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

Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

reasonstobecheerful.world

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 366 posts

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#301

Post by riversflow »

chrisseaton wrote: post #291
riversflow wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve broken far far more phones than I’ve had to replace because they became obsolete. If we came anywhere close to most phones lasting until they are outmoded we’d be doing good.

> broken far far more phones Maybe just be more careful? 'Take reasonable care of your things' should possibly come between reduce, and reuse-recycle.

Such condescension in response to breaking a piece of glass you carry with you in your pocket all the time. It’s honestly offensive.

Its funny how people whom share my active lifestyle often have a similar problem, and lament how fragile phones are.

Most of my phones have been broken between my hip/thigh and a blunt object. Most recently when I slipped and fell on some moss while backpacking. But other incidences including (literally) running into wheelbarrow in the dark, getting knocked out of my hand by a cyclist, a metal water bottle in a vehicle flying and smashing my phone into my hip.

I don’t go out of my way to hurt myself, and am actually a careful, graceful person. I’ve never broken a camera in over 50k shutter pulls.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#302

Post by zug_zug »

cbmuser wrote: post #231
zug_zug wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> When repair labor costs more than automated production.. When companies deliberately build products in unrepairable ways then repair labor costs more than automated production. Imagine if mac butterfly keyboards were replaceable. Or for example I recently fixed my dad's washing machine, but it took a couple hours of labor to replace the pump because you had to remove about 4 other things to get to it (when they co…

> When companies deliberately build products in unrepairable ways then repair labor costs more than automated production. They don’t. They optimize for production costs, not repairability, that’s all. And glueing 100,000 iPhones together is faster and cheaper than screwing them together.

> They don’t.

"With consumer electronics becoming increasingly more complex, many electronics manufacturers have instituted systems whereby the only means to repair a device or obtain repair parts would be through one of their authorized vendors or original equipment manufacturers (OEM). " [1]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronics_right_to_repair

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#303

Post by esyir »

aembleton wrote: post #251
lostlogin wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Failure to address the problems they are causing. Eg near me is a nice park. Every single evening the car park gets a dump of McDonalds and Wendy’s rubbish. Yes, it’s their customers and not them, but if those companies addressed their waste by creating less, making more efficient packaging or finding other ways to improve the situation, they would make way more difference than any customer could.

That should include allowing drive thrus to stamp the car number plate onto packaging.

Feels like we get closer to big brother every day, only this time it's self-monitoring.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#304

Post by esyir »

corty wrote: post #273
TeMPOraL wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps they cannot price in reliability? How many people know that Miele offers long lasting and repairable appliances, instead of just expensive ones? I for one "know" this by weighing HN anecdotes I've seen over the years - couple dozen saying that they sell solid stuff, and one or two saying that they used to sell solid stuff, but are now following the trend of replacing metal components with cheap plastics. How…

The abstract problem is that the market is imperfect due to insufficient customer knowledge. I know my last washing machine lasted X years, but how that will compare to the new one from the same manufacturer, I don't know. The manufacturer also won't (really) tell me, just the usual fluff about quality. So as a consumer, I am unable to decide objectively, just using rumours if there isn't a hard guarantee or a trustw…

Isn't the warranty pretty much the metric of "how long it'll last", as expected by the manufacturer?

A long warranty, while not a guarantee, is pretty correlated to the product lifespan.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#305

Post by JoshTko »

esturk wrote: post #249
JoshTko wrote: post #217

This doesn't make sense. I have sold every single iPhone that I have owned (about 6), and virtually all were 100% functional at time of sale. Making the products openable will likely to make them heavier, more expensive, larger, and more prone to damage (i.e., water damage), and thus less durable overall. I don't want this as a consumer as it will lead to more waste.

Not sure how your personal anecdote comes into play. So you have replaced your phone every 2 years while it's still working, good for you. But have you considered that some people will replace their phone only when it's broken beyond repair?

Apple's approach still makes sense in that scenario since the phones in general will be easier to make more durable. There are far many more phones that are exposed to water than there are people who regularly repair/upgrade their phones. Openable phones are going to be nearly impossible to waterproof, or will make them far larger and more expensive.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#306

Post by corty »

esyir wrote: post #304
corty wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The abstract problem is that the market is imperfect due to insufficient customer knowledge. I know my last washing machine lasted X years, but how that will compare to the new one from the same manufacturer, I don't know. The manufacturer also won't (really) tell me, just the usual fluff about quality. So as a consumer, I am unable to decide objectively, just using rumours if there isn't a hard guarantee or a trustw…

Isn't the warranty pretty much the metric of "how long it'll last", as expected by the manufacturer? A long warranty, while not a guarantee, is pretty correlated to the product lifespan.

Not so simple. Many manufacturers advertise a long warranty and then, when things break, drag their feet, blame improper use or wear and tear, offer workarounds instead of repairs, etc.

A long warranty is only good if the manufacturer is trustworthy. But untrustworthy manufacturers are one of the causes of the whole problem.

A fix might be warranty terms defined by law, where the manufacturer can pick the duration and nothing else. Disputes should be settled in court or by a neutral board of experts.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#307

Post by themacguffinman »

foofoo4u wrote: post #150
MzHN wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do I as a consumer know if a product will last or not? High price does not automatically signal longevity. The other thing is that nothing lasts forever, so eventually you'd need to repair. Most things you can't repair by yourself, so if the repair costs more than new, and the suggested increase for disposal, I'd still end up buying new to save the hassle. My wishlist is: - For consumers, incentivize repair over…

All good questions. I am not going to pretend I know the answers here. I'll share my thoughts though. > How do I as a consumer know if a product will last or not? You, yourself, wont know. Not unless you are an expert on the product, which most people are not. The manufacturer may know what they are selling you is terribly engineered and will break, but you will not. So how can we overcome this imbalance of knowledge…

Perhaps this could be more elegantly solved by making companies pay for the cost of disposal. That way, the business will be incentivized to optimize down the cost because otherwise they'll have to bake the cost into the product, which disincentivizes consumers from buying it through higher prices. It also gets rid of the information asymmetry because the company definitely knows and is incentivized to know their overall quality so they can account for it.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#308

Post by chrisseaton »

riversflow wrote: post #301
chrisseaton wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> broken far far more phones Maybe just be more careful? 'Take reasonable care of your things' should possibly come between reduce, and reuse-recycle.

Such condescension in response to breaking a piece of glass you carry with you in your pocket all the time. It’s honestly offensive. Its funny how people whom share my active lifestyle often have a similar problem, and lament how fragile phones are. Most of my phones have been broken between my hip/thigh and a blunt object. Most recently when I slipped and fell on some moss while backpacking. But other incidences inc…

Honestly they seem plenty robust to me already - I’ve never had one break in any way and I never use a case and just keep it in my pocket for everything from daily use all the way up to tactical military exercises.

Every phone I’ve ever had has become reasonably obsolete though.

I think that’s the case for most people. That’s why recyclability is more important than excessive robustness.

Re: Europe Is Guaranteeing Citizens the Right to Repair

#310

Post by mementomori »

Are there any incentives for corporations to reduce waste? Designed obsolescence is the main business model of smartphones. If anything disrupts the profits in this business model, there has to be an incentive (either reward or punishment) that is enforceable and actually enforced. If a law is made and corporations end up circumventing it, that doesn't count. I kind of expect corporations to continue successfully circumventing/overcoming the efforts against designed obsolescence. Convincing consumers it's OK not to get a new phone every year is another issue.
Post reply on HN