Internal Documents Show Apple Is Capable of Implementing Right to Repair • Hacker News Board

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

#111

Post by imandride » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 2:08 AM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #50

monocasa wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can absolutely have a cryptographically secure hardware chain that you can replace parts on. Just require that root keys get wiped on a part swap.

Ok, but you now have an iPhone that can leak your fingerprint or face data, or make it easy to pull credit card information off of. When that happens, will consumers (and the media!) blame Apple for making an insecure phone or the repair store for using untrusted hardware?

If I am remembering correctly, secure enclave has already been compromised. It was mentioned in an article about development iPhones for sale on the black market. So physical access to the device means all of that is already accessible.

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

#112

Post by kllrnohj » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 2:13 AM UTC

xoa wrote: post #98

kllrnohj wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be ignoring that some manufacturers, like Apple, will straight up refuse to do repairs or sell replacement parts in some cases. One such iconic example was Linus Tech Tip's Mac Pro. They know they broke it and tried to pay for repairs , but Apple straight up refused to repair it, saying instead they needed to buy a new one. Similarly Apple refuses to do repairs or charge extreme amounts once a Macbook is…

> You seem to be ignoring that some manufacturers, like Apple, will straight up refuse to do repairs or sell replacement parts in some cases. Seriously, can you please explain how on Earth you got "me ignoring that" when I directly stated I thought it should be legally required for all manufacturers, specifically including Apple, to do repairs for a long period of time. I used 4-5 years as an example period that migh…

> Which is why I'm saying that shouldn't be allowed.

How? You're going to pass legislation that mandates manufacturers support repairing indefinitely and at a reasonable cost? What if they go out of business, or just literally don't have a repair division in the first place? And why does the manufacturer get gifted a monopoly here?

> I don't see that. I see an inevitable result of engineering things to be as compact and efficient as possible. The higher the active to dead matter ratio, the less leeway there is for simple repair and swapping too. The problem isn't making that tradeoff, the problem is not pricing it in.

That's because you're confused as to the topic it seems. Nobody is saying that devices have to be easy to repair. They are instead saying you can't DRM replacement hardware and actively block importation of replacements, which is literally what major companies (including Apple) are doing right now. It isn't about engineering trade-offs compromising ease of repair, it's about literally engineering it to be impossible to repair (without DRM keys)

> It makes the most sense to regulate the desired result. Just pass a law saying manufacturers must offer 1 year of warranty on every $125 value of electronic goods up to a maximum of 6 years.

Well for starters because that's not actually the desired result, nor is that even a _good_ result. And you're calling other people's posts "frustrating", lol

> The disdain technical people here often display towards people in other fields even now is really sad.

Talk about unrelated & unwarranted, wow.

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

#113

Post by 12298765 » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 2:14 AM UTC

mises wrote: post #109

chii wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A device is repair hostile if repairing requires the permission of a third party instead of the device owner. Security is different because a device can be made secure without it being repair hostile - e.g, the owner of the device has the private keys in a signed code update. So a maid can't just Willy Nilly change your baby monitor, but you can.

> has the private keys How do you store these? It's not really user friendly for the average consumer, and certainly has little recourse if you lose them all. How well does it usually go when people are told to keep track of, say, a dongle? What if each device needs one?

The point isn't that every user will know how to repair their own products, rather that they could if they choose.

Think about your lawnmower. If the engine won't run, maybe you can figure out through a bit of research that it's probably the spark plug. So you can go buy a spark plug and swap it yourself. You don't need the manufacturer to authorize your new spark plug.

However, many people would not know anything about where to begin replacing their spark plug, and don't want the hastle to learn, so they bring it to the manufacturer and pay a premium to have it done for them. But if they someday decided to learn, they could learn themselves. Or even take their lawnmower to a friend who can help them.

To take away those option entirely, only leaving the one option -- paying the manufacturer a premium to do it for you -- is what I have an issue with.

Bonus: the lawnmower manufacturer could include a type of safety lock that does not allow you to work on your lawnmower, to prevent a user from hurting themselves. However, the manufacturer should also give the user the ability to remove that lock, positively asserting that they know what they're doing (like giving the private keys, or allowing a motherboard switch to be toggled which unlocks the system, etc)

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

#114

Post by voltagex_ » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 2:30 AM UTC

darkpuma wrote: post #102

widowlark wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to be fair, its like 3 pounds lighter - and doesnt need to be

I think that's about the weight of a typical american soft drink. Surely even the least fit among us can cope with such a hardship.

I carry a 1.1kg Dell XPS in my bag, if I went up to 2 or 2.5kg my wheelchair would be a bit more unbalanced and more difficult to push uphill. The soft drink fits in my cupholder.

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

#115

Post by xoa » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 2:33 AM UTC

kllrnohj wrote: post #112

xoa wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You seem to be ignoring that some manufacturers, like Apple, will straight up refuse to do repairs or sell replacement parts in some cases. Seriously, can you please explain how on Earth you got "me ignoring that" when I directly stated I thought it should be legally required for all manufacturers, specifically including Apple, to do repairs for a long period of time. I used 4-5 years as an example period that migh…

> Which is why I'm saying that shouldn't be allowed. How? You're going to pass legislation that mandates manufacturers support repairing indefinitely and at a reasonable cost? What if they go out of business, or just literally don't have a repair division in the first place? And why does the manufacturer get gifted a monopoly here? > I don't see that. I see an inevitable result of engineering things to be as compact…

>indefinitely

I never once suggested any such thing. If you are so intellectually dishonest that you take fixed terms and caps and turn it into "indefinitely" then there is no point in discussing things any farther.

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

#116

Post by threeseed » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 2:37 AM UTC

jandrese wrote: post #58

wlesieutre wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember in the old iBooks back when WiFi was a new thing you could order without it and install your own card later in about 15 seconds. There were little sprung pull tabs between some of the function keys, pull them back, lift the keyboard out, AirPort card slot was right there. RAM slots too. And the removable keyboard , gosh! Those keyboards didn’t just shit the bed if a piece of dust got in them, but even if t…

Yeah but it was half a centimeter thicker, and therefore useless to today's Apple.

You make it sound like Apple is doing this despite their customers.

But nobody other than a handful of people would rather have a much heavier device in exchange for being able to replace their WiFi card or keyboard.

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

#117

Post by eridius » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 2:53 AM UTC

eridius wrote: post #81

m463 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pentalobe screws?

Measure that make it harder (but not impossible) for users to disassemble their devices serves to avoid people doing accidental damage (and voiding their warrantee). It's possible to get a pentalobe screwdriver, and anyone not willing to get one probably has no business opening up an Apple product.

For those downvoting me, if you genuinely think that pentalobe screws are bad, can you please explain why someone who doesn't have access to a pentalobe screwdriver has even the slightest business opening up an iPhone?

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

#118

Post by saagarjha » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 4:52 AM UTC

madeofpalk wrote: post #83

noir_lord wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still think that the "cheese grater" was the pinnacle of apple desktop design (and I've never owned a mac), I just love it - enough that I damn near bought a broken one to use to build my new PC in the end laziness won and I went corsair but it's still an amazing piece of industrial design.

If by 'pinnacle of apple design design' you mean actively user hostile, then yeah! The handles on that thing were rough .

The new Mac Pro doesn't even have handles, so…

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

#119

Post by saagarjha » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 4:54 AM UTC

brokenmachine wrote: post #92

saagarjha wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> iFixit is doing a social good IMO Agree. > anyone fighting against it is on the right side Don't. For example, Louis Rossmann recently kicked up a storm when he claimed that Apple used the customs to seize his "genuine" battery shipments (which was widely reported in the media and gave him significant publicity), except it turned out that he left out the fact that the parts were unauthorized: https://old.reddit.com…

What exactly does "unauthorized" mean in the context of spare parts?

It means that the batteries were made without Apple's approval, but carried Apple's branding and were intended to be sold as genuine Apple batteries.

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

#120

Post by saagarjha » Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 5:02 AM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #97

saagarjha wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> iFixit is doing a social good IMO Agree. > anyone fighting against it is on the right side Don't. For example, Louis Rossmann recently kicked up a storm when he claimed that Apple used the customs to seize his "genuine" battery shipments (which was widely reported in the media and gave him significant publicity), except it turned out that he left out the fact that the parts were unauthorized: https://old.reddit.com…

That reddit post you linked to also does its best to avoid focusing on the actual situation. There's no such thing as an "unauthorized" battery. If factories are producing batteries with a default Apple logo (ie to Chinese standards), and he's instructing them to cross it out, that also seems completely legitimate.

> That reddit post you linked to also does its best to avoid focusing on the actual situation.

No, it doesn't. In fact, I think it's pretty explicit in making the situation clear:

> First of all, let me start by saying, I am not defending Apple's terrible stance towards Right to Repair.

> I think Apple's R2R policy is awful - It sucks that once the device you buy is on the "obsolete" list, you can no longer get 1st party service from Apple. Not only that, but there are no legal ways to obtain parts. IMO this is something all of us should be putting pressure on Apple to change. I'd love it if there was a law on the books that forced companies to make spare parts for products available to customers for x amount of years after the warranty expires. That would allow people to continue using the devices they buy.

> In closing, I'm going to continue supporting Louis, iFixit, and their attempts to secure our rights to repair the products we own.

But it is also very obvious that Louis Rossman was clearly dishonest. Actually, I don't quite understand your argument:

> If factories are producing batteries with a default Apple logo (ie to Chinese standards), and he's instructing them to cross it out, that also seems completely legitimate.

How is this "completely legitimate"? Apple is (quite understandably) annoyed that some factories decided to make batteries that Louis could peddle as genuine Apple batteries, when it's clear that they are in fact not these at all (they're crossing out the logos to pass customs, for heaven's sake). Of course they're going to be seized, because they're counterfeit: Apple probably wasn't even involved here. I'm surprised he has the gall to try to make this a huge PR issue by claiming that Apple was trying to stop him from repairing Macs with genuine batteries that he bought when he knows they're just shady batteries from China he's trying to bring into the country.