Hacker News Reader

Comment by VogonPoetry | Hacker News Reader

Does this also mean only using "standard" parts? Or does the manufacturer have to over-produce the parts for, lets say 7 years, and then warehouse and ship those parts, probably multiple times. Or keep a low rate production line running for 7 years? What happens to the parts that don't get used? Are they scrapped?

That "what if" cost is going to be built into the cost of the laptop. Repairability doesn't always keep the cost low. The purchaser will definitely have to foot the cost otherwise it isn't sustainable.

View on HN

> Does this also mean only using "standard" parts? Or does the manufacturer have to over-produce the parts for, lets say 7 years, and then warehouse and ship those parts, probably multiple times. Or keep a low rate production line running for 7 years? What happens to the parts that don't get used? Are they scrapped?

None of that is relevant in this context: The parts are available, but the laptop is designed and built such that the alone keyboard cannot be replaced.[1]

[1] Not sure if this is possible on that specific laptop, but with a steady hand, a tiny drill, maybe a magnifiying glass too, you can maybe drill out the rivets, then replace the keyboard, then either re-rivet it back again or tap very tiny thread into the laptop and use screws.

The laptop is deffinitely designed in a way that the keyboard is extremely hard to replace. Took me like 5 hours across 2 days. Rivets are not even the worst part, I used tiny drill and carefully glued in the replacement keyboard using phone screen glue (B7000) between the keys. (glue needs to go both on the frame and on the keyboard as there is a gap that needs to be bridged) Since there are screws along 3 of its edges, I deemed it good enough. drilling and tapping or riveting would have been extra painful.

What makes the repair more complicated is that 1) you need to take out basically everything to get to the keyboard. There are many different screws, luckily ifixit has a disassembly guides with their sizes. Still it was a bit painful to reassemble. 2) One of the things you need to take out or at least lift is the glued in battery - this took a lot of careful prying with thin plastic sheet and dousing it in ipa. 3) backlight is glued on to the case in an extremely fragile way, so it needs to be replaced with the keyboard or will probably look uneven after repair. (i reused the old one as I don't mind it but still, it could just have been glued to the keyboard itself and it would be easier to repair.

Repairability definitely doesn't keep the costs low. If it was cheaper and easier, it wouldn't have to be regulated. As for supply chain management, companies that get that equation correct are going to benefit. Which is exactly how it should be.

We define the rules of the game and companies that can best implement those rules will succeed. That is capitalism.

It won’t self resolve because consumers don’t fully factor in every detail while buying, and they often don’t get such granular choice anyway.

It’s easier and more profitable for companies to make a product that catastrophically fails around about when the new model is out. So that’s what they do. Until just now when the EU is reeling them back in line.

> Does this also mean only using "standard" parts? Or does the manufacturer have to over-produce the parts for, lets say 7 years

Why not? I don't understand how it's legal for manufacturers to produce absolute trash that can't be replaced and will just end up in a landfill. I think 7 years is far from enough, but because computers evolve quickly maybe 15 years is ok. For the rest of electro-mechanical goods, 50 years should be the baseline.

If a car or fridge from 50 years ago is still working with proper maintenance, that should be the minimum to be expected from products released today.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com