . Look who is laughing now.

That kind of thinking went out the window a very long time ago. 

Back when books were mostly on paper I would buy plenty of English language content direct from Amazon US. Even with shipping it was cheaper than buying the same imported content locally. 

As the business grew, it popped up on the EU radar and, poof, the loophole was gone. An EU directive placed obligatory, country-of-origin sales tax on all transactions via cards based in the EU.

Size matters, as Apple is learning, but it was good while it lasted. Apple should feel the same. 

StrangeDays said:

EU fanboys: “Follow the DMA or don’t release in our market!”


Apple: “Ok.” (doesn’t release)


EU fanboys: “You can’t do that! Come back here, mister!”

…lol. Sorry dudes, you can’t *make* a company release the products or features you want. This is still a private business, not a state-run entity. 

And how did you reach the conclusion that the EU wants to *make* Apple release a product or feature in the EU? 

She didn't say that. She said this:

"I think that is the most sort of stunning, open declaration that they know 100% that this is another way of disabling competition, where they have a stronghold already."

Firstly, it's clearly a personal opinion, and secondly, at this point in time at least, it is not far off the mark with regards to Apple's 'competition' issues within the EU.