Most companies do a simple board swap for the customer, but then send the faulty boards back to the factory to be 'refurbished' - ie. run through the automated test rig and check every function is fully working.

By doing that, an unnecessary board swap is 'free' to the manufacturer - which makes diagnosing problems in the store far easier - just keep swapping parts till the issue is resolved.

When those boards end up back at the factory, they'll pass the test immediately and be able to be sent right out again for another repair.

For boards that don't pass the test, sort them by the failure symptoms and suddenly repair becomes far easier - "these 50 need a new power supply IC, pay someone $25/hour on the rework station to do that, costing $3/board labour and $3/board in components".

I didn't argue that to shame on Apple. I can understand why that is done ( especially with warranty extensions )

What I am arguing is that there may be a much cheaper ("easier" for the person who knows what to do) way to repair it if you don't care about the warranty but that path can currently be blocked by the manufacturer.

For example: We had a deadline for submitting our final game build last year and my laptop where I had everything setup died a day before the deadline. I went to a local electronics shop, bought a different laptop, removed the SSD from the broken one put it in the new one and was backup and running 30 minutes after returning home.

I would not have cared about warranty there, only about the speed of getting back up and running to meet the deadline.

They're not just videos "about repairing". He's teaching people about defects, finding them, and how to repair them. He's selling tools used for repairs, even though someone can start a competing business. It's like you're being sceptical of teachers because they're getting paid.

Why do you think he set up repair.wiki? It's a free resource he started to provide diagnostic and repair guides for a wide range of electronics. He's very transparent about wanting people to be able to repair their own devices and his actions clearly back that up.

These are not the actions of someone being protective of their skills to make more money imo.

Can't both things be true at the same time?

* He is fighting an honest fight for the right to repair

* His business is benefiting from right to repair laws

For example when he supported the right to repair for farming equipment, I hardly believe he did that for his repair shop bottom line

> I think the internet has broken people’s brains.

I agree, but what I see as a result is this paranoia that there's a conspiracy and something sinister in absolutely everything.