• Azzapatazza@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Louis Rossmann’s video is a good take on this. Basically the anti-repair stance they have held for so long is evolving into a passive approach where it is either too costly or too difficult to repair

      • Heisme@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        What they are saying is that Apple is now fine with people repairing their own devices because the cost of the equipment/parts to replace parts in their own devices likely is more expensive than the average Joe is willing to sink into a DIY project, with none guaranteed results, as opposed to just send it to Apple for a repair.
        Sure people can now send it to a third party for a fix but if the cost for a repair at a third party shop is marginally lower than an Apple repair, Apple is betting that a customer will likely choose them vs. a third party. Apple will be gatekeepers over NEW replacement parts for their devices so it’s a win win win for them. They win if you buy their parts to replace parts, they win if you take it to a third party and you buy their parts and they win if you take it to Apple for service and repairs.

        • affiliate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          10 months ago

          and they also win because they now get good PR as being “supportive” of the right to repair movement

  • justsomeguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Same as oil companies claiming they care about going green now after denying the mere existence of climate change tooth and nail for decades. Apple even already confirmed that they’ll weasle their way out of the EU law for replacable phone batteries with the waterproof loophole.

      • affiliate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        10 months ago

        i hadn’t heard of it before but i found a verge article that says

        The battery regulation contains an exemption for devices “that are specifically designed to be used, for the majority of the active service of the appliance, in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion.”

        the actual legislation (linked in the verge article) says

        … this Regulation should provide for a limited derogation for portable batteries from the removability and replaceability requirements set for portable batteries concerning appliances that incorporate portable batteries and that are specifically designed to be used, for the majority of the active service of the appliance, in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion and that are intended to be washable or rinseable. This derogation should only apply when it is not possible, by way of redesign of the appliance, to ensure the safety of the end-user and the safe continued use of the appliance after the end-user has correctly followed the instructions to remove and replace the battery. Where the derogation applies, the product should be designed in such a way as to make the battery removable and replaceable only by independent professionals, and not by end-users.

        im far from being a legal expert and i know apple has its own private army of lawyers, but it seems like it will be an uphill battle to say the iphone qualifies for that exemption.

        • kameecoding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          that would be quite a spurious argument, that exemption looks like it’s for stuff like Go-pros.

  • L26@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    10 months ago

    “The big exceptions are video game consoles and alarm systems.”

    Why specifically exclude game consoles?

      • AnonTwo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I’m guessing because then states would need to heavily modify code laws on things like fire alarm requirements. Those regulations are for anyone who might have to walk into your house.

        • The_Mixer_Dude@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          There aren’t regulations on security systems to my knowledge. Fire alarms work independent but they can optionally operate with a security system. Security systems are consumer devices, you can buy them yourself anywhere without any licensing or regulation.

      • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Legal and liability nightmare I’d guess. Imagine someone dies in a house fire so they sue the repair shop, or insurance refuses to pay because you modified your alarm.

  • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    All they are doing is shifting the responsibility and liability into you.

    They want to control the discussion about R2R. Rather than having pro-consumer groups set the rules, they rather have their influence dictate the rules to R2R from the inside. They know that participating in the process both makes them look good, but also let’s them control the discussion.

    They want you using authorized Apple parts using authorized Apple tools and installing authorized Apple software. But using your labor to do it. Probably one of the biggest bottlenecks in the phone repair chain is the labor to open up and repair the phone. So for Apple it is a win-win to off-load that manual labor onto the user. If they fuck up the phone, then it is a win for Apple because that person now needs a new phone. If the repair goes successfully, it is still a win for Apple because the user is still locked into their ecosystem and they just bought some highly marked-up parts and didn’t give more work to their probably overloaded repair supply chain.

  • thefluffiest@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    10 months ago

    Also, the EU is currently adopting a right-to-repair bill that will require all companies, including Apple, to only offer home-repairable devices starting 2027.

    Apple just sees which way the wind is blowing and decided to hop on the bandwagon. Better to own and somewhat control it.

  • Pavidus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I couldn’t really give two flying fucks what any business supports for legislation.

    However, I do care that their opinions weigh more heavily than anyone else’s.

  • Swim@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Labor is too expensive, better to push it back on to the consumer and make bank on the parts