51–60 of 147 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand that Apple can't provide upgrades for free, but why can't I buy an upgrade for $30 or whatever? Better than throwing away perfectly good devices. And they won't let anyone install any other software onto the hardware, so I can't even rely on the free market providing what I want.
> why can't I buy an upgrade for $30 or whatever? Because otherwise you won't buy new device for full price
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vendors do not have to support their product indefinitely. They have to design their products in a way that they do not become useless after support ends. E.g. by opening up the bootloader and letting users install custom software.
> E.g. by opening up the bootloader and letting users install custom software. If limited to the bootloader, such as allowing users to run their own operating system, then that is definitely a possibility, with the exception of firmware running on the device itself. But I doubt that is what most users here are expecting, and in my opinion, it wouldn't provide much value to the vast majority of customers.
Not every business venue needs to be a multi billion multi national and using some devices for a long time is better than burrying them all in a land fill.
I live in a rich European country. This is not Shenzhen. The, very scarce, technically inclined people who know how to repair a vacuum cleaner or electronic toothbrush can get a real job with an hourly rate that makes repairs economically unfeasible. Repair cafes are nice hobby projects for pensionados but it is not going to move the needle.
When did it become socially acceptable to throw things out rather than repair them ? When did it become economically rational ? Helsinki (for one) needs some real repair cafés.
reduce, reuse, recycleEarlier quoted context omitted.
You underestimate my willingness to 'under sell' my free time by spending it to fix something I own.
How does that generalise across the population?
If you want an economic argument there's no way to sell my free time for anywhere near the market rate on such a short notice.
I live in a rich European country. This is not Shenzhen. The, very scarce, technically inclined people who know how to repair a vacuum cleaner or electronic toothbrush can get a real job with an hourly rate that makes repairs economically unfeasible. Repair cafes are nice hobby projects for pensionados but it is not going to move the needle.
EU is huge and hourly rates are different in many countries. Nevertheless, the point is not the electronic toothbrush, but rather the "BIG" stuff that costs much and it's creating a lot of garbage. A 1200 euro TV that breaks after 5 years - are you willing to buy a new one just because? Once you have that infrastructure in place, eventually also the "smaller" things will be cheaper to replace.
I've played with entrepreneurship most of my life - I know how "a solution looking for a problem" looks like. Any VC would laugh them out of the room.
Edit: don't get me wrong - there is a part of this that is almost free and only requires a bit of enforcement. That part is good, and it's exactly what governments should deal with. But anything that imposes direct or indirect costs should go through serious cost/benefit analysis.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I'm asking these devices to work like normal computers, because that's what they are. Also I doubt that there's anything left on 2015 era hardware that will grant you an edge on current age competitors To give a reply: > Can you freely tinker with your motherboard's firmware? Can you modify the Bluetooth or Wi-Fi firmware on your motherboard? Can you modify and independently update the internals of Windows itself…
> I'm asking these devices to work like normal computers > Yes I expect do be able to do all of those things if I want to For the components I listed, and based on my understanding of "normal computers" as desktops and laptops, you cannot do all of these things today. > it's my computer It's their firmware. They don't magically give up their intellectual property rights when you purchase a piece of hardware from them…
And yes, I also support adding laws to force manufacturers to respect my rights.
> However, that shouldn't come with the expectation that the hardware's chain of trust remains intact or that all features will continue to function as they do with the OEM software.
I'm okay with that if the manufacturer doesn't remove features in bad faith (which they almost always do as there's very few legit uses on their side).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Updating old products is expensive, especially as their hardware falls further behind. Unless manufacturers adopt some kind of subscription model to justify the cost of continued updates, which would likely be very unpopular, I don’t see how they can realistically keep older devices supported indefinitely.
Well I'm quite sure the advances in LLMs abilities are going to be quite a nice change in this regard. If vendors would be required to release all firmware source code or at least full specs after devices drop out of support, it would be fairly simple and cheap now to port drivers to new kernel release or different OSs.
This may be the hope or expectation you have with regard to regulation, but I don't think it is ever going to happen because it would conflict with other regulatory requirements, especially in the realm of radio.
You may say "regulation can be changed" but radio regulations exist for real reasons and I doubt anyone could convince the major governing bodies otherwise.
Not to mention that such a requirement could effectively force companies to give up intellectual property that they have invested heavily in developing. What if a manufacturer outsources the firmware development to a vendor that specializes in firmware? If the manufacturer were required to release that firmware as open source, they would effectively be forcing that vendor to open-source its product. That could undermine the vendor's entire business model.
I live in a rich European country. This is not Shenzhen. The, very scarce, technically inclined people who know how to repair a vacuum cleaner or electronic toothbrush can get a real job with an hourly rate that makes repairs economically unfeasible. Repair cafes are nice hobby projects for pensionados but it is not going to move the needle.
The manufacturer/seller already employs people who deal with this, and it's not expensive. Getting my washing machine fixed for 10€ parts + labor instead of 300€ parts + labor sounds mighty nice to me. > Manufacturers must also provide [...] access to spare parts at a reasonable price. This is the important part. Stupid shit like 0.3€ soldering buttons to 200€ motherboards so the repair is expensive has got to go.
Hopefully data collection that supports device-specific repair cost breakdowns and tracking is part of this legislation.
Currently, manufacturers optimize for manufacturing -- it's cheaper to assemble with a $200 all-in-one board than a discrete button.
If it were more expensive to use an all-in-one board (say, because they were on the hook for repairs and/or buyers had a place to easily compare repair costs...) then they'd do otherwise.
Price/cost obfuscation is the root of a lot of inefficiencies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> E.g. by opening up the bootloader and letting users install custom software. If limited to the bootloader, such as allowing users to run their own operating system, then that is definitely a possibility, with the exception of firmware running on the device itself. But I doubt that is what most users here are expecting, and in my opinion, it wouldn't provide much value to the vast majority of customers.
It would open up a tertiary market for smaller companies to do that (maybe even sell into a different market). Not every business venue needs to be a multi billion multi national and using some devices for a long time is better than burrying them all in a land fill.
> it wouldn't provide much value to the vast majority of customers
I should have phrased it as:
> it wouldn't provide enough value to their customers to create meaningful value for the company.
You can argue that "ha ha, we shall enact regulation to force them to do this!" but the reality is that only a small percentage of customers would actually benefit from such regulation. Because most people are not going to tinker with their devices, especially if there is no easy or straightforward way to do so.
So in the end, you'd have more regulation that makes it harder for new players to enter the market, while doing little to solve actual customer problems and ultimately imposing significant costs on manufacturers.
For people who actually care about long-term device support, they can choose reputable manufacturers that already offer it. If no such manufacturers exist, that may instead represent an opportunity for someone to build a business around providing better long-term support.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently had to throw out a first gen iPad that was physically still in mint condition (even including the battery, somehow), simply for the lack of support essentially turning it into a useless brick.
IMO this is one of the biggest gaps in the new EU repair rules (from what I have seen of it). It should mandate unlockable bootloaders, etc. or at the very least an unlockable bootloader once the regular support period is over. Imagine the cool things people could do with old iPads. Put Android or Ubuntu Touch and give it to people who cannot afford a tablet. Wall display for Home Assistant. Rip out the batteries and…
If we're talking about a 15-year old device, it definitely feels like requiring (1) a boot loader unlock method & (2) all technical specs required for basic functioning (display, input, compute) aren't overly burdensome on Apple et al.
Essentially mandating a corporate 'methods and specifications' EOL requirement to avoid device obsolescence.
This would also have a side effect of giving the EU a regulatory trade barrier against sketchy fly-by-night Chinese tech (e.g. "DMOAO tablet").
And encouraging tier I tech device manufacturers to offer longer warranties, in their own self-profit-interest.