Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Right To Repair Movement Is Forcing Apple To Change (vice.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the thinking-differently dept.

The executive director of Repair.org says Apple has "decided to be nicer to consumers in order to stop them from demanding their right to repair," according to Motherboard. Slashdot reader Jason Koebler shared this article: It's increasingly looking like Apple can no longer ignore the repair insurgency that's been brewing: The right to repair movement is winning, and Apple's behavior is changing. In the last few months, Apple has made political, design, and customer service decisions that suggest the right to repair movement is having a real impact on the company's operations...

Apple has repeatedly made small concessions to its customers on the issues that Repair.org and the larger repair community have decided to highlight. The question is whether these concessions are going to be enough to satiate customers who want their devices to be easily repairable and upgradable, and whether the right to repair movement can convince those people to continue demanding fair treatment.
The article notes that at least 12 U.S. states are still considering "fair repair" laws, which would force Apple to sell replacement parts to both independent repair shops and the general public.

12 of 165 comments (clear)

  1. Anti-Apple Bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is a definite anti-Apple bias on this site. Just recently, a story indicated that the Microsoft Surface couldn't be repaired or even opened up without effectively destroying it. That's clearly an attempt by Microsoft to make it extremely difficult to repair their devices. It's actually quite a bit more insidious than anything Apple has done. At least those devices can be repaired or at least disassembled without destroying them. Yet Slashdot mostly focuses on Apple and readers will bash Apple in every story about them, even if Apple has done something good. The bias is ridiculous and, because this site is associated with Linux and the open source community, it damages the credibility of Linux and open source in the process. The bias is toxic and has destroyed any credibility in calling for easier repairs and many other things the Slashdot community is associated with.

    1. Re:Anti-Apple Bias by Known+Nutter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The bias is ridiculous and, because this site is associated with Linux and the open source community, it damages the credibility of Linux and open source in the process.

      Seriously? That's a bit dramatic considering these days, Slashdot is the rag mag of tech/IT. What you're saying may have been true 15 years ago, but that ship has sailed. While I agree about the bias (MS takes it equally on the chin, if not more), I seriously question the influence the Slashdot "community" actually has. It's a mess. Just consider the prevalence of goatse... seriously? That went on for years and it doesn't exactly command credibility -- never mind the GNAA.

      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    2. Re:Anti-Apple Bias by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's actually quite a bit more insidious than anything Apple has done.

      Microsoft: Uses standard manufacturing process that just so happens to make a device a bitch to open and impossible to re-close without a standard manufacturing device.

      Apple: Creates a non-standard screw with no technical manufacturing advantages for the sole purpose of preventing 3rd parties from opening their device. Uses trademark and patent law to protect the design. Sues producers of the tools to prevent them from falling into the hands of repairers.

      You must have been smoking some seriously good stuff to have come up with your sentence. At least MS's design had a technical and manufacturing advantage. But you are right about one thing, the bias is ridiculous. Fuck Apple.

    3. Re:Anti-Apple Bias by iampiti · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Some users may be biased against Apple, that you can't avoid in a large community but I believe Apple gets what they deserve here.
      What you may be right about is that maybe other companies also deserve some negativity from us. I personally despise the sealed battery strategy that has become the norm on smartphones and I hate every company for it. Some will call me hyprocrite for buying a non removable battery smartphone on my next change but I can't buy something that does not exist (I won't considered unknown brands).
      Another trends I hate is the "Mobilization" of desktop computers (App stores, built in publicity (clean installations of Win 10 have crap like Candy Crush preinstalled, publicity in Windows explorer...), spying, apps force UIs designed for touch on everyone...)
      We users are losing rights on our devices and if we don't push back we'll keep losing

    4. Re:Anti-Apple Bias by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think MSFT gets its fair share of criticism here. So does Android/Google. Apple was the leader in the closed ecosystem, so they got more attention for that reason. MSFT doesn't appeat to want to be left out and is working hard to get its fair share of that criticism.

      I will always give preferences to devices that are somewhat repairable. Easily replaceable screens and batteries (and possibly USB ports) should be a selling feature. I hope people continue to make it clear that is what they want. I understand that devices might be more resilient and weatherproof if they are epoxy filled, but I owned had plenty of devices which were easily repaired yet fully met by 'toughness' needs. Some people might need more rugged stuff than me.

    5. Re:Anti-Apple Bias by Khyber · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "There is a definite anti-Apple bias on this site"

      Well, yea. When your company goes so far as to A. treat its customers like children and prevent them from using 18+ apps that they PAID FOR (tortious interference of business/contract) B. go out of your way to fuck your customers over on repair charges and C. claim to innovate when you just copy everything that's been done before or conceptualized on TV, using commodity parts they didn't even fucking design, well yea I'm certainly not going to like that company.

      And I used to work for them. I can tell you far more horror stories.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  2. Don't stop now! by hyades1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I hope consumers keep the pressure on, and don't get bought off with a few minor concessions. The time to enshrine the "right to repair" in law is now.

    If Apple and similar corporations get breathing room, they'll soon have things so twisted around that even opening one of their damned machines will bring the FBI swooping down on you...because terrorism, kittens, children, etc.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  3. Take it easy on "right" by iamacat · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So long as company takes its stuff back for recycling, internal design of a product is between them and their customers. The later may well insist that the product is modular, repairable and upgradable and make purchases accordingly. On the other hand, system on a chip designs held together with a lot of glue could well be cheaper, lighter and more durable mechanically. I wouldn't put a right to repair on the same footing as inallienable rights and would instead consider it a desirable product feature that can be achieved through market forces.

    Then again, in my opinion there has been no reason to buy anything from Apple. You can get a phone or a laptop for 1/3rd of the price elsewhere and "repair" it by upgrading to a much better one when it breaks after a few years.

    1. Re:Take it easy on "right" by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So long as company takes its stuff back for recycling, internal design of a product is between them and their customers.

      A corporation is a legal construct whose very right to exist depends on the goodwill of the government, which in theory means The People. Once upon a time, in order to form a corporation at all, you had to demonstrate that there was a public interest. These days, you just fill out a form, and pay a fee.

      Recycling is a bare minimum requirement. The best form of "recycling" is reuse. And often, before you can reuse something, you have to repair it. Not to get all hippie dippy or anything, but repair and reuse is by far superior to recycling any time there's not a dramatic energy savings involved in an upgrade. The phone upgrade cycle is particularly needlessly wasteful — the power consumption is relatively irrelevant here, but phone power consumption is actually increasing so that cannot be a counterargument here in any case. But computers in general have reached a point where even relatively gutless machines are useful for years if they can be kept going, and even desktops haven't had a drop in power consumption in some years, either.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Take it easy on "right" by ckatko · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do... do you try to be this stupid?

      Your first and second paragraphs are polar opposites. The REASON people are fighting for Right To Repair is because YOU CAN'T REPAIR a phone or laptop for 1/3rd of the price because of policies practiced by companies like Apple.

      You CAN'T legally get the diagnostics software. You CAN'T legally get the schematics to determine circuit paths (one capacitor blows and takes out a chain of parts... how do you know what parts are affected?). And Apple does stuff like the infamous "Error 53" where the home button is PAIRED to the motherboard and if you attempt to repair it, iOS intentionally bricks the phone and--amazingly!--it's a simple procedure for the Apple staff to fix... for a fee.

      I look forward to the day when my Ford Focus can only be serviced by Ford technicians, and I can only use Ford Certified (TM) tires on my wheels to ensure "optimum user experience."

  4. Re:Consumers != Legislators by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 2, Insightful
    You may be an all-American Fuckwit, but never mind:

    Businesses only have the rights they do because the community grants them those rights - including the right to incorporation and limited liability, if the business benefits the community. If the public-at-large decides the corporation is fucking them over, they may decide to remove its right to exist. In a democratic country, the government is supposed to represent the collective views of the people.

    In a Republican one, it is meant to reflect the view of Donald Trump^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HThe fithy rich.

    (Of course, if you sell your soul to the devil, then the devil has a right to your soul, but if you don't, then its yours).

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  5. Extend this... by LaughingRadish · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This concept should be extended to enforce the right of people to install whatever they want on hardware they own. And no sneaking around that with semantics. So... want to sell something with a locked bootloader? Fine. Disclose to buyers how to unlock it. Want to sell something with Secure Boot? Fine. Disclose to buyers how they can install their own keys and disable Secure Boot.