6 ms·
> I can't get behind what you're saying but I am curious to hear your take. Why do you think right to repair "won't ever work"? hnaccount_rng has already raise
by negative_zero 2y ago
> I can't get behind what you're saying but I am curious to hear your take. Why do you think right to repair "won't ever work"?
hnaccount_rng has already raised good points. I will add to them:
1) Working in product compliance I have learned: The simpler the rules, the harder it is to avoid them/weasel them. "Right to repair" rules will ALWAYS be more complicated than a simple "good" warranty. You are essentially legislating how to design products which has an infinite solution space. AND what do you legislate? "It has to be repairable". What is that?
- What skill level of the technician is required? What is the maximum time that they are allowed to spend to deem it "repairable"? (given enough time and skill you can repair almost anything). How we do verify that? Do they need a certification now? Who sets the requirements for that? Who does the testing? Or should the consumer be able to fix it? What tools are allowed or not allowed? Are custom tools allowed? Do I now have to manufacture them and sell those? (cause we use lots of bespoke tools). Now I have to inventory those items, that's going to cost.
- Are mechanical jigs (which are ubiquitous and very expensive and normally bespoke for manufacturing or repairs) allowed? How complicated can they be? Say they are allowed, how does the technician use it? Do I now have to manufacturer it and make is saleable? How much can it cost? (they can easily cost tens of thousands). Can I just lend said jig? For how long? Who insures it when it is in transit? How many jigs must I have in circulation at any time so that repairs are conducted fast enough?
- Can I not use glue anymore? Or only certain types? Say you legislate types that are easy to remove or desolve, ok well their mechanical properties suck and the device will be crappier now.
- How long does this need to be repairable? The reality these days is that a lot of PCBs are cheaper and/or easier to just scrap and replace ... so do I now have to keep repair stock? How much? For how long? What if I run out? Am I now obligated to spin up a 1 million dollar production line to make a few very uneconomic spares?
I could go on ALL day.
How do you legislate all of that? Cause the parts that don't now have to go through the courts. Now it's just a big steaming mess that doesn't work AND it's complicated AND you have many smart engineers, who just want to get paid and go home and smart lawyers to circumvent it.
2) I know this might be very unpopular to say on HN, but the reality is that MOST (not all) of what companies do that makes things "unrepairable" is mainly because it's a) cheaper or b) securing the supply chain against counterfeiters because counterfeits devalue your brand and also you don't want to be on the hook for repairing really good counterfeits (and I have personally experienced the latter).
3) The "good warranty" solution is utilising an internal manufacturer calculus that already exists. Right now it is "tuned" to if US market => it only has to last a year + 1 day. Then "not our problem". In a "hand wavy based on experienced way" it's easier to get change by just shifting the goal posts (longer warranty).
4) I applaud you on fixing the items yourself but while it was fine for you, the quality probably wouldn't have passed on my production line. I have also observed many of those little phone repair shops do work and every single one I would have booted off my line. I am yet to see a single one of them use proper ESD protection (in any modern factory you are not even allowed inside without ESD gear). Sure they fixed it for you, but some other customers phone is now a walking wounded. I guarantee it.
I found this article very illustrative about just how clueless, many people, even "right to repair" proponents are about the systems that they are trying to regulate:
https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/21/23079058/apple-self-service-iphone-repair-kit-hands-on https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/21/23079058/apple-self-servi...
Yes, that jig Apple supplied, that's what it takes these days. Modern production and repair lines are soooo tuned for efficiency it's insane. That tuning introduces complexity which then goes through the roof for repairing stuff outside of said line. It's why often it's cheaper and quicker to throw parts out and replace it. We've gotten THAT good.
Finally, I actually think it is actually rather insulting how many people believe that fixing something like a phone PROPERLY is "not that hard" and "any tech can do it". I see these comments as demeaning and insulting to the experienced people working on these production and repair lines who are often underpaid and treated very poorly.
5) Right to repair will not solve e-waste. My opinion is it won't make much of a dent. E-waste is a separate issue that absolutely also needs to be tackled by compulsory recycling. And actually, in the case of phones and many other consumer electronics, making them "repairable" can mean more resources being used. People (especially on HN) bemoan glue being used. Modern glues are great. They're used because they speed up assembly, are fairly easy to apply and make stuff thinner and mechanically simpler. Say you ban glue as a part of Right to repair legislation, I guarantee the screws and extra plastic you need instead use more material and have more embodied energy. You've actually now increased the amount of e-waste.
Finally, I think fundamentally, rather than being repairable, I think most people just want these devices to last longer (so again just force that through long warranties). And it can be done. I have personally worked on products with a 10 year "official" warranty and a "quiet internal" 20 year one. It wasn't an exotic product or industry either. In my opinion, repairing a thing is the ambulance at the bottom of the hill, it should not have broken in the first place. Why mandate the ambulance in all cases when you can mandate the minimisation of pushing stuff off the cliff instead?
- kurito 2y agoThank you for taking the time to write all this, it's very informative. It sounds messy, but then again I can't help but feel that every single point you mentioned is quite complex because we managed to reach a point in time where a device designed with repairability first, seems such a farcical concept. We might have become really precise with manufacturing, and produced beautifully thin and solid devices. But the fact that Apple needs to ship a 79-pound/36kg repair kit just to change the battery of a phone, doesn't really demostrate how clueless people are about the repair process, on the contrary it demonstrates the absurd lengths Apple is willing to go just to mock open access to tools, parts and processes. Regarding longer warranties, that would be an excellent step, but warranties won't solve the same problems, as they will never cover user caused damage which I'm guessing is the cause for most repairs. What if we started with the obligation of the manufacturer to provide access to reasonably priced parts along with schematics, without altering their manufacturing process? Would that be an acceptable first step towards making repairs more accessible?
- burnerthrow008 2y ago> on the contrary it demonstrates the absurd lengths Apple is willing to go just to mock open access to tools, parts and processes. Emphasis added. I think the absurd metal gymnastics HN'ers are willing to go through to justify things they don't understand is just... I can't even.
- seec 2y agoYou seem to be the naivest one here, talking the bullshit Apple feeds you, when all that's required to remove the battery is a hairdryer, some prying tools and a bit of skills. They actually are mocking the whole thing by pretending their bizarre contraption is needed, when many have tried and showed first hand it was faster to do it the "old" way. The fact that you don't see that makes your opinion rather unsavory. But you do you I guess.
- negative_zero 2y ago> Thank you for taking the time to write all this, it's very informative. No problem :) I take the issue with short life products and e-waste very seriously and have given it much thought. > It sounds messy, but then again I can't help but feel that every single point you mentioned is quite complex because we managed to reach a point in time where a device designed with repairability first, seems such a farcical concept. I think we are also just at a natural point in technology where it is just hard to repair some of these things. Either we eschew these new technologies completely and loose their benefits to keep repairability, or accept that a lot of it isn't just repairable and we need: 1) Strong laws to protect the consumers investment in devices 2) Properly fund research into e-waste recycling 3) Mandate e-waste recycling and support specialist waste companies to do that. We're literally counting atoms worth of materials to cut costs, reduce sizes and increase performance. > We might have become really precise with manufacturing, and produced beautifully thin and solid devices. But the fact that Apple needs to ship a 79-pound/36kg repair kit just to change the battery of a phone, doesn't really demostrate how clueless people are about the repair process, on the contrary it demonstrates the absurd lengths Apple is willing to go just to mock open access to tools, parts and processes. But this is my point. I don't think Apple was being absurd. This is just want it takes these days and almost all people don't appreciate that a jig like that is what it takes. And it's not even all that complex or expensive compared to jigs I have worked on. Even many hardware engineers don't have a full grasp. Many these days have never been on a CM floor because a lot of it is abstracted away for them. And/Or they have never really talked to the mechanical engineers making jigs etc. because of internal company siloing. > Regarding longer warranties, that would be an excellent step, but warranties won't solve the same problems, as they will never cover user caused damage which I'm guessing is the cause for most repairs. This is a good point and my best idea for that is that, as apart of the warranty, the consumer gets one free/cost at percentage of purchase price (maybe 30%), no questions asked repair/replace for accidental damage. Simple, it's the manufacturers problem and they'll work out that optimum point between: make it more rugged for drops vs not rugged enough for surviving being run over by a car. (We already have standards for drops, water etc. They'll just get made more robust). > What if we started with the obligation of the manufacturer to provide access to reasonably priced parts along with schematics, without altering their manufacturing process? Would that be an acceptable first step towards making repairs more accessible? I have a very long, 2 part post, (sorry) to a another commenter which I think addresses this. Edits: formatting