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

It's your device, you should be able to repair it

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 566 posts

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#321

Post by 6510 »

8note wrote: post #298
devoutsalsa wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big reason that stuff isn't replaceable anymore is because consumers wants some of the benefits that come w/ non-replaceable parts. For example, it's nice that I can drop my iPhone in water w/o worrying (too much) about destroying it. I spent ~$1500 on an iPhone 12 Pro in November & dropped it in a lake in December. Part of the reason it's (more) waterproof if because it's not covered w/ ports/hatches/openings that…

I'm not sure consumers per se want it, but that companies think it's what consumers want, and only make things like that. It's a self fulfilling prophecy that customers will buy it. I dont have another choice

Manufacturers want planned obsolesce more than anyone. The problem in my view is that we take limited resources and combine it with slave labor to create landfill. Those few years of usage are not even that relevant. Recycling should be the first goal then repair ability. I think we can do this without the manufacturers drawing the proverbial short straw. Maybe we should get a partial refund when returning expired devices. Maybe we should rent them rather than buy them.

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#322

Post by passivate »

css wrote: post #2

This article moves the goalposts on what "right to repair" is several times. It generally means that manufacturers should not hide schematics from device users or disallow third party manufacturing of first party parts. However, the author states: > The law doesn't yet cover smartphones and tablets that she says are getting harder to fix. One problem is keeping older devices updated with new software. Now "right to r…

>Now "right to repair" includes not only designing devices to be easier to repair but also includes legacy software support? Where do we draw this line? If your M1 dies, you can't fab one yourself or run older software on it indefinitely.

You're argument is with the author, and his interpretation, not with "right to repair". What "right to repair" is or isn't , is not decided by the author of this article. There are various organizations that are loosely related with a few shared ideals.

>We must very carefully define our terms here, because requiring someone else to provide on one's behalf presumes a right to the product of their labor.

Not really. Anyone can propose anything in an article, and they must be free to do so. Its upto us as a collective to think over ideas and proposals and then push for policy proposals that align.

Ultimately the terms will be defined in legislation, not on bbc.com

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#323

Post by operator-name »

arrozconcosas wrote: post #303

Won't repairable phones be bulkier? I would think its hard to be able to have as compact / integrated / low-toleranced of a design if you make more exposed screws, clips and replaceable seals etc.

Firstly repairability and the right to repair are distinct issues.

Surface Pro X and Galaxy Buds are great examples that show just compactness and relative repairability can coexist.

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#324

Post by bogwog »

arrozconcosas wrote: post #303

Won't repairable phones be bulkier? I would think its hard to be able to have as compact / integrated / low-toleranced of a design if you make more exposed screws, clips and replaceable seals etc.

No.

Also, "right to repair" doesn't mean manufacturers have to change their product designs in any way. iPhones today aren't hard to repair because they're thin, they're hard to repair because Apple ships DRM that checks the serial numbers of all the parts, so that it will refuse to work if you try to replace something.

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY7DtKMBxBw

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#325

Post by passivate »

djoldman wrote: post #281

I believe that this right to repair stuff is really a reflection of a superceding market breakdown: oligopolistic power. Consumers want to do what they like with the things they own and some want the information needed to repair those things. Some companies don't have to offer this information or can get away with locking down their devices because they are immune from competition. This immunity is generally acquired…

>Some companies don't have to offer this information or can get away with locking down their devices because they are immune from competition.

Oh it is much worse that this. These 'Some' companies actively block repair shops from purchasing spare parts so they can repair end-users' devices.

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#326

Post by joshspankit »

thinkharderdev wrote: post #133
joshspankit wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if we (users) choose to only browse lean sites with our first-gen iPads, why should we (society) say “stop doing that”?

I don't think that it is correct to say that anyone is telling you anything. Apple has decided that they will drop support for devices after a certain period of time because the development effort of maintaining support is too costly given the number of users with the old hardware. If I could be emperor for a day I would just mandate that when they drop support an old device, they have to provide a way for users stil…

I fully agree with the idea that ending support means you’re agreeing to hand the keys to the community

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#327

Post by doikor »

JoshTko wrote: post #122
leoedin wrote: post #53

PCs and even most laptops have been very repairable for decades. You can still run Windows or Linux on a 10+ (20+?) year old laptop without an issue. The idea that a 5 year old laptop would be unusable or not get the latest version of Windows is unacceptable. Yet phones cost similar amounts and have nowhere near the repairability. A decade ago you could argue that it wasn't that important - specs were changing so qui…

The trend for lack of reparability in smartphones is because of consumer preferences. Consumers are consistently choosing devices that are smaller, lighter, higher durability, waterproof, cheaper etc. vs. devices that are more repairable that do not have those features.

Most of the the newest devices are perfectly repairable if the manufacturer would release the schematics and not block their suppliers from third parties buying the parts (and as newest trend lock the parts together on hardware level). Maybe not all problems but a lot of the most common ones for sure.

Repair shops have managed to source new screens and cameras for the latest iPhones for example. Apple just firmware locks them to the device that stops them from working even though it is a identical part (except for the serial number burned into the chip).

Basically it is not about making designs that just happen to be hard to repair but instead the manufacturers are making them intentionally hard or impossible to repair for third parties to protect their own repair line and/or force you to buy a new one especially now that phones have started to last 3+ years just fine as progress on cpu speeds have slowed done.

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#328

Post by giantrobot »

rasz wrote: post #161
cbmuser wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s usually because these people don’t have the slightest clue how industrial mass-production for consumer goods work. They constantly think it’s always about the customer, it isn’t. The products are almost always optimized for costs, nothing else. If a manufacturer uses glue instead screws, they don’t do that to make it harder to repair. They prefer glue because it’s cheaper. The same applies for cheap components…

No, its not optimized for cost. Manufacturing is optimized for _profit_. >they don’t do that to make it harder to repair you mean cryptographically linking lcd screen to motherboard is done for cost, not to stop third parties from being able to repair it?

It's done for security because the screens are primary input devices and linked to the biometric sensors. Without protections for genuine components anyone could replace your screen with one that had a hardware key logger and compromised biometric sensors. The security of the system is as weak as the weakest component.

Your phone has access to tons of personal data, for some people just about all of their personal data. It's in every user's best interest to have secure hardware since it's inherently mobile and easily lost or stolen, easier than a desktop locked in a house.

But no I'm sure it's just some conspiracy to make iPhones disposable. That makes way more sense.

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#329

Post by foxhop »

duped wrote: post #221
hilbert42 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you take away the ability of companies to negotiate reasonable deals with their venders, they'll just buy them out and vertically integrate." Why was that argument irrelevant in the past when the 'right to repair' was was accepted as completely normal† and manufacturers actually encourage it? (See my point to that effect above.) † That is, to the extent that back then no one would have understood what the phrase…

Because JIT manufacturing didn't exist. It's not coincidence that we make more devices that are more complex, and do it faster today than we did in the olden days and they are simultaneously more difficult to repair with tougher to source components in low volumes. Everything from the design process to the assembly and repair is completely different today than it was 50 years ago. At the same time, consumers stopped…

There is no such thing as consumers in this argument. These are citizens!

Re: It's your device, you should be able to repair it

#330

Post by Wohlf »

35fbe7d3d5b9 wrote: post #230
OrwellianChild wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your approach will always be a valid choice, for those who want it, and companies will be happy to provide that device-as-a-service model. R2R is just seeking to preserve the practical access to repairability for those who want to service their own devices.

> Your approach will always be a valid choice, for those who want it This isn't "my approach" – it's the approach that the vast majority of purchasers prefer. And pining for the good ol' days of technical datasheets doesn't help everybody who can't start their cars without the successful interaction of nearly a hundred proprietary microcontrollers running proprietary code speaking over a high-speed data bus. And here…

You can't buy a new car like an '88 Camry anymore, the government will not allow it to be sold due to safety and environmental regulation.
Post reply on HN