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

One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

columbianewsservice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 562 posts

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#421

Post by KiwiJohnno »

walrus01 wrote: post #369
Nextgrid wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By the time you were to pay for the repair service and the parts it might not be economical. Louis Rossmann proves that such a business does work and is profitable while remaining significantly cheaper for customers (otherwise he wouldn't get any business).

I think this works by volume of customers in the NYC metro, but might not be viable for a repair shop in a smaller city. I would be very interested to see if a similar specialist could financially support the salaries of a few full time techs in a much smaller metro on the scale of, for example, Spokane WA.

In the article Louis says he wants to leave NYC, because the rent is exorbitant and over half of his work is mailed in anyway.

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#422

Post by sudosysgen »

eigen wrote: post #390
wmf wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like a basic consumer protection issue that's mostly already solved in the developed world. When I get my car serviced, it's understood that I will hold the mechanic responsible for everything so they don't even bother trying to put sketchy parts in my car.

yet Prius catalytic convertors are apparently a big market, so much so that it is a regularly stolen item. so someone is buying these parts to install when a car is serviced. [1] https://www.inquirer.com/business/toyota-prius-catalytic-con... [2] https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/thieves-target-toyota-p... ! [3] https://www.theguardian.com/money/2020/feb/01/catalytic-conv... > The thieves make about £300 to £500 f…

They're not making money by installing the converters into Priuses.

They are making money by selling the platinum inside.

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#423

Post by graywh »

hourislate wrote: post #66
Terretta wrote: post #60

I genuinely do not want repairability anywhere near the top of the list of performance and design trade offs. Ruggedness, longevity, sure. Avoiding need to repair, definitely. Repairability? Other concerns, things that change the day-to-day use of the device, should weigh more. Spent too many years as a full service PC network support small business to ever again want to deal with parts that aren’t actually attached…

Are you also against being able to upgrade a device, like adding memory or a larger hard drive? Why can't repairability be at the top of the list with performance and design? Apple doesn't want you to fix its devices, it wants to force you to either have them fix it or buy a new one. It's a business decision not a technical one.

and it seems like of the time, the fix costs as much as a new one

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#424

Post by BeFlatXIII »

pembrook wrote: post #406
xyst wrote: post #82

Apple's fight against right to repair while pushing materials to the public that state they are trying to reduce their carbon footprint is the absolute peak of hypocrisy. I understand the closed off design of their products is a result of the Steve Jobs era, but why can't the current leadership make a change? Why can't Apple make their products easily repairable while making them aesthetically pleasing? The typical "…

It's because they can see the bigger picture, beyond these 2010s-era complaints of 'user-upgradable RAM.' This is totally irrelevant in a SOC world. Apple is indeed reducing the carbon footprint of computer manufacturing, by consolidating more and more components on a single chip (SOC) with M1, and creating smaller and smaller hardware. There's a ridiculous amount of carbon footprint saved by not having to source, sh…

What display technology will be used in 10–20 years? LCDs & OLEDs may be obviated by then, but panels of some sort will still be a must.

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#425

Post by z-nexx »

pembrook wrote: post #406
xyst wrote: post #82

Apple's fight against right to repair while pushing materials to the public that state they are trying to reduce their carbon footprint is the absolute peak of hypocrisy. I understand the closed off design of their products is a result of the Steve Jobs era, but why can't the current leadership make a change? Why can't Apple make their products easily repairable while making them aesthetically pleasing? The typical "…

It's because they can see the bigger picture, beyond these 2010s-era complaints of 'user-upgradable RAM.' This is totally irrelevant in a SOC world. Apple is indeed reducing the carbon footprint of computer manufacturing, by consolidating more and more components on a single chip (SOC) with M1, and creating smaller and smaller hardware. There's a ridiculous amount of carbon footprint saved by not having to source, sh…

idk what you are on about, you wanna defend throwing away a whole laptop when the battery's dead or the LCD is broken? You don't think "right to repair" is all about replacing IC's on a PCB, right? There are a ton of vital components in a modern laptop that would easily be replacable by either a dedicated layman or an unlicenced professional. E.g. the webcam, SSD, battery, cables between these and the MB, the LCD, keyboard, touchpad, power button, speakers, screen bezel, digitizer, daughterboards, lid sensor, the list goes on and on and on.

And remember that "right to repair" does not only entail end users, but also local repair shops and IT service companies who simply are not licensed with a specific brand.

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#426

Post by GuB-42 »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #329
Nextgrid wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason it can be done in China is because those shops illegally obtain the parts (whether counterfeit or stolen, since Apple won't intentionally sell them to anyone) and resources (schematics, software, etc) to be able to do so. This situation is both good and bad. Stolen parts are good, in the sense that this grey market at least allows consumers to repair devices cost-effectively. It's also bad, because besides…

>the grey market opens the door to bad actors who pass off used/defective/rejected/counterfeit parts as the real thing. The real thing is already broken if you're at the point of buying these parts. The entire object is already e-waste until you add new parts. E-waste turned into functional object is a good thing even if it's achieved with used/rejected/counterfeit parts.

Some counterfeit parts can be worse than waste, they can be dangerous. Like batteries that catch fire and glass that shatters into sharp fragments.

It can also happens to legitimate products (ex: Galaxy Note 7), but these can be traced and recalls can be issued.

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#427

Post by tzs »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #312
paulgerhardt wrote: post #208

Living in Shenzhen, it’s shocking how easy it is to go out and repair stuff. Living in Palo Alto, it’s frustrating how hard it is. I’m thinking maybe, just maybe, introducing repairability laws won’t solve the problem. I am perfectly happy upgrading the memory on my MacBook Air with a reflow air station rather than swapping out some dims if it means my laptop is half as thick and twice as rugged. I’m also just as hap…

I remember in the 80s, devices would all come with the complete schematics right there in the box. I remember poring over them after buying something, I thought it was fascinating. Like my TV, computer etc. Everything. This should really be brought back, even though component-level fixing is not nearly as easy as it was back then.

In the 1960s DIY TV repair was such a big thing that there were self-service kiosks in supermarkets that sold vacuum tubes and included a tube tester.

When your TV stopped working, you took the back panel off with the TV turned on and looked to see which tube was not glowing. You would then turn the TV off, pull that tube from its socket, take it down to the supermarket, stick it into the correct socket on the kiosk, and press the "test" button. A meter or lights on the kiosk would tell you if the tube was dead.

If it was, you looked up the tube in a book that was attached to the kiosk. The book would list the part number of an equivalent tube sold at the kiosk. You'd grab the right tube from the racks of tubes in the kiosk, go pay for it at the checkout stand, take it home, put it on the socket, and 99% of the time that fixed your TV.

If that didn't you might take the rest of the tubes in and test them just in case the problem was a tube failure other than a burned out filament.

Only if that didn't do it did you call the TV repair shop.

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#428

Post by pembrook »

swiley wrote: post #419
pembrook wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because they can see the bigger picture, beyond these 2010s-era complaints of 'user-upgradable RAM.' This is totally irrelevant in a SOC world. Apple is indeed reducing the carbon footprint of computer manufacturing, by consolidating more and more components on a single chip (SOC) with M1, and creating smaller and smaller hardware. There's a ridiculous amount of carbon footprint saved by not having to source, sh…

Yeah no that's bullshit. (and a change of subject) We're not asking for modular connectors (although those are nice) or larger competents. we're asking Apple (and everyone imitating them) to stop artificially preventing people from replacing parts (either via deals with suppliers that prevent people from buying them or via software lockouts.) People do surface mount rework all the time (I think the guy TFA is talking…

> “People do surface mount rework all the time”

What percentage of Apple customers are doing surface mount rework, or even hiring other people to do this, in your estimation?

My guess is less than .01%.

And how much could that really be increased if Apple were forced to make their parts accessible and available in the aftermarket? Vs the carbon footprint of the extra manufacturing effort and having to set up distribution channels for these parts?

I just don’t see the sustainability argument. I don’t think any large number of people would suddenly say they want to keep their slow, heat-generating Intel MBPs if they were more repairable. The upgrade cycle will always be the upgrade cycle.

It’s disingenuous to play the “green” card here. I’d be more on the side of the right to repair Apple critics if they would just be honest and say “hey, this is a hobby for us and we want to save money and we just want to be able to do this stuff because it’s fun!”

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#429

Post by chevill »

KiwiJohnno wrote: post #421
walrus01 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this works by volume of customers in the NYC metro, but might not be viable for a repair shop in a smaller city. I would be very interested to see if a similar specialist could financially support the salaries of a few full time techs in a much smaller metro on the scale of, for example, Spokane WA.

In the article Louis says he wants to leave NYC, because the rent is exorbitant and over half of his work is mailed in anyway.

Yea but you also have to take into account that he's internet famous. Probably the most well known person in the computer repair industry says his shop with 16 people is taking in between 1 and 2 million a year.

So that's somewhere between 62.5k and 125k per employee annually in revenue. He's doing well enough but its not exactly a money printing machine and you would assume a person at the top of his industry is doing significantly better than anyone else could.

I do think its quite possible to make a living doing this in most places, but there's easier ways for people with that level of technical skills to make more money so it remains to be seen how many will choose to do it.

That being said I'm 100% supportive of right to repair and I'm a fan of Louis's content.

Re: One man’s fight for the right to repair broken MacBooks

#430

Post by Proziam »

pembrook wrote: post #428
swiley wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah no that's bullshit. (and a change of subject) We're not asking for modular connectors (although those are nice) or larger competents. we're asking Apple (and everyone imitating them) to stop artificially preventing people from replacing parts (either via deals with suppliers that prevent people from buying them or via software lockouts.) People do surface mount rework all the time (I think the guy TFA is talking…

> “People do surface mount rework all the time” What percentage of Apple customers are doing surface mount rework, or even hiring other people to do this, in your estimation? My guess is less than .01%. And how much could that really be increased if Apple were forced to make their parts accessible and available in the aftermarket? Vs the carbon footprint of the extra manufacturing effort and having to set up distribu…

> My guess is less than .01%.

Because it's prohibitively expensive vs the cost of a new device due to the policies being discussed in this thread.

There was a time I could get a screen replaced in a phone for $40-50. Today, Apple literally bricks the device for swapping out a broken button, even if the part is an authentic Apple component. The trend has been getting progressively worse, and while this thread is mostly about Apple it affects far more industries (Farming being a big example).

> And how much could that really be increased if Apple were forced to make their parts accessible and available in the aftermarket?

I'd reckon a pretty high % of people with cracked screens would happily get them repaired if it were not either ludicrously expensive to do so, or if they felt that they could get it done by 'professionals' instead at some random corner store. These shops can't source parts and schematics "legitimately" and the whole process feels very grey market which drives people away.

Post reply on HN