Hacker News Reader

Comment by dann0 | Hacker News Reader

This anti-Apple commentary is getting boring. We don’t have all the information and we definitely can’t guess Apple’s motivations. They definitely aren’t focused exclusively on maximising profits: they already have all the money, and they make plenty of things that don’t start life as a cash cow (Apple TV, AirTags, even iPads for a while).

If you don’t like Apple’s approach, use one of the other brands instead. The problem is no other mainstream manufacturers can be trusted to provide a device as secure and private as Apple’s.

I am a strong supporter of the right to repair, and it informs my decisions, but in many cases, I am willing to pay a premium for known, trusted and secure platform with hardened components from a trusted and secure supply chain. That includes the labour of installing those parts. There are cheaper options around if that isn’t important to me.

View on HN

> I am a strong supporter of the right to repair, and it informs my decisions, but in many cases, I am willing to pay a premium for known, trusted and secure platform with hardened components from a trusted and secure supply chain. That includes the labour of installing those parts. There are cheaper options around if that isn’t important to me.

IMO, that's the same sentiment that comes up in the app store tax threads. Some Apple users say they're willing to pay more, but the reality is they're being subsidized by the users that don't need or want those features.

In the case of device repair, I don't see an issue with locking the phone as perfectly as possible from the factory, but once I buy it and own it I should have the option of putting it into some type of repair mode where I accept the risk of having it repaired with 3rd party parts.

If you want to pay 2x or 3x or whatever's needed to make up the difference that's fine by me. Just don't make me participate in that system because I don't need it.

> If you don’t like Apple’s approach, use one of the other brands instead.

There's not a manufacturer in the solar system that's going to forgo the use of parts serialization unless it gets prohibited with legislation. The money to be made by locking out competition is too appealing.

> IMO, that's the same sentiment that comes up in the app store tax threads. Some Apple users say they're willing to pay more, but the reality is they're being subsidized by the users that don't need or want those features.

Well, true, but I have no influence on other consumers decisions, but they obviously see value in the overall proposition. I don’t demand a price reduction from my ISP because I don’t use torrents or tor.

If you don’t see the total value in Apple’s offer, buy something else.

> If you want to pay 2x or 3x or whatever's needed to make up the difference that's fine by me. Just don't make me participate in that system because I don't need it.

Buy a different brand, then.

I do agree that it’s very desirable to be able to simply and cheaply replace broken components. It intensely annoys me too, but, for me, it’s ok (not great) given the overall proposition, to ensure end to end security.

I replaced a screen, parts and labour, on my phone this week for AUD$45 with Apple Care. Can anyone else do that for $15 or $25 as you suggest?

I don’t see the other manufacturers being significantly better in this regard.

The big opportunity for Apple, in my opinion, is to figure out a more compelling recycling program.

> There's not a manufacturer in the solar system that's going to forgo the use of parts serialization unless it gets prohibited with legislation. The money to be made by locking out competition is too appealing.

Our points are the same, but one never hears this level of criticism directed at Samsung or Google. Are they any better? Maybe in a few different ways, but not as a whole.

But pretending that Apple is somehow the worst, when they are categorically far from it, is just disingenuous and frankly boring.

> But pretending that Apple is somehow the worst, when they are categorically far from it, is just disingenuous and frankly boring.

Apple is pioneering an extremely anti-consumer system and once they prove it'll be tolerated (and extremely profitable), every other manufacturer will do the same, so I don't think it's completely unfair to paint them as being one of the worst participants in the idea.

I definitely don't think Samsung or Google are better. They're the same and they'll participate in the same type of schemes.

The problem that I have is that everyone is going to do this. We'll have artificially restricted supply on everything we buy and the total cost of ownership will increase accordingly. I don't want that system, but I'm going to be forced into it because not enough people can understand the long term, negative consequences for the average person.

> Buy a different brand, then.

I do. I've always bought LG phones after they've been on the market long enough to be discounted. I try to get them for $300 or less and my cost average on phones for the last 6-8 years has been about $100 per year. I also pay $<20 per month for a phone plan that only includes 1GB of rate limited data and I limit my usage to important things like tethering my laptop for RDP.

It's easy to use "vote with your wallet" as a response to criticism, but some of us actually do. I do it because I can see a terrible future where parts serialization, planned obsolescence, and subscription repair plans foster an era of non-ownership. If we let it happen it's going to be nasty and anyone who's not rich is going to suffer pretty badly IMO.

I'm already paying 2x what you pay for an android phone by buying an iphone.

So, why do you care what I pay for a phone or even what Apple is offering?

Makes no sense. You’ve made a decision based on what’s important to you. I’ve done the same. Why do you think you’re more right than me?!

>They definitely aren’t focused exclusively on maximising profits: they already have all the money, and they make plenty of things that don’t start life as a cash cow (Apple TV, AirTags, even iPads for a while).

Which part of Apple TV, AirTags, or even iPad were not profitable from the start? Even assuming you mean AirPod instead of iPad.

While I dont disagree ( or agree ) whether Apple make these decisions on security or repair priority. Apple under Tim Cook have been very much a maximising profits company. Every single step, big or small he has been extremely cautious of revenue and profits compared to Steve Jobs. And the reason why Apple has managed to give precise forecast every quarter.

Absolutely seconded. While I understand the reaction that many people here have to these sorts of things, in the end it is Apple's product and nothing forces you to buy it.

People shill alternatives all the time here, why not do it in these sorts of discussions too.

>The problem is no other mainstream manufacturers can be trusted to provide a device as secure and private as Apple’s.

As much as I hate to admit it this is pretty much true, and extends beyond just security and privacy for me, having an actually reliable (and power user friendly) ecosystem to dump my tech needs into has been a godsend.

> in the end it is Apple's product and nothing forces you to buy it.

Nothing except the lack of choice in the duopoly world, where Google is even worse.

I'd venture to say most consumers won't know of this new limitation if previous to now they have used 3rd party repair shops. Does anyone know how much an "authorized" screen repair costs vs. an "unauthorized" one previous to this model?

out-of-warranty Apple Store (and AASP, presumably) screen repairs are pretty expensive[0], although I can't find anything that lists the hardware cost of getting a replacement screen for repair (probably because that requires an AASP to defect and leak it, risking their AASP status).

0: https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/service/screen-repla...

The problem is that we don't have much choice brand-wise. We get to pick Apple or Android. From a security/privacy perspective, the various Android brands are more or less the same (or, more accurately, the best of them are still likely much worse than Apple, and the worst of them are likely backdoored by the manufacturer or the government where it's manufactured).

Capitalism and the mythical free market have given us two choices, each with very big negatives. I don't want either. I want a phone that respects and fights for my privacy and security, and is relatively easy and cheap to repair, and allows me control over what I run on it.

(And I don't consider platforms like the PinePhone to be choices here. I want contactless payments on my phone, as well as Venmo/Cash App. I want my banking and airline/travel apps. I want Signal, Slack, Whatsapp. I want the app for my local gym. These things either don't run on other platforms, or provide a janky mobile web experience.)

> The problem is that we don't have much choice brand-wise. We get to pick Apple or Android. From a security/privacy perspective, the various Android brands are more or less the same (or, more accurately, the best of them are still likely much worse than Apple, and the worst of them are likely backdoored by the manufacturer or the government where it's manufactured).

Completely agree. But this is always argued as it being Apple’s fault and not a market failure. Why don’t the supposedly better options ever gain enough share to be important?

> Capitalism and the mythical free market have given us two choices, each with very big negatives. I don't want either. I want a phone that respects and fights for my privacy and security, and is relatively easy and cheap to repair, and allows me control over what I run on it.

I mostly agree, but this isn’t an option we have. Again, is this Apple’s fault?

> (And I don't consider platforms like the PinePhone to be choices here. I want contactless payments on my phone, as well as Venmo/Cash App. I want my banking and airline/travel apps. I want Signal, Slack, Whatsapp. I want the app for my local gym. These things either don't run on other platforms, or provide a janky mobile web experience.)

Exactly. One doesn’t usually buy a thing based purely on one feature. All design has compromises, and we pick the most suitable from a limited set.

Could this be argued as Apple simply further "securing their supply chain" or locking out substitutions of aftermarket parts?

Yes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com