105 points

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

permalink
report
reply
10 points

Yea I’ll believe it when I see it

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
62 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Re Weaselling from EU rules: do you have a source? I am very interested.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Thanks. That will not work. IO68 is not waterproof. It’s not a reason enough to not have a replicable battery. We have had ip68 phones with removable backs and user swappable batteries. We can have it again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Which loophole is that again?

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply

Never believe mega corporations.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Or even regular ones

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Or people

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

permalink
report
reply
38 points

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

Why specifically exclude game consoles?

permalink
report
reply
38 points

Because they lobbied hardest.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Not saying this is a good excuse, but I suspect it’s related to DRM / cheating.

Video game consoles exist for the sole purpose of playing protected content, and they rely on part on verifying things haven’t been tampered with to discourage creating.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points
*

That’s the slipperiest slope ever. All modern computing is full of DRM. I watch Netflix on my Mac and game on my desktop, should I have no rights?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Again not saying it’s a good excuse. You’re right that modern computing is full of DRM, but unlike a computer, an Xbox is literally just a DRM box. They rely on their hardware DRM to prevent piracy.

Not sure if it’s still the case but back in the day, people would install aftermarket disc readers in early 360s specifically to allow it to play unprotected game discs, so anyone with a DVD burner could burn a pirated ISO onto a disc for their Xbox

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Video game consoles exist for the sole purpose of playing protected content,

Consoles have never been good at handling protected content. I’m pretty sure they have higher piracy rates than PC, purely because PC will emulate them.

Pretty sure the main reason has always been form factor and self-contained. People get consoles because they don’t want the setup that a PC entails. That and up until around 10 years ago maybe, PCs were prohibitively more expensive than consoles.

But hell, even back in the 90s my first experience with Pokemon was on no$GB

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Why alarm systems???

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Nobody talking about fire alarms still

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

For the same reason you need a licence in most places to install fire and security systems. If you make a mistake, people can die.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Who said fire?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I would assume because at that point you have a PC.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The government telling us to buy a PC

permalink
report
parent
reply

Apple

!apple_enthusiast@lemmy.world

Create post
Welcome

to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!

Rules:
  1. No NSFW Content
  2. No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
  3. No Ads / Spamming
    Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread

Lemmy Code of Conduct

Communities of Interest:

Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple

Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode

Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.

Community stats

  • 2.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.3K

    Posts

  • 19K

    Comments