There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Pyr_Pressure ,

What’s wrong with the bill?

hh93 ,

Apple doesn’t profit from expensive repairs anymore if it’s easy to repair for everyone

xT1TANx ,

This only means they found a way to make more money by having it than not.

mojofrododojo ,

oh so this means they’ll stop soldering ram and SSD’s to motherboards?

yeah… not really repairable without a reflow setup, thanks Apple.

MrFagtron9000 ,

Are they supporting it so that they can gimp it?

We support the right to repair! Starting now all keycaps will be replaceable. Anything on the motherboard is off limits though or the display or the battery or the ports or the camera.

just_another_person ,

Ok…what’s the catch?

MyDogLovesMe ,

Turning it into the car parts/repair scam, …er business.

HellAwaits ,

Uh no, hell did not freeze over.

You would have to be insanely naive to think Apple didn’t change anything to make the bill practically useless against them.

nyoooom ,

Pretty sure they are turning around as a similar bill is in preparation in Europe that they won’t be able to stop it so they want to get ahead of the curve and come out as supporters.

NeoNachtwaechter ,

At least, that’s what they want to make you believe…

xkforce ,

This makes me wonder what is in that bill that would cause Apple to support it given their history

ChaoticNeutralCzech ,

Louis Rossmann is skeptical but he read the bill draft and could not pinpoint any poison pills or potential loopholes.

Chariotwheel ,

Maybe not as hard of what they expect the EU bringing to the table and they want to get ahead and get some right yo repair on their own terms before the EU finished cooking something harsher

BlackEco , (edited )
@BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.com avatar

Apple’s letter also asked that the bill “focus on requiring manufacturers obligations to provide the documentation tools, and parts to enable the repairs performed by authorized repair channels, as opposed to a broader undefined scope of repairs.” Apple also wants repair providers to mention when they’re using “non-genuine or used” components.

The bill, as written, also requires non-authorized repairers to provide written notice of their lack of official vendor approval.

Elizabeth Chamberlain, director of sustainability at iFixit, told Ars Technica that while disclosing the use of third-party parts is reasonable, she’s concerned that it “supports unnecessary fear-mongering around used and third-party parts.”

“I also worry that lumping used and third-party parts together will contribute to further confusion. Apple’s ‘unable to verify’ warnings already blur the line between those categories,” she added.

In short, this bill allows Apple to encourage people to repair their devices at Apple-certified repair shops by marketing them as better than non-certified ones.

weedazz ,

Mfi certified ifixit coming soon?

ikidd ,
@ikidd@lemmy.world avatar

To be fair, most mechanics will give you the choice of OEM parts or jobber. Most people understand the difference is minimal but it keeps the OEM part price in line.

Endorkend ,
@Endorkend@kbin.social avatar

It's most likely mostly that they'll have to sway that way no matter if they like it or not in Europe and they aren't going to make different phones for the different markets, so they flip the PR machine towards pretending THEM coming up with supporting right to repair, instead of being forced to by the EU.

Haui ,
@Haui@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

This is the best headline I have read in my life. The person that came up with it is a genius.

(It‘s news from yesterday but I wanted to comment on the headline)

SGG ,

Apple support their version of right to repair.

You have the right to repair your Apple device on their terms, with their overpriced tools, with their overpriced parts, following their restrictive terms, and authenticate almost every repair with Apple.

If you try and get a part from another supplier, or source your own genuine parts from dead devices that’s going to cause “bugs”, like faceID or auto brightness not working if you have the audacity to repair “their” device.

They’re also going to work like hell to use any loophole that allows them to deny self repair.

Remember, it’s Apple’s device, you’re just using it.

Yes, this reads jaded as hell. But given all the things Apple have done to deny self or 3rd party repair it’s hardly lies.

wheelie ,

Also the part price is almost the same as just giving it to apple to repair themselves.

persolb ,

Credit where it is due though… they could have remained silent and probably taken no flak… so good on them.

Their big request seems to be to make sure people are aware when a phone is fixed with off-brand parts. This also makes sense to me. Some portion of off brand parts will cause problems, which may show up as complaints back to or about Apple.

(An example: we have a system trained to map rail territory using head-end video using some visual odometery and 2010-era AI. A specific client has cameras that we can’t process well because of weird subtle artifacts. Apple is doing much more complicated stuff than we are.)

tabular , (edited )
@tabular@lemmy.world avatar

Talk is cheap. They get flak for their actions, what here has changed.

wewbull ,

No. No credit.

This is the old embrace and extend strategy. They know they are losing the argument, so they’ll embrace it and redirect to a version they control. It’s good for them, not the consumer.

In microelectonics, there’s not really such a thing as an “off brand part”. Nearly all the parts that matter in an iPhone are custom. You’re not going to buy just any old camera module and shoehorn it in. It won’t physically fit, and it likely won’t support the right commands. If somebody makes one specific for the iPhone, well… Look at that… It meets the specification.

Even if it does become an issue because (for example) the optics aren’t exactly the same and face ID doesn’t work, would someone complain to Apple or the repair shop that didn’t do an effective repair?

Really, because of the custom nature of most components, what Apple is trying to stop is the canibilisation of iPhones to fix other iPhones. That would give old broken iPhones value. Only Apple is allowed to exploit that value.

Zron ,

Any pre-owned device is going to inherently be less valuable than a brand new device. Phones are sharply depreciating assets.

What apple doesn’t seem to want is to recycle components from otherwise unusable devices into damaged devices . They want repair shops to have to buy parts directly from apple, so they can maintain control of the market.

nottheengineer ,

Sounds like a classic EEE scheme. There’s no way in hell apple would actually support this without ulterior motives.

Nia ,
@Nia@reddthat.com avatar

I think it’s to save face since they’re going to have to in the EU anyway, what better way to get good PR than to pretend you’ve had a change of heart and make more sales in the process

nottheengineer ,

That would mean they have actually given up, which I highly doubt.

qaz ,

Probably a mix of both EEE and PR

autotldr Bot ,

This is the best summary I could come up with:

In a letter dated August 22, Apple showed its support for California’s right-to-repair bill, SB 244, after spending years combatting DIY repair efforts.

As reported by TechCrunch, the letter, written to California state Senator Susan Eggman, declared that Apple supports SB 244 and urged the legislature to pass it.

California’s final bill “should balance device integrity, usability, and physical safety” with the right to repair, Apple’s letter reportedly says.

Apple’s letter is a reverse-course on the battle against right-to-repair efforts that it’s been fighting for a decade, as noted via Repair.org Executive Director Gay Gordon-Byrne through a US PIRG press release Wednesday.

That includes in California, where in 2019, The Verge and Motherboard reported that an Apple representative met with legislators, encouraging them to kill a right-to-repair bill over alleged consumer safety concerns.

Nathan Proctor, senior director of US Public Interest Research Group’s (PIRG’s) Right to Repair Campaign, wagered a guess to Ars:

The original article contains 824 words, the summary contains 153 words. Saved 81%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •