Slashdot Mirror
California Reintroduces 'Right To Repair' Bill After Previous Effort Failed (appleinsider.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Apple Insider: California State Assembly member Susan Talamantes Eggman on Monday announced the introduction of Assembly Bill 1163, which will require manufacturers like Apple to "make service literature and equipment or parts available to product owners and to regulated, independent repair shops." "For nearly 30 years California has required that manufacturers provide access to replacement parts and service materials for electronics and appliances to authorized repairers in the state. In that time, manufacturers have captured the market, controlling where and when we repair our property, and inflating the electronic waste stream," Eggman said. "The Right to Repair will provide consumers with the freedom to have their electronic products and appliances fixed by a repair shop or service provider of their choice, creating a competitive market that will be cheaper for consumers and reduce the number of devices thrown in the trash."
The bill, officially filed as legislation relating to electronic waste, is Eggman's second try at right to repair legislation. Her first attempt, 2018's Bill 2110, was introduced last March and subsequently died in assembly that November. Like the pending Bill 1163, last year's tendered legislation was crafted as a play to reduce e-waste. Eggman's announcement includes a word-for-word reproduction of an explainer included in 2018's press release for the now-dead Bill 2110. In it the lawmaker argues that customers who are unable to pay for manufacturer repairs are forced to replace broken equipment like smartphones, TVs and home appliances. Beyond financial benefits, Eggman also says that the repair and reuse of electronics is more efficient than purchasing a new device, noting that such measures can "stimulate local economies instead of unsustainable overseas factories."
The bill, officially filed as legislation relating to electronic waste, is Eggman's second try at right to repair legislation. Her first attempt, 2018's Bill 2110, was introduced last March and subsequently died in assembly that November. Like the pending Bill 1163, last year's tendered legislation was crafted as a play to reduce e-waste. Eggman's announcement includes a word-for-word reproduction of an explainer included in 2018's press release for the now-dead Bill 2110. In it the lawmaker argues that customers who are unable to pay for manufacturer repairs are forced to replace broken equipment like smartphones, TVs and home appliances. Beyond financial benefits, Eggman also says that the repair and reuse of electronics is more efficient than purchasing a new device, noting that such measures can "stimulate local economies instead of unsustainable overseas factories."
Call me old-fashioned, but it will always be: Susan Talamantes Robotnik.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Apple and others (John Deere, to pick another industry) consistently lobby against right-to-repair laws. I've heard plenty of arguments in favor of RTR, but I've rarely heard a credible argument against. Is there a reason, outside of greed, that we shouldn't be able to have access to documentation and parts for devices we own?
I have an HP laptop that's getting on in years, and the wifi has developed an intermittent fault. On HP's site, I downloaded a tech/repair manual for the thing that includes the part number for the wifi card. It's trivial for me to buy a new one and install it. What is it about Apple's gadgets that forbids mere mortals from looking inside?
Why?
Where is the text of the bill?
The only Assembly Bill 1163 I can find in california for 2019 is about electronic waste
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB1163
I didn't vote for a single Bush or Clinton. Not either of either. Bill Clinton wouldn't have been my first choice, Hillary Clinton is nuts. That doesn't make Trump any less of a liar, fraud, traitor, coward, stolen valor pussy, daughter fucker, etc.
I hope you understand this soon. One's enemies being flawed does not make us virtuous or righteous. Especially when, like Trump, you're almost exclusively pointing out your own character flaws in other people.
That's why when Patty Reagan, daughter of Ronald, and Ron Jr. are both saying that Trump does not represent even 1% of a sliver of what their father did, that he is a craven coward and wrestling personality at best...
You ought to pay attention, because you don't have son-of-Reagan credentials and you're backing a traitor. You're not even a Republican, really. Just a traitor.
Those winds will change on a dime. Watch out for strong rope, it'll grab you right by the neck, traitors.
...who is the Walrus?
"What is it about Apple's gadgets that forbids mere mortals from looking inside?"
Nothing. Even without the law being passed, you can get the pentalobe driver, open your iphone, replace parts which 3rd party versions (if you know what you are doing), and close it up again. This law is forcing manufacturers to continue manufacturing parts for products they no longer produce, for 7 years.
For those who don't know.....
The main villian of the famous game series Sonic the Hedgehog. Real name Dr. Ivo Robotnik. He's a scientist obsessed with showing the world how great he is. "The Greatest scientific genius in the word." as he calls himself. Many incarnations had followed him as many different cartoons of Sonic had appeared but the name Eggman differs him from the rest and marking him as the original Sonic villian.
From:http://www.nameaning.net/boy/Eggman
What's cynical about "Money" ?
I respect that you were hoping for a better answer, but I doubt there IS one. If I am wrong about this I would sincerely appreciate being shown that I am wrong.
Alan Parsons
Two rules are critical:
1. Wear items, such as batteries, must be easily user-removable and replaceable. Exceptions for certain types of medical and human interface devices, or where the device's primary function is as a battery (ie. power banks).
2. Superuser privileges on personal and mobile computing devices must be made available at time of purchase. If there is a means of escalating privilege (ie. sideloading, rooting, firmware flashing, oem unlock, etc.) and it's not limited by FCC compliance, it must be available, or the device cannot be legally sold or imported for resale.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
Let's see if they can get it right this time.
Make sure you keep the steak in the heart and use plenty of holy water and garlic. Can't be too careful. We are talking about the Clinton dynasty after all.
Don't forget Robotnik's bullshit-asserting gender-neutral clone, SuperKendall from Sonic II.
But vote on it till they vote right, is bullshit.
You have the right to buy devices that you are able to repair; you also have the right not to buy such devices.
Is the U.S. a free country or ain't it?
Government has no business legislating this stuff; these are issues for the market to work out, and for The People to negotiate among themselves through voluntary interaction. If there's not a product on the market that meets your moral standards, then tough luck; either make it, or stick your money where your mouth is and spend your resources on other aspects of existence.
The principled position is an opposition to the ever increasing role that government is trying to play in the interactions of The People.
Not only should root access/firmware flashing (or equivalent) be mandatory as terms of sale on all general/mobile computing devices, it should be a criminal offense to offer functionality to non-rooted devices that is not also available to rooted devices.
That is, it should be a crime to discriminate between devices passing SafetyNet, and devices which fail.
My $0.02.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
With Tim Cook mentioning during the earnings call people repairing their phones as one of reasons for disappointing sales, you can be sure Apple is gonna do everything possible to brick phones at the first sign of an illicit repair..
If the answer is "money" then that's a totally valid reason for them to lobby. But it's also cynical, because the businesses insist that it isn't about money, it's instead about their noble efforts to protect consumers. I obviously don't believe that line of horseshit, but I was just hoping there's a reason somewhere in between the two.
The only reason a consumer would not want the ability to repair is if it made the device more expensive. In some cases that might be true, but generally, it's not.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
You know, sometimes I think people use buzzwords just to sound like they know what they are talking about - even though they really don't know what the buzzwords mean.
Because the bill is just a "play to reduce e-waste" and they obviously want more e-waste and more profits. /S
It's just what you think. There is no reason except money, and whatever rationalization they give is bullshit.
but I was just hoping there's a reason somewhere in between the two.
There isn't any, basically businesses are trying to prevent people from owning and controlling the things they pay for to turn it into a racket. The new model is "everything as a service" where you merely rent your existence from these big companies. It's a real revenue generator.
Wow, nazi *and* apk troll/spam. This thread just gets more intetesting
"What is it about Apple's gadgets that forbids mere mortals from looking inside?"
Because Apple fears it could collapse the 'reality distortion field'.
Joking- but if this was an actual valid reason, it would not suprise me one bit.
It is a bit "interesting" when unapologetic capitalists fight so hard against property rights for everyone else. Almost as if they don't really believe in capitalism so much as they believe in I got mine, screw you!
Part of that is because of what you are replacing. If you are replacing anything related to the Secure Enclave, this could be seen as trying to circumvent the overall security of the device.
Or they want it more secure from tampering, like from state actors.
Because crappy repair shops do a crappy job. That reflects negatively on Apple's brand. Also Apple thinks they own their devices even after you buy them, and a lot of their customers feel more comfortable being owned.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
You don't need John Deere as an example. Pick California's (and Silicon Valley's) own Tesla Motors. They flat out refuse to allow owners to service their own cars, even when their own service centers are bursting at the seams with month long waits for appointment, and weeks long waits after you're dropped the car off for service!
Crappy repair shops do an even worse job without manuals and first-party sold parts. That reflects even worse on Apple's brand.
Oh who are we kidding. People that buy Apple products typically don't use them strenuously and treat them as disposable either through failure or next year's model.
If it is called "right to repair" it sounds like it wouldn't cost anything, but if it requires making and selling replacement parts for 7 years, it could cost a lot to give that as a guarantee.
Like what if the product doesn't sell well and I stop selling it after 6 months. I still have to keep a factory open for 6 and a half extra years. Yikes!
You have to be pretty careful to avoid unintended consequences. I haven't seen any good suggestions yet, to be honest; you can't force companies to create high quality repair manuals, even if you force them to create repair manuals, you can't really force them to make parts if they discontinue a product, and you can't stop them from choosing a design that makes repair hard.
The idea is great, but when it comes to making rules, it is just not easy to use force for this while still having an economic system that includes personal business freedom. But if you tax the potential for e-waste you might encourage good behavior.
there's a difference between forcing the creation of new keys and bricking the device.
This is apple, where the screens crack if you look at them funny.
As I understand it, proposed "Right to repair" laws aren't actually giving you a right to repair your gadget, but rather a way to make it more convenient for individuals and third parties to repair by forcing the manufacturer to provide things like removable batteries, parts, documentation, etc. Other than DMCA silliness whereby copyright is have somehow argued to relate to you opening up or repairing a device you own, a legal strategy employed by John Deere I believe and that I don't defend, you can repair your device right now unless you legally agreed not to. So the lesson is: if repair is important to you, don't buy things you can't repair. Don't agree (by signing, etc.) to contracts that limit your ability to repair, if that's important to you. The fact is, repair isn't all that important to people, otherwise they'd pay more to a competitor that made repair more convenient. Don't assume someone else will give you things that you didn't pay for (like convenient repair). It strikes me as somewhat shameful that people knowingly buy things that are hard to repair, then cry about how they're hard to repair. You are not entitled to Apple or the guy down the street doing the things you want, unless you made a deal for those things. In summary, right to repair law proposals are designed compel manufacturers to comply to a government mandate, because presumably consumers can't be trusted to behave in their own economic interests. Don't get me wrong, I love repairing my devices, but I don't feel like paying for pricier ones just because of that. It's not even clear that such repairs are advisable for most devices and people, given the rapid technological change and relatively low prices.
Your property right is to your device, not to the manufacturer doing anything else for you. If these repair rights are so important to you, then pay for them: only buy from manufacturers who provide guarantees of convenient repair and available inexpensive parts and free documentation. Understand that such guarantees change the business model for making devices, and almost certainly will raise prices. Manufacturers would provide this if enough people would pay for it, but realistically they won't. So you want something for free: you want to, in effect, take something from the manufacturer that you didn't pay for. They owe you nothing, they are not your slave. Nor are you theirs.
Don't you mean intestecular.
Okay, I'll play Devil's Advocate. For one thing Chinese replacement batteries? Can blow up, blow up REAL good. Anybody who has dealt with Chinese batteries can tell you their Lithium Ion batteries are dodgy as fuck, but are you gonna force manufacturers to keep making batteries for devices they no longer sell, batteries that have a shelf life and take up space, because some consumer down the road MAY actually replace the battery instead of just shitcanning it and getting another? Because if you don't force them most devices made this year are gonna be obsolete next year so they ain't gonna make batteries for that model so see dodgy Chinese batteries.
Second one relates to the first...as we have seen with everything from hard drives to Wifi chips there is a ton of ways to hide malware in stuff these days and most of the parts are gonna be coming again from dodgy Chinese factories (because the OEM won't be making last years model parts, they'll be busy working on the new hotness with whatever is hot that year like phone notches or notchless with camera behind the screen or extra wide screens or whatever) and if its one thing we've learned the past few years its the Chinese government wants to suck up data more than even Google which is saying something. Are the consumers gonna blame the dodgy Chinese company who put in the bug when it comes out they've all been duped and the reason their device feels like its gonna melt is its been turned into a bitcoin miner? Nope they are gonna blame the OEM,
Now personally I'm all for letting folks get their stuff fixed from whomever they want, and that anybody should be able to import after market or refurb parts to fix these devices, but OTOH I can also see the OEMs deserving at least a way to let the consumer know if that used device they are picking up on eBay is using genuine OEM parts or Cheapo Chinese Crap, same as how AFAIK you aren't allowed anywhere to take a car out of the junkyard, fix it up and then sell it without a salvage title to let people know its been busted up. To me that is fair to all parties and personally I'd like to know if that device I'm buying used has a real OEM screen and battery or is hacked together from parts on Ali Express or the replacement part I get is the real deal or a fake.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
You cannot be serious. Right to repair laws definitely will put burdens on manufacturers to do stuff, change stuff, provide stuff, and manage stuff that they are not otherwise obligated to do. They also will change their business models (greater competition from the used market). If these laws cost the manufactures nothing, then they wouldn't fight them so hard. Try to see it from their perspective. These burdens will cost the company more, which will put upward price pressure / downward profit (which is ultimately the same thing). Yes, I repair my gadgets, but I don't think most people would want to pay extra for that ability, but right to repair laws would force consumers to pay more (either in dollars or reduced availability). If consumers prioritized easy repair, then more devices would have that. I don't even see it mentioned in reviews. It's quite clear that nowadays consumers would not pay much for repair. So devices don't have it.
Oh who are we kidding. People that buy Apple products typically don't use them strenuously and treat them as disposable either through failure or next year's model.
Which means that right to repair laws are unnecessary.
You can choose not to buy a Tesla.
"What is it about Apple's gadgets that forbids mere mortals from looking inside?"
Nothing. Even without the law being passed, you can get the pentalobe driver, open your iphone, replace parts which 3rd party versions (if you know what you are doing), and close it up again. This law is forcing manufacturers to continue manufacturing parts for products they no longer produce, for 7 years.
Funnily enough iFixit's list of hard to repair smartphones is topped by a bunch of Android devices: https://www.ifixit.com/smartph... The Samsung s10 scored a 3, the iPhone XS scored a 6, higher score means more repairable so in iFixit's opinion the iPhone is more repairable than a shit-ton of Android devices. I suppose it is time to grab the pitchforks, light up the torches and burn iFixit HQ do to the ground for spreading heresy.
you can be sure Apple is gonna do everything possible to brick phones at the first sign of an illicit repair..
If those people then buy another iphone they deserve everything they get.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
On the other hand better development of third party repair shops would reduce workload for company's own repair facilities. The only reason companies can get away with such ineffective labor distribution is because all other companies do it. Trashing perfectly working devices because cost of repair is higher than cost of a new one(most likely due to authorized repair facilities having inadequate capacity due to monopoly privileges allowing for very few of them) is ridiculous and economically inefficient and if market forces aren't working to prevent it then it's yet another example of market failure.
apple doesn't have a monopoly on builtin obsolescence.
People that buy Apple products typically don't use them strenuously and treat them as disposable either through failure or next year's model.
Actually, thy do. Moron!
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
iPhones run iOs.
Android devices run Android.
The Android device of my GF has an address book app, that can only store one phone number and one email address for a person ... the device has two sims, so have most of her friends ...
Go figure.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
All arguments against are complete nonsense. Competitors just do professional reverse engineering, for example, it is not that expensive or that much effort. They cannot use most of what they find for legal reasons, but they have the information. The "trade secret" argument is a complete lie, nothing else. Pretty much the same for the "less secure" devices argument.
What Apple (and others) do is artificial creation of a monopoly, nothing else. It is hugely profitable but it benefits absolutely nobody but them.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
If the answer is "money" then that's a totally valid reason for them to lobby. But it's also cynical, because the businesses insist that it isn't about money, it's instead about their noble efforts to protect consumers. I obviously don't believe that line of horseshit, but I was just hoping there's a reason somewhere in between the two.
That's only because the left made caring about money akin to a cardinal sin. And I guess that workers come to work because unicorns and butterflies or something.
No, you have to keep a warehouse with repair parts in it. And if you didn't sell any product, you're not going to need to keep many repair parts on hand, either.
You tell 'em, Comrade Wang!
Also, the fewer custom parts you use, the fewer you have to stock. If you use all standard parts, you don't have to keep anything.
That sounds like a shitty device, that's a benefit of android though. There are plenty of others to pick from.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
In the case of John Deere, some of their arguments are based on the fact that their equipment is a motorized vehicle. As such, right-to-repair laws are tantamount to right-to-modify laws. Allowing that opens the door to people tinkering with the engine performance, which could result in worse emissions (but moar powah!). Alternately, in the case of a combine or other farm equipment, safety features could easily be disabled or circumvented by someone, in the name of faster or more efficient operation. The person disabling the safety features may not always be the person actually operating the equipment, so it's not just a "you mod it, you assume the risk" kind of thing.
I don't really buy those arguments, but they do exist.
The easy counterargument is to point out that the above situation has existed in the auto industry for decades, consumers are well served, and the sky has not fallen.
You could not buy the cheap chinese crap. I had to get a new battery for my laptop last month. Lenovo stopped supplying batteries for my model thinkpad some time ago but I was able to locate a new-old stock Sanyo battery originally made for my laptop. Has 100% capacity and shouldn't explode.
It can be hard to make sure that all subcomponents in a part are well sourced of course. At some point you have to trust the supplier. But keep in mind that even in new products most of the parts come from China already.
There are a couple of arguments I have personally heard.
1. Personal Electronic Manufacturers
The most common argument put forward is the "Degraded User Experience" fable, which goes something like this: If you take our pristine product, and give it to an inexperienced third party to repair, you have no assurance that the repairer is trained or qualified to maintain our beloved technology. If a sub-standard repair is performed and you then elect to sell or give away the product without disclosing the 3rd party repair, the new owner could form the mistaken impression that our pristine product is somehow unreliable or of poor quality. It is only by controlling the entire end-to-end process, including repairs, that we can provide that assurance of life-long quality.
To which my response is often, Well, OK, but how come you stop supporting your products after just a couple of years? If you are the sole source of repairs, should I not be given some guarantee that your products have a useful lifespan?
2. The Technology is Too Dangerous for Mere Mortals
The most common argument put forward by companies like John Deere (and car companies using electronic servicing tools, like BMW) is to argue that: Our technology is extremely complex. It is also used for purposes and in ways that, if a problem were to develop, may result in the injury or loss of life of the operator. Because of this - and without accepting any liability for any loss of life or injury through the use of our products - we cannot in good conscience allow untrained, unqualified third parties to service our products.
To which my response is often, Hang on, the only difference - the *only* difference between your ability to service this product and a third party is that you've got that fancy box of electronics to plug in to the dashboard to reset the "service interval" clock. Unless or until you can demonstrate to me that your possession of and use of that reset device preserves my safety in a way that a third party cannot, you're talking nonsense...
To be clear, neither of these arguments are valid; neither of them should be accepted as legitimate justification. The simple truth is that these practices allow companies to charge whatever they want for maintenance and spares. This is all about controlling the market to control profits - to keep a captive market.
Or, put another way, racketeering.
Her friends have two sims also?
It's Android, just download a different app.
It will increase costs. Maintaining parts inventory cost money. Creating a product that can be serviced costs money. How about all circuits board become wired instead of soldered, easy repair. Do you want waterproof or not?
Yes, but to my knowledge no android phone to date has had a software bomb in place to prevent the device from booting if a 3rd party repair was detected.
There's a world of difference between being difficult to repair and having the device actively look for 3rd party repairs and refusing to operate because it found one.
Manufacturers would provide this if enough people would pay for it
Asshole... not only were we paying for iit, we still are.
Jamie Hyneman.
C'mon, this is Nerd 101 stuff.
When a government official is passionate about a niche issue, and they fail to get the votes, they will keep trying over, and over, and over again until they just wear everybody out and pass it to shut them up.
you can't force companies to create high quality repair manuals, even if you force them to create repair manuals,
You can require that their internal repair guides are the ones made public.
Vote with your dollars. That will get their attention.
Same applies to MSFT, Oracle, Amazon, Walmart, John Deer, Google, Facebook, Twitter, HP, Lenovo, Dell, Toshiba, Asus, Netgear, Cisco, TP-Link, Samsung, Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Huawei, and any other company you feel doesn't treat you like a client.
Let everyone know about your story and unhappiness. When you get burned, speak out.
For example, I have a Huawei phone that cannot be rooted because they locked the boot loader and won't give out the unlock codes. When I bought it, there was a process to unlock it, but they changed the policy.
Google phones loose support about 2-4 yrs before what I consider "EoL" happens.
Toshiba and Acer Chromebook keyboards break with use. After 18 months, they just wear out. Replacement requires buying a whole new upper panel for $120+ and removing **everything** from inside the laptop - major surgery. Last time I needed to replace a Dell keyboard, it was $22 and 5 minutes.
No problem with forcing a company to offer repair rights.
You fuckers annoy me, you think you have a right to run a company how you want. You don't.
Shills be shillin'!
Right to repair laws definitely will put burdens on manufacturers to do stuff, change stuff, provide stuff, and manage stuff that they are not otherwise obligated to do.
These changes are pretty minor. We're not talking about a huge expensive design effort or anything, and I say that right now as I am working at a manufacturing company.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Bull shit and you know it. Apple expressly forbids repairs from 3rd party repair shops or else it voids the warranty. John Deer won't let you repair their tractors because they claim it violates their IP.
Might want to read up before posting inane blather.
Even if that were correct, if that's what the owner wants to do, how could it possibly be a problem? The owner is in a much better position to make those decisions anyway. How can the manufacturer possibly know as much about how valuable the owner's data is to them?
Way to go off topic ass-hole. This is about Right to Repair which encompasses all companies not just Apple.
Unless those arguments came with a campaign contribution check, they were irrelevant arguments.
Along those lines, the best argument in favor of using government force to prevent people from repairing the things that they own, is: "here's my check; hope your ad gets seen by lots of people before the election."
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Are you fucking clueless! What fucking burdens? You mean having spare parts. Oh no. It's called a fucking supple chain moron. It's called Asset Management.
Jesus christ do you anti-property rights people have a fucking clue how businesses work!
Yeah because Honda as such a bad reputation due to lousy repairs shops. Fucking clueless.
Cover more than Apple moron.
You can chose not to be a troll.
Lenovo stopped supplying batteries for my model thinkpad some time ago but I was able to locate a new-old stock Sanyo battery originally made for my laptop. Has 100% capacity and shouldn't explode.
What was the charge percentage when you got it?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Would you like to try again by a proposition on the ballot?
Megajoules of energy stored in a lithium battery pack in a vehicle and untrained people attempting to repair said vehicle is likely to lead to electrocution or a nice big lithium fire or both.
OTOH people repairing anything else in the vehicle is pretty benign. But you probably don't want people operating on or near the battery pack.
Way to go off topic ass-hole. This is about Right to Repair which encompasses all companies not just Apple.
The question was: "What is it about Apple's gadgets that forbids mere mortals from looking inside?" so I merely pointed out that iPhones are easier for mere mortals to open up and repair than many Android phones who usually get a lot of love here on Slashdot for being universally superior to iPhones in every way. This clearly pissed you off since you started comparing me to your rectal opening which says some very disturbing things about your psychology.
I am the eggman
They are the eggmen
I am the walrus
Goo goo g' joob
Just another day in Paradise
Yeah!
About 2 years ago, because of all of the toxicity caused by Trump and his godawful election campaign, and how he went out of his way to bring out the worst in people (and succeeded), I decided to quit Facebook and all other social media.
I really went through withdrawal - and bad. The first 3 months were just awful, but once I got past it, I realized just how terrible the Internet is for human society. I still do email and hang out on a couple of sites (like this one) that are somewhat pertinent to my life, but I keep it to a bare minimum.
Then, about a year ago, I decided to also give up the cell phone altogether. I found I was constantly beholden to its battery life, text messages, and so on. People expected instant access to me, and often if I did not respond to someone's text within a few minutes, I would get the phone call: "did you get my text?" (Yes I got it, I was just busy living my life and didn't feel like dropping everything I was doing to respond to you)
So, I got a home phone line, and turned off the cell phone plan completely. I still keep the phone in the glove box because it can still call 911, but no more vibrating pocket or constant demands.
Again, it was another dose of pure freedom. Sweet, sweet freedom.
I find that the more "connectedness" I walk away from, the more connected I feel to those who are really part of my life. Technology, especially social technology, does not create connectedness. It only creates expectation, obligation, and demand. It gives an avenue of demand to people who would not otherwise have it, and in most cases to those who SHOULD not have it.
Yeah I still read slashdot, and a couple of ham radio forums... but this is a minimal part of my life now. Free at last, free at last. Thank God almighty, I am free at last.
So in your mind, the Chinese government has no say over how iPhone is made _IN CHINA_? If they wanted to, they could introduce the malware at the source in Foxcon's factory itself.
Are the consumers gonna blame the dodgy Chinese company who put in the bug when it comes out they've all been duped and the reason their device feels like its gonna melt is its been turned into a bitcoin miner? Nope they are gonna blame the OEM,
And if a repair shop replaces a battery, and then the wifi chip dies, the customer is going to blame the repair shop. Yeah, people are dummies. So what? It cuts both ways...
Now personally I'm all for letting folks get their stuff fixed from whomever they want, and that anybody should be able to import after market or refurb parts to fix these devices, but OTOH I can also see the OEMs deserving at least a way to let the consumer know if that used device they are picking up on eBay is using genuine OEM parts or Cheapo Chinese Crap, same as how AFAIK you aren't allowed anywhere to take a car out of the junkyard, fix it up and then sell it without a salvage title to let people know its been busted up. To me that is fair to all parties and personally I'd like to know if that device I'm buying used has a real OEM screen and battery or is hacked together from parts on Ali Express or the replacement part I get is the real deal or a fake.
How would you know when buying a used car? Do people check if they swapped the headers out, or the battery, or the turbo or the tranny? Sure you can go to a mechanic and get it checked out for $100, but there is no way they can do a thorough job for that little money - considering it will take them days if not weeks to check every single part.
There exist non-OEM refurbishers that have been doing a quality job on all kinds of products for decades. This is just a money grab from Apple .. plain and simple.
In some cases there is.
About the only real example I can think of is Apple and their fingerprint scanner.
To ensure that the fingerprint scanner isn't compromised it had to be paired with the secure enclave, and to ensure that anyone installing replacement scanners was able to be held accountable they necessary keys are only available to apple certified repair shops which means Apple can pull their certification if they get complaints from users who's devices were compromised.
That's the right way to handle replacement of sensitive parts on a device if you care at all about security, and it'd be impossible if Apple were required to disclose the keys to anyone who asks.
However the legislation doesn't just state you have the right to buy the parts if the manufacturer has them, they also require the manufacturer to maintain a stock of parts to sell you for 7 years. That's going to mean the cost of the stockpile of parts gets amortized over the devices which mean higher prices. For users that don't particularly want to crack open the device (most users) that's entirely down side.
Yes, of course there is a reason...
Oh... nevermind.
They already have the service documentation, specs, etc for internal use. They are even already on internal access websites. It wouldn't really be a big deal to make them available. They certainly don't HAVE to make the devices use cryptography techniques so that they refuse to accept already existent 3rd party replacement parts (Apple, John Deere and others do this). They don't have to use non-standard screws and then add glue in an effort to make repairs harder. Those things that they don't have to do actually cost them extra money to develop and implement.
And the ultimate trump card, the larger society and it's government are not obligated to grant them a charter to exist as a legal entity at all. Corporations are entirely a legal fiction whose charter is GRANTED by government. They are not living beings, They do not have natural rights. There is no obligation to allow them to abuse the DMCA to prevent others from making replacement parts or to prevent repair shops from taking 2 broken devices to make one that works.
soyboy?
not-man?
Good grief. You're a random collection of MRA epitets hiding behind an AC account.
I wonder who wrote you, bot....
That's been the case for automobiles for ages - manufacturers have to maintain parts for 15 years.
It's not a bad thing, honestly; it reduces waste. But manufacturers whine bc repair cuts into current sales.....
"Truth is what works" -- William James "It works!!" -- o-dark-AM comment
> Apple and others (John Deere, to pick another industry) consistently lobby against right-to-repair laws. I've heard plenty of arguments in favor of RTR, but I've rarely heard a credible argument against. Is there a reason, outside of greed, that we shouldn't be able to have access to documentation and parts for devices we own?
.. it will, as it did.
No.
The idea is to constantly sell new, and the new is supposed to last just enough so you don't complain.
That's why all of them laptops, phones, etc. You're basically on their mercy, and even changing a battery is borderline impossible.
So, yes.. Greed rules all. Capitalism has ability to evolve into this, and given chance
"What is it about Apple's gadgets that forbids mere mortals from looking inside?"
Nothing. Even without the law being passed, you can get the pentalobe driver, open your iphone, replace parts which 3rd party versions (if you know what you are doing), and close it up again. This law is forcing manufacturers to continue manufacturing parts for products they no longer produce, for 7 years.
Funnily enough iFixit's list of hard to repair smartphones is topped by a bunch of Android devices: https://www.ifixit.com/smartph... The Samsung s10 scored a 3, the iPhone XS scored a 6, higher score means more repairable so in iFixit's opinion the iPhone is more repairable than a shit-ton of Android devices. I suppose it is time to grab the pitchforks, light up the torches and burn iFixit HQ do to the ground for spreading heresy.
Yes, but does Google lobby against right to repair laws as Apple apparently does? I honestly don't know. Difficulty of repair due to poor design choice (intentionaly or not) isn't the same as actively lobbying the government to prevent people from repairing their own devices.
No one cares what your captcha was
Houston TX, USA
LOL
Correct, here in America we have anti consumer laws that are supposed to protect us from big business. But that's all socialist propaganda!!! /s
No they don't, it's all ran by fairies and unicorns to them and "free market" principles. LUL
But but but, The the the freee markettttt fixes everything!!!!
Oh you are one of those people. You can Be safely ignored.
If god willin, the shills will be shillin'.
Fucking idiots like that are why we can't have anything nice. Instead of siding with the consumer(which they are themselves), they decide that big business knows what is best for us. Mention government tho and they flip a wig. It's big businesses job to look after citizens, not the govt, free market and all that.
Besides I have never seen this thejam guy post on any other fucking topics, but somehow he's all up and down this thread blaming users and praising big business. After all they know what's best!!!
They already maintain the inventory for their shops to fix phones. What's the difference? Jesus Christ.
I have no seen 1 good argument from you guys. All I hear is "this will make phones cost more money". What? Are you people that fucking clueless. Apple already charges 1200 for a phone!!! Also Apple isn't the only fucking company. This would apply to them all.
I feel this is a call to stop buying their crap all together. Wonder how that might impact their sales.
I have to agree with this. There are too many people who when they hear someone is not fond of Trump they instantly jump to the retort "you're a loser", "you're a Hillary lover", "you're a traitor" etc. They don't understand that Trump is not the perfect human being that they assert. They're stuck in a drunken sports fan mindset that they're favorite team is perfect and all other teams are despicable. Except that this isn't supposed to be about something trivial like sports teams but it is about governing a country.
It's so bad that even when staunchly traditional conservative Republicans say "I like much of what Trump has done but I think he's got many flaws" they still get castigated as RINOs. They are in a binary world of 1s and 0s, where no 0.9s are allowed.
And what's wrong with that? Most of these parts are manufactured by others anyway, even Apple doesn't do everything in-house. I know everywhere I've worked we have had to maintain or repair older products, and provide firmware or software patches for old releases, because we sold this stuff for long term use and some customers are even paying for support. Outside of the Apple Reality Distortion Field, it's basic business sense to maintain good customer relationships in order to continue earning revenue. So screwing over a customer generally means you lose money. If you've got a defective product then you recall it or allow repairs, if it's too expensive to maintain then you offer to allow an upgrade at a discount, etc. If you don't do this then you lose customers.
Inspector: It doesn't say anything here about lark's vomit!
Mr. Hilton: Ah, it does, on the bottom of the box, after 'monosodium glutamate'.
Inspector: I hardly think that's good enough! I think it's be more appropriate if the box bore a great red label: 'WARNING: LARK'S VOMIT!!!'
Mr. Hilton: Our sales would plummet!
These devices are being built to intentionallly fail early and be unrepairable, as it drives sales for the newer versions. Planned obsolescence at an extreme.
There are phone plans they try to push where you can get a new phone every two years or 18 months or such. So I have to ask why would I want to upgrade in two years, are the current models I'm thinking about buying today so unreliable that I should cancel my purchase and shop elsewhere?
Often that can be true. But generally you protect a circuit board in that case. Making it impossible to change a battery is not necessary to protect against state actors or rival companies trying to clone, etc.
Often these replacement parts already exist and if they deem a product obsolete the parts are thrown away or used on later products, etc. Many parts are actually from third parties anyway.
Also, if the product is reliable then there's a good chance you won't need many replacement parts. If you need boatloads of parts for future repairs then chances are you've got a shitty product.
Really. They are. I'm not just talking about a legal fantasy here; corporations are made up of people—you know, members of The People. Government has no business telling those People what to do with their own property; if they want to sell their property with certain constraints on the buyer (e.g., if they want to lease their property), then that's perfectly legitimate.
In the United States, the government is supposed to be restricted, no any of The People. That's what you Unamericans don't get, and apparently never will.
If its more than a year or two old? Its degraded, because lithium ion batteries degrade over time, "new old stock" is not gonna change chemistry.
But hey, if you want to buy a degraded battery or a knock off from Ali Express? I 100% support your right to do so, I simply believe the companies should also have the right to make sure its appropriately marked so its not being passed off as OEM, no different than how you can make bags that LOOK like a Gucci, but you can't sell it as a Gucci bag.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Yes, but to my knowledge no android phone to date has had a software bomb in place to prevent the device from booting if a 3rd party repair was detected.
There's a world of difference between being difficult to repair and having the device actively look for 3rd party repairs and refusing to operate because it found one.
They have a system that prevents the computer from booting if you install inauthentic parts which given their business model of producing extremely reliable kit is not that surprising nor would it be for any other laptop manufacturer. Try installing inauthentic parts in a Lenovo or Acer, take the thing to the manufacturer to complain and see what they say. That, in my book, is not repair, it is experimentation on your part (same for smartphones and tablets). Also, Apple does not ban 3rd party repair centres, they just require them to be licensed. I've dealt with two licensed third party Apple repair centres over the last 20 years and I have yet to experience anything other than excellent service.
"What is it about Apple's gadgets that forbids mere mortals from looking inside?"
Nothing. Even without the law being passed, you can get the pentalobe driver, open your iphone, replace parts which 3rd party versions (if you know what you are doing), and close it up again. This law is forcing manufacturers to continue manufacturing parts for products they no longer produce, for 7 years.
Funnily enough iFixit's list of hard to repair smartphones is topped by a bunch of Android devices: https://www.ifixit.com/smartph... The Samsung s10 scored a 3, the iPhone XS scored a 6, higher score means more repairable so in iFixit's opinion the iPhone is more repairable than a shit-ton of Android devices. I suppose it is time to grab the pitchforks, light up the torches and burn iFixit HQ do to the ground for spreading heresy.
Yes, but does Google lobby against right to repair laws as Apple apparently does? I honestly don't know. Difficulty of repair due to poor design choice (intentionaly or not) isn't the same as actively lobbying the government to prevent people from repairing their own devices.
A string of Android device manufacturers like Samsung for example lobby against right to repair laws.
Please provide the phone manufacturer and model. I HIGHLY belive you are lying. Most definitely you did not check if you can add multiple numbers for a contact. If you use the sim for contacts storage, then this is a sim limitation, rather than a phone limitation and this is all on you.
I've upgraded the ssd on a gen3 lenovo x1 carbon. I've also installed a wwan card on it that was not sold by lenovo (admittedly I did some research to check if it's one of the two that is bios-accepted). The battery on it is also user replaceable. I also upgraded the ram and drive on a lenovo x230 without ANY issues. On the x230 you can also replace the battery with any third party ones (but almost all are shit quality)
When it comes to android, at least you have alternative manufacturers. With apple, you have none. Sure, you can get a decent hackintosh or even a great one for a lot cheaper, but iphones don't have hackintosh builds.
When it comes to android, at least you have alternative manufacturers. With apple, you have none. Sure, you can get a decent hackintosh or even a great one for a lot cheaper, but iphones don't have hackintosh builds.
Being a one stop shop that doesn't license it's OS is kind of Apple's business model, people know that right off the bat and they accept that limitation when they buy an Apple device. That being said, as far as I can tell the biggest Android manufactures score a lower recent reputability rating on that iFixit list than Apple does. Samsung, Google, HTC, Huawei all score a 4 or worse on that list for their newest devices, In fact HTC has three phones on there that are rated almost irreparable. Apple on the other hand has been scoring consistently higher reliability ratings with time. They went from the iPhone 1st gen that scored a 2 to scoring a 7 for everything up to the iPhone X series whose repairability rating dipped to 6. The highest scoring Google phone on that list is the Pixel XL of 2016 that scored a 6 and Google has been consistently lowering its repairability rating to a mere 4 with the Pixel 3 XL. I wonder if that indicates that Google is rapidly learning to force users to upgrade as they gain experience by making their phones progressively harder to repair? It seems more justifiable to accuse Google+Samsung+HTC of forcing users to upgrade that than Apple given iFixit's experiences with repairability.
You want a violently imposed monopoly to save society from a voluntarily grown monopoly.
That makes no sense.
"Often it is so" does not imply "therefore there is no impact of mandating that it be so."
So my response is merely, "So what?" You need a lot more words, arranged into a point, in order to have actually succeeded at making a relevant point.
So what if there are often extra parts laying around? If they're not selling them, we have no idea if they made enough to supply the market for 7 years. And, we know that we don't know that! So we know they can't say that they have enough; how would they know in advance of any sales?
Yeah, maybe it was shitty product. OK. That happens. That's my point; now they can't even discontinue it, they have to keep making the damn parts! Making 1 shitty product in the history of your company, guarantees your company goes bankrupt?!
If you need boatloads of replacement parts, it might mean it is a shitty product; or that the competition built a similar product but your website is easier to find to order the parts from. There isn't any guarantee that the parts actually are replacement parts, especially if you're required to sell them!
And for similar reasons, just because your product is reliable doesn't mean you don't have to make a lot of replacement parts, if it is mandated that you make and sell them. Especially in this context, where we're talking about selling them to individuals and you can't force people to an authorized service center to make sure it is really even a "replacement."
It is a nice idea, it just doesn't map to a sane policy proposal. Banning soldered-in battery packs seems like a more reasonable idea, but they'll just switch to glue, and ultimately they do have to be fastened into place in some applications. So it is very hard to achieve a good rule.
Liar liar, pants on fire!
You're playing a word game around "didn't sell any" even though I didn't say "any," I said "doesn't sell well."
If you sold a few units of products, you could easily be required to eventually stock and sell any number of the "repair" parts. There is no limiting factor; it could be 10 replacement widgets per unit sold, it could be 10,000. It could be 1,000,000.
You can't force them to sell parts for home repair, because you can't regulate that the parts are really going to home repairs.
It is completely hare-brained, just some random snippets of what would be nice "in a perfect world," without any thought to the results of the policy as a whole.
Any "right to repair" that eventually becomes law will look different; it will not involve the forced stockpiling of replacement parts, or consigning anybody that released a product to slave away for some number of years continuing to make the thing. Forcing the release of repair manuals is more likely, though easily gamed. Preventing companies from interfering with the import of 3rd party replacement parts is possible, though unlikely. Probably that would have to be done by the US Congress, not California. Preventing the soldering of batteries is possible, with a bunch of exceptions.
Right now, there are a lot of items where replacement parts are really cheap, but are only sold to verified customers. For those products, the cheap parts is often part of the reviews, part of the purchasing process, part of the long term business strategy of the company making the item. And sometimes, they change the replacement part due to experience with how it wears or fails. You're not going to convince Government in the US to try to stop any of those practices. Forcing them to release the repair manual, though, that's doable.
Well, no, if you're the one required to stock the part, and they stop making it, why don't you now have to start making it?
And if you're off the hook in that case, suppliers will just start publishing a date after which they promise to stop selling a particular part number, and the part numbers will change more often.
This is one of those policies that seems simple at first, but as soon as you start looking at the problems, and how to work around the problems, you start to realize that if you work around the problems, you also worked around the intended effects of the policy.
Example: If you buy at least 10k microcontrollers, the factory is often willing to silkscreen your own product name on it so you can treat it as a custom part. They could re-word the exact same product feature to make up their own part number just for one company to buy, then they can cancel it whenever you ask.