Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
11–20 of 156 posts
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#12Why Google? They sell very little hardware, and they could even benefit from the repair market. It is also one of their best weapon against Apple, in the same way that privacy is one the best weapon Apple has against Google.
Worst of it is Google was not even in the title of the article. The title was editorialized to include Google.
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#13I have submitted this yesterday [1]. The submission didn't make the front page. The title of the article is "Microsoft and Apple Wage War on Gadget Right-to-Repair Laws". When the title was editoralized to insert Google, it made to front-page. Can someone explain why the editing of the title? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27225003
It's largely random which submission of an article ends up getting traction. That's true across every topic, so I doubt that inserting Google into the title made the difference.
As for why - perhaps the submitter felt that it was misleading for the title to pick on just MS and Apple when Google is also implicated in the article? That's a legit reason to edit a title on HN—it's one of the unlesses in "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait".
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#14Why Google? They sell very little hardware, and they could even benefit from the repair market. It is also one of their best weapon against Apple, in the same way that privacy is one the best weapon Apple has against Google.
Worst of it is Google was not even in the title of the article. The title was editorialized to include Google.
Why is that the "worst of it"? Google is mentioned eleven times in the article and not in a "pro right to repair" kind of way.
> But it was Google that surprised advocates with the vigor of its opposition.
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#15Reduce reuse recycle is fundamentally against the business model of BigCorpos. Of course they will fight tooth and nail against legislation that impinges on their business model [1]. It goes to show how good Apple's PR department is that people view them as an eco-oriented company (hint: they're literally in the "producing consumer e-waste market"). But I mean people these days also think Microsoft are open-source fr…
I don't see how this is not blatantly in violation of anti-trust laws. It seems to me it is clearly harming the best interest of the consumer to have less choice and more expensive repair options due to lack of RTR.
I say this as someone who would still use Apple licenced repair shops. The standard of service quality is high, and the results are dependable and consistent. Why is it not enough to compete on quality, and why do they have to behave in an anti-competitive manner?
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, I live in a state (Massachusetts) that has passed two right-to-repair laws via ballot initiative. Both passed over intense opposition from the auto industry; almost all advertising in the lead up to the vote was in opposition. But it passed in both cases because... it's common sense. If you buy a product, it's yours and you should be able to do what you want with it, whether that means modifying the hardware or…
inb4 all the Apple shills who will claim they only ever want a product in a completely sandboxed environment where the device manufacturer holds their hand every step of the way
I live Apple and I want them to verify hardware, but I also want to ability to go “yes I k know this isn’t an apple screen/battery or said display has changed - use it anyways or register it”
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#17One note: the article misses the connection between this and the current lawsuit between Epic and Apple. These companies are opposing right-to-repair in part because it undermines the ability to maintain control over what software people run on their devices, and where they install software from.
Also, I live in a state (Massachusetts) that has passed two right-to-repair laws via ballot initiative. Both passed over intense opposition from the auto industry; almost all advertising in the lead up to the vote was in opposition. But it passed in both cases because... it's common sense. If you buy a product, it's yours and you should be able to do what you want with it, whether that means modifying the hardware or…
I suppose there are differences here, for example the root-of-trust of a car still isn't accessible to you; you can't run your own ECU firmware unless you jailbreak your ECU. Luckily, that is generally not the main 'feature' of the car, and for most people a car isn't a brain-extension with private and personal aspects.
Keep in mind that this doesn't mean you shouldn't own or repair your stuff, but there are significant differences between products, and those differences aren't always clear.
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#18One note: the article misses the connection between this and the current lawsuit between Epic and Apple. These companies are opposing right-to-repair in part because it undermines the ability to maintain control over what software people run on their devices, and where they install software from.
Also, I live in a state (Massachusetts) that has passed two right-to-repair laws via ballot initiative. Both passed over intense opposition from the auto industry; almost all advertising in the lead up to the vote was in opposition. But it passed in both cases because... it's common sense. If you buy a product, it's yours and you should be able to do what you want with it, whether that means modifying the hardware or…
> But it passed in both cases because... it's common sense.
Yeah. I don't even understand why we have to argue in favor of stuff like this. Somehow we ended up living in such a fucked up world where the things we purchase don't actually belong to us and we actually have to fight tooth and nail to make it sane again.
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#19I just replaced my phone battery using an iFixit kit a few minutes ago. It's probably extended the life of my phone by a year.
Yeah, I just recently replaced the battery in a family member's MacBook Air. Surprising that it was even possible to replace (thanks iFixit)! With this model the SSD is also replaceable, thankfully. Of course, once the logic board itself fails, that'll be a whole different story, but at least _some_ aspects of the system are repairable.
Re: Microsoft and Apple wage war on gadget right-to-repair laws
#20I have submitted this yesterday [1]. The submission didn't make the front page. The title of the article is "Microsoft and Apple Wage War on Gadget Right-to-Repair Laws". When the title was editoralized to insert Google, it made to front-page. Can someone explain why the editing of the title? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27225003
It's largely random which submission of an article ends up getting traction. That's true across every topic, so I doubt that inserting Google into the title made the difference. As for why - perhaps the submitter felt that it was misleading for the title to pick on just MS and Apple when Google is also implicated in the article? That's a legit reason to edit a title on HN—it's one of the unlesses in " Please use the…
Amazon was also included in the article. I don't see Amazon on the title. And the submitter even put Google in front of Microsoft. The submitter not only added Google, also changed the order.
Probably not random. Since there is always _at least_ one anti-Google article makes to front page every day. And the quality of discussion on Google related is probably the lowest on HN. The mod team didn't seem very eager to moederate Google related threads so far.