31–40 of 151 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Do you use a 4s for its minimalist size?
I was recently upgrading a 2008 MacBook. Upgraded the hard drive and the memory. It was so easy. It is an absolute joy to service this machine. It also has many useful ports and an awesome battery indicator on the side.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 ??
I was recently upgrading a 2008 MacBook. Upgraded the hard drive and the memory. It was so easy. It is an absolute joy to service this machine. It also has many useful ports and an awesome battery indicator on the side.
How times change!
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.
You shouldn't have to deal with an extra mm and all the inconvenience that comes along with it just to support my right to replace the battery.
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.
Planned obsolescence is a very shitty and cynical strategy on the part of manufacturers, and anyone fighting against it is on the right side.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 ??
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.
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).
Garbage is a problematic externality because if you try to charge true cost for it, people throw their garbage in the street or the ocean instead of paying. So we generally have subsidized trash pickup, and then "the market" literally overproduces garbage due to the subsidy.
One solution to that is to require the devices to pay the recycling cost up front, but everybody hates that because it makes the device more expensive, moreso than making it repairable would.
The other is to require it to be modular/repairable so that when one component fails or becomes obsolete it can be replaced or upgraded, which extends the life of the other components and reduces the total number of devices that have to be produced and ultimately end up in a landfill.
This may actually increase the original purchase price of the device by quite a bit, because the manufacturer will end up selling fewer units (that's the whole idea) but still have to recover the same fixed costs. But then the user doesn't have to replace their device as often, so the net cost should be slightly lower (the gain being the actual reduction in waste).