kaarme

teejay2012 said:

kaarme said:

 Especially Apple, with their history of leaking nudes of repair customers.

Your comment points seemed reasonable but then you suggest that this one case represents an Apple SOP. Earns a double face palm...

Where did I say that it represents an apple SOP? The point is that apple, like any other repair provider is capable of making mistakes, so there is nothing that makes them holy or special compared to many other repair providers, and in a free market the consumer is free to make a purchase decision based on any arbitary whim. An arbitor shouldn't have a conflict of interest, and it especially shouldn't be possible for it to also be the plaintiff. And that's what apple is in this situation: an entity that decides who is competent to repair, but also potentially capable of being an incompetent repair service itself.

chasm said:

This law will probably be struck down fairly quickly in a court challenge, since the state overstepped its jurisdiction by mandating that manufacturers must provide the same parts, tools, and documentation to unqualified people *for free* (state governments cannot mandate business to give stuff away for free), and mandating that this must be provided outside Minnesota also (Minnesota has zero authority to dictate this outside Minnesota).

I’m not against amateur/enthusiast repair for certain kinds of repair that can be done safely, but as usual the zealots of this movement go too far. Most people are 100 percent *not equipped* if they puncture a swollen battery while trying to remove it, and it explodes or starts a fire. Do you think they’ll sue *themselves* for being incompetent, or the *lawmakers* who allowed them to engage in risky repairs? Oh hell no, they’ll sue *Apple* of course.

Apple has little choice but to fight this in court. This law as written is incompetent and dangerous.

"costs that are equivalent to the lowest actual cost for which the original equipment
manufacturer offers the tool, software, or documentation to an authorized repair provider,
including any discount, rebate, or other financial incentive offered to an authorized repair

Apple has already shifted on it's own accord, and you all are still advocating for a policy apple itself is admitting is unethical. 
https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/17/22787336/apple-right-to-repair-self-service-diy-reason-microsoft

22july2013 said:

If I don't like Apple's policy on repairability I can buy a Samsung. Free market. Lots of choices.

Or we can cancel the free market and issue orders to every company telling them what they can build.

We have plenty of environmental, anti-trust and safety regulations already, yet we don't generally consider that to be abolishing the free market.
Secondly, if you had read the report you can see that none of the big manufacturers, including Samsung have very good scores, and most  manufacturers engage in massive amounts of lobbying via professional lobbyists, and using the legal system to attack independent repair providers and attempts to make repair easier.  There ARE NO CHOICES. With the exception of 1 or 2 niche new manufacturers, manufacturers are anti-repair. Claiming that this is a free market economy which the manufacturers are engaging in is flat out misinformation.

 Repairability requires very minor changes, such as part availability and documentation and just not gluing things together. Read the damn report.

xiao-zhi said:

Buy a Dell or Motorola and enjoy your time repairing it while I use my MacBook Pro and iPhones to do things! 

Or what about this: you can keep using macs and iPhones and you also get to repair them instead of buying new ones if Apple actually sold parts and documentation to third party repair?

sdw2001 said:

Dumb.  No one really cares about repairability any more.  The devices are solid state and integrated.  This means they require less repair.  We aren't talking about an x486 from 1995 here.  Things like batteries typically last longer than they used to as well.  For example, I've replaced the battery on my 2009 MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo three times.  I just unloaded my 2015 MBP after 5.5 years of use, and the battery was still at least 80%.  Most people really don't have the technical skills to repair these devices anyway.  It was different when you'd open up a beige box and swap out a 6 inch RAM module.  You know what else I can't really work on anymore? My car.  It's been like that for over 20 years.  

The examples the report gives are fairphone and the Framework laptop, and there have been of decently repairable, thin AND affordable devices within the last 10 years. And this is primarily about third part repair PROFESSIONALS, with sautering equipment and skills. And guess what? You can actually get your car repaired by independent repair because of rtr. Would you rather  have that banned and be forced to pay 3x the price at the manufacturer? Yeah, probably not.

tundraboy said:

When compact devices like smart phones move towards fully integrated solid-state construction, what will there be left to repair when something breaks?

At this point, repairability actually adds to the cost of manufacturing and impairs product quality.  Designed-in repairability will impair compactness, dust and water proofing, and assembly costs.  Not to mention security and privacy.  So most of us will be penalized with more expensive less capable devices just to benefit what is basically a minuscule cottage industry of repair outfits.

I am not saying that electronic junk is not a serious environmental problem but a long term solution doesn't lie in repairability.  Comprehensive, designed-in reduced material usage and recyclability is where the truly effective solution lies.

There are examples of repairable, sleek and reasonably low cost devices. In fact, this was the norm even with smart phones not too long ago. There have also been dust and water proofed repairable devices. (https://www.androidcentral.com/best-sustainable-repairable-phones)
You make a lot of claims without evidence, but your claim of lack of security and privacy is the most ridiculous. I fully admit that android phones don't have a good track record with data security due to software diversity, but if repairability and open source is a security risk, explain to me how graphene os running on a pixel or qubes running on a power9 board is unsecure. It's, of course, ridiculous considering those technologies were designed for openness yet are considered the pinnacle of security hardened technology. Security achieved by design, not by obscurity. It's a pretty universal principle in the infosec world.

Regarding the claim of repairing being a "cottage industry": 

• Eight out of ten Americans (81%) say they have, in the past five years, replaced at least one of the types of items we asked about (smartphones, small and large home appliances, and vehicles) due to breakage.
• When deciding which product to purchase in certain categories, repairability is important. For those planning to buy a vehicle, 83% say repairability is very important; for large appliances, 60% say it’s very important.
  Source: https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/press_release/consumer-reports-survey-finds-americans-overwhelmingly-support-the-right-to-repair/

The reason why independent repair is small right now is because it has been made difficult and manufacturer repair is overpriced in contrast to what independents charge or would charge. Manufacturers generally benefit from consumers not repairing their devices.


Everyone here should actually read the report and also read the ftc report below.
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/nixing-fix-ftc-report-congress-repair-restrictions/nixing_the_fix_report_final_5521_630pm-508_002.pdf

Stop simping for corporations. If you have apple devices you should be happy right to repair is going forward, since it gives you more options in the market and lowers your costs.