This isn’t Apple being nice.
This is Apple wanting to sell things in California, combined with Apple not wanting to manufacture two separate versions of their devices for the US market.
This is also why everyone gets USB-C iPhones now, instead of only the EU.
Nothing new or exclusive for Apple: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_effect
Same with the Brussels Effect
They supported this legislation before it was passed. Still not out of the goodness of their hearts, this version includes provisions that they had wanted previously.
They “supported” this legislation by implementing a system where parts still require users to call in to activate them, you are “strongly encouraged” to rent or buy specialized tools from apple, and the price of parts plus rental generally comes out as only slightly less than paying an apple store to do it for you.
It is malicious compliance that they get to use for a PR boost.
Still a step forward, and it will make it easier to pass further steps.
It really isn’t.
Because this has highlighted the “loophole” to these kinds of laws. Strict control of parts and equipment to manipulate pricing so that third parties cannot exist and this becomes “your phone is under warranty” by another name.
It definitely sounds like the law kind of sucks and needs to go further in the future, but are you really saying that being able to repair your existing device, even if the parts are overpriced, is exactly as bad as having to buy a whole new one? The reduction in e-waste alone seems like a potential improvement.
If anything, this has increased the amount of waste.
Because, as a customer (making up the numbers but it IS something like this)?
I can pay Apple 300 bucks to let their geek squad repair it for me. Or I can pay 290 bucks to have their special tools shipped to me as well as their official parts, with all the packaging associated. And then I have to ship them back my old parts. All with extra packaging because you can’t send a customer a box full of monitor mainboards. And, because I need to source all of these directly from Apple, the moment they are no longer legally required to offer replacement parts, they won’t.
So… I can save something ridiculous (let’s say 10%) to fulfill my own warranty and nothing else.
But let’s think about this as a repair shop.
I can’t use third party or even OEM parts because basically everything requires the customer to authenticate with Apple. I can’t stock parts because Apple strictly controls parts and requires customers to special order them and return the old part during a repair. And I can’t compete with the geek squad because THEY get to stock spare screens in the back room. So I am exactly where I used to be of “Some stuff I can repair even though Apple says not to. Most stuff I can’t”
So yeah. The end user experience is almost exactly as bad as it used to be. And this is “a win” which means pressure has been let down and companies have a path to neuter these laws. So yeah, it is worse.
Well if it really works out like you’re speculating that definitely sounds shitty I’ll give you that!
So everyone’s still on leashes. Got it.
parts still require users to call in to activate them
How else would you do it? Phone theft used to be way too common. I’m fine with Apple reducing phone theft by making it harder for thieves to get value from stolen devices
I’m buying my phone as a functioning device: I may need to repair it or replace the battery but why would I want to mod it? Those who do, can go through the extra steps
This is far different than a server, which I buy with very different expectations
So you are arguing this is to prevent some Gone in 60 Seconds like movement where Giovanni Ribisi and Scott Caan are in the wings waiting to rapidly replace a single component to sell those stolen phones before the Faraday cage bag mysteriously dissolves?
This has nothing to do with thieves. This has everything to do with keeping third parties from not being able to exist. And I should not have to explain why someone might want to buy a third party version of an apple accessory.
Why would preventing someone from replacing a broken part without calling in to Apple, prevent phone theft?
The phone isn’t going to magically disconnect from Apples network just because you replaced the screen.
Maybe if they replaced the internal storage, but Apple could easily require to call if you only replaced that part. Everything else should be more than fair game.
And what about those who would rather mod their Apple phone than have phone theft security? Their opinion does not matter because you decide you don’t need it?
Why would preventing someone from replacing a broken part without calling in to Apple, prevent phone theft?
Digitally locking some of the major components together make it harder for a thief to part out the phone - you can’t just buy a new screen from someone on the street who stole a phone and took it apart, and expect it to work
IIRC: They battled this talking point/discussion and legislation for years. Up until a week before it was voted on and passed.
They are not your friend.
Maybe because EU passed this before California. Then it’s easy to on board.
In this case, they managed to delay the bill long enough that they now have a bunch of programs in place to actually profit from third-party repairs of their devices. This gives them an advantage over their competitors, so they are now in support of this bill.
Always gotta be a big conspiracy
Thumbnail looks like a purple Dodge Challenger is about to drive through the window.
Apple storefront: planned obsolescence
Dodge Challenger: CA’s right to repair law
IMO Apple must have found a way to literally Dodge this Challenger if they’re supporting it. Wonder what concoction their legal team has drafted up?..
Based on this, it looks like an attempt to negotiate with the consumers “directly” and make it look like they are being active.
Wouldn’t it be cheaper long-term to just not be assholes for once?
Basically you have the right to repair, but the only tools that will work are those you buy from apple and call-in to make sure you didn’t buy them second hand.
I’m glad for the EU, California, and other places that are big enough to force this sort of stuff nationally or globally.
Every so often the phrase “where California goes the nation follows” comes true. I had a feeling about this one, but not so soon nor decisively.
I am out of the loop on this one. I am probably wrong, but…Wasn’t the bill nullified by the fact apple has the sole right to supply the replacement parts? Or does the bill work as intended where replacement parts can be sourced elsewhere as well as documentation being made available?
I have no idea, but I’m grateful for a step in the right direction. It feels like there haven’t been many of those in recent times.
My point was that it may have been made useless. I seem to remember Louis Rossman complaining about it, but I have no idea over which issue. There is no point in having a right to repair act if it can still be abused in some way shape or form by large manufacturers.
I think the problem with this one was that manufacturers can hold all the cards on the cost of buying replacement parts. This would open up the issue of people being gouged. I was hoping that someone could give me more accurate information on the issue.
Apple saying they will honor like they’re in control and have a choice.
Well, didn’t they play a huge role in the genesis of this law? I think they have some way to continue ignoring costumers.
They had the choice of not doing business in California, which is what they had threatened to do with previous right-to-repair and other consumer protection laws. In this case, they found a way to make money off it if so they are supportive of this bill now since they have successfully delayed it long enough to have an advantage over their competitors.
Not by choice
Apple »claims« they will honor ‘right to repair’ – just like they claim their latest devices are ‘carbon neutral’
this is a ruleset though, and it’s likely much cheaper for them to produce one SKU for the US rather than two, a california rule abiding one, and a rest of the country one.
Their carbon neutral claims are a stretch, but they did massively reduce their carbon footrprint in addition to using offsets. The majority of the reduction is from using green energy at their factories and no longer using air shipping.
Didn’t they influence the creation of this law? I’m still sceptical of its effectiveness.
Yes, thats what Louis Rossman said. I get my news from Louis 🤣
That’s what the smart ones do I hear
It is not wise to solely take news at face value. I always do a little digging into something whenever I hear any news on it myself.
I’d say that from what I’ve seen, Louis isn’t interested in spreading disinformation.
But I would also still do a little digging; it’s just a healthy way to process the content you consume. If you aren’t willing to audit your opinion, then your opinion holds little water in an objective conversation.
He’s definitely not and I would agree with the sentiment that he is a reliable source of information, but remember that all people make mistakes sometimes. Treat the news as a notification, not a source of information.
What really makes him credible is he literally calls himself out in videos when information changes or he makes mistakes.
- “When I said, xyz, don’t listen to me. I was wrong/lied.”
- " [company name] changed their stance/policy and my previous statements are outdated."
He also tells viewers and readers all the time to come to their own conclusions and do their own research.
He also comes clean and informs his viewers if it turns out he made a mistake which I appreciate
Too bad I still need a hammer and chisel to replace the keyboard on my MacBook and don’t even get me started on removing the battery which I need to do first
Same thing happened with net neutrality, California put NN into law, and the rest of the country followed because it doesn’t make sense to build a separate Internet for California.
I understand this as the California Effect and similarly the Brussels effect. While both do change company policies, I do understand that many companies are going to continues to try and avoid a regulatory ruling as there is so much status quo market loss on the line for them.
This article describes how they’ll be trying to use MOUs with nongovernment bodies to mollify consumers and regulators.
That’s great. I’m still gonna avoid everything Apple.
The iPod Touch 7 was great… but then they decided it didn’t actually deserve long term support even though it was the last version they’d be making. So go ahead and come out with an iPod Touch 8, Apple, but I won’t be trusting enough to buy it after getting burnt.
Ehhh with eu sideloading, right to repair and generally a good phone it looks like a good deal but i also think full software liberty(you can replace the software on it) is a part of RTR and i dont know if thats ever gonna happen especially with even android phones getting more and more restricted.
Who asked? Use what you like. Nobody cares, this is just a good thing for everyone
You sure didn’t, but surprisingly loudly so.
It’s almost like it’s inconsequential which gigantic mega-corporation you give your money to with regards to a smartphone or computer.
I don’t like giving money to Google but at least I can flash a free software operative system and I’m not in a golden jail under the tyrannic rule of a corporation.
Good for you! I still don’t see what prompted you to say this though. It’s not really consequential to anyone but yourself.
Are we not allowed to share opinions on Lemmy?
It is on-topic, is it not?
I feel like going on an article about Apple and saying “but I don’t like apple” is a waste of screen real estate honestly. It’s such a pointless and stupid thing to say.
They get to sell their parts without having to pay all of the repair people and probably getting out of a certain amount of warranty liability. Win-win-win for them.
And people repairing their own stuff is always a good idea. People learning how to maintain their electronics is never a bad thing! Everyone should pick up a soldering iron at some point. :)
While in complete agreement that it’s good the option is there, have definitely interacted with plenty of end users who, for various reasons, really should never.
Hey, some people learn from their mistakes. Hell, my first PC build (23 years ago…) was DOA because I had inadvertently bent a pin on the CPU, and it got smashed when I tightened down the cooler. That was an expensive mistake, but one I certainly learned from.
Thank god PGA is officially dead, finally. My first Ryzen cpu came in the mail with bent pins, I spent fucking hours straightening all of them. Worth it tho, got 5 years of life out of it between me and my brother before it was finally allowed to rest and spend the rest of it’s life on a shelf(it still works, its just slow).
Not that I fully disagree, just that there’s a reason they didn’t do it before. Probably more profitable to not have repairable devices. Not that they won’t try to make the best of the current situation, as you said.
Also, it would likely be more expensive to produce a line of repairable products just for one state and do different for the others, so this is the best way of spinning this.
4 choices: don’t sell in CA, fight the law, make a separate phone to meet R2R laws that are likely going to become more prevalent, release a press report portraying magnanimity towards R2R and make the bare minimum effort to meet the law.
The last is the only real answer.
What does this mean regarding their components pairing? Will they still force indepent repair shops to go through apple to validate a repair by requesting a new pairing for the replaced part? Will it be free? Will it depend on whether the part is a genuine apple part? A salvaged one? A third party part?
you now have the right to repair with only their parts, which is progress, albeit minimal and expensive
Here, you can buy a screen for 80% of the cost of a new iPhone.
Like they have a choice. Even Apple can’t manufacture separate devices for specifically for California.
yeah. not because it’s right, but because it’s cheaper.
Just like with CA emissions standards for cars
it took a lot of years for that, though.
Damn this is huge.
