Hacker News Reader

Comment by specialist | Hacker News Reader

OEMs must be required to provide all parts at cost plus s/h. And misc docs for free.

I totally get that Apple is constantly under seige from scammers, knockoffs, etc. Not my problem.

Further, setting up official spares channel would likely resolve 90% of fraud by fullfilling a definite need. No diff than acceptible streaming moots most demand for pirating.

Lastly, I'm fine with self repair requiring an official factory reset, or whatever, for stuff dependent on the secure enclave. Like rebinding FaceID to a new camera/display assembly. A fair tradeoff between security and convenience. So I can repair my phone now, suffer with entering PIN, and then make a quick stop at a Genius Bar later, at my leisure, to reenable FaceID. With so many third parties trying to pwn Apple gear, I totally grok this precaution.

View on HN

> Further, setting up official spares channel would likely resolve 90% of fraud by fullfilling a definite need. No diff than acceptible streaming moots most demand for pirating.

It will curb the problem certainly, but I think 90% is a bit optimistic. More people than you think would elect to buy the cheapest part they can find, regardless of quality. It’s why those dangerous dirt cheap chargers sold at gas stations, Aliexpress, Wish, etc that lack safety circuitry continue to sell in large quantities.

Electronic replacement parts should be much more tightly regulated so that the worst junk can’t even be imported. I think it’s fine that third parties make replacement parts, but there should be a minimum bar of quality they’re held to.

If you could get all parts at cost couldn't you build your own iPhone for less than the price of an iPhone?

Cost includes the overhead of packaging, inventory, returns, etc. So it'd generally be cheaper to buy a complete assembled unit retail.

Trying to think of exceptions... Can't think of any. Maybe the Sears & Robuck kit houses?

My father bought us a kit computer. An off the shlef equiv unit would have been cheaper. We paid extra for the priviledge of self assembly.

Maintaining inventory makes “cost” a weird concept. And I can’t think of any regulation requiring anyone to provide something at “cost” that works well.

If they're able to maintain inventory on all of their current products I think they can probably maintain inventory on parts for them.

Of course they can, the person above was alluding to the fact that keeping an inventory of parts often costs more than the parts themselves.

A lot of their “inventory” is “ship it right after manufacture directly to the customer”.

No other company provides replacement parts at cost.

Outrageous, isn't it? Why do auto manufacturers, to pick a villan, treat their spares as a profit center?

I'm for any measure that pushes back on planned obsolenscence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com