We Need the Right to Repair Our Gadgets
wsj.com
wsj.com
Another case, I've got a water purifier at home that uses a series of filters (sediment, reverse-osmosis, UV radiation, carbon etc.). Due to the quality of water supply, the sediment filter requires manual cleaning every month or two, else everything down the line stands a chance of getting damaged. These filters aren't cheap ($100 every 2 years in a 3rd world country). I find it annoying that the design of these filters is such that it is cumbersome to remove that simple sediment filter. Almost everyone I know ends up paying the service provider for annual maintenance. In reality, a simple design change can make the maintenance super easy.
It's the same story with modern cars, gadgets, washing machines, everything. The money to be made from repair is a whole industry. On the brighter side, the industry is begging to be disrupted.
P.S. I've tried repairing my laptop for broken hinges, displays, heat sink etc. by watching youtube videos & ordering cheap parts from ebay. It's an immensely satisfying feeling when the gadget starts working again. You not only save money & environment, you can justify your engineering degree too :-)
Regarding your 2nd point, most of the cartridges use a "Welded Housing" and carry the "Dow Filmtec" brand. However there are sellers on ebay that supply housing that can be opened and you can fill your own filter material. I'm a little skeptical on taking this route without an understanding or testing ability of what effect it would have on drinking water. I wonder if there's an off-the-shelf complete water test kit or a lab that would do that for me.
I live in Taiwan and currently get drinking water from fill-up stations outside due to heavy minerals in the groundwater here. It's not too inconvenient to do it once a week or so, and the water stations are ubiquitous, but I miss having drinking water from the tap.
I've visited water filter shops 2-3 times with the intent of buying a filtration system but am put off by the cost of replacement filters which I know I will have to buy frequently. I'm being cheap but the engineer in me keeps saying there's a better way.
Also, I was not able to figure out how I can test the water quality without sending it to a lab in the US. Do you test your own water?
The additional filter would look something like this [1]. It's an inline sediment filter with a separate casing. For the rest of the unit, you might still be able to buy a complete kit off ebay e.g. [2] & assemble it yourself [3].
[1] http://www.osmiowater.co.uk/media/catalog/product/cache/1/im...
[2] http://www.ebay.com/itm/RO-Zoi-Xi-Pure-Filter-Kit-incl-UV-Bu...
YouTube has definitely been a huge enabler of this. I would have been way less likely to attempt it without the confidence of a step by step video to follow along with.
I would love more documentation, like anyone, but you don't really need any documentation to replace a broken capacitor (a very common failure for most screens, I guess): you need to know how to spot a broken capacitor, find a replacement, and basic soldering skills. There are tons of videos that teach that, but few people really want to research that (generally because they are afraid of electronics, or think they are not smart enough).
On the other end, some issues can't be fixed at all, because repairing is so close to the full price of the device. Some examples that happened to me: inflating smartphone battery that damages the motherboard, damaged screen due to shock (wide vertical band of dead pixels).
Between that, there are probably a lot of small problems that are specific to a particular model. It would be great that those ones are documented, indeed.
Some other basic things, like replacing a smartphone/laptop battery and screens would be very welcome on the manufacturer website, but like capacitors, you should be able to find tutorials for a lot of devices.
The truth is, to repair things, you need mostly knowledge to identify problems and labor time to fix things. Both of which is what makes it expensive.
Then we have digital locks (DRM) which the article brings up which artificially prevents customers from repairing. You can have all the knowledge in the world and still not be able to fix a simple issue since the digital signature of the part won't be accepted by the device. There has been political discussion around the world to forbid this kind of technical restrictions in cars or at least force retailers to inform the customer about the limitations.
Both issues impacts customer rights and is entirely political in nature. The problem of having enough knowledge, access to documentation, or skill to perform repairs is all secondary problems once the political right to repair is granted.
For limited access to parts, it depends what "parts" we are talking about. If it is an electronic part (capacitor, microcontroller etc...), most gadgets use off-the-shelf components, that are easy to find, provided you know where to search. If it is a black-box with very specific requirements (screen, battery, whole PCB ..), access to parts may indeed be a problem.
While I like the political right to repair, we have to be careful about what this mean. How does it affect small companies, that may not have the time to produce documentation, or very integrated products that can't really be repaired (which, if there is an exception, becomes a loophole big companies will use, of course).
This one has an easy solution, though: manufacturers and vendors should be compelled to prominently disclose exactly what the nature of any such behaviour will be before the sale is finalised, so customers can vote with their wallets and there is awareness in the market if anyone wants to compete on the basis that they have no (or at least less customer-hostile) artificial limitations. Fail to do so and be on the hook for whatever the normal compensation would be for a device breaking at the time the limitation kicks in, up to and including a partial or full refund of the purchase price or even paying additional compensation for any consequential losses.
Anything non-consumable broke? Fix it.
It is getting unbearable: washing mashines, fridges, phones, laptops dying within few years.
For some devices, five years might be well into the range where a significant proportion of devices would be expected to fail even without artificial breakage. For example, it might be unreasonable to expect a minimum 5 year warranty on a typical consumer hard drive being hulked around in a laptop. It's possible to build more reliable drives with better components and more robust cases with improved physical protection for those who need better resilience, but it makes the products more expensive, and the market has already provided for this with a range of different product types at different price points.
On the other hand, I have plenty of white goods in the kitchen of my home that have been working just fine for a decade and there's no reason they shouldn't be. Fixing a 5 year warranty period regardless of context might have been an open invitation to the manufacturer of my fridge to build in something that would break after 61 months (which seems a lot closer to what you seem to get with more modern kitchen white goods today).
I still think full disclosure is probably the best way to fight this trend. You can artificially cripple your device if you want, but like the warnings on cigarette packets, you have to use at least 30% of the space on your packaging prominently warning users that your product is deliberately broken and explaining exactly how so they can make an informed decision about whether they still want to buy it. I'm going to guess a lot fewer manufacturers would be so keen on nerfing their products if they also had to come clean about it to their prospective customers before they got their money.
Right now that fancy watch on your bosses wrist looks great while the wheels are turning. Once they stop, the person will need to send the watch to an expensive trip to the factory. Why, because these companies don't sell parts to independent watch repairers. That watch is essential a lease from the company.
That automobile, with the propiority operating system, breaks down. Independent auto repair shops have no legal right to buy the repair codes--let alone fiddle with the computers. All those fancy features break. People are being forced to bring their ailing automobile to expensive Dealerships. The tech has gotten so complicated, even dealership mechanics are learning on your dime. I know this for a fact. My best buddy is a dealership mechanic.
So, it's not just computers/electronics. I'm big on repair. I don't like this throw away society. If you don't have the knowledge/skills to repair a gadget--that's fine. If you are locked out of the system, can't get the schematics, or can't get parts--that just wrong?
I'm fine with not allowing a customer to fiddle with a gadget when in warranty, but after that warranty ends, they should be able to repair their Gadget?
It is an extremely artificial restriction.
Then again if the marketed it right a lot of the tinkerers would probably go for it.
Plus the reason Samsung recommends qualified shops is because at the end of the day electronics can be dangerous if you are not careful.
Touching a charged high voltage capacitor could give you a nasty shock or even kill you so it's not for everybody.
If i had to complain about something it would be that the repair shop is charging too much for a very simple job.
Manufacturers like this sort of argument, but often don't seem to have a lot of actual evidence to support their position. If using a certain kind of custom screw is necessary to save a few mm of thickness and 0.5lb of weight in a new laptop, there's a concrete benefit to the customer. If using a certain kind of custom screw really makes no detectable difference at all to the spec, but the only global supplier of such screws has an exclusive contract with the original manufacturer to supply them so no-one else can get hold of replacement screws without a silly amount of effort, that's just artificially limiting third party repair options. At some point that sort of behaviour justifies regulatory intervention to keep the market competitive.
Some manufacturers are trying to use DMCA to prevent user repairs/modifications.
We had the right to repair but it's in jeopardy.
Whether that's valid or not is debatable. But it's not the same as saying an individual cannot repair their gadgets (voiding warranty is expected, but understandable).
Recently, John Deere has been threatening shade tree mechanics with DMCA suits for performing unauthorized repairs on tractors that they own.
What if your next car from GM said "Oh the oil light came on. You'll need to go to the dealer for an oil change so they can have the engine control unit turn the oil light off."
Suddenly an easy fix turns into something protected by the DMCA, and we're just supposed to be OK with it?
http://www.wired.com/2015/02/new-high-tech-farm-equipment-ni... for anyone who hasn't seen the John Deere story:
> The family farmer who owns this tractor is a friend of mine. He just wanted a better way to fix a minor hydraulic sensor. Every time the sensor blew, the onboard computer would shut the tractor down. It takes a technician at least two days to order the part, get out to the farm, and swap out the sensor. So for two days, Dave’s tractor lies fallow. And so do his fields.
Try "Your car isn't going to start even if you changed the oil. Just have it towed to your driveway and come up with other transportation until an authorized repair tech can come and press a button for a few hundred dollars."
Imagine airbus or boeing or the FAA allowing uncertified code to enter critical commercial aircraft systems.
So, I'm of two views on this. Critical systems should not be allowed to be modified by uncertified technicians, or similar, but at the dame time, they should not classify non critical components as critical. Some reasonable authority should make those calls, not the mfg or Joe/Jo public.
Yeah because some tractor is as much of threat as a 450 ton jumbo jet.
Even if there were no regulations preventing it. Even if there were no technological locks preventing it. No one would install unapproved software on such a contraption because the risk of getting sued out of existence would be too great.
Are you going to continue to argue that they're not doing it or will you argue that they're only doing it when they have a good reason?
That could describe a brake job, or replacing a fuel line.
Basically, we all recognize that it's a BS justification.
I'd like to see:
1) in case there is any (F)OSS component in the firmware, the device manufacturer or distributor must provide the source of all (F)OSS components and a working build environment, for every firmware version available, as well as the neccessary tools/keys to upload said firmware to the device.
2) Disassembly and reassembly instruction manuals, as well as spare parts, should be provided nondiscriminately to both the manufacturer and any interested party. In case the device is "repaired" by swapping the defective unit with a working one, the manufacturer is exempt.
3) In case proprietary screws, glues etc. are used, the manufacturer must provide the same tools as used by official service at fair conditions.
4) All requirements above must be kept valid over the expected life time of the device, plus two years.
In case a manufacturer or distributor fails to adhere to these rules, the regulatory body must have the power to ban the product from sale until manufacturer or distributor comply.
What you can reasonably legislate/regulate is that manufacturers/suppliers can't actively impair third parties who want to provide alternative services and are able to do so to a sensible standard. Just blocking the kinds of legal shenanigans that these giants use to tie up small/local potential competitors would be a good start.
I applaud dell for making their repair manuals available online. All companies should be following in their footsteps. Apple give all sorts of information to techs but not to consumers. No repair manuals and Even the support tools are different.
There is a downside to diagnostics tools being freely available, you can clear any fault codes before you sell the car to an unsuspecting buyer, this will prevent the dash warning lights appearing until the sensor registers the fault again, which could be under particular driving conditions. Of course, this is little different from the normal 'buying a used car' pitfalls.
ON the other hand, I saved literally thousands of dollars by diagnosing my air-suspension fault myself, and then carrying out the work required based on that fault code. Pretty sure the dealership don't want me doing that, but then maybe they shouldn't charge a high hourly rate for a 5-10 minute process of attaching a cable and looking at the screen?
Before the recent examples of using internet connected entertainment systems to hack cars there was a case where someone found that there was a vehicle bus connector in the wheel arch of certain vehicles, plug into it and you could do anything to the car from outside.
The security by obscurity argument is pretty dead at this time -- it doesn't magically get resurrected just because the object we are securing is a car.
Replacing the entire odometer is a different issue entirely.
And how does support for replacing a circuit board imply that the circuit board needs to support software updates? I don't understand what you're saying at all.
The diagnostic tools provided to official dealerships handle reading fault codes and reprogramming the microcontrollers fitted to the car. I think that OBD-II is about as good a compromise as you are going to get to allow aftermarket diagnostics.
In hindsight, it could have been better to have treated the car as a WAN, with every controller firewalled off from each other, particularly as the manufacturers have been talking for years about allowing access to the vehicle bus from outside so that cars can be linked together into a train and all changing speed at the same time. I don't think you would choose to do this with CAN though and I don't know of any proposals for newer network standards though it is a few years since I was a member of any of the ISO committees that worked on this.
This is already reality. Any AutoZone store, and probably most other large auto parts retailers, will read and clear codes for you at no charge. Their upside is that you might buy a part to fix the code.
In many states they won't clear codes. Even for trivial faults that aren't safety issues.
The toaster-oven, with its newer features, had not the staying power.
I also don't think it was necessarily a conscious decision to make disposable toasters (or cell-phones or effectively computers), just that a market segment opened up and overtook others. We might blame consumers, but we can only blame them in aggregate for incenting a trend to continue by buying into it.
You can get replacement lids for a round slow cooker very easily, but those ellipses are all built with slightly different sizes and eccentricities, and you can only get replacement crocks and lids that fit well directly from the original manufacturer, who will either gouge you on the price, or inform you that they recently discontinued that size, and they are no longer available at any price. As a result, I tried to propose a "no more oval slow cookers" rule, but that was vetoed by the spouse.
The greatest obstacle to repairing seems to be the availability of replacement parts that fit. Most of the time, getting just one critical repair part costs 50% or more of the cost of just replacing the entire thing. We could make everything more repairable if only we have more accepted standards for COTS parts.
It is very much like the difference between the old Apple 30-pin connector and USB connectors. Those 30-pin things break very often, and are relatively expensive to continually replace. In contrast, I have never paid extra for a USB charger/connector cable, and none of them have yet become non-functional. So I have quite a few male-type-A to male-micro-B cables, and thanks to the standard, every non-Apple device in my home can share those cables. The Apple devices are split between 30-pin and Lightning, which are always in short supply. Again, I tried to propose a "no crappy, expensive, everbreaking, proprietary connectors" rule, but it was vetoed by the spouse.
If you want repairability, you're going to at least need some standards for dimensions and form factors. And you'll probably also need some sort of patent licensing reform, such that the repair parts for a retail product protected by patents may be manufactured and sold using a standardized license.
So at some point, preferably sooner rather than later, we're going to need to settle on some standardized monolithic smartphone dimensions, like large: 150x75x12mm, medium: 130x65x12mm, small: 110x55x15mm, and tiny: 90x45x18mm. It doesn't really help me, the consumer, to have 100 slightly different options for phone dimensions when I go looking for a 3rd party protective case, or for shirts with the right pocket size. And it certainly doesn't help when the only differences between two different replacement batteries are 0.2 mm of length, and the contacts shifted 0.1 mm to one side, and then both cost $5 more because of it.
So yes. I cannot heat up bagel-bites in there. Nor can I download apps.
I don't buy Apple products anyhow.
No matter which iPhone you buy, YouTube is full of video guides and you can buy DIY repair kits on eBay for most tasks.
It's unfair, because big brands don't have to do anything for these benefits, but that's the way it is. Buying niche products makes DIY repairs a lot harder.
Yes you can watch a Youtube video and figure out how to take them apart, Apple's devices have to be serviced by someone after all, but a ton of money, thought, time, and effort go into designing methods and hardware for obscuring the typical consumer's ability to dig into an Apple devices.
I've taken my Mac Mini apart multiple times, an impossible task without buying an iFixIt kit first. The reason I took the computer apart was to stuff a second hard drive into the machine. I had to remove every single component of the machine in order to access the hard drive. It was a huge pain in the ass just to add a second hard drive. Good luck doing that to a Macbook.
My Thinkpad features a single screw that lets me access the hard drive caddy. The product doesn't suffer at all from providing this feature and it gives me the ability to upgrade my machine as I see fit.
That said, the newer Mac Mini is much better than the old one in this regard. Some steps were made to reorder the layers in the package, so you no longer have to remove ALL the screws (25? 30?)
When I read about Apple designing new screw heads (for example) which can only be unscrewed using a special screwdriver that kind of stuff makes me bristle though.
So they've been dicks for over a decade.
I bought my first apple product six months ago. An iphone 5 32gb model. It had been roughly used, and I got a discount.
I bought this, in part, because I can get cheap parts for an older iphone; this is much less true of any other model of older phone.
Also, I can get updated software for an older iphone... this is also not true of older android phones (as far as I can tell, CyanogenMod drops support just as quickly as the original manufacturers. Yes, I could figure out how to port the security updates to the device-specific package, but I could also write my own phone OS, given enough time and effort. There's no reasonable/practical way to get up to date software for an old android phone.)
A new apple phone isn't as better than a new android as people say... and god damn, itunes is a piece of shit when it comes to managing podcasts. ios might even be worse (no sd card, etc..) But an iphone that is a couple years old and has sustained some damage is way better than an android of a similar vintage, simply because of the software and hardware support.
Note, it is pretty unlikely that I would buy an apple workstation, for all the reasons discussed in this article, and because I find their keyboard unpleasant.... but the point remains that in practical terms, it's way easier to repair an old Iphone than an old android phone, simply because of the wide availability of parts.
(that said, the fork of the fork of the fork of the nokia linux that came with my nokia n900 many years ago is still going, which is really kind of amazing. But the n900 is pretty primitive at this point.)
Even so, spare parts for the iphone are gonna be way more available than spare parts for the n900.
but I am time-poor right now. Perhaps to the point where if my iphone broke I'd give it away to someone with more time to fix such things and buy another.
I just had my hob replaced, turns out the new hob, branded as Neff is exactly the same hob branded by about 10 other electric hob makers you see in your local white goods outlet. All they did was change the knobs.
It's the same with bog standard fridges/freezers. I used to service computer equipment for a company that manufactured floor standing fridges/freezer combos. I was told by staff there that they manufactured them for nearly every conceivable well known brand in the UK - Hotpoint, Electrolux, Indesit. All that really changed between brand were the plastic moulded insides that held the shelves, door handles, and possibly the door facings. The actual refrigeration/control electronics meat and potatoes, chassis, power supply were pretty much the same across all the brands.
My GE fridge was all Samsung parts.
Which were all made by someone else.
Meanwhile, my ancient Thinkpad T500 I owned before the MBA is alive and kicking, and when its battery gave out after three years, I could just order another battery to replace it with. On my MBA, everything is glued together, so I have to pay a couple of hundreds for a 1st og 3rd party shop to replace it instead - with no guarantee what the end result will be.
The future really sucks this way, especially since it’s not a secret that batteries do worse over time - it’s in the friggin’ manuals for Apple’s devices.
Apple’s products are a lot more affordable than they used to, when we criticized them for being for the rich, but now they seem to expect us to replace our products far more frequently than we used to.
—
On a lighter note, the remote for my Pioneer remote broke, and I literally can’t adjust some of my speaker settings without it, and Pioneer have taken weeks to respond to my query. It’d be ridiculous if I had to get a new sound system, and surely losing a remote isn’t some obscure scenario to these people.
Edit: to add context, my wife's 2013 MBP already needs a new battery but that's glued in and they want to charge me to replace it. It hangs off the charger all day with only short disconnects to move it around. And the space bar only works on one end.
This isn't a conspiracy. If you want a thin (and light) device, you have to make compromises. A user replaceable battery on a MacBook will add a slight amount of thickness and weight (same with soldered vs in soldered components). I totally understand if you're not a fan of it, but in that case you probably ought to buy a ThinkPad instead.
It's $129 (excluding taxes): https://support.apple.com/kb/index?page=servicefaq&geo=Unite...
Apparently 2012-gen batteries have known issues and die far sooner than they should be.
I also own a 2012 MacBook Air. In July I brought it to an Apple store just two weeks before my Apple Care support ended. I got a brand new battery for free because the three year old one had "only" 70% capacity left.
On the other hand the battery in the Dell laptop I had before got really bad after just one year, right after the one-year guarantee ended. 14 months after I bought the laptop I had to buy a new battery because the old one only lasted 10 minutes anymore.
Of those two scenarios I really prefer the Apple one. If you don't have Apple Care anymore you still don't have to bring it to a third-party shop. Apple will replace the batteries for $129 for up to 7 year old laptops: https://support.apple.com/kb/index?page=servicefaq&geo=Unite...
> Mr. Wiens is also part of a coalition pushing legislation in Minnesota, Massachusetts and New York that would require “digital electronic product” makers to provide owners and independent repair businesses with service information, security updates and replacement parts. This would, he says, increase choices and lower prices.
…is asininely stupid. In what possible world would the cost of writing, illustrating and editing service information and maintaining security updates not increase costs, which will end up being passed on to customers as part of the cost of doing business?
I'd love for equipment to be supported, but I'm not so daft as to think that means it'll be cheaper.
Heck, even mandating repairability can have costs: for one thing, it would have prevented the existence of smartphones.
Those supposed costs you talk about were already incurred. It's just a requirement that the manufacturer not just limit repairs to "factory authorized" repair centers. There's a very similar debate going on about repairability of automobiles.
I think the argument is that the possibly higher upfront costs would come with a lower total cost of ownership, since you could cheaply repair the item instead of needing to replace it.
Security updates should definitely be mandatory, even if cost increases a smidge.
Maybe they could use better security upfront if they don't want as many hotfixes...
1. The new tool should be cheaper than the one it replaces. 2. It should be at least as small in scale as the one it replaces. 3. It should do work that is clearly and demonstrably better than the one it replaces. 4. It should use less energy than the one it replaces. 5. If possible, it should use some form of solar energy, such as that of the body. 6. It should be repairable by a person of ordinary intelligence, provided that he or she has the necessary tools. 7. It should be purchasable and repairable as near to home as possible. 8. It should come from a small, privately-owned shop or store that will take it back for maintenance and repair. 9. It should not replace or disrupt anything good that already exists, and this includes family and community relationships.
This is the same issue with smartphones. Back in the day, it was easy to get your phone fixed. I ran both a Verizon and a Nextel service shop. The carriers were more than happy to provide training and access to tools and parts. For a mom and pop shop it took several hundred dollars for tools and a good starting point with parts (antennas, replacement screens, keyboards, flips, and main boards). Then you had a list of what they charged for each repair. Parts and costs and a set price for repairs.
The carriers really don't see this as a revenue driver anymore and dropped their service centers. Now you see other "unathorized" shops springing up that handle repairs these days. the problem is the cost of the parts. A display assembly for an LG2 is somewhere in the neighborhood of $75.00. Add in labor and now you're around $125-$150 to get your screen fixed. Not bad, but most people balk at those prices and simply opt to trash their phone and find something on craigslist or ebay.
Until the carriers get back involved, it's an expensive proposition (on both sides of the equation) to do phone repair.
Sometimes people will opt to replace them, especially since the G4 is out now and the G2 is 2 generations behind. But most people don't have an upgrade available right now, can't afford to live without a phone, and -- perhaps most importantly -- really like the phone they have, and the data that's stored on it.
People also hate buying on craigslist or eBay because of shoddy quality and scammers -- we've seen a ton of people get scammed with iPhones that are iCloud locked that people bought on craigslist not understanding that you can't remove an iCloud lock from a phone and it's only good for parts.
This has been my experience; we do over 100 phone repairs a week on average from a single store.
Its micro four-thirds so my next camera will be panasonic.
>I’ve heard this argument echoed elsewhere in the electronics industry. But the view is not unanimous: Dell, for one, makes repair guides and parts widely available on its site. So do H-P and Lenovo. Are we to believe that repairing a TV is so much more complicated than poking at a laptop?
Opening up a laptop and replacing a part available from the Dell online store is an entirely different scenario to fixing a burnt out TV...
Would the author be arguing the same thing if he'd tried to fix something himself and been zapped in the process?
But as i see it we already have the right to fix or own stuff. I mean the warranty will be voided... which i my mind seams fair.
I had first hand experience of that: I repaired a screen, plugged it in to check it, then unplugged it and realized I forgot to cut the ends of a capacitor. When I touched it with a metal tool (luckily, the tool was insolated), there was some serious spark, that I guessed where due to capacitor discharge. Had I used my hand, this would have gone through my skin instead.
Mainly because there isn't a Samsung online store that sells TV parts directly to users (admittedly I'm guessing here), nor did they design the TV to be fixable by semi-competent users, nor did they use interchangeable industry-standard parts, nor do they provide service manuals -- all contrary to the situations with many computers. If you want to argue that it should be this way, go ahead, but you can't merely say "computers and TVs are different", because the TV companies have made it that way by operating differently than the computer companies. A user is just as likely to zap himself on a PC as on a TV, but that didn't stop computers from being a lot more user-serviceable than TVs.
More to the point, I'm under the impression that you can seriously injure yourself by working on a television, as it has large capacitors (or something, I don't know much about hardware).
I've never heard that said about a laptop, and I have no qualms about changing parts in my computers, while I'm fairly afraid of my televisions.
But more importantly, what kind of patronizing, condescending attitude is that? "This is potentially hazardous, so we're not going to tell you how to do it"? I though most US citizens were against such nanny-state treatment? Or is this suddenly OK because it's not the government doing it, but a foreign corporation?
The kruger-Dunning crowd would just ignore all that and have a go anyway ("How hard can it be?")
From looking around trying to find what bulbs I am suppose to use I found that pretty much all manufactures seemed to use a simple lamp unit replacement. They all decided it was silly to have such an item not easily replaceable - sadly not mine (mine may well have been the first year of projection HDTVs by Toshiba maybe they took short cuts to get it ready early).
Engineering for sensible repairs is something consumers should expect. Where you draw they line is sometimes hard but some things seem obvious. And that may change over time, not having easy user replaceable batteries seems silly to me. As Apple designed every smaller items and batteries didn't need to be replaced so often making them non-easily-user replaceable became more acceptable in my opinion.
Still it would be better to design for easy and cheap maintenance if possible. Far too often it seems like products are engineered without any thought to servicing or with thinking that seems like planned obsolesces (making it intentionally hard to maintain). Though my guess is it is usually just not thinking about how to design it well for the actual customer use, not them intentionally designing it so users have to buy new ones due to specific design features and company policies shortening the useful life to customers.
But the circuits were much simpler... I understand how a rectifier works... I got no idea how a switch mode supply works. And the parts were a lot larger. And the cost per device was a lot greater, too, making paying a repair person a saner choice.
Turns out, I can order keyboard and top case for $150 from Hong Kong.
Got it, and moved all the parts from the old machine to the new one. And it took a long day. Mine is a 2012 model, and it's reasonable to perform many repairs on it, though I did need to source a few odd screwdrivers. Harbor Freight had them in one of those kits with 20 some odd bits.
Honestly, I really like this machine. I could get a new one, but I don't like the new ones as much as I like this one. The repair day was totally worth it.
Growing up, I didn't have a lot. Spend to solve a problem generally was not a viable option. Fix to solve was, and I did a lot of fixing, scrounging, combining, etc... growing up, and I'm really noticing how hostile some products are turning out to be.
Doesn't have to go this way. I know a lot of people are making a lot of money, but that's artificial value.
I hate artificial value.
If people are going to make lots of money, let them! Heck, any of us here would gladly join them, or do our own thing to get our share too. The more the merrier.
But let's make damn sure that money is made on real value, not artificial value, or we all will be losing out.
As for the actual repairability, this is something that the consumer actually gets to help decide! Unfortunately checking on the repair documentation before purchase is way way down the list. If it is something expensive and it is important to you then by all means, do the research.
I am strongly against mandating that a manufacturer provides you any information or parts that they don't want to. Let the market decide and vote with your own dollars.
There are numerous examples where intellectual property laws have been abused for this purpose.
Token encryption on most physical media means that building anything that can play that media without the appropriate licensing arrangements is illegal in many places, for example, and suitable terms may or may not be offered by the IP rightsholders. That led to dumb things like not being able to buy a DVD/Blu-ray player that would skip the pointless junk at the start and just play the movie, because no-one was legally allowed to make such a machine and compete for business with the ones everyone hates.
It also meant that when my PVR failed, the manufacturer wanted the whole box back and couldn't let me swap out the (apparently fine) hard drive with all the programmes I'd recorded (that data being the entire point of the device) because, they claimed, of some terms in their own agreement that let them manufacturer a device that could play OTA HD content.
Onboard electronic and diagnostic systems in cars is another field where manufacturers are very cosy with their franchised dealerships in a lot of countries and plenty of shady things happen to prevent otherwise perfectly competent local garages from competing for servicing and literal repair business.
Exactly none of these things are in the customer's interests, and exactly none of them have anything to do with whether a third party has the technical capabilities to produce or repair the equipment as required. It's just huge corporations and special interests abusing laws intended for very different purposes to lock up their markets against otherwise normal (and obviously likely to be successful) competition.
Holy Space Pope! Isn't that pretty much exactly what started RMS on the Free Source mission!? He wanted to repair [the code in] his printer.
If only my Kobo aura H2O had the same story. One drop on an airport floor and it's an expensive paperweight. Kobo does not repair, nor sanction repair, nor is it even really possible.
We have gone back to proprietary messaging formats. Home automation, I feel, will always be held back because everyone wants to do their own protocol. The list goes on.
There should be a push for as many open protocols as possible. Differentiate yourselves by what you DO with the open protocols.