After years of fighting Right to Repair, Apple U-turns-ish in California Apple has endorsed, with caveats, California's proposed Right to Repair law after spending years opposing DIY fixes. In a letter [PDF] provided to The Register, the iBiz this week declared it supports SB 244 and urged the State Assembly to approve the law bill, passed by the State Senate in May. The draft legislation is due …
Does not require that manufactures allow repair shops to disable security features
So, basically, if Apple implement "security features" to prevent non-Apple parts working, repair shops would not be allowed to disable those features, and would have to use Apple parts, at whatever excessive price Apple charge?
Focuses on manufacturer obligations to support authorized repair channels
Who authorizes "authorized repair channels"?
Call me cynical, but surely those two caveats basically neuter the entire proposal?
Exactly. Apple hasn't changed their tune, they will work hard to make sure the bill is toothless, and then they will use their support of it for PR purposes. In the meantime, they will continue to solder non-standard and commercially unavailable memory and SSDs directly to the motherboard and require "calibration" tools which aren't available to the public for even the most simple part replacements.
So, basically, if Apple implement "security features" to prevent non-Apple parts working, repair shops would not be allowed to disable those features, and would have to use Apple parts, at whatever excessive price Apple charge?
Sigh. I figured someone would call that requirement evil without looking at the whole picture.
Note that Apple actually left the door open for non-original parts, provided the user is told about it, but this is about something different - you're dealing with a chain of trust issue for the Apple security model.
This first became apparent when non-Apple installed fingerprint sensor replacements didn't work: those devices had to be integrated into the chain of trust as it exists in an iPhone and 3rd parties were not able to do this, IMHO wisely because installing parts that did not actually do the job would then become rather easy - and guess who would then get the blame? Apple, of course.
Replacing a screen or a digitiser? Absolutely, should be easy, provided there's some measure of control the repair doesn't void the waterproofing. Battery? Umm, problem. Not the waterproofing, but the quality. If you have ever seen a lithium battery ignite you know you don't want that near someone's head or in someone's pocket, but who can Johnny End User trust to stick the RIGHT battery in there and not some cheap knockoff that will eventually blow up?
And again, if that happens, the repairer won't get the blame but Apple - front page headlines will be about an iPhone blowing up, with weeks later a small print report on page 9 that the cause was an non-certified OEM battery. Yes, it could have been made a lot cheaper, but would you get on a plane if you knew that the person next to you had a dodgy battery in his device? Remember, you can't extinguish the thing. Dell already had that problem, and those were their OWN, QA verified batteries.
If you apply some logical thinking to the issue you'll see that the 'right to repair' people and politicians tend to skip over trivial problems like safety and maintaining security because those don't fit into their narrative. The truth, as always, lies somewhere in the middle. Apple is not blame free here, but there are some possible some sound reasons for their reluctance.
"Sigh. I figured someone would call that requirement evil without looking at the whole picture."
"Note that Apple actually left the door open for non-original parts"
While forcing manufacturers to not provide parts direct to consumers or repair shops. That tends to be part of the 'whole picture.' It's part of their closed eco-system, screw the little guy repair shop who can fix the broken part, but they can't get the part through customs because Apple has a court order in place to stop "counterfeit parts" at the border.
Watch Louis Rossman's YouTube channel for "the whole picture."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVL65qwBGnw
Or the CBC news report on a Canadian Apple Store who charges the same for repairs as a new laptop actually costs.
https://youtu.be/_XneTBhRPYk?si=6vi4PcF77V2d6ONW
Apple has done this for DECADES. They are a corporation that wants to make more money this year than last year. And you, as the loyal customer, need to finance that. Good luck.
"Or am I just too cynical?"
Not at all. Many companies have weaponized the DMCA by putting locks on all sorts of things. The locks are super wimpy but circumventing them is a felony (in the US) so it's a matter of The State vs. hacker rather than a company having to spend their own money prosecuting cases. Third party repair shops that do anything to circumvent those locks would be up on charges.
It's pretty stupid of manufacturers to do this. If I had an iPhone and broke the screen, I may not have the money for an official Apple repair nor the time to send it in the mail for repairs. I might need to buy an Android phone to be able to get by until I can get the iPhone repaired or afford a replacement. That's a big risk for Apple if I find that something less expensive does the job just fine after getting used to a different OS. Repaired iPhones also be sold back into the market if the former owner opted for a replacement and traded in the broken phone. That means more people with iPhones and those people may buy a new one from Apple in future. Until that time, they'll be spending money in the app store to have a full set of spyware to add to the factory installed collection.
Way back when I was doing pro audio, gear that could be repaired was much more prevalent. If you couldn't get parts or service docs, you retired that bit of kit and bought something that a local shop could fix. Over time that process selected the sorts of equipment many companies had in stock. It was also pointless to not sell parts and provide schematics since the gear isn't that complex. Even the most complex gear didn't come with firmware listings so you couldn't go out and build a copy which I found was more expensive than buying new.
I don't think you're being cynical enough.
> I might need to buy an Android phone to be able to get by until I can get the iPhone repaired or afford a replacement. That's a big risk for Apple
It's not that big of a risk.
> you retired that bit of kit and bought something that a local shop could fix
Is that local shop authorised?
"Is that local shop authorised?"
For pro audio gear? They'd only need to be certified if they were doing warranty work. If you wanted something repaired that wasn't under warranty, there wasn't any 'authorized' to worry about. The manufacturers would sell parts and schematics to anybody. Maybe some would only sell the docs to an established shop with a resale permit, but I never ran into that.
Apple rely on getting people hooked in - they know how iOS works, they have spent money on 'apps' for it, it works well with their iPad / Mac (and not anywhere near as well with anything non-Apple). None of that is unsurmountable, but it's enough to keep a significant number of people buying the fruity toys rather than anyone else's toys.
They aren't the only ones who can make getting parts difficult though - even the manufacturers which supply the corporate IT market are getting worse. E.g. I recently needed a replacement USB-C cable module for a Dell docking station. It's hard-wired, but the end part of the docking station (with the cable attached) is a replaceable part, and the user guide even explains how to replace it. Spent ages going round and round with Dell, being passed from one department to another. Basically they now refuse to supply it as a spare part, and thier only 'solution' is to throw away the whole docking station and buy another one. These are not cheap docks, and I really don't think this is acceptable - the USB-C cable and plug are always going to be the weak point, and requiring the replacement of the whole thing if one of those gets damaged is ridiculous. And it's a bespoke part, so no third party alternatives.
I disagree. It's just a bad UI.
There's no good reason a link shouldn't be detected and made clickable, the vast majority of sites that allow comments do it.
No, I prefer it this way. If people aren't smart enough to use the codes available, then I assume that their posted URLs (they're not links) are not worth the pixels they're displayed on.
Same. Although a URL may look more pleasing when it's obfusticated, a lot of us are IT types. Don't click on random links. Sure, if you mouse over text, the browser should usually show you the URL, and I can decide if I want to click it, or not. But it's easy enough to higlight a URL and open it, if you want, and the destination (or source) is more immediately obvious.
Nah, Apple will continue to make life as hard for their customers as possible.
The USB-C charging port was not the W most people think as Apple were already moving away from lightning as they had hit the power limit on it. No bill passes without some tacit approval from the overlords.
Same with the replaceable battery proposals. People skip over the bit in the proposal that would still allow for the need to use tools to swap the battery. It isn't going to be like old times where you could pop the battery out with a finger nail. It just might mean you don't need to unglue the f-ing screen to get the battery out.
For now don't hold your breath as the corrupt politicians will always manage to screw you over and line their pockets. Hochul basically rewriting the NY right to repair bill AFTER it had been passed by all the lower levels is a good example.
I can think of two reasons why Apple would do this. (1) it hurts the competition more than it hurts them. (2) they've spotted something that will make repairs harder, not easier, for end users, and they want it passed quick before anyone knows it.
And yes, I've been an Apple user for years, myself, before you ask.
No right to repair? Then the OEM is required to replace the defective unit with another one, right up to the last day of the warranty, and provide a new day one warranty on the replacement. Don't make it anymore so don't have a replacement? It gets replaced with the current version level that matches the original purchase (if it was the flagship 10 years ago, customer gets the latest flagship) and again, warranty starts at day 1. Or, allow third parties to repair with third party parts if the customer wants.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2023
