Agreed - regardless of the motivations behind it, this is great. Of course, it would be even better if they stopped doing things like disabling features after using third party replacement...
Agreed - regardless of the motivations behind it, this is great. Of course, it would be even better if they stopped doing things like disabling features after using third party replacement components, but this is still a step in the right direction.
Did everybody forget the last time this happened when they tried to do something like this with repair shops, but you had to sign a huge NDA that didn't let you discuss the program, and it turned...
Did everybody forget the last time this happened when they tried to do something like this with repair shops, but you had to sign a huge NDA that didn't let you discuss the program, and it turned out you couldn't hold any stock, so you had to order parts at the time of repair, which meant even simple repairs would take weeks requesting replacements, and you also had to agree to mandatory random audits where they'd just show up like a gang, tear through your shop looking for contraband (any apple parts kept in stock) and eject you from the program if you have any.
They're doing this just to convince politicians to drop right to repair laws, and as soon as the heat dies down, they're going to drop the program. it still needs to be law to keep them honest.
Louis Rossman has some opinions: https://youtu.be/2jCtVDCiY_8 He always brings some well thought out points to right to repair, and this is no exception. His main point is this: the previous apple...
He always brings some well thought out points to right to repair, and this is no exception. His main point is this: the previous apple repair program seemed pretty great, but turned out terrible. Also, how granular will their part offerings be? For example, are they only going to offer laptop upper cases, including keyboard, trackpad, and battery, or will they offer those pieces individually. This could easily end up being no more than a PR stunt.
If Rossmann is skeptical, I am skeptical. He, just by being "in the industry" should know a vast majority of the important bits that we, some randoms on the internet, ignore or don't even know....
If Rossmann is skeptical, I am skeptical. He, just by being "in the industry" should know a vast majority of the important bits that we, some randoms on the internet, ignore or don't even know.
Especially with learning how Apple did this before, the chance of this being a PR stunt really seems like something to consider.
Also, Rossmann has said that if this program amounts to anything, he will daily drive a Macbook, so he seems to be somewhat confident in his words.
I'm paraphrasing this from no idea where, but: "The good thing about being a pessimist is that you either tell the truth or be pleasantly surprised" Also, I'm not sure if Apple of all corporations...
However, he does have a strong tendency towards the negative.
I'm paraphrasing this from no idea where, but: "The good thing about being a pessimist is that you either tell the truth or be pleasantly surprised"
Also, I'm not sure if Apple of all corporations deserve positive thinking.
As someone on the HN thread for this pointed out, this probably wasn’t a response to the recent uptick in the right-to-repair movement and lawsuits; a program like this would probably take years...
Apple today announced Self Service Repair, which will allow customers who are comfortable with completing their own repairs access to Apple genuine parts and tools. Available first for the iPhone 12 and iPhone 13 lineups, and soon to be followed by Mac computers featuring M1 chips, Self Service Repair will be available early next year in the US and expand to additional countries throughout 2022. Customers join more than 5,000 Apple Authorized Service Providers (AASPs) and 2,800 Independent Repair Providers who have access to these parts, tools, and manuals.
The initial phase of the program will focus on the most commonly serviced modules, such as the iPhone display, battery, and camera. The ability for additional repairs will be available later next year.
As someone on the HN thread for this pointed out, this probably wasn’t a response to the recent uptick in the right-to-repair movement and lawsuits; a program like this would probably take years in the making. As someone who knows almost nothing about the logistics of something like this, I have no clue what their motivation for this might be. Could anyone more qualified to speak on this provide some insight?
I'm not qualified, these are merely my impressions. It is quite possible that a project which already existed was accelerated, though. It could also be the case that the commotion surrounding...
I'm not qualified, these are merely my impressions.
As someone on the HN thread for this pointed out, this probably wasn’t a response to the recent uptick in the right-to-repair movement and lawsuits
It is quite possible that a project which already existed was accelerated, though. It could also be the case that the commotion surrounding right-to-repair prevented the project from being cancelled before coming to light.
Personally, I have two additional guesses:
It's better to sell components at a premium than having people buy Chinese knockoffs
By anticipating a commitment to right-to-repair, they become less of a target for regulation
Have we become so cynical and paranoid that it's absolutely unthinkable that a company might do this because they genuinely think it's the right thing to do? Or at least that it would produce...
Have we become so cynical and paranoid that it's absolutely unthinkable that a company might do this because they genuinely think it's the right thing to do? Or at least that it would produce enough goodwill long term to offset any short term gains that might come from forced obsolesce?
I think Apple management actually believes in the "make the world a better place" Silicon Valley mantra and they're committing to all kinds of environmental programs that feel at least genuine in intent (of course their goodwill ends when it comes to aspects of mass production that are incompatible with it). As a concrete example, they have been offering iOS updates for 5+ year old devices for a while now, which beats any Android device I know of and that fact clashes with the theory that this is all some sinister plot to force people to buy new crap. Their "premium" positioning allows them a little more freedom with stuff like this and I believe the recent movement towards self-repair and recycling is big enough to benefit them. With the recent MBP redesign, I have hopes that there's a trend at Apple to listen more to its users instead of just drowning out all criticism with ads. Maybe they just genuinely listened? Maybe there's money in becoming a lesser asshole?
Twenty-seven states considered such bills in 2021. More than half have already been voted down or dismissed, according to consumer groups tracking the proposals.
One reason these legislative efforts have failed is the opposition, which happens to sell boatloads of new devices every year. Microsoft’s top lawyer advocated against a repair bill in its home state. Lobbyists for Google and Amazon.com Inc. swooped into Colorado this year to help quash a proposal. Trade groups representing Apple Inc. successfully buried a version in Nevada.
TechNet, a trade group representing several large tech firms including Google and Apple, sent letters to lawmakers in multiple states as part of an industry coalition. “Allowing unvetted third parties with access to sensitive diagnostic information, software, tools, and parts would jeopardize the safety and security of consumers’ devices and put consumers at risk for fraud,” David Edmonson, a TechNet vice president, said in a statement. “States have continually rejected legislation like this, with 25 states alone last year deciding not to take action.”
Earlier this year, Washington Democrat Mia Gregerson sponsored another right-to-repair measure...
According to Gregerson, however, one company had an outsized influence. “If you really want to know who was naughty—it was Apple,” she said. Lobbyists representing the iPhone company discreetly told colleagues that it would be willing to endorse repair programs at local colleges in exchange for killing the bill, according to Gregerson. Apple declined to comment.
Unlike Microsoft, Apple often lets hired guns or trade groups do its advocacy. In New York, an Apple-backed association, Security Innovation Center, sent around talking points opposing a right-to-repair bill in 2018. Such legislation “would have gifted hackers with digital keys to thousands of Internet-connected products,” read the document viewed by Bloomberg News. Additionally, the document said these laws would mandate tech companies to hand over sensitive trade secrets. That New York bill never made it for a vote.
In Colorado, two lobbyists from Capstone Group registered on behalf of Apple to oppose a repair bill this year, state records show. They were joined by a phalanx of representatives from other tech firms, telecoms and trade groups.
Well, first of all: Touché! I didn't know the extent of their lobbying efforts. That being said, I'm not sure that's a contradiction to their motivations for changing their products. Also, I'm...
Well, first of all: Touché! I didn't know the extent of their lobbying efforts. That being said, I'm not sure that's a contradiction to their motivations for changing their products. Also, I'm very much playing devil's advocate here since I've certainly raged against Apple's bullshit in the past.
Basically, for me this comes down to one design aspect of their recent hardware: Slimmer cases.
For context, I'm currently using a 2012 MacBook Pro (with an upgraded SSD). I bought it used and before had a 2009 MBP for which I had replaced the hard drive, RAM and fixed the fan. All this was (relatively) easy, there certainly were no intentional hurdles to make it harder. Further, I'm using a first generation iPhone SE, which now is 5 years old, shows no sign of wear and just got an upgrade to iOS 15. The "planned obsolesce" angle doesn't seem to make sense since Apple hardware seems to designed to last longer (while charging enough premium for that to not make it charity).
There is only really one trend that ended up destroying their reputation as producers of quality, long-lasting and, yes, repairable devices and it's an obsession with slim cases. When I first heard they were gluing in batteries in MacBooks I was convinced it was some sinister plan to make it harder to replace them but then I read some analysis of the layout and it turns out, yea, they probably did it to stupidly cram more battery in a slimmer case! They also introduced butterfly keyboards which everyone hated and removed all kinds of ports (including HDMI and magsafe charging), none of which can be explained otherwise, it's all to make cases slimmer!
As for the lobbying part: Well, of course they're fighting the law. No company wants the government to dictate their product standards. They made the decision that small cases are more important than repairability, which was a bad decision but an internal decision and one that shaped their entire product line. Their legal team has no choice but reacting to decisions like that and they sure employ a bunch of coldhearted assholes to do that job (because they're a giant ass company).
The latest MBP is a reversal of this trend, though. It's actually a bit thicker than previous models, it re-adds all kinds of ports, a better (higher) keyboard and a non-glued battery. It still uses a ton of custom parts (i.e. the touch-id power button) but I'm not sure I'm willing to scold them for using custom hardware if it adds custom function. So when it's said that they're only doing it out of fear of a right-to-repair law, I have doubts. It might be a factor (although if we're accepting their role as a ruthless megacorp, it would also be obvious that they'd successfully lobby for exemptions). But IMO they're mostly doing it to bolster their "pro" angle, which does not only fit the easier to replace battery but the whole list of changes they did to the MBP hardware. And maybe, just maybe they try and make their devices last longer. This doesn't have to be charity, it looks like they're pushing for custom repair kits which will come with a price tag. Just the initial cost of their devices more than prices in longer lasting hardware as well.
So while I don't think that Apple are saints, I do think that, among all the options out there except maybe something like a Fairphone (which can barely match demand), Apple devices are the ones with the longest lifespan. So this repairability push isn't at all out of character in the grander scheme of things and doesn't need to be dissected to the point where it's actually a sign of evilness (or a reluctant retreat). It fits Apple.
Apple are also a bunch of assholes in just about a million other ways. But this is about making devices last longer.
Not any company, but certainly Apple. They either did this because they think it'll protect them from R2R-based lawsuits in the coming years or because they think it'll kill R2R legislation, or...
Have we become so cynical and paranoid that it's absolutely unthinkable that a company might do this because they genuinely think it's the right thing to do?
Not any company, but certainly Apple. They either did this because they think it'll protect them from R2R-based lawsuits in the coming years or because they think it'll kill R2R legislation, or both. For over a decade now they've been anti-repair as a matter of policy; something has to have to changed.
I don't think it is cynical to believe large corporations usually act in a way that protects their interests, sometimes to the detriment of society. There is ample evidence that this is the...
I don't think it is cynical to believe large corporations usually act in a way that protects their interests, sometimes to the detriment of society. There is ample evidence that this is the default modus operandi of such entities.
This is not to say that everything they do is automatically evil, but Apple earned a reputation when it comes to consumer rights. They most certainly deserve a chance, but their previous actions more than justify a dose of skepticism. And because the sentiment is, in this case, justified, it cannot be called cynicism.
Every publicly traded company does not function on a morality scale, but on a profit scale. They do this because they expect more profit out of it. Like they way they killed the headphone jack and...
Have we become so cynical and paranoid that it's absolutely unthinkable that a company might do this because they genuinely think it's the right thing to do?
Every publicly traded company does not function on a morality scale, but on a profit scale. They do this because they expect more profit out of it. Like they way they killed the headphone jack and started selling AirPods. You think those are good for the environment, with their tiny batteries that will need replacing every 1-2 years?
I find it very strange that people still defend mega-corporations with nearly limitless funds and power. For the record, I don't have a problem with anyone buying their products. You do you mate. I just find it strange that they then argue for them too.
I think it's healthy to view businesses with a sense of skepticism. https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/17/22787336/apple-right-to-repair-self-service-diy-reason-microsoft
I think it's healthy to view businesses with a sense of skepticism.
I'm not exactly qualified either...but this doesn't seem the sort of thing that would take multiple years. They've already got a distribution network in place for sending to Apple stores. The...
I'm not exactly qualified either...but this doesn't seem the sort of thing that would take multiple years.
They've already got a distribution network in place for sending to Apple stores. The initial phase in list seem like things that would pretty much already be on hand at those and would pretty much just requiring someone there to box up the stuff and mail it.
Even if it did...right to repair is not a new thing....it's basically been shouted about since the DMCA passed in the first place. Apple has spent plenty of money and time fighting right to repair as others have noted, and this smells like seeing the writing on the wall and trying to control the narrative instead of the legal system (which would hopefully err on the side of consumers).
My thoughts from a text convo: Yeah, I saw that. They'll make it more expensive to do that than apple care And then they'll edge out smaller repair tech companies and using it as a sign that they...
My thoughts from a text convo:
Yeah, I saw that. They'll make it more expensive to do that than apple care
And then they'll edge out smaller repair tech companies and using it as a sign that they [are] 'pro repair rights' or something
Will likely hold up on court when they inevitably start suing the larger and smaller brands for 'damaging their reputation and using their copyrighted and proprietaty assets, tools, and tech" for repairs or something [or use their market position as leader in self repairs to destroy small business']
I am usually optimistic, but apple has never been good on this, never trust mega-corps.
I really hope this influences future designs for apple products. For a time I was deep into the iPod modding scene -- and nothing could be easier to work on. It'd be great to see the most common...
I really hope this influences future designs for apple products. For a time I was deep into the iPod modding scene -- and nothing could be easier to work on. It'd be great to see the most common components easily replaceable.
At least with the 12 mini, it wouldn't have taken a lot of work to shuffle things around a bit to make the replacement a lot easier.
This seems, at the face of it, absolutely wonderful. I sincerely hope this becomes a norm in the industry going forward.
Agreed - regardless of the motivations behind it, this is great. Of course, it would be even better if they stopped doing things like disabling features after using third party replacement components, but this is still a step in the right direction.
Seems like they're doing that too: https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/16/22786274/apple-iphone-13-screen-replacement-face-id-ios-15-2-beta-fixes
Did everybody forget the last time this happened when they tried to do something like this with repair shops, but you had to sign a huge NDA that didn't let you discuss the program, and it turned out you couldn't hold any stock, so you had to order parts at the time of repair, which meant even simple repairs would take weeks requesting replacements, and you also had to agree to mandatory random audits where they'd just show up like a gang, tear through your shop looking for contraband (any apple parts kept in stock) and eject you from the program if you have any.
They're doing this just to convince politicians to drop right to repair laws, and as soon as the heat dies down, they're going to drop the program. it still needs to be law to keep them honest.
I hope this helps make the law happen. It takes away their "oh but it'll cost us so much money to set up the program" card.
Louis Rossman has some opinions: https://youtu.be/2jCtVDCiY_8
He always brings some well thought out points to right to repair, and this is no exception. His main point is this: the previous apple repair program seemed pretty great, but turned out terrible. Also, how granular will their part offerings be? For example, are they only going to offer laptop upper cases, including keyboard, trackpad, and battery, or will they offer those pieces individually. This could easily end up being no more than a PR stunt.
If Rossmann is skeptical, I am skeptical. He, just by being "in the industry" should know a vast majority of the important bits that we, some randoms on the internet, ignore or don't even know.
Especially with learning how Apple did this before, the chance of this being a PR stunt really seems like something to consider.
Also, Rossmann has said that if this program amounts to anything, he will daily drive a Macbook, so he seems to be somewhat confident in his words.
Rossmann has a lot of well deserved credibility. However, he does have a strong tendency towards the negative.
I'm paraphrasing this from no idea where, but: "The good thing about being a pessimist is that you either tell the truth or be pleasantly surprised"
Also, I'm not sure if Apple of all corporations deserve positive thinking.
Nice quote. I don't think that is how pessimism works though.
And yeah, Apple deserves skepticism, 100%. I was talking about Rossman, really.
As someone on the HN thread for this pointed out, this probably wasn’t a response to the recent uptick in the right-to-repair movement and lawsuits; a program like this would probably take years in the making. As someone who knows almost nothing about the logistics of something like this, I have no clue what their motivation for this might be. Could anyone more qualified to speak on this provide some insight?
I'm not qualified, these are merely my impressions.
It is quite possible that a project which already existed was accelerated, though. It could also be the case that the commotion surrounding right-to-repair prevented the project from being cancelled before coming to light.
Personally, I have two additional guesses:
In any case: great news!
Have we become so cynical and paranoid that it's absolutely unthinkable that a company might do this because they genuinely think it's the right thing to do? Or at least that it would produce enough goodwill long term to offset any short term gains that might come from forced obsolesce?
I think Apple management actually believes in the "make the world a better place" Silicon Valley mantra and they're committing to all kinds of environmental programs that feel at least genuine in intent (of course their goodwill ends when it comes to aspects of mass production that are incompatible with it). As a concrete example, they have been offering iOS updates for 5+ year old devices for a while now, which beats any Android device I know of and that fact clashes with the theory that this is all some sinister plot to force people to buy new crap. Their "premium" positioning allows them a little more freedom with stuff like this and I believe the recent movement towards self-repair and recycling is big enough to benefit them. With the recent MBP redesign, I have hopes that there's a trend at Apple to listen more to its users instead of just drowning out all criticism with ads. Maybe they just genuinely listened? Maybe there's money in becoming a lesser asshole?
No cynicism or paranoia required. The evidence speaks for itself, IMO. From just a few months ago:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-20/microsoft-and-apple-wage-war-on-gadget-right-to-repair-laws
Well, first of all: Touché! I didn't know the extent of their lobbying efforts. That being said, I'm not sure that's a contradiction to their motivations for changing their products. Also, I'm very much playing devil's advocate here since I've certainly raged against Apple's bullshit in the past.
Basically, for me this comes down to one design aspect of their recent hardware: Slimmer cases.
For context, I'm currently using a 2012 MacBook Pro (with an upgraded SSD). I bought it used and before had a 2009 MBP for which I had replaced the hard drive, RAM and fixed the fan. All this was (relatively) easy, there certainly were no intentional hurdles to make it harder. Further, I'm using a first generation iPhone SE, which now is 5 years old, shows no sign of wear and just got an upgrade to iOS 15. The "planned obsolesce" angle doesn't seem to make sense since Apple hardware seems to designed to last longer (while charging enough premium for that to not make it charity).
There is only really one trend that ended up destroying their reputation as producers of quality, long-lasting and, yes, repairable devices and it's an obsession with slim cases. When I first heard they were gluing in batteries in MacBooks I was convinced it was some sinister plan to make it harder to replace them but then I read some analysis of the layout and it turns out, yea, they probably did it to stupidly cram more battery in a slimmer case! They also introduced butterfly keyboards which everyone hated and removed all kinds of ports (including HDMI and magsafe charging), none of which can be explained otherwise, it's all to make cases slimmer!
As for the lobbying part: Well, of course they're fighting the law. No company wants the government to dictate their product standards. They made the decision that small cases are more important than repairability, which was a bad decision but an internal decision and one that shaped their entire product line. Their legal team has no choice but reacting to decisions like that and they sure employ a bunch of coldhearted assholes to do that job (because they're a giant ass company).
The latest MBP is a reversal of this trend, though. It's actually a bit thicker than previous models, it re-adds all kinds of ports, a better (higher) keyboard and a non-glued battery. It still uses a ton of custom parts (i.e. the touch-id power button) but I'm not sure I'm willing to scold them for using custom hardware if it adds custom function. So when it's said that they're only doing it out of fear of a right-to-repair law, I have doubts. It might be a factor (although if we're accepting their role as a ruthless megacorp, it would also be obvious that they'd successfully lobby for exemptions). But IMO they're mostly doing it to bolster their "pro" angle, which does not only fit the easier to replace battery but the whole list of changes they did to the MBP hardware. And maybe, just maybe they try and make their devices last longer. This doesn't have to be charity, it looks like they're pushing for custom repair kits which will come with a price tag. Just the initial cost of their devices more than prices in longer lasting hardware as well.
So while I don't think that Apple are saints, I do think that, among all the options out there except maybe something like a Fairphone (which can barely match demand), Apple devices are the ones with the longest lifespan. So this repairability push isn't at all out of character in the grander scheme of things and doesn't need to be dissected to the point where it's actually a sign of evilness (or a reluctant retreat). It fits Apple.
Apple are also a bunch of assholes in just about a million other ways. But this is about making devices last longer.
Not any company, but certainly Apple. They either did this because they think it'll protect them from R2R-based lawsuits in the coming years or because they think it'll kill R2R legislation, or both. For over a decade now they've been anti-repair as a matter of policy; something has to have to changed.
I don't think it is cynical to believe large corporations usually act in a way that protects their interests, sometimes to the detriment of society. There is ample evidence that this is the default modus operandi of such entities.
This is not to say that everything they do is automatically evil, but Apple earned a reputation when it comes to consumer rights. They most certainly deserve a chance, but their previous actions more than justify a dose of skepticism. And because the sentiment is, in this case, justified, it cannot be called cynicism.
Every publicly traded company does not function on a morality scale, but on a profit scale. They do this because they expect more profit out of it. Like they way they killed the headphone jack and started selling AirPods. You think those are good for the environment, with their tiny batteries that will need replacing every 1-2 years?
I find it very strange that people still defend mega-corporations with nearly limitless funds and power. For the record, I don't have a problem with anyone buying their products. You do you mate. I just find it strange that they then argue for them too.
I think it's healthy to view businesses with a sense of skepticism.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/17/22787336/apple-right-to-repair-self-service-diy-reason-microsoft
I'm not exactly qualified either...but this doesn't seem the sort of thing that would take multiple years.
They've already got a distribution network in place for sending to Apple stores. The initial phase in list seem like things that would pretty much already be on hand at those and would pretty much just requiring someone there to box up the stuff and mail it.
Even if it did...right to repair is not a new thing....it's basically been shouted about since the DMCA passed in the first place. Apple has spent plenty of money and time fighting right to repair as others have noted, and this smells like seeing the writing on the wall and trying to control the narrative instead of the legal system (which would hopefully err on the side of consumers).
My thoughts from a text convo:
Yeah, I saw that. They'll make it more expensive to do that than apple care
And then they'll edge out smaller repair tech companies and using it as a sign that they [are] 'pro repair rights' or something
Will likely hold up on court when they inevitably start suing the larger and smaller brands for 'damaging their reputation and using their copyrighted and proprietaty assets, tools, and tech" for repairs or something [or use their market position as leader in self repairs to destroy small business']
I am usually optimistic, but apple has never been good on this, never trust mega-corps.
I really hope this influences future designs for apple products. For a time I was deep into the iPod modding scene -- and nothing could be easier to work on. It'd be great to see the most common components easily replaceable.
At least with the 12 mini, it wouldn't have taken a lot of work to shuffle things around a bit to make the replacement a lot easier.