Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 151 posts

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#21

Post by simion314 »

kevinherron wrote: post #19
simion314 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did the free markets ended slavery in US or under-age working? I remember many good things had to be forced with laws and not let to be decided by the big companies.

Are you equating the "injustice" of not being able replace the battery in your iPhone with that of slavery?

No, I am invalidating the point of "Free markets" solve things, so you can ignore the slavery and put other things free markets did not solve like pollution,cigarettes etc but I assume someone would bring the excuse that the goverment was at fault all along and free markets were not free.

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#22

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

duado wrote: post #8
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't believe manufacturers should have to build things to be easy to take apart, to be replaceable or upgradeable, or anything else along those lines. Why not? > I'd rather see legislation that ensures when a piece of tech reaches the end of its useful lifetime it can be submitted back to the manufacturer and properly recycled at no cost to the user. It is always and exclusively at the cost of the user?

Making something that’s easy to take apart often makes it bigger, because interfaces need to be modularized. I’ve never needed to open one of my iPhones and would not want them 1mm thicker to be repairable.

> Making something that’s easy to take apart often makes it bigger, because interfaces need to be modularized.

So, you can still make it mandatory where you don't need to make things bigger?

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#23

Post by mfoy_ »

kevinherron wrote: post #18
voxic11 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are misconstruing the aims of the right to repair movement. Its nothing to do with forcing companies to make it "easy" to repair, but rather about preventing companies from including "features" which serve no purpose besides preventing third party repair. An example would be a tractor that is designed to be cheaply serviceable, but has a feature which disables any replaced parts until a message signed by…

You're right, I remember this initially, but many discussions about right to repair get hijacked and center around topics like iFixit and their blatantly self-serving anti-Apple campaigns.

All ad campaigns are blatantly self-serving... so what's the point?

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#24

Post by mfoy_ »

kurtisc wrote: post #13
kevinherron wrote: post #5

I guess I believe in this "right to repair" movement, but only so far as to ensure that if you're capable of taking your device apart and putting it back together without breaking anything that you don't automatically void some warranty. I don't believe manufacturers should have to build things to be easy to take apart, to be replaceable or upgradeable, or anything else along those lines. I'd rather see legislation t…

In our quest to increase recycling we seem to have forgotten that the original phrase was 'reduce, reuse, recycle'. For example, the manufacturer doesn't have to waste the energy to recycle the case if the case can be reused by making the battery user-serviceable.

Won't somebody please think of the shareholders? How will they be able to make insane profits if people aren't replacing??

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#25

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

kevinherron wrote: post #14
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't believe manufacturers should have to build things to be easy to take apart, to be replaceable or upgradeable, or anything else along those lines. Why not? > I'd rather see legislation that ensures when a piece of tech reaches the end of its useful lifetime it can be submitted back to the manufacturer and properly recycled at no cost to the user. It is always and exclusively at the cost of the user?

> > I don't believe manufacturers should have to build things to be easy to take apart, to be replaceable or upgradeable, or anything else along those lines. > Why not? Because, 1) I personally don't care about this. 2) More important than 1, I don't think the law/government has any business deciding this. The market can decide (spoiler: it already has).

> 2) More important than 1, I don't think the law/government has any business deciding this.

Why?

> The market can decide

Does that mean that it should decide?

> (spoiler: it already has).

Has it? How did you determine that?

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#26

Post by mfoy_ »

xoa wrote: post #16

I really dislike the "Right to Repair" movement because I see it as a lobbyist (iFixit pushes it heavily for example since they make money off it) & niche driven push that is both wasting a real chance to get at some actual critical problems and generating new ones of its own. The two big issues are reasonable life span as part of the purchase price, and questions about ownership vs security. 1. For the first, most p…

How would you legislate the desired result?

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#27

Post by pessimizer »

kevinherron wrote: post #5

I guess I believe in this "right to repair" movement, but only so far as to ensure that if you're capable of taking your device apart and putting it back together without breaking anything that you don't automatically void some warranty. I don't believe manufacturers should have to build things to be easy to take apart, to be replaceable or upgradeable, or anything else along those lines. I'd rather see legislation t…

I'm almost the diametric opposite of that; I believe that manufacturers shoud be compelled to build things to be easy to take apart, replaceable, and upgradeable, if that can be done at a net-zero cost, and should be subsidized by the state if it can't, possibly with tax breaks.

But I don't believe that they should be required to keep it under warranty in that case. I'm fine with a company putting a warranty seal on a device if they don't want people to touch the insides.

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#28

Post by sorenn111 »

simion314 wrote: post #10
kevinherron wrote: post #5

I guess I believe in this "right to repair" movement, but only so far as to ensure that if you're capable of taking your device apart and putting it back together without breaking anything that you don't automatically void some warranty. I don't believe manufacturers should have to build things to be easy to take apart, to be replaceable or upgradeable, or anything else along those lines. I'd rather see legislation t…

So I assume there may be at least 2 distinct issues: 1 preventing people to repair their hardware with software locks, not selling parts, not providing documentation, copyrighting schematics, repairs manuals and doing all you can to not allow third parties to fix hardware. 2 building thins that are impossible or hard to repair because you don't care about the fact that for a broken key you have to replace half the la…

I disagree with some of your sub points from point 1. Selling parts, providing documentation, and building repair manuals are forcing behaviors form companies. Compelling them to do provide a service or product that they would not otherwise provide. Legislation that prevents certain actions is great, but I'm wary of any compulsion from governments to companies and individuals.

If you want to take stuff apart, Go for it! But Apple should not be required to write, edit, and sell manuals that it does not want to.

Re: Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair

#29

Post by simion314 »

sorenn111 wrote: post #28
simion314 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I assume there may be at least 2 distinct issues: 1 preventing people to repair their hardware with software locks, not selling parts, not providing documentation, copyrighting schematics, repairs manuals and doing all you can to not allow third parties to fix hardware. 2 building thins that are impossible or hard to repair because you don't care about the fact that for a broken key you have to replace half the la…

I disagree with some of your sub points from point 1. Selling parts, providing documentation, and building repair manuals are forcing behaviors form companies. Compelling them to do provide a service or product that they would not otherwise provide. Legislation that prevents certain actions is great, but I'm wary of any compulsion from governments to companies and individuals. If you want to take stuff apart, Go for…

But why should Apple be special? As an example for cars most countries have laws that force them to provide you parts years after the car is no longer sold, don't you think that having companies not selling you parts make them have to much control over you?

1 So let me know why should some companies not sell parts?

2 why not share the pdf with schematics and diagnostic software or punish people that share them(is not cost)

Post reply on HN