[HN Gopher] Apple launches Self Service Repair in Europe
___________________________________________________________________
Apple launches Self Service Repair in Europe
Author : Terretta
Score : 198 points
Date : 2022-12-06 15:41 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| sircastor wrote:
| I've been recently trying to resurrect my mom's old 2015 MacBook
| Air and there's a special excitement in being able to follow the
| clues on the logic board as to where there's a problem, and then
| being able to fix it.
|
| When I was going through my father's stuff after he died, I came
| across a Television manual that had come with the product. It
| included a full schematic of the TV. Every resistor, capacitor,
| transistor, and diode. I marveled at the idea that the company
| who made this TV was more interested in your having confidence in
| the product than protecting their next sale...
| mfer wrote:
| Business values have definitely changed over the years. This
| has lead to a drastic change in options available to consumers
| and what they have come to expect. And even in what schools in
| the US teach.
|
| When something is a cultural change... and you notice something
| better in the past... how do you push to make it better, again,
| in the future?
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > better in the past
|
| First you have to define what better means, before you can
| try to make it better again. What you just said boils down to
| "make it more expensive, again, in the future"
|
| My mom's first VHS player got repaired when it broke. On a
| new equivalent it would probably get chucked. Sounds
| terrible? Her first VHS player cost $700. In the early 80s!
| That would be absurd in _todays money_ much less back then,
| _of course_ that bad boy got repaired when it broke.
|
| Same goes for things like washers and dryers. Nostalgic
| memories of how back in the 60s they were built like tanks.
| Of course they were, they cost the same price then as they do
| now, not adjusted for inflation. Spend that kind of money on
| a washer today and it will be built like a tank.
| mfer wrote:
| The context we were talking about was repairability. Modern
| washers and dryers are still fairly repairable. Even at
| their lower price point when figuring for inflation
|
| Cars are getting less repairable. I think most people
| who've worked on cars for a long time will argue that car
| repairability is getting worse. Cars are also a case where
| the average cost, when figuring for inflation, has gone up
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| I bought a microwave recently and it came with an electronics
| schematic for repair too. Now, it uses large capacitors,
| resistors, etc so it would be fairly easy for a novice or field
| repairman to work on. I can kind of understand why
| microelectronics don't come with circuit repair schematics
| though.
| Eleison23 wrote:
| staringback wrote:
| This is what they took from us
| CharlesW wrote:
| > _It included a full schematic of the TV._
|
| For you and other young 'uns, Apple and other early computer
| makers did this as well:
| https://downloads.reactivemicro.com/Apple%20II%20Items/Hardw...
| shagie wrote:
| You could go even further with the Apple II reference manual
| (the Red Book)
|
| http://cini.classiccmp.org/pdf/Apple/ (page 122 is where it
| really gets interesting). It has enough information to
| wirewrap your own (and hand key the instructions to blow a
| prom).
| Someone wrote:
| One reason they stopped doing that was because it made it
| too easy to make clones
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_II_clones)
|
| It was Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp. (htt
| ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Frankl..
| ..) that led to the judgment that software stored in ROM
| was copyrightable in the US, requiring Phoenix Technologies
| to make a clean-room implementation of the BIOS of the IBM
| PC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Technologies#Clon
| ing_t...)
| kube-system wrote:
| > I marveled at the idea that the company who made this TV was
| more interested in your having confidence in the product than
| protecting their next sale...
|
| Because back then a TV cost an arm and a leg and they broke
| more often. Being maintainable was a requirement for _the
| initial_ sale.
| denysonique wrote:
| >Because back then a TV cost an arm and a leg and they broke
| more often. Being maintainable was a requirement for the
| initial sale.
|
| Cars being a significant expense do not come today with a
| schematic or repair manual.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Cars are a lot cheaper nowadays per feature then 50 years
| ago.
|
| For example just adding air conditioning to a normal family
| sedan back then would cost the equivalent of $10000 USD
| nowadays.
|
| If your fine with paying $10000 for an air conditioner,
| $20000 for an electric driver's seat, another $20000 for an
| electric passenger seat, $10000 for heated seats, $30000
| for ventilated seats, etc... then I'm sure manufacturers
| would be more than willing to supply a transistor level
| diagram.
| kube-system wrote:
| People took their TVs to TV repair shops in the past, as
| well.
|
| Buyers want their durable goods to be durable. They don't
| want to spend a significant chunk of their income on a
| product and be stuck with a broken product next year.
| Whether that's a 10 year 100,000 mile warranty, or a
| schematic you can take to your local TV repair man, they
| don't care.
| culopatin wrote:
| Don't they? Not in the glovebox, but there are repair
| manuals for cars that are easily available. I get access to
| every model's repair manual with my .edu account.
|
| The thing is that having the manual or not is not the
| problem, is the equipment you'll need that is hard to get,
| and not only that, for cars you may only use them once, for
| that particular car, that particular repair, and it may
| cost hundreds. Maybe if you keep the car for 15 years and
| 300k miles you get to use it again.
|
| Same with the equipment you need to do circuit repair
| nowdays.
|
| Back in the day the boards were simple, big and you could
| use a $10 soldering iron to fix things. Now a regular
| soldering iron tip covers 3 components at a time.
| sircastor wrote:
| > there are repair manuals for cars that are easily
| available. Less than they used to be. It feels like the
| Chilton manuals have dried up for late model vehicles.
| bombcar wrote:
| Chilton manuals were great but they got killed by
| YouTube.
|
| Haven't been able to find anything that doesn't have
| someone on YouTube replacing it.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| In conjunction with repairing a TV costing an arm and a leg
| nowadays.
|
| Who can possibly fix individual components in a modern
| integrated chip for less than the cost to manufacture a new
| one?
| kube-system wrote:
| Repairing many TV faults like bad caps or bad LEDs is not
| that expensive compared to TV repairs in the past. It just
| makes sense to pay a couple hours of labor on a TV in 1960,
| but it doesn't in 2022. The TVs today aren't worth paying
| the labor to fix them. The labor is more than the price of
| a new TV.
| jaclaz wrote:
| But, set aside the cost, there is as I see it a not-so-
| hidden environmental cost, the discarded TV set that
| could be repaired replacing one or two components needs
| to be _somehow_ taken care of.
|
| There was a manufacturer in Italy that - at the time -
| created the "perfect" setup for cheap repairs that
| produced no or very little waste (old post):
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29166395
| sircastor wrote:
| While you can't fix the component in the IC, you can
| replace the IC - and often we're not even dealing with BGA
| components - Just surface mount or even through-hole.
| Poking around YouTube reveals a number of folks who have
| done it.
|
| Though I doubt you could run a TV repair business these
| days and be very profitable.
| sn0wf1re wrote:
| No one.
|
| But no one could fix a capacitor or resistor for less than
| it would cost to manufacture a new one. "fix a capacitor"
| even seems silly to say, because it is beyond the scope of
| the average person to fix. A similar analogy is a car
| engine, you can repair the engine, however mostly what a
| mechanic does is swap out pieces. Some things can be fixed
| with a welder, most (spark plugs, gaskets, belts, even
| parts like a carburetor) are just replaced. This is similar
| for "technology" items. The parts may not be fixable but
| sub-components should be replaceable; the overall product
| should be repairable.
| ghaff wrote:
| Did a quick look and a 21" color TV in the mid-70s was around
| $3,000 in today's dollars.
| [deleted]
| rootusrootus wrote:
| This is always an important point that seldom gets brought
| up these days when people are complaining about "they don't
| make things like they used to." Of course they don't, and
| we're generally better off as a result.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Instead people buy lots of cheaper junk every year and
| pile the garbage higher.
| hjgjhyuhy wrote:
| Environment would be better off if it was much cheaper to
| repair things instead of just buying new.
| kube-system wrote:
| This implies that the prices of goods would be higher
| relative to wages.
|
| From an environmental perspective it is a reasonable
| position. But a democracy is never going to support any
| such transformation. "Make appliances more expensive so
| that I cannot afford new ones easily" said nobody.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| If appliances break less frequently or are repairable
| more easily they will last longer. That means you can
| spread the higher cost over a longer period of time.
| kube-system wrote:
| Appliances generally are quite reliable today, and most
| failures aren't particularly difficult or expensive to
| fix compared to appliances in the past. But there are
| also some limiting factors to spreading appliance cost
| over a long period of time. People may have limited funds
| (whether cash or credit) to purchase appliances, and if
| they can, they prefer to have them all up front. While in
| the past, it may have been reasonable to save up for
| years to buy a refrigerator, and use a root cellar in the
| meantime, that isn't socially acceptable today (nor is it
| a remotely viable expectation for a business to make of
| their customers). Also, people in the US move relatively
| often, and so it makes little sense to buy an appliance
| for the sole purpose of someone else's benefit.
| ghaff wrote:
| And it's not like everything was made to last longer in
| the "good old days." If you lived somewhere with snow,
| you were lucky to get a car through 5 years and 50,000
| miles--and it probably needed fairly regular tune-ups
| etc. to keep running.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > If you lived somewhere with snow, you were lucky to get
| a car through 5 years and 50,000 miles--and it probably
| needed fairly regular tune-ups etc. to keep running.
|
| And farmers and other rural people all knew how to do
| this, had welders and other power tools and access to
| spare parts (or at least a junkyard). The frame parts
| themselves were made with enough slack that even if you
| had a crash with something, it needed to be a fairly
| serious collision to cause damage beyond the frame. Hell,
| even a 1994 VW T4 could collide with the rear end of a
| traffic jam, be 10cm shorter than before and it would
| still run (I speak from experience on that one).
|
| Today, most cars are locked down so hard you need
| specialized software from the manufacturer to swap a
| fucking stereo, and the frame is packed with bits and
| pieces so even a tiny ding on a parking lot can end up
| with a five figure repair bill.
| giobox wrote:
| > The frame parts themselves were made with enough slack
| that even if you had a crash with something, it needed to
| be a fairly serious collision to cause damage beyond the
| frame. Hell, even a 1994 VW T4 could collide with the
| rear end of a traffic jam, be 10cm shorter than before
| and it would still run (I speak from experience on that
| one).
|
| A return to this would likely require unwinding decades
| of global crash and pedestrian safety legislation - it's
| this more than anything else that has made cars less
| resilient to small knocks, especially the pedestrian
| safety rules found in many markets. Yes old cars were
| easier to fix, but survivability for occupants and anyone
| else involved in your accident was significantly worse.
| Personally, I'll take the safety features of 2022 over
| 1994 - the changes are massive.
| ghaff wrote:
| Bumpers used to actually be bumpers or, as someone once
| quipped, braille devices to help you park. Now they're
| fairly fragile containers for all manner of sensors.
| kube-system wrote:
| A cars' bumper is still there, it's still steel (save for
| a few exceptions), and still intended to take the impact
| from another vehicle. The fragile container for sensors
| is technically the bumper _cover_.
| rebuilder wrote:
| Where / when was this? Living in Scandinavia, this was
| not my experience at all - as a kid we went through a
| number of used cars - Lada, Mazda, even a VW Beetle - and
| while the Beetle was definitely more of a summer car
| (heating would have been nice!), I never heard of a car
| being terribly worse off because of snow.
| wil421 wrote:
| It's not the snow it's the salt that's sprayed on the
| roads in the colder states. I'm down South and only see
| small amounts of snow every couple years or so. Our cars
| do not have this problem.
|
| I think the 70s were more notorious for cars rusting out.
| It's still a slight concern for older cars coming from
| colder states. I watch two people on YouTube who
| specialize in 90s and 00s Mercedes and BMWs. Many times
| they are looking in specific spots for rust on older
| cars.
| ghaff wrote:
| 70s in the US--typically European cars. Even in the last
| 20 years I had a Ford Explorer that I ultimately got rid
| of because everything underneath in the vehicle was
| rusting out at about 100,000 miles.
| kube-system wrote:
| US states with snow typically salt their roads in the
| winter, in an attempt to melt it down to the bare road,
| and it is very corrosive. Not sure about where you lived,
| but some other places use other strategies, often:
| requiring vehicles to have snow tires.
| rebuilder wrote:
| Salt is used here as well. Maybe they use less, because
| while it definitely causes corrosion, 50 k miles seems
| incredibly short-lived.
| ghaff wrote:
| Yes, today 50K miles would be very short-lived. In my
| more recent experience, getting to 100K miles and ten
| years or more is pretty easy. Cars have gotten a lot more
| reliable both in terms of not rusting out and mechanical
| reliability generally.
| kube-system wrote:
| Well, before galvanization (and more modern coatings),
| cars were pretty junky.
|
| https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotive-
| history/galvanizati...
|
| My first car, built in 1987, was partially galvanized (I
| know because the sales brochure was proud of this fact),
| but had rust streaks down the doors at 50k miles and the
| frame rusted completely through at 80k miles.
|
| The improvements in automotive coatings in the 90s and
| 00s have been immense.
| MBCook wrote:
| One of the last times something like this came up I went
| and looked up the cheapest desk fan in an old Sears
| catalog. Maybe the '60s or so.
|
| It was priced at like $15, about the same as today.
|
| But if you did the math for inflation, it would cost like
| $120.
|
| So of course they lasted forever. And they were made of
| metal and designed to be workhorses. They cost $120!
|
| When you make a plastic desk fan for $15, even with razor
| thin profits for everyone involved there just isn't much
| money left to put into lasting quality parts.
| ghaff wrote:
| And the plastic desk fan probably lasts for years anyway.
|
| A lot of us have way too much disposable odds and ends--I
| don't even want to tell you how much tech logo clothing
| I've ended up with over the years. But not everything
| needs to be pass down to your grandchildren quality.
| heather45879 wrote:
| And just think when you got the tech logo clothing you
| become a walking billboard. Are you getting paid to wear
| it?
|
| But yeah most grandchildren auction off their parents
| belongings anyway. That's why birds make nests and then
| they go somewhere else and maybe return, make a new nest.
|
| People are fixated on permanence--perhaps that's another
| way to build housing: design it so it is sustainable,
| then tear it down and recycle the materials every 10
| years.
| bluedino wrote:
| Part of that $15 also paid a wage to the guy who built
| the fans, who worked in the fan plant in some town that
| closed up 40 years ago.
| heather45879 wrote:
| Sure some things are better--but you won't find half-
| decent workmanship in the majority of products--just walk
| through Home Depot and take a look at anything "Husky".
|
| And regardless, modern features are pretty much frivolous
| crap anyway. I mean, a smart refrigerator? A smart oven?
| Please. Older ovens are designed to bake--not sell ads.
|
| When my TV just magically started showing ads I decided
| it's time I go to the library and read more books. Books
| were designed to better humanity.
| kube-system wrote:
| I'll take a set of Husky wrenches over any early 20th
| century hand tools, any day. Sure, many of those wrenches
| are still around, but they're awful to actually use.
| Aunche wrote:
| >just walk through Home Depot and take a look at anything
| "Husky"
|
| For the average person who has one or two projects every
| year, Husky or Harbor Freight is more than enough.
| mitchdoogle wrote:
| One of the first people I've seen suggest that planned
| obsolescence is a _good_ thing for consumers. Let me
| guess, you are somehow financially motivated to see
| people buying more stuff more frequently?
| kube-system wrote:
| Yes, most consumers prefer a $15 fan that lasts 10 years
| to a $150 fan that lasts 40 years. Especially the people
| that have $50 in their pocket.
| ghaff wrote:
| And there's no real guarantee the $150 fan will last 40
| years anyway. A few years ago I bought an unreasonably
| expensive toaster and it broke after less than 2 years.
| pinusc wrote:
| I think this is the real issue. A lot of premium priced
| stuff today is not built to match the quality the price
| suggests.
|
| If you did spend $150 on a fan today, it would probably
| last just as long as a $15 one. Emphasis on probably,
| there are good quality items... just not a lot.
|
| TVs are a great example: a $900 Sony smart TV I got 5ish
| years ago lasted barely longer than its 3 year warranty
| (before a hardware-related bootloop). A crappier cheaper
| TV would have lasted the same.
|
| Seems to be the trend when introducing smarter software
| features. Near every appliance I had to replace in the
| last decade died because of "the motherboard" (according
| to several technicians), which was coincidentally about
| 50% the price of the appliance. I guess manufacturers
| like to cheap out on embedded hardware components?
| kube-system wrote:
| Yeah, it is hard for a consumer to judge long-term
| longevity, and even harder for a company to demonstrate
| it.
|
| > Near every appliance I had to replace in the last
| decade died because of "the motherboard"
|
| Part of this is because appliance repair techs are not
| skilled in component level repair. They are trained to
| understand module-level repair, and that's it. It is
| possible to do more precise repairs, but mass
| manufacturing makes new modules cheaper than skilled
| (western) labor.
| kelnos wrote:
| I think the point being made is that if all you have
| available is $120 fans, there is going to be a good
| number of people who can't afford them at all.
|
| Cheap goods make things more accessible to more people.
| Planned (or even unplanned) obsolescence is an
| unfortunate side effect.
|
| Re: planned vs. unplanned: I don't think the cheap fan
| manufacturer really builds it that way so you keep having
| to come back when yours breaks. At least, I don't think
| that's the primary motivator. More likely, their goal is
| just to sell more units in the first place, and lower
| prices are usually a good way to do that.
|
| (Meanwhile, companies like Apple have found the holy
| grail: an expensive, high-margin, premium product that's
| difficult to repair.)
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| And this probably should give everyone an idea of how powerful EU
| is an economic entity despite being more internally divided than
| US. Naturally, as moves go ( edit: for Apple ), it is very
| rational ( and as some already noted, it is not that dissimilar
| to what some car makers do -- provide tools, but at ridiculous
| cost and hoops to jump through ).
|
| It is absolutely a step in the right direction.
| yreg wrote:
| This program was in the US first.
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/04/apples-self-service-r...
| vinay427 wrote:
| What does this have to do with the EU and the US? The program
| just launched in 8 European countries, 7 of which are in the
| EU, several months after launching in the US. I don't see any
| clear pattern that has to do with the EU considering the
| program was launched in a non-EU country first and still isn't
| available in much of the EU.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| Are you suggesting Apple provided this program out of their
| good will? In a very real sense, were it not for the strength
| of EU as an economic block, this would not have happened.
| daemoens wrote:
| Most people don't see the EU as weak, just ineffectual. But
| it was definitely the EU that got them to do all this.
| Axsuul wrote:
| It's dubious but the USB-C coming to iPhone should be
| credited to the EU.
| daemoens wrote:
| Yeah the USB-C thing was done entirely by the EU, the
| repair program was from the combined pressure from
| regulators around the world.
| vinay427 wrote:
| > Are you suggesting Apple provided this program out of
| their good will?
|
| No. I'm not sure where you found that in my comment, but to
| clarify, I'm genuinely curious what you claim is the link
| to the EU given that this wasn't rolled out in the EU first
| and still isn't available in most of the EU.
| Lio wrote:
| I kind of agree with you but if this was just about EU
| power how do you explain rolling this out the UK at the
| same time?
|
| If this was just about appeasing the EU then Apple would
| surely not have included the UK.
|
| (Disclosure, I'm British and very pro-EU.)
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| Hmm, that is a good counter. Off the top of my head, I
| can't. It does not automatically invalidate the argument,
| but it does significantly weaken it. Maybe there is
| something here I am missing.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I don't think Apple cares _that_ much about EU legislation.
| Given their location, I think it 's more likely they're
| paying attention to legislation in California and getting
| out ahead of that.
| prophet_ wrote:
| my story: dropped my iphone x ended up with a detached screen.
|
| Decided to fix it myself. While handling the screen and
| disconnecting cables I managed to damage Face ID sensor
| permanently.
|
| Decided to take advantage and replace battery. In the process of
| removing the battery cable managed to damage it in such a way
| that cable now keeps disconnecting itself.
|
| While trying to disconnect the battery cables by removing the
| parts near charging connector I managed to pull it a bit strongly
| and damage the charging connector that is connected to the logic
| board.
|
| Even if I manage to repair the phone to the state it was (incl
| face id) with a professional it will cost as much as another
| phone.
|
| With the experience above I decided I will think twice next time
| before trying to repair devices myself.
|
| Update: typos.
| celestialcheese wrote:
| The response from the folks at repair.eu is great[1]
|
| Apple is just trying to front-run legislation that is gaining
| momentum, just like they did last year when Biden and the FTC
| signaled R2R friendly legislation.
|
| They will do anything to make sure they stay at the center and in
| control of their products from cradle to grave.
|
| 1 - https://repair.eu/news/apples-self-repair-programme-is-
| not-t...
| rootusrootus wrote:
| If your default assumption is Apple is evil, you will always
| find a reason to be critical. There is literally _nothing_ they
| could do which would make you happy.
| lnsru wrote:
| Isn't it evil? The goal is a profit and ways to get there are
| secondary. Like for all mega corporations in the world.
| celestialcheese wrote:
| Where did I say Apple is evil? They make incredible products,
| and I've been a lifelong user. I'll happily give credit where
| credit is due - They have made great strides in their latest
| iteration of products towards repairability with battery glue
| tabs and making the batteries accessible without full
| disassembly. The Jony Ive era of "Thin at all costs" is
| thankfully over.
|
| But I'm not going to be their cheerleader when they make a
| move that is deliberately designed to undercut independents
| and preempt consumer-friendly legislation for repair in the
| EU and US. This program is purely corporate strategy and
| marketing to defend a major profit center.
| cosentiyes wrote:
| A nice first step, but somewhat frustrating that they don't
| include pre-2020 models. A fan in my 2018 mbp has recently
| started to act up and "reputable" sellers (ifixit) are currently
| out of stock.
| polishdude20 wrote:
| But do they provide board views?
| MrBuddyCasino wrote:
| iPhone 13 Display Bundle: $269.95 ($236.35 after credit). Letting
| Apple stores handle it is ~300, so not really worth doing it
| yourself. Yeah I guess they did that on purpose.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| What's the retail price of a 100% comparable display panel?
| rasz wrote:
| $110 on ebay
| W4ldi wrote:
| Or: Apple isn't doing any profit repairing your device.
| TrickyRick wrote:
| Or: Apple is profiting from both repairs and sale of repair
| kits?
|
| (I have no idea which is true, but the fact that the kit is
| roughly the price of the repair+a reasonable salary for the
| work is by no means an indication that they make no profit)
| Not15CharsLong wrote:
| I would really like to believe this is not some sort of cynical
| attempt to circumvent current-and-future "right to repair" laws.
|
| On the one hand: yes, this _does_ allow third parties to carry
| out repairs on Apple equipment. On the other hand: no, this is so
| costly and inconvenient that it effectively locks out everyone
| but Apple anyway.
|
| So, what would it take to enable cost-effective repair of Apple
| equipment? A relaxation of "parts DRM", even if it weakens
| overall ecosystem security? A mandate to enable side-loaded OSes
| to extend hardware lifetime and perhaps enable certain kinds of
| (security-sensitive) repairs?
|
| I truly don't know...
| [deleted]
| Manfred wrote:
| I agree, right to repair is a difficult thing. Technically I
| can repair my own car, but realistically I will take it to a
| shop because owning or renting all the tools required to even
| replace a tire from a rim is way too high.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| Replace the whole wheel. You don't need any tools (except
| those that supplied with the car itself).
|
| There're plenty of perfectly serviceable cars. You might be
| too rich to care about it, but I live in a third-world
| country and there're lots of people who do self-service for
| some repairs and procedures. It's not hard and it doesn't
| require costly tools. Especially with modern resources when
| you can download service manuals and watch youtube videos its
| easier than ever. You only need a will (or necessity).
| reaperducer wrote:
| _Replace the whole wheel. You don 't need any tools (except
| those that supplied with the car itself)._
|
| Note that many new cars these days don't come with any
| tools at all. And spare tires are an expensive optional
| extra that don't always come with the tools anymore.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| These aren't the same beast, though.
|
| A lot of car tools are specialty tools than can only be used
| on other cars. And they are big because cars are big. It is
| hard for a library to stock some of these tools, too. People
| often have a few car tools, though: A jack, wrenches, and
| things like that. You know, the ones that are easier to store
| in an apartment closet and can be used for other things. Some
| libraries rent these.
|
| Phone tools are closer to the car tools that people have.
| Even small libraries can rent them and you can store them in
| your desk. You'll probably be able to use some on other
| electronics or at least other phones. You'll probably let
| family borrow them. Some of the tools are _already_
| affordable, too. The things you can 't do, you can pay
| someone for. And they can probably work out of a kiosk.
|
| I'd actually argue that right to repair _is_ hard, though -
| just not for the reasons stated. It is easier to unscrew
| something than to unglue it. We don 't design for ease
| repairs. Ease of manufacturing has been winning out.
| Terretta wrote:
| It's not ease of manufacturing. Looking closely, following
| for years, one notices it's never been "ease of making"
| above all else for Apple, it's been how the device feels
| and lasts.
|
| They've demonstrably gone to insane lengths to figure out
| how to manufacture things better for use but impossible to
| make at scale before they figured it out. Then they teach
| suppliers those methods.
|
| Eventually others benefit too.
| mitchdoogle wrote:
| Replacing a tire is one thing that requires specialized
| equipment built for the task, but something like regular
| maintenance - changing oil, replacing filters, battery etc is
| relatively easy and can be done with basic tools that almost
| every "handy" person will have: wrenches, screwdrivers, etc.
| kelnos wrote:
| Years ago I decided I should know how to change the oil in
| my car, and do it myself regularly. I bought the required
| equipment, did it once, and then never did it again. It
| took me longer than it took someone with expertise (and
| expensive, professional equipment), and it actually cost
| more, when considering I couldn't buy motor oil in bulk,
| and had to pay to dispose of one-off quantities of used oil
| properly.
|
| I would certainly replace the battery on my own, though.
| Well, maybe: getting a new battery home without the use of
| my car might be so annoying that it would probably be
| easier to just get a tow to a mechanic (or get someone to
| jump it and then drive to the mechanic). And again I'd have
| to deal with disposing of the old battery on my own: again,
| annoying and costly.
| bombcar wrote:
| The main reason I do my own oil changes is that all the
| cheap places are notoriously bad at it.
| kube-system wrote:
| Two tire irons and a static balancer are about $100 at harbor
| freight, which is the same price my dealership charges to
| mount and balance 4 tires.
|
| I've tried it. It's a lot of work, but it can be done without
| expensive tools.
| mikestew wrote:
| I used to be a professional auto mechanic. I know how to
| swap tires on a rim. I know how to do it without scratching
| the fuck out of your nice alloys (which you, dear
| inexperienced reader, are guaranteed to do the first few
| times you try it). I know why you need to get the bead into
| the recess of the rim lest you struggle mightily to get the
| new tire on. I've changed motorcycle tires by the side of
| the road with nothing but a couple of tire irons.
|
| I also know that "a lot of work" doesn't even begin to
| describe it if I'm doing it on my garage floor with tire
| irons. If you're low on money and without other options, by
| all means, give it a go. But if $100 isn't the difference
| between your kids eating or not, save yourself a fuck-ton
| of grief (as well as half a Saturday) and just go get those
| new skins put on at a shop where they have big air-driven
| machines that will spoon those things on in mere seconds.
| Back in my pro days, myself and a helper timed ourselves
| from the time the car pulled into the bay until it hit the
| ground with four new tires: nine minutes. I probably can't
| get a single wheel off my car from a cold start in nine
| minutes.
|
| So, yeah, it can be done. But you don't want to do it.
| bombcar wrote:
| Yeah wheels are one of those things that the big machine
| helps a ton. I'll gladly pay to have that done, even if
| I'll replace the starter myself.
| kube-system wrote:
| I just think of it as getting paid $100 to go to the gym.
| And I get to exercise the more colorful parts of my
| vocabulary. :)
|
| Those days are probably behind me though.
| mikestew wrote:
| Well, you nailed the two primary reasons I don't do it
| anymore. :-) It _is_ a workout for sure, and I would
| curse a blue streak the whole time.
|
| OTOH, it's a handy skill to have when you're in the Yukon
| by the side of the road with an unpluggable tire, and 100
| miles from civilization.
| oneplane wrote:
| The problem with 'a lot of work' is that people price that
| as $0 while it actually isn't "free", unless you are
| prohibited from doing meaningful work for others or
| yourself, which most people aren't. So if the cost for some
| low-quality tools is the same as having it done with high-
| quality tools but saving you time and effort, it doesn't
| make sense to try to mass-market the low quality option.
|
| This is also what is probably at the core of all this right
| to repair stuff: there are definitely some anti-consumer
| practises but in reality people might be too busy with
| other things to fiddle around with their products when
| someone else could be doing it instead (or they might
| simply prefer it and shift any blame and quality control to
| a third party while they are at it).
|
| Even for really simplistic things like changing a light
| bulb in a car people just can't seem to be bothered.
| aeyes wrote:
| > I will take it to a shop
|
| The question is if you can take your car to an independent
| repair shop and do they have access to tools, repair manuals
| and original parts? Today, independent shops often don't have
| access to genuine parts and the manufacturers don't make them
| available on purpose so that only they can do the repair at
| much higher prices.
|
| Right to repair isn't necessarily about doing the work
| yourself.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| This actually really upset me when Apple first released their
| Self Service Repair program.
|
| Apple said it was the exact same tools their repair
| technicians use, and offered all the tools for a $49 rental
| (which, honestly, probably doesn't even cover shipping for 77
| lbs. of equipment). _The Verge_ , _iFixit_ , _Ars Technica_ ,
| and others claimed Apple deliberately designed and priced
| their repair program to make self-service repair not worth
| it, _even if_ there wasn 't the part serialization.
|
| Which... what malarkey. Of course repairs are cheaper when
| you don't need to rent the toolkit every time and can reuse
| tools. According to Apple, the parts are the same cost the
| Apple Stores and their repair partners get, and according to
| congressional testimony this is not a profitable program, so
| what do you expect? Apple to sell parts publicly for cheaper
| than they get themselves? Do you want Apple to send you the
| repair tools for free _and_ have cheaper parts? That 's what
| they were saying - the parts should be cheaper and the tools
| should be less complicated _even though_ that is what Apple
| literally uses. You think Apple repairs screens with guitar
| picks and are upset Apple doesn 't ship those instead? It was
| really disappointing.
|
| Imagine if Apple was a car company. They wanted the ability
| to repair their cars, so Apple agreed to loan them for $249
| hundreds of pounds of equipment for repairing just about
| anything on their cars. Then imagine if people cried this
| made car repair too complicated by design. Right to Repair
| does not encompass _right to simple, idiot-proof, no-tools
| repair_.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| The underlying idea of the right to repair program is for
| companies to start designing their stuff with self-repair
| in mind. It's not only about making spare parts available.
| So that you don't _need_ hundreds of dollars of equipment
| to open up your phone. Then the whole buying /rental thing
| is a non-issue because all you'll need is a Philips #0. Or
| torx even (I love torx because it doesn't skip and damage
| the screw head)
|
| Fairphone for example does a great job showing us what what
| would look like.
|
| But this is the criticism I have with Apple's program.
| Technically they comply here but not in spirit. It's clear
| to me they don't actually want this to happen. They didn't
| invent pentalobe because it looks cool like a little
| flower. But to keep people out.
|
| Of course existing products can't be improved but upcoming
| products should take be easier to repair.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| This is a different definition of Right to Repair
| entirely. iFixit and others fall into this definition,
| while people like Louis Rossmann believe R2R simply means
| _Right to Repair_ , and not _Right to a Repairable
| Design_. This is another issue with R2R - some define it
| as just getting parts and tools; others as mandatory
| design guidelines and requirements.
|
| Pay attention carefully and watch different videos about
| what R2R means. There's a significant schism in the R2R
| movement over whether R2R means repairable design or not.
| The most successful branch legislatively (New York,
| Rossmann, EU proposals) says that it does _not_ include
| repairable design; and that Right to Repair only
| encompasses the right to have manuals and parts, not that
| the manufacturer has to make specific design choices
| (other than, like, USB-C but that 's not repair-related).
|
| Edit: Another issue that comes up is _how granular is a
| "part"_. Louis Rossmann sees a _part_ as being on the
| level of a specific microchip and is upset he can 't
| order parts at that level of granularity. Apple, and
| other R2R activists, view a _part_ as a much larger
| finished item, such as a PCB or a Battery (rather than,
| say, the specific resistor on the inside of a Battery).
| Legislators for R2R in EU currently are trying to define
| R2R as being "if the manufacturer sells a part, they
| must sell it to everyone," not "the manufacturer must
| individually sell all pieces of a product until they are
| no longer divisible" - but the Louis Rossmann crowd views
| as being insufficient R2R. So... another loose R2R
| schism.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| > Pay attention carefully and watch different videos
| about what R2R means.
|
| I don't do videos. If someone actually takes the time to
| write it down I'll read it :)
|
| But for me right to repair simply doesn't work when the
| design itself is repair-hostile like Apple's.
| wiseleo wrote:
| For everyone who says "it's too hard" to repair tiny
| parts, it's not. It requires special tools and surgical
| hand precision, but the tooling is affordable. You can
| outfit a lab for less than $1000 non-recurring cost. We
| should have schematics and boardviews available because
| they _are_ in effect the product repair manual. We should
| have ability to order individual chips. Limiting repair
| to field-replaceable units is IBM's business model.
|
| When I don't have schematics and boardviews, I have to
| spend time generating them in my head.
| HPsquared wrote:
| It's a problem with politics in general: that of some
| slogan going around which gains traction among a wide
| range of people, but different people have different
| interpretations of what the slogan actually means. They
| support their chosen definition, not that of others.
|
| In fact, I would propose this kind of ambiguous slogan
| has, as a memetic advantage over more well -defined
| ideas, precisely because of this "broad appeal" which is
| actually the broad appeal of a slogan, not a policy.
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| >Legislators for R2R in EU currently are trying to define
| R2R as being "if the manufacturer sells a part, they must
| sell it to everyone," not "the manufacturer must
| individually sell all pieces of a product until they are
| no longer divisible" - but the Louis Rossmann crowd views
| as being insufficient R2R. So... another loose R2R
| schism.
|
| Rossman appears to want the same as you say the EU want,
| the _actual manufacturer_ to sell parts freely rather
| than being locked up by that manufacturer 's downstream
| buyers (eg Apple) preventing repairers like Rossman from
| going to the chip factory to get the supplies to do
| repairs, in the same way that Apple go to the factory to
| get supplies when manufacturing boards, etc.
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| iPhone 13 lasted me this whole year without any major
| damage with 2 small children - multiple times in water,
| countless drops on tiles all without a case.
|
| Would FairPhone would even remotely be so robust?
| labcomputer wrote:
| > Fairphone for example does a great job showing us what
| what would look like.
|
| Which is to say that it makes a trade off of improved
| repairability by sacrificing water resistance and battery
| life compared to Apple's phones. TANSTAAFL
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Fairphone is only one example. There are many repairable
| designs that are waterproof.
|
| For example Samsung's XCover series can be opened, have
| removable batteries and are waterproof. It's a matter of
| priorities, waterproofing just wasn't one for Fairphone.
|
| I know XCover isn't meant to be repairable as such but
| it's obviously a lot more repairable than a glued up
| phone.
| Terretta wrote:
| Please do not legislate to screw up my devices'
| durability and reliability so some wing nuts can, well,
| disassemble them with wing nuts.
|
| I prefer indestructible and long lasting devices-as-
| tools. I want more appliances, fewer janky assemblies of
| parts more likely to fall apart or fail me when I need
| them most.
|
| Put another way, the goal is not "easier to repair", the
| goal is net fewer devices requiring repair, net fewer
| repairs.
|
| One of those is _actually_ better for the environment
| than the other, and it 's not the one that churns through
| parts for people who want to repair or tosses more
| devices in the trash for people who prefer to just buy a
| new one.
|
| The thing that's good for the planet is devices that
| last. That's the goal.
|
| TL;DR:
|
| If you want to legislate something, legislate lifetime
| warranties.
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| So, I've to iPhones, one with a broken camera and one
| with a donor camera (for whatever reason, battery
| problem, mainboard, whatever). I can swap the camera
| module, or take up a repair shop. But Some make sure the
| repaired device won't work fully even though all of the
| parts are Apple originals.
|
| Tell me how Apple not doing that shit would make the
| slightest iota of difference to their ability to make
| devices that last?
|
| How would them not attacking 3rd party repairers make a
| difference.
|
| Why not mandated warranties _and_ repairability?
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| > Please do not legislate to screw up my devices'
| durability and reliability so some wing nuts can, well,
| disassemble them with wing nuts.
|
| But rugged devices are generally much more easily
| disassembled and often even have replaceable batteries.
| Like Xcovers. We use them in work and they can be easily
| taken apart with torx screws, battery replaced etc, all
| while being much more rugged than normal phones and
| waterproof.
|
| The only reason I don't really use them is that Samsung
| keeps putting midrange CPUs and mediocre LCD screens in
| them. I really wish the S-active range was still around.
| The last one was the S8 active sadly.
|
| But these things don't have to be mutually exclusive at
| all.
|
| > The thing that's good for the planet is devices that
| last. That's the goal.
|
| That's your goal. Not mine. Upgradability for example
| makes devices last longer. Having the user decide what is
| repairable instead of a company also.
|
| > If you want to legislate something, legislate lifetime
| warranties.
|
| Lifetime _limited_ warranties is what this will turn out
| to be.
|
| There's no point in a lifetime warranty if a supplier can
| simply refuse it because there's an unrelated scratch on
| the side so they can claim it to be user damage.
|
| I don't think trusting corporations is ever the answer.
| Terretta wrote:
| > _Having a user decide what is repairable instead of a
| company_
|
| Users do not know better.
|
| As soon as you have aftermarket repairs, next thing you
| know, users are suing makers because some aftermarket
| nonsense burned a hole in their leg, or more recently,
| because their entire multi-family dwelling burned down.
|
| It's been interesting how fast the same places passing
| laws giving right to repair pass jump to pass laws that
| you can't use repaired things _so people don 't die_.
| giobox wrote:
| The problem is the Verge's arguments do hold _some_ water.
| Its not just a 49 dollar rental - its 49 dollars with a
| mandatory hold on a credit card of the _full_ replacement
| value.
|
| Many iPhone owners will not have a credit card (especially
| in Europe), let alone a credit card with a credit limit
| capable of holding thousands of dollars even if it's
| temporary. It's also a risk some people on lower incomes
| simply will not want to take. The tools Apple send are so
| over-engineered for the task at hand, the replacement value
| is enormous relative to the task.
|
| > https://www.selfservicerepair.com/tool-kit-rental
|
| When NYT tried, 49 dollar rental fee, 1210 dollar hold.
| 1210 dollar CC hold just to replace a battery is crazy when
| independent stores across the USA do it with third party
| tools costing a fraction of this just fine every day.
| Apple's right to repair efforts arguably verges on a parody
| of a right to repair at times - cellphones should not need
| a holding deposit significantly larger than renting a car
| for the same period of time to replace a $79 battery. If
| Apple's motivations are genuine, the full replacement hold
| could arguably become a lower insurance hold fee just like
| a car rental often does.
|
| If you want to look to a company renting for 7 days
| expensive, heavy, complex technical equipment - I think
| lensrentals.com does a great job renting equipment costing
| tens of thousands of dollars and Apple's repair program
| could learn a lot.
|
| > https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/25/technology/personaltec
| h/a....
|
| > https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/faq/
| [deleted]
| Sharlin wrote:
| It's very different being able to take your car/laptop to
| _any_ old shop than there only being a single shop that 's
| licensed (enforced by lawyers+DRM+tool/part availability) to
| do repairs on your particular brand.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > So, what would it take to enable cost-effective repair of
| Apple equipment?
|
| Forcing them to make a larger, more modular device that a few
| loud people want and most regular users couldn't care less
| about. I don't buy the argument that Apple is forcing people to
| choose their devices. They're in business to make what
| customers want, and their broad success suggests they've got
| that nailed.
| mitchdoogle wrote:
| No one is arguing that Apple is forcing people to choose
| their devices. That is a straw man. Consumers overwhelmingly
| support right to repair:
|
| https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/press_release/consumer-.
| ..
|
| https://morningconsult.com/2022/03/23/right-to-repair-
| electr...
| filoleg wrote:
| > Forcing them to make a larger, more modular device that a
| few loud people want and most regular users couldn't care
| less about.
|
| Even worse than that, those few loud people who say they want
| it can easily turn out to be just that - loud, but not
| actually wanting it once their demands are satisfied.
|
| Case in point - iPhone Mini. Some people were loudly
| demanding a smaller iPhone for years. Apple introduces iPhone
| 12 Mini in Q4 2020 with great specs in a small form-factor.
| Builds on top of it with iPhone 13 Mini a year later. Then in
| 2022, Apple announces discontinuing iPhone Mini line due to
| very weak sales.
| janef0421 wrote:
| I think the mini failed because most of those customers
| bought the second-generation SE.
| kelnos wrote:
| Why would your takeaway from that be that even the loud
| people didn't want it? It's perfectly plausible that all
| the loud people bought the Mini, but it still wasn't enough
| to make it a viable product.
|
| Also, Apple gave it less then two years. I could easily
| imagine plenty of people wanting the Mini, but being unable
| to justify the purchase because their existing (larger)
| iPhone was only a few years old. Not everyone has the
| resources to buy a new iPhone every year or two.
| signatoremo wrote:
| New product is a major investment, nobody competent would
| just discontinue it because it doesn't sales well early
| on. I suppose Apple has the number to show future sales
| of the Mini would be weak.
| labcomputer wrote:
| > So, what would it take to enable cost-effective repair of
| Apple equipment?
|
| It would take people to stop stealing iPhones and selling the
| parts to unscrupulous repair shops.
| Not15CharsLong wrote:
| "People stopping stealing iPhones" is not going to happen.
| And the current Apple policy of "well, enter your AppleID
| credentials to unlock this phone" deals with that pretty
| effectively.
|
| What we're talking about here, is _disabling_ that
| possibility once the fingerprint sensor (OK), screen (huh) or
| battery (double huh) has been replaced.
|
| In other words: after which "repairs" exactly does Apple get
| to disable a device? Some of these would enable fencing,
| others definitely not... TL;DR: yeah, difficult!
| mmastrac wrote:
| I'd love to hear the backroom conversations that lit a fire under
| them to launch this in the EU. I wager that right-to-repair is
| getting close over there and forcing Apple devices to use USB-C
| was a bellweather.
|
| Their programs haven't been great so far, but _some_
| repairability is better than none, and eventually this will build
| a taste for non-disposable devices in consumers' minds.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > forcing Apple devices to use USB-C was a bellweather.
|
| Apple has been migrating all of their devices over to USB-C for
| years. The iPhone has been a holdout because people will bitch
| about not being able to use their 10 years of accumulated
| lightning cables. I hate to have sympathy for a big corp, but
| c'mon, nothing they do will appease _everyone_.
| Etheryte wrote:
| I don't think this take holds up to scrutiny. Unless I've
| missed any recent news, Apple has currently said they will
| switch the iPhone to USB-C for the EU market but keep the
| lightning connector in the US.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Then why have they switched literally every other device to
| USB-C?
| bombcar wrote:
| Apple always says they won't change anything until they
| suddenly announce that changing the thing is the most
| bestest advance ever.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| And that makes them like literally every other company in
| the entire world.
| sircastor wrote:
| I really don't think the law is what pushed Apple to adopt
| USB-C. I think they actually wanted to use it back in 2012 when
| they introduced lightning, but USB-C wasn't ready for
| primetime, so they made their own.
| ghaff wrote:
| It was pretty clear that Apple was going to phase out
| Lightning in favor of USB-C at some point. The only question
| is at what point given that it was going to be something of a
| slight negative for existing customers--but that's less true
| today with USB-C increasingly widespread.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Now is about the right time for my family. We've got
| critical mass for USB-C -- the macbooks, newest iPads for
| the kids, chromebooks, etc. We're down to only having
| Lightning for our iPhones and my wife's iPad. So we've
| crossed over the point where losing the lightning cable
| would be annoying, and into the zone where it'll be nice to
| throw it out and only have USB-C from here forward.
| MBCook wrote:
| Doesn't lightning predate USB-C?
| sircastor wrote:
| Lightning was debuted a couple of years (2012) before USB-C
| was finalized in 2014.
| Zenst wrote:
| The whole aspect this was already launched in the USA, meant
| that expanding it was logical, however it was needed.
|
| The real question is - how competitive is it, and prices.
| Hence, device insurance is, and probably will be, the safest
| move for many still.
| Zenst wrote:
| Including the UK https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63866869
| Zenst wrote:
| Ah I see the article says "Europe" not EU, many convolute the
| two alas. More so this is only some countries in Europe, so
| might want to change the title.
| richrichardsson wrote:
| Yes, I came to make this comment too.
|
| As a resident in a minor EU country, the fact we are often
| excluded from lists of EU countries in many companies
| websites is a source of much frustration.
|
| The title should be amended to say "parts of Europe", not
| "across EU".
| imiric wrote:
| > "We believe the best technology for our customers and for the
| planet is technology that lasts, which is why we design our
| products to be durable and rarely require maintenance or repair,"
| said Jeff Williams, Apple's chief operating officer. "But when a
| repair is needed, we want customers to have many options for
| safe, reliable, and secure repair. That's why we're excited to
| launch Self Service Repair in Europe, giving our customers direct
| access to genuine Apple parts, tools, and manuals."
|
| Corporate PR doublespeak at its finest. My eyes rolled back into
| my head reading this.
|
| "Technology that lasts" from a company who perfected planned
| obsolescence.
|
| "Rarely require maintenance or repair" might've been their ethos
| decades ago, but nowadays there are plenty of dumb design and
| hardware issues. See Louis Rossman for examples.
|
| "We want customers to have many options for safe, reliable, and
| secure repair" translates to "we were happy gouging customers for
| an AppleCare subscription, and fighting 3rd party repair shops,
| until governments introduced pesky consumer rights and anti-
| competitive laws".
|
| But great, let's celebrate all mighty Apple finally doing what
| they should've been doing all along, _in one region of the world
| where they're legally obligated to do so_.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| I find Apple devices have outlasted similar caliber devices
| from Google or Samsung. Obviously, they all can suffer from
| battery issues over time, but everything from physical build
| quality to software updates seems to last.
| savanaly wrote:
| I used my last iPhone for 7+ years I believe, and didn't feel
| forced to upgrade when I finally did either. How is that Apple
| have "perfected planned obsolescence"?
| [deleted]
| denysonique wrote:
| The parts for the EU market seem to be more expensive than for
| the US.
|
| Example, iPhone 13 Pro Max screen price:
|
| US: $311.96
|
| UK: $338.63 ($26.73 more expensive)
|
| Poland: $351.35 ($39.39 more expensive)
|
| The prices are without VAT/Sales Tax (20% for UK and 23% for
| Poland already deducted respectively)
| Etheryte wrote:
| Proportionally the price difference is more or less the same as
| it is for new devices. For example, an iPhone 14 Pro Max starts
| from $1099 in the US and $1279 pre VAT (EUR1222 pre VAT) in the
| EU.
| sbuk wrote:
| Consequences of poorly performing GBP and Euro.
| denysonique wrote:
| >Consequences of poorly performing GBP and Euro.
|
| In the comparison I have used current exchange rates. GBP or
| PLN don't have a tendency to drop down by 10% overnight. I
| also do not see the reason why Apple couldn't offer the
| option to charge in USD, in Europe many banks offer currency
| conversion without fees for online card payments, such as
| Monzo in the UK.
| andylynch wrote:
| It's simple, their finance team's would be made
| significantly more complicated and costly - eg now you get
| to do _extra_ FX management on your stores local sales for
| VAT. And virtually all their local customers will be
| wanting / only able to pay in their local currency anyway.
| All to sell at an arguably lower price ?
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Not to mention, potential higher operating costs in some
| countries (which means the cost to provide these items is
| also higher). For example, labor and energy costs are higher
| in the UK and Europe than in the US.
|
| Someone else mentioned that warranties are required to be
| longer in the EU, which would increase the OEM's operating
| cost as well.
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| That all sounds reasonable, except why would Polish
| operating costs and warranty costs to be much higher than
| UK?
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| I'm not sure about Poland, perhaps there are import fees
| or other costs that are higher than other places.
| Yajirobe wrote:
| Meanwhile the wages of developers differ ten-fold between
| Poland and the US
| virtualritz wrote:
| Warranty on new parts by law is 24 months in the EU ...
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| As a slight aside, _minimum warranty_, that is I think?
|
| Certainly when UK was in the EU then the Consumer Rights Act
| gave (and gives) (paraphrasing) "as long as a reasonable
| person would expect" as the effective warranty period;
| washing machines are expected to last a decade, at least, so
| if it fails after 3 years you can claim regardless that the
| warranty on the box says 2 years.
|
| Software providers say "no returns" or give a couple of hours
| of gameplay time, but the UK law (as above) specifically
| includes software and gives no such limit.
| bmicraft wrote:
| Not exactly, not really.
|
| Mandated warranty is 24 months. But the burden of proof (of
| some kind of manufacturing defect) is on the consumer after 6
| months.
|
| So really, you only get 6 months of little to no questions
| asked.
| hubraumhugo wrote:
| I'm building a community that collects data about the longevity
| and repairability of products. This could evenentually help to
| keep corporations accountable: http://looria.com/ExitReviews
| mapierce wrote:
| Interesting! Will bookmark
| isx726552 wrote:
| If you're relying entirely on user submitted data, how are you
| planning to combat spam, griefers, disgruntled types, and
| competitors trying to smear each other?
| arthurcolle wrote:
| This redirects to looria?
| skywal_l wrote:
| Great idea.
|
| The problem might be that only people pissed of at a product
| might be motivated enough to add a review and you end up with a
| skewed view.
|
| Anyway, added a review. Best of luck!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-06 23:01 UTC)