Hacker News Reader

It would be like when the capacitor blew on my A/C condenser if I would be forced to replace the whole unit instead of the $10 part.

It’s important that people know if they are getting 3rd party or refurbished parts, but it’s equally important for people to have the right to use 3rd party and refurbished parts if they so choose — with the only restriction of having the necessary safety/compliance markings.

That's not analogous at all. Apple is not stopping people from repairing their devices with 3rd party or refurbished parts. The parts in the OP article were branded as Apple parts (logo and everything) but were not actual Apple parts. That's why Apple is asking for receipts and purchase orders. They want the guy to prove that he's buying the parts from them if he's telling customers that they're genuine Apple parts.

The amount of misinformation around here is staggering...

That wasn't my understanding from reading the article... I read it to mean that they were refurbished Apple parts, but not refurbished by Apple. A screen assembled by a third party consisting of some parts made by Apple with the Apple logo, but the assembly of the completed part was not done by Apple. But TFA is really not clear at all on this point.

My capacitor analogy was more to the point of Apple being against microsoldering repairs where individual components are replaced instead of the entire board.

Yeah... I understood the analogy but I just think it's inaccurate because Apple doesn't have that policy out of some kind of nefarious reasons. They do it that way because micro soldering repairs in-store would take far long and are probably not worth the effort. A customer would much rather get their phone or computer swapped out or repaired in 20 minutes than have to leave it for days on end while it's re-soldered and individual components are on order. Since Apple can do that all off-site, there's not really a benefit. The comment about waste isn't correct either since Apple recycles most of that stuff.

I have another not-very-green issue: my iPhone lightning port is wearing out. Apple will not repair it in their own shops. At least they don’t seem to try to prevent third parties from doing it.

This is especially surprising given the unusual design of the Lightning port. Most ports (e.g. all USB variants) put the parts that are likely to wear out in the cable. Lightning has them in the jack, which is why the cable is so pretty. But for some reason Apple thinks it’s reasonable for the jack to be officially non-replaceable.

Actually the mini-USB put the parts that were likely to wear in the plug...

That’s why mini USB is now almost extinct, replaced with micro USB (and now Type C?) which doesn’t make that mistake.

IIRC type C is even rated for 10k cycles. Other than some serious charging screwups and a generally overcomplicated design, it’s quite well engineered.

So, I thought my port was wearing out as well, and got very upset. What I found, however, was just that pocket lint had gotten jammed in there and compacted down over and over through the years, such that the cable didn't fit snugly any more.

I fixed this just by using a plastic flosser to pick the lint out (you could use a paper clip, but I opted for the somewhat-softer plastic), then some canned air to get rid of the remaining bits.

Went from "oh god, I gotta go to the Apple store" to connecting with a SNAP again, with a seal tight enough to support the phone's entire weight.

I hope that this is just your issue, because it's very easy to fix, even if diagnosing it is a bit tricky.

This only works for a couple of years; eventually, the pocket lint permanently reduces the springiness of the contacts, such that the cable is "loose" in the socket, and the connection can therefore be lost by shifting the position of the phone.

Fortunately, it's a simple (if tedious) fix with a $15 part.

Yep. The Apple store even kindly cleaned my port for me, and it helped a bit. But they still flat-out refuse to do the repair.

I think you are misrepresenting dpkonofa's position. I believe his position is that Apple shouldn't be forced to assist with your repairs by producing manuals and parts. That isn't the same as "why don't they just become Apple authorized repair shops?"

Thank you. I'm being downvoted left and right here because people are arguing a straw man of what I'm actually saying.

>resulting in much higher costs and eWaste for customers.

This isn't true or accurate. The costs of this service are lower, overall because the rate of repairs are faster which means more customers can have working devices faster which means that Apple can (and does) take time on the backend to remanufacture and certify parts. They don't throw out these components. They're taken apart, tested, and, if they pass, they're used to remanufacture devices for warranty and insurance purposes that are then sold to phone insurance carriers and given to warranty customers.

The idea that they are restricting repairs for any reason other than the fact that it's a better experience for the end-user is complete FUD.

I would take anything Rossman says with a grain of salt, he clearly has a personal vendetta against Apple. Further, Apple products are almost entirely recyclable, up to and including the packaging. As long as they are properly disposed of, you wouldn't be producing additional waste.

And you are assuming that "flash" and "sexy" serve a single, vapid purpose. The designs of their products are as compact and space efficient as possible because weight, battery size, and thermals all play a factor in the quality of a product.

You can shit on them all you want but no company comes close to Apple in quality, and I don't see anyone complaining about the right to repair ultrabooks, or pixelbooks.

>As long as they are properly disposed of, you wouldn't be producing additional waste.

I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. You'd have to take into account the cost of sourcing raw materials for a replacement machine, right? I've heard anecdotes about how buying a used gas-burning car is actually less detrimental to the environment than buying a new EV; this strikes me as a similar situation.

buying a used gas-burning car is actually less detrimental to the environment than buying a new EV

I think that's only true if that gas burning car was going to be destroyed if you didn't buy it. Someone will buy it, maybe someone that's replacing their older less efficient car. And by buying the more expensive EV, your demand is helping to increase volume and lower costs of EV's.

No, even driving 200miles a day, for 15 years in a 1978 suburban with bad rings is less poluting than producing a single eCar.

The air quality in the 70s would disagree with you. Sunsets are not supposed to be orange, and the sky is not supposed to be brown.

Source?

https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life...

Manufacturing a mid-sized EV with an 84-mile range results in about 15 percent more emissions than manufacturing an equivalent gasoline vehicle. For larger, longer-range EVs that travel more than 250 miles per charge, the manufacturing emissions can be as much as 68 percent higher.

These differences change as soon as the cars are driven. EVs are powered by electricity, which is generally a cleaner energy source than gasoline. Battery electric cars make up for their higher manufacturing emissions within eighteen months of driving—shorter range models can offset the extra emissions within 6 months—and continue to outperform gasoline cars until the end of their lives.

Louis Rossmann, Jessa Jones, these are all people I'm aware of at least on YouTube that are people who truly care about teaching the public how to do a lot of their own repairs.

I can tell you, I'm a software guy. And I was absolutely intimidated by circuit boards, until I found the world of electronics repairs on Youtube (EEVBlog too). Now I have fixed two power supplies and a pair of headphones. In all those cases, I was able to get parts easily from third parties (and for my headphones, I got cheap replacement parts from AudioTechnica themselves).

I am delighted to have rediscovered this part of my skills that I lost in my teens when I fell in love with software development.

Yet I still can't get a genuine apple battery to replace on my phone. I've successfully replaced batteries on about 5 iPhones now, but they were all shady battery replacements on Amazon. Frankly I'm just annoyed that Apple doesn't make these parts available.

Look at the backlog for battery replacements now. If you get it from Apple, there is now a monthslong wait-list at the genius bar because they've created their own bottleneck.

>are people who truly care about teaching the public how to do a lot of their own repairs

Rossmann makes money off of his businesses that repair computer products, Apple or otherwise. He stands to gain a lot based on the popularity of his channel whether he's telling people the truth or not. He's not in it to help people, he's in it to drum up business. If he helps people along the way, then that's great.

Case in point - he made a whole video about how shitty the new MacBooks are and claimed that plugging a USB device into the USB-C port disabled WiFi. He pushed that point and tweeted about it and posted it everywhere. When it was discovered that it wasn't the computer but the cheap $5 USB-C to USB-A converter that he was using that was unshielded (which is required by the USB spec), he never issued a retraction or an apology. All he wanted was to get in on the fervor surrounding the newly released laptops. He doesn't give 2 shits about whether or not he's teaching people factual information. What really sucks about it, much like the whole "Right to Repair" movement, is that it takes away substantially from the issues and points he brings up that are completely valid.

Louis Rossmann, who openly admitted to using illegally obtained schematics and internal documents from Apple? I wouldn't be throwing that name around as a talking point at all in this discussion.

The reason why Apple doesn't want any Joe-schmoe just yanking and replacing caps and other components is simple: quality control. I can barely count on two hands people I would be comfortable working on the innards of a PC, let alone my phone and even then let alone desoldering and soldering new components onboard.

Apple isn't doing this because they don't want people to repair their stuff, but because for most consumers it isn't feasible without ruining the rest of the product. These are small, compact, and complicated devices. It's not like swapping out some RAM or a GPU on a desktop rig at all.

So yes, replace the whole board and recycle the old (as Apple does with most of their parts).

> Louis Rossmann, who openly admitted to using illegally obtained schematics and internal documents from Apple?

Are you seriously trying to discredit a man for doing exactly what he's fighting for?

It's like trying to discredit a politician that's pushing for the abolition of jaywalking by saying that he jay walks himself. No shit - that's the whole point.

I'll repost the same thing here, since apparently this is confusing to some HN users this morning:

> So you're discounting someone's opinion because they were forced to use unauthorized repair manuals because the manufacturer stopped producing repair manuals for devices customers have paid for?

Yes, because it's a legal case we are discussing here and that's called "breaking the law". Failing to understand that means I cannot discuss this article with you at all since a really important common understanding has been missed on your part.

"I'm sorry, I can't discuss this case with you because you won't sit at the back of the bus, like the law says" --You 60 years ago

>The reason why Apple doesn't want any Joe-schmoe just yanking and replacing caps and other components is simple: quality control. I can barely count on two hands people I would be comfortable working on the innards of a PC, let alone my phone and even then let alone desoldering and soldering new components onboard.

And yet people are perfectly OK with a greasy mechanic fixing their metal cage hurtling down the freeway at 65 miles per hour. Your attempt to demean skilled repair workers is rather telling of your own bias.

Quality control only happens on premises you control. Once the product reaches the point-of-sale terminal, the consumer own it, and the QC job is done. You send your product out onto the free market and have to hope you raised it well enough to uphold your brand.

It isn't about QC; it's about money. It's the same reason every car dealership has an in-house repair department. Branded repairs mean that people can still buy the brand after they already own the product. Counterfeits cut into that revenue stream.

> Louis Rossmann, who openly admitted to using illegally obtained schematics and internal documents from Apple? I wouldn't be throwing that name around as a talking point at all in this discussion.

So you're discounting someone's opinion because they were forced to use unauthorized repair manuals since the manufacturer stopped producing repair manuals for devices customers have paid for? That's the whole crux of the issue, that people have lost the "right to repair" their own devices due to suppressing information, suppressing reverse engineering efforts, and suppressing compatible replacement components (and software).

Effectively you're saying that if someone supports and tries to uphold the "right to repair" their opinions should be ignored because they did something a large corporation told them not to.

> Apple isn't doing this because they don't want people to repair their stuff

See, I thought it was financially motivated.

> but because for most consumers it isn't feasible without ruining the rest of the product.

Someone has a broken device, they shouldn't be allowed to try and repair it themselves because they could make it worse? In either case they have a broken device. And Apple is well within their rights to refuse a repair after someone has tried a DIY repair, but often that isn't a financial possibility which is why a DIY repair was tried to begin with.

You don't have to go far to find an anecdote of someone who took an older Macbook into an Apple store and the repair cost was nearly as high as a replacement cost.

> So you're discounting someone's opinion because they were forced to use unauthorized repair manuals because the manufacturer stopped producing repair manuals for devices customers have paid for?

Yes, because it's a legal case we are discussing here and that's called "breaking the law". Failing to understand that means I cannot discuss this article with you at all since a really important common understanding has been missed on your part.

> that's called "breaking the law"

Right, which is why people are advocating getting the law changed, because they believe the practical outcome of law as it current exists is not just (nor economically efficient, for that matter).

> Yes, because it's a legal case we are discussing here and that's called "breaking the law".

It is an issue for society at large, fair use should include repair materials, and if you look at judgements from vehicles and farm equipment cases you'll see that the legal side isn't clear cut anyway.

Not least of all because you're conflating OWNING stolen materials and REDISTRIBUTING them. Copyright largely covers the latter and not the former. In this case they're simply owning a "stolen" document and using the knowledge from it, which isn't within itself a copyright infringement or illegal.

Unless you can explain how simply owning a stolen document is "breaking the law." Which law?

> Failing to understand that means I cannot discuss this article with you at all since a really important common understanding has been missed on your part.

You don't wish to discuss it because it challenges your whole viewpoint. Which is in essence that Apple's rights extend into a device they sold to a user, and that a user shouldn't be legally allowed to "tamper" with their own property.

> Yes, because it's a legal case we are discussing here and that's called "breaking the law".

Even if this is true, the law isn’t some divine fiat. Some laws are dumb and it is proper and patriotic to point it out and criticize. Just because something might be against the law doesn’t make it wrong. Your argument is the shallowest sort of moral argument, that things should be done a certain way just because that’s how they’re done.

Please don't cross into personal swipes. If you can't discuss something, it suffices not to discuss it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

If his facts are correct, it's irrelevant that he also broke the law. Facts are facts.

>manufacturer stopped producing repair manuals for devices customers have paid for

Why is a manufacturer in any way obligated to provide this information for customers (and for free, no less)? Apple is not stopping him from taking apart these devices and figuring out how to repair them but I don't see why they should shoulder any obligation to provide that information to people that refuse to become an authorized repair center (which is exactly what that authorization and certification gets them).

>Someone has a broken device, they shouldn't be allowed to try and repair it themselves

This is not at all the point of contention nor in any way what Apple is doing here. Stop spreading FUD.

> The reason why Apple doesn't want any Joe-schmoe just yanking and replacing caps and other components is simple: quality control

Right, and the entire discussion is that Apple's right to quality control has overreached to the point that it is now impinging upon the common sense right of someone to be able try to fix something that they own when it breaks.

How so? Apple isn't stopping anyone from being able to try and fix something that they own. The only action they've taken is against companies claiming that they're an Apple authorized repair center when they're not.

About counting people thing: your frame of reference is probably too narrow?

Come to thing of it, I personally don't know ten people capable of doing state of the art SMD repairs but I'm sure there are many more than that in _my town_.