If you're skeptical of this very banal notion than you are likely not qualified to be doing whatever work you're doing. Yes, tons of technology is needlessly complicated and the salesmen and their compatriots in the "no user serviceable parts inside" sticker division have spent a lot of time and effort to convince people that the inside of electronic devices is sacrosanct; however that has led to an IMHO dangerous notion that every instance of someone saying "hey, you really shouldn't take this apart on your home bench" is regarded with suspicion, or some notion of "they just want you to buy a new one!" and not that, sometimes things break and if they're designed well, they may well have a failure mode that prevents a much worse failure mode.

And it might be expertise that's the dividing line, but it could just as easily be a matter of the material itself: that sometimes, what's in there is pretty fucking dangerous actually and shouldn't be messed with by just any old guy, even a technical guy, who has a YouTube tutorial. It might be that the parts inside failed for a reason and replacing them, while it makes whatever thing work again, might not actually be a great idea depending on why the original ones failed and that if you don't know the answer to that question, blindly putting them back might be setting you up for something disastrous.

I'm 100% a believer in the right to repair, but I do not mean for that always to be myself. On the rare occasion I take something apart with lithium cells inside (which I avoid at all costs!), I handle them like live grenades and either re-connect them to whatever managing circuitry or, if whatever it is is beyond fixing, disposing of them safely. I don't do this because I don't understand them: I know intimately how they work. I do this because I understand them and respect the danger they pose, not unlike firearms or the parts of my car that I know I don't know enough and am not qualified to fix.

Being intelligent is, IMO, oftentimes more about knowing what you don't know and respecting that than knowing what you know.

And, as an aside just because it's related to this point I've articulated: do not take apart lithium batteries in an apartment. I don't give a shit what your qualifications are or how good your risk assessment might be, you do not have the right to take into your hands the safety of yourself and at the same time, every other person currently occupying the structure you inhabit. That is just not your risk to accept, full stop. You are not an island and all the high minded libertarian nonsense you can muster cannot get around the fact that if you make a mistake, no matter how benign in the moment, you could damn well set other people's homes on fire with zero warning for them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone's saying that "an average consumer" in the terms of "I can't tell the difference between a hammer and a soldering iron" should be able to repair their devices.

But I think that if the consumer can demonstrate some minimum level of interest (education, certification, or at least competence) then they absolutely should be able to repair devices they own.

And, further, that owning devices and software should be the default and normal thing. The trend today of renting/leasing things is clearly anti-consumer.

I actually don't think they could care less if you fix it yourself. Apple, Samsung etc have done nothing to stop repair shops around the world that fix/replace phone or computer components and companies like MacSales have happily existed for years.

I can imagine if he has attempted to repair a MagSafe charger or a battery that Apple would rightly want to protect their customers but anything else would be largely harmless.

People are far more likely to care more about devices that are easy to use than ones that are easy to repair.

My father, for instance, just barely has sufficient skill to make use of his iPhone, but it has considerably improved his life. I don't imagine anyone could convince or train him to use something different solely on the basis of it being easy to repair.

He's going to have to pay someone to repair it for him anyway, so what does it matter if it's Apple or someone else? I imagine he'd happily exchange it for whatever the latest model is if a technician were to imply that an upgrade would fix his hypothetical problem.

One important consideration here is that smartphones are of use to a market which includes people willfully resistant to relearning.

Yikes, I hope you're joking! The cost of manufacturing consumer electronics has gone down so much that it's virtually impossible to have a viable repair business in the US - perhaps high-end laptops, Apple products, and very straightforward, limited repairs like phone screen repair, but that's about it.

As another anecdotal data point, I volunteer in a thrift store, and by far the hardest donation to sell is electronics - most of the time we just trash/recycle it, even if it is in very good condition. People aren't willing to pay very much at all for tech that is even just a couple years old. Thus, if the average age of a piece of electronics needing repair is, say, 2 years, by that point the product will have probably depreciated most of its value. At that point the vast majority of people will just buy the latest and greatest.

That dude is looking for problem when there's none. He starts off the article with this

> For people like me who have little experience repairing electronics, the self-repair setup was so intimidating that I nearly wussed out.

Did he expect Ikea like instruction manual to repair an advanced consumer electronic gadgets? That kit is clearly meant for professional (or at the very least hobbyists) repairers who clearly have experience, and know what they are doing.

To be fair he does call out Apple's recommendation and that this repair kit is better used by experts. I also feel that faced with increased regulation and public scrutiny Apple threw the entire kitchen sink as a cruel joke. I mean that 75pound repair equipment requiring $1200 hold on a card should is a big signal to retail users "do not even dream of attempting repair"

In fairness to Apple, that’s not fair at all.

I hope right to repair keeps gaining traction. If I need to buy a laptop any time soon it’s going to be a Framework. I replaced a DIMM in my current laptop (ThinkPad) and would have been pretty upset if I had to throw it away because of soldered RAM.

My fear with authorized repair programs as the only option is the risk of changing what’s considered fact. After a (people) generation where all training and education says “this is impossible,” people will believe it. The manufacturers get to dictate the new reality with no pushback from knowledgeable opponents because those opponents won’t exist anymore.

I’ve personally fixed many vehicle problems, a hot tub, a stove, a dishwasher, a fridge, a furnace, etc.. I’m 100% positive the manufacturers are lying about the complexity of everything and confident in saying that a lot of the complexity is intentionally engineered to be complex.

People want to fix their own stuff and they’ll try no matter what. The manufacturers like to tout the risks of DIY repair, but the biggest risk, by far IMO, is a lack of official schematics and docs. The manufacturers are literally creating the risk by withholding repair resources and forcing everyone to trust random internet strangers.

Learn how to discharge capacitors if you’re going to DIY fix anything :-)

That goes for everything though, most people don't know how a car works, yet you can replace every single component. The same goes for desktop computers and household appliances.

This has been the norm across many technical devices that have become part of everyday life. How many regular users know how a radio works? The point is that regardless of how technical they are, these devices have remained repairable by anyone who is so inclined.

The movement to proprietize basic maintenance on the part of manufacturers is purely profit driven, and is carried out at the expense of consumers, the environment, and overall innovation.

How can you say that I should not repair or upgrade my phone / laptop without Apple blessing because my device could harm you WHILE at the same time I can repair my car at a third party mechanic and fucking cars have more potential to cause damage then electronics and tractors, though car manufacturers are hating this are against right to repair and pushing this FUD campaigns. As long as you have the choice to repair your phone at an official place then is not your bussiness that some guy is capable to cleanup the water from the device itself or he is competent to fix is speackers or his car and fix it itself.

When I was a kid I was "fixing" digital watches by replacing broken parts from other broken watches(most of them were using compatible displays or bracelets) but in future this evil corps want to make it illegal, make proprietary scres and copy right them so I can;t open the device, put DRM in them so I can't change a display etc the result would be a lot e-waste and more money for the corporations. And who knows maybe if you see a kid that opened up an electronic device you will call the police to handle the dangerous situation.

Nah. If you know what's broken (which is often a cheap multimeter test away given you have the right schematics/boardview files) you can totally get by with a cheap hotair (858D-style clone for $60), a decent soldering iron (even a dinky TS100, $70), and some decent miscellaneous tools and supplies (tweezers, flux, solder). This is equipment anyone that does any sort of electronics should already have. And likely equipment you'll find at a local hackerspace.

For 01005-sized SMD passives you'll most likely also need a cheap binocular microscope (an amscope on a gooseneck for $150 will do), but you can totally do 0201-level stuff without one if you have good eyesight.

It gets a bit more expensive if you're doing BGA swaps from donor boards because you need to reball them, but it's still easily all within a $1k budget for all the tools required. But hey, if Apple just allowed you to buy their BGA components new instead of people having to use donor boards, this wouldn't be needed.

Component level repair is not voodoo magic, you just need practice and a steady hand. Equipment is cheaper than ever. Pretending it's out of the hands of an average curious hacker is playing into Apple's bullshit about how magical and integrated their devices are and that therefore they're the only ones that can possibly work on them.

I find this incredible.

Most people have been throwing away / replacing perfectly repairable appliances since long before mobile phones.

What makes mobile phones different?

(Obligatory Framing: I'm all for RtR. I don't think it's practical to require Apple to dumb down their design or construction to fit what a consumer could accomplish at their basement bench. But if I, or my neighborhood repair shop, is sophisticated enough to perform the work, I do think parts should be available.)

Both of those are fairly valid complaints though. Intentionally making a device hard to access or repair is almost as bad as not allowing it at all. That shows an actual concerted effort to stop or make it as difficult for consumers as possible.

That's basically the definition of anti-consumer practices.

It in no way benefits me to not be able to use a standard screw driver to open something and have to either purchase an expensive proprietary tool or at worst take it to an 'authorized' repair shop that has the license to use the proprietary tool.

And I think it's pretty patronizing to think that people are too dumb to realize that their digital products are not transferable. Even kids realize their fortnite skins aren't transferable, or that they can't "lend" their friend their copy of minecraft (without sharing the account).

>Also, similar issues were cropping up around phone repairs specifically having the screen or battery replaced which are very common repairs.

>None of these industries have tried to make it easier to repair their products. Nor have they tried to make replacement parts more readily available. Nor did they try to notify their customer base about it before the purchase. These are things that unless you have read their terms of service (with these concerns in mind) you would likely not know about them until you were trying to have the repair done.

I think this example is illustrative how people know but don't care. Hard to repair phones have been around for a almost decade now? Based on a quick search, Samsung Galaxy S5 (released early 2014) was the first phone from Samsung that had non user serviceable batteries. iPhones had non-user replaceable batteries for years prior. Unless you've never had to repair your phones before, and you've never heard of your friends/collegues replacing their phone, I think it's very unlikely that "you would likely not know about them until you were trying to have the repair done". There are still phones with replaceable batteries today, but they're relegated to niche status. What does this tell us? I say it's that most consumers give repairability lip service. They might be in favor of it in the abstract, but will cave the moment there's any trade-off involved, like waterproofing, thickness, or pricing.

People purchased items that they cannot repair, for myriad reasons, and did not purchase items they could repair. I don't know anyone that wants to fix their phone, they want to walk into a store with a broken one, and walk out with a working one and restore their settings. That's a relatively small value item, but same applies for home appliances and automobiles.

How exactly do you know this?

I would imagine lot of people want their own device repaired.

It is really arrogant to proclaim that 99.9% of consumers share your opinion and financial privilidge of not caring about repairs.

Polls consistently show that modt xustomers want repairs and repairability, for laptops >50%, and something like 30% would attempt repairs themselves.

We have a real problem with folks like yourself denying that we, people who want repair, even exist. And companies making parts impossible to get hold of.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/technology/articles-reports/2020...

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/consumer/articles-reports/2021/0...

"Everything required to replace or repair parts of the device should be fully, clearly and publicly documented, including all discrete part numbers, tools, jigs, etc. Any parts that are manufactured only by the device's manufacturer under patent protection or trade secret must be available for purchase."

If jigs are required, they must at least fully describe the jig so that people can make their own, if required.

You can use glue as long as it can be removed without damaging the device, and the type of glue is documented and available for purchase.

Mandating a level of skill is not necessary. If a repair requires high skill, like desoldering, they can find someone to do that repair, or sell the device to someone willing to do that repair before purchasing a new device. The level of skill required to repair a device will become known, although I'm also not opposed to requiring that be declared up front.

As you said, the scope of possible designs is infinite, so there exist designs that can satisfy all of these requirements.

The whole point is to expand the lifecycle of devices and create a repair and recycling industry, rather than the existing limited lifecycle of manufacturer->consumer->ewaste.

> 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".

Perfect is the enemy of the good. If your phone is a brick and an improper fix makes it useful at a much lower cost than a whole new phone, that's all that matters. Sorry, but your comment just sounds super elitist. Even if only 50% of devices are successfully repaired because they're being done "improperly", that's still a 50% reduction in ewaste.

> and also you don't want to be on the hook for repairing really good counterfeits (and I have personally experienced the latter).

Then don't. I don't see why the manufacturer should be on the hook to repair a counterfeit.

> 5) Right to repair will not solve e-waste. My opinion is it won't make much of a dent.

I disagree 200%. I've repaired countless phones, TVs, computers and other devices for myself and friends and family, all without help of legislation that would ensure the availability of parts and instructions, and the right to repair would only expand this trend. Most people wouldn't do this themselves even with the right to repair, but they are almost certainly within 2 degrees of separation of someone that would.

You're also looking at this very myopically through a specific tech industry lens and ignoring one of the main motivations of the right to repair: super expensive farm equipment. John Deere has a stranglehold on farmers who tend to be very DIY, and this has been driving up their costs and sometimes even driving them out of business because they can't access service or parts at affordable prices, and they can't repair the devices themselves. Breaking this stranglehold would be huge.

Okay, this is your view, and we have a disagreement. We'll just have to agree to disagree :)

Also, its not just about glue vs nuts/bolts - Please consider the larger picture here about repair.

>It's also not hard or terribly expensive to get most broken phones fixed at plenty of repair shops.

That is not accurate, Apple for instance, chokes the supply chain by banning sale of components to repair shops. They prevent replaced parts from working by employing DRM. In any case, you're missing the general point. Right to repair isn't just about phones. We're talking about a common movement across multiple industries - Agriculture, Appliances, Automotive, Consumer Electronics, etc, etc. You can find more information here - https://www.repair.org

People don't make their decisions in a vacuum. They know they can repair their laptop, their PC, their car, etc. They know this based on their experience and experience around them. We need to promote the same mindset for other consumer electronics.

In any case, any added change will force the companies to innovate their assembly technique to reduce costs - just like every industry does when there is a new environmental regulation. The reality is we are seeing piles and piles of electronics fill up the landfills, and we need to do more to address re-use, repair and extending the lifetime of devices - This is the just one component of an overall plan to reduce e-waste.

Isn't this because manufacturers are actively hindering repair shops? It's both the result and the cause of the manufacturers' strategy. No schematics, devices built without taking repairability in mind and very expensive parts or parts that come with caveats.

Making longer warranties is always welcome but it won't help as much, because the vast majority of repairs aren't covered under warranty. I'm guessing that most repairs are due to user error than manufacturing defects thus not covered under warranty.

> Because you generate, at best, an adversarial situation.

This shouldn't be the case. Reducing e-waste and thus doing everything possible for sustainability should be the priority here. I've found myself many times in a situation where a perfectly working device was damaged, or just stopped receiving software updates and had to be decommissioned because of security concerns, and this is not only limited to phones.