206
submitted 10 months ago by JoShmoe@lemmy.zip to c/technology@beehaw.org

I believe this is genuine support of the bill from Apple. Between Right to Repair winning in Massachusetts and the EU demanding compliance, I think Apple decided to flip the script. They would want to continue the illusion of customer friendly tech.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Glaive0@beehaw.org 70 points 10 months ago

What are the holes that can be poked into this as written? I firmly believe Apple is still against repair that would eat into their new sales. So where does this, as written, give them the room to keep that going?

Is it just that they can continue to make their “screen issue = replace whole top shell of laptop” and similar the default and draw the line there, standardizing high-cost repairs even if it’s just a wire or small component replacement? If they don’t allow ANY standard repairs more granular than swap module for module, they don’t have to provide more granular resources than that. I’m not fully up on what repairs Apple authorizes.

This is definitely a win to some degree, though. But when your opponent goes to your side and draws a line, that always gives me the chills.

[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 49 points 10 months ago

It could be Apple has concluded it’s going to get forced into this, so it’s pushing for laws that apply to all makers in order to avoid a law specific to itself.

Generally speaking a law that creates a responsibility can be a win if it also creates that same responsibility for everyone else.

Meaning it could be apple trying to ensure its competitors are also subject to any rulings.

[-] Glaive0@beehaw.org 13 points 10 months ago

That’s definitely my hope.

[-] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 8 points 10 months ago

They decided a law is coming and they have the margins to absorb the cost better than their competitors.

[-] nous@programming.dev 8 points 10 months ago

Nah, it is them trying to control the bill by saying they are for it - if only these concessions are made. The article shows what they dont want to give up, under the guise of safety and security and disallowing repairs that might weaken that. And since they have been increasing the number of parts that are serialised in the name of security I bet they would argue repairing these parts will weaken their security and therefore cannot be allowed. Also, they want to focus on authorised repair channels, which they already massively lock down to the point they are more shipping stations than actual repair places. But also want to force third parties to disclose when they use used or non genuine parts - which since they only sell whole assemblies rather than individual components will likely force everyone that is actually making repairs to advertise that they use used/refurbished parts.

So they still want control, they just realise they can have better control by claiming to be fighting for right to repair while undermining any useful impact any bills would otherwise have - all while claiming they are for right to repair.

[-] edwiebe@mstdn.ca 4 points 10 months ago

@Glaive0 @JoShmoe I really have no deep understanding of Apple but my guess is that they actually want to ensure repaired devices meet their specs for command and control of it, for purity of image, and experience of using it, and to reduce possible hassles dealing with people who complain about their now (possibly) off-spec device. I’m betting on some vision of purity (reputation) and control. Anyway, I don’t think the repaired for resale market would do much to sales.

[-] Glaive0@beehaw.org 15 points 10 months ago

It’s less the repaired retail market (which they control on Amazon at least) and more the “I could repair this for cheaper than half of a new phone” lost sales. They’ve been quietly letting that group slip by for years of progressively more expensive to “repair” (read, “swap modules”) while people who could get a basic repair done for cheap are pushed to buy new phones instead.

[-] taanegl@beehaw.org 67 points 10 months ago

Next step: demand unlockable bootloaders without breaking warranty and easy rollback to a stock system.

After that: mandate that firmware source code be bundled with sales of devices.

We're comin' fo dat ass, Steve Apple.

[-] anlumo@feddit.de 15 points 10 months ago

We have to stop voting for neoliberals first, globally.

[-] Uranium3006@kbin.social 12 points 10 months ago
[-] CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago

If the next iPhone has an unlockable bootloader, a USBC port, and a removable battery then I may just buy my very first iPhone (to run Linux on of course). With the work Asahi is doing for Mac hardware, an unlocked Apple Silicon iPhone could be an amazing Linux phone.

[-] tesseract@beehaw.org 59 points 10 months ago

And then you have monstrosities like these. Don't ever trust a word they preach.

[-] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 4 points 10 months ago

Same crap they pulled with the iphone 14

[-] umami_wasbi@lemmy.ml 47 points 10 months ago

A repair bill supported by Apple most likely not a bill I want. It is hard to imagine Apple will loosen it's tight grip.

[-] nous@programming.dev 26 points 10 months ago

Yup, they basically said they will only support it as long as:

  • it does not threaten the security/safety of the devices/consumer data. AKA will continue to let them lock out parts and software under the excuse of security.
  • focus on docs, tools and parts for authorized repair channels. AKA what they currently do/want as they already control these sectors.
  • force repair providers to disclose use of unauthorised or used parts. AKA force third parties to advertise they don't use genuine/new parts as apple don't and likely still wont make these parts available (just continue with expensive whole assembly repairs).
  • only apply these rules to new products.

So the way I read it - Apple see they are losing the right to repair fight so now want to flip sides so they can better control the laws that get put in place to better quite their needs by cutting off the teeth of any bills all the while claiming they are supporting right to repair for PR purposes.

[-] umami_wasbi@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 months ago

New Anti-Consumer MacBook Pros - Teardown And Repair Assessment - Apple Silicon M1/M2

Proofed. Support a defective bill and create an anti-repair product.

[-] JoShmoe@lemmy.zip 6 points 10 months ago

Apple isn’t in charge of Right to Repair.

[-] bilboswaggings@sopuli.xyz 4 points 10 months ago

We probably want it, but can get more with another

Kind of like they support this because they want to stop or slow down a more broad bill from passing in the near future

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 32 points 10 months ago

There must be a loophole in the bill. Hopefully people find it and sound the alarm before the bill passes.

[-] moody@lemmings.world 18 points 10 months ago

Either that, or it's become clear they can't win, and they're trying to look good and gaslight people into believing they were always on the right side of this.

[-] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 11 points 10 months ago

Pretty hard to imagine a megacorporation not winning.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 10 months ago

In the US sure, with all its legalised bribery.

But they'll have a much harder time with it in the EU where they cannot as easily buy people off. Plus it's actually a crime in the EU, so if they get caught trying they'll be in trouble, so perhaps they've concluded it isn't worth the risk.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 10 months ago

The law only says they have to sell replacement pieces, they are still going to make a killing selling stuff.

[-] gbin@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 months ago

Oh you lost a screw ... Let me see ... That will be $3k for the screw but we do have a cool new iPhone too you know!

[-] drwho@beehaw.org 30 points 10 months ago

It's Apple.

What's the catch?

[-] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 20 points 10 months ago

My exact thoughts.

The last time they "supported" rtr, they locked parts to the firmware. Yeah, you can switch between them, but then had to take it to Apple to reregister the parts, which they would only do if they were brand new and genuine. Apple is a snake in tall grass.

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I see EU mentioned somewhere. The legislation here was created to give the end consumer the right to repair by their own means; if they are to pull a stunt like that it is probably going to blow on their hands.

[-] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 3 points 10 months ago

I hope you're right. But apple has a tendency of skirting these law.

[-] ursakhiin@beehaw.org 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's simple. They see the writing on the wall and are going to act like it was what they wanted all along.

[-] skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]

[-] RobotToaster@infosec.pub 17 points 10 months ago

I'm guessing it doesn't stop them putting DRM in parts and making parts cost more than a new phone.

[-] KrokanteBamischijf@feddit.nl 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

While this is very much welcome news, I am a little skeptical because this might still be a PR stunt.

Apple has shown they have the engineering capacity to design their devices to be virtually unfixable, all while still technically being compliant with this proposed piece of legislation.

Nonetheless, this show of support might finally be a means for us to end the ongoing culture war on repairability. It has been too much of a polarized debate lately, where opponents seem to be under the impression that a lack of repairability is a good thing for everyone, when it is really just having a choice that matters most.

Now that Apple has officially put in writing it's support for repairability of consumer electronics, we can finally stop debating wether or not repairability is a good thing, and instead how we're going to ensure the new situation works for everyone involved. Hopefully.

[-] Haui@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 10 months ago

Those people you are talking about sound like the „willfully ignorant“. People who can’t be bothered to understand a topic they’re talking about. Oh, and sociopaths who just like others to suffer.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Montagge@kbin.social 13 points 10 months ago

Apple doesn't care if you repair it because they know their operating system will make it unusable anyways.

[-] JoShmoe@lemmy.zip 3 points 10 months ago

I know they ritualistically make third party software and tech incompatible, but we do have recent cases in our favor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/08/15/hp-printers-scanner-disabled-low-ink/be2b30fc-3b86-11ee-aefd-40c039a855ba_story.html#

HP had designed the scanning functionality to not operate if the printer didn’t have any ink.

[-] Khalic@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago

A little hyperbole, they will make it look crappy-er compared to their new stuff and abandon it progressively, as people fall to fomo.

[-] Ganbat@lemmyonline.com 11 points 10 months ago

Someone in there finally said, "We can sell them the parts, and then the ones that fail to fix it either have to buy a new one or send the old one to us to fix at even more cost!"

[-] radiated@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

Their lawyers probably found a loophole.

[-] Diabolo96@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Apple ? Right to repair ? I must be in a parallel universe. Still bullshit corpo talk because the only parallel universe where apple wouldn't be the pinnacle of anti-consumerism would be if it never existed in the first place.

[-] regalia@literature.cafe 8 points 10 months ago

Lol they are the ones that this bill is directed against. This is like police suddenly supporting defund the police.

[-] soulfirethewolf@lemdro.id 7 points 10 months ago

I still do think that the bill is more about having the right to repair from more sources, as opposed to the right to an easy repair. I definitely do encourage devices to be engineered in a way that allows them to be repaired by as many people as possible, and that the skills to work with hardware should definitely be taught more in schools. But I still think that there's a lot of people who don't know the whole process of finding decent quality parts, and will just stoop to somewhere like Wish or AliExpress for something like a battery because they don't feel like paying for something they don't fully understand, they just know that they need a new one. And then put themselves at risk if the battery in question wasn't made up to the correct safety standards. So I do think it's somewhat of a responsibility to warn people about shopping for parts. But there should definitely be less restrictions on Apple hardware and the law should be rewritten to put price caps on genuine parts to keep them within reach of most people.

[-] qyron@sopuli.xyz 4 points 10 months ago

I still do think that the bill is more about having the right to repair from more sources, as opposed to the right to an easy repair.

Starting with the consumer themselves.

This is starting to sound a lot like the time the auto manufacturer tried to void warranties if the cars were to be taken to anywhere but the official service.

Ford, VW, Volvo, Renault, Mercedes and BMW had their asses handed to them by the EU as it was deemed lockout: the owner had the right to seek service wherever they wanted and get parts from what ever source they chose.

Not to start on the implications of disloyal competition...

[...] But I still think that there's a lot of people who don't know the whole process of finding decent quality parts, and will just stoop to somewhere like Wish or AliExpress for something like a battery because they don't feel like paying for something they don't fully understand, they just know that they need a new one.

Anyone should be able to buy anything wherever they choose.

If someone finds a better deal on a chinese retailer, good. If the part turns out good, better. If not, learn the lesson and try again.

And then put themselves at risk if the battery in question wasn't made up to the correct safety standards.

It's a bit iffy to argue on the basis of poor or absent safety standards. Unless we are speaking of going out to find the dingiest shop on an online retailer, 99% of manufactured goods follow the same standards.

Yes, bad batches exist but batteries are one of those things where counterfeiting is not worth the trouble; the moment the parts can be sourced from any number of manufacturers, all will go by similar quality.

So I do think it's somewhat of a responsibility to warn people about shopping for parts. But there should definitely be less restrictions on Apple hardware and the law should be rewritten to put price caps on genuine parts to keep them within reach of most people.

I'm all in favor in limiting commercial margins but even I consider meddling when it comes to law setting prices to consumer goods.

In the end, only those who want to will buy. Yes, Apple products are basically highway robbery but nobody is being forced to buy the crap they make nor need it to survive.

It's a phone, not food, fuel or shelter. If it's too expensive, buy cheaper.

[-] JWBananas@startrek.website 7 points 10 months ago

Yes, because they've already been working on it.

They've already seen the writing on the wall. And now that they have made decent progress on their end, their competition will be scrambling to catch up when the bill becomes law.

[-] umami_wasbi@lemmy.ml 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Isn't the program that requires you to fill a form to order a serialized display and send the old one back? That's still monopoly, just shift from service to sales. The essence remains the same.

[-] JoShmoe@lemmy.zip 5 points 10 months ago

What competitors? I genuinely don’t know of any other tech companies with exclusive ports.

[-] TommySalami@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago

I hope you are right. More end-user freedom is a good thing and, if it is a matter of turning the tide, I'd love to see more tech companies competing to be the most accessible for repairs.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
206 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37381 readers
370 users here now

Rumors, happenings, and innovations in the technology sphere. If it's technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS