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

Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

ifixit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 126 posts

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#41

Post by makeitdouble »

Teever wrote: post #34
rtpg wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What I don't understand is why a couple of the higher quality tractor companies have not started pushing hard to brand "we support repair" and having available online manuals and software to support this. This seems a perfect marketing/product platform for an underdog that also believes this. My understanding is basically all high-capital machinery makes a _lot_ of money from support contracts and repairs. I think…

Yeah but didn't they make a lot of money from support contracts before bullshit DRM? So isn't the difference between making a lot of money and a lot more emoney with DRM? And if that's the case can't a defector break from the DRM paradigm and offer tractors without DRM so they still make a lot of money at a minimum, but likely more due to picking up more customers? Like to put it in other terms can't they make up for…

Knowing nothing about tractors, but there always was a strong push from vendors to not allow repairs by the user.

In the olden days it would be weird shaped screws and stickers with "warranty void" kind of bright red wording everywhere that would impact their bottom line. Then potential denial of repair or extra costs ("out of warranty") if they could find any plausible reason to attribute the issue to your intervention where you shouldn't touch.

I'd see the introduction of DRM as a way to enforce rules that were already there, more than a radical change to their business model.

So yes, I'd expect a lot of resistance to moving to right of repair.

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#42

Post by crabmusket »

rtpg wrote: post #31
Gustomaximus wrote: post #23

What I don't understand is why a couple of the higher quality tractor companies have not started pushing hard to brand "we support repair" and having available online manuals and software to support this. This seems a perfect marketing/product platform for an underdog that also believes this. Massey, Fendt or similar could really differentiate themself and take market share on the back of this I suspect. Especially w…

> What I don't understand is why a couple of the higher quality tractor companies have not started pushing hard to brand "we support repair" and having available online manuals and software to support this. This seems a perfect marketing/product platform for an underdog that also believes this. My understanding is basically all high-capital machinery makes a _lot_ of money from support contracts and repairs. I think…

Without knowing about the industry, I like to wistfully think that a cooperative would be the way to structure a company that cares about this. Not just worker-owned, but customer-owned as well. If you're buying an asset you expect to last decades, having a stake in the manufacturer doesn't seem like a completely bad idea.

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#43

Post by orangepurple »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #23

What I don't understand is why a couple of the higher quality tractor companies have not started pushing hard to brand "we support repair" and having available online manuals and software to support this. This seems a perfect marketing/product platform for an underdog that also believes this. Massey, Fendt or similar could really differentiate themself and take market share on the back of this I suspect. Especially w…

Could it be because there is no meaningful competition and the current players possibly collude?

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#44

Post by vkou »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #18
voakbasda wrote: post #10

I suspect that John Deere and friends will find a way to challenge this in court and -- if they eventually lose -- find a way to maliciously comply with the law. Their behavior has been actively hostile to their customers for years, and they have zero incentive to change. Like Apple's repair kits mentioned in another comment, I suspect their strategy will involve providing tools that cost nearly as much to rent as it…

Name, shame, and industry blacklist Deere product managers. It's the only way. Stop acting like there's nothing that can be done.

> Name, shame, and industry blacklist Deere product managers.

Why would you give them that kind of free advertising?

Do you think the people that hire them don't want them to behave in that way?

It's like trying to shame a door-to-door salesperson for being too pushy. All you're doing is advertising that he's really good at his job.

'Name and shame' is a feel-good knee-jerk to social problems that need to be solved by legislature. There's always going to be assholes who will try to turn a quick buck by burning their reputation for a profit.

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#45

Post by cobertos »

crabmusket wrote: post #42
rtpg wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What I don't understand is why a couple of the higher quality tractor companies have not started pushing hard to brand "we support repair" and having available online manuals and software to support this. This seems a perfect marketing/product platform for an underdog that also believes this. My understanding is basically all high-capital machinery makes a _lot_ of money from support contracts and repairs. I think…

Without knowing about the industry, I like to wistfully think that a cooperative would be the way to structure a company that cares about this. Not just worker-owned, but customer-owned as well. If you're buying an asset you expect to last decades, having a stake in the manufacturer doesn't seem like a completely bad idea.

The problem with any cooperative feels like a human one. Keeping everyone informed and active communicants. People like to forget about things when they're stable.

A coop loses so much value when it just becomes a one email a year affair with "Hey, it's that time to vote for things again!"

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#46

Post by radlad »

makeitdouble wrote: post #41
Teever wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but didn't they make a lot of money from support contracts before bullshit DRM? So isn't the difference between making a lot of money and a lot more emoney with DRM? And if that's the case can't a defector break from the DRM paradigm and offer tractors without DRM so they still make a lot of money at a minimum, but likely more due to picking up more customers? Like to put it in other terms can't they make up for…

Knowing nothing about tractors, but there always was a strong push from vendors to not allow repairs by the user. In the olden days it would be weird shaped screws and stickers with "warranty void" kind of bright red wording everywhere that would impact their bottom line. Then potential denial of repair or extra costs ("out of warranty") if they could find any plausible reason to attribute the issue to your intervent…

> I'd see the introduction of DRM as a way to enforce rules that were already there, more than a radical change to their business model.

Voiding a warranty for DIY repairs is very different from making DIY repairs impossible.

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#47

Post by kwiens »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #23

What I don't understand is why a couple of the higher quality tractor companies have not started pushing hard to brand "we support repair" and having available online manuals and software to support this. This seems a perfect marketing/product platform for an underdog that also believes this. Massey, Fendt or similar could really differentiate themself and take market share on the back of this I suspect. Especially w…

I don't understand this either. I can tell you that after a decade of advocacy on ag Right to Repair, not once has a manufacturer reached out to us and asked how they could improve repairability. As a Kubota owner, this disappoints me.

Fortunately in the electronics world, we have Framework and Fairphone. And Nokia making noises around improving repairability. Google and even Samsung launching independent parts programs.

One of the ag manufacturers should break off and take the lead. It's not going to be Deere, or Case, or New Holland.

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#48

Post by freejazz »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #7

But will John Deere do what Apple did? Here’s one example: “Apple shipped me a 79-pound iPhone repair kit to fix a 1.1-ounce battery” https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/21/23079058/apple-self-servi... “I’m starting to think Apple doesn’t want us to repair them”

I don't get this article - he wants to replace the battery... to do that he has to replace the screen. he then complains that he has to use this big device to suck the screen off?? he wanted to do the repairs... these are the tools to do the repairs. he'd be writing the same exact article if they sent him crappy versions of the tools to do the repairs...

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#49

Post by dataflow »

icelancer wrote: post #39
dataflow wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

W.r.t. the first bullet point, I don't think NY was any different - AFAIK the governor didn't "mess" with it (despite the reporting making it look that way); she just didn't sign it until the legislature revised it. The second one is nice to hear though.

"I don't think NY was any different - AFAIK the governor didn't "mess" with it (despite the reporting making it look that way); she just didn't sign it until the legislature revised it." Isn't this a distinction without a difference?

I think you might've missed the point of the discussion? We're comparing what powers the governor of each state has, with respect to signing legislation in general.

Re: Colorado passes agricultural Right to Repair

#50

Post by whalesalad »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #23

What I don't understand is why a couple of the higher quality tractor companies have not started pushing hard to brand "we support repair" and having available online manuals and software to support this. This seems a perfect marketing/product platform for an underdog that also believes this. Massey, Fendt or similar could really differentiate themself and take market share on the back of this I suspect. Especially w…

It’s very simple: revenue.
Post reply on HN