Comment on Apple will honor California's 'right to repair' rules nationwide

gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Nothing new or exclusive for Apple: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_effect

  source

  • Wifimuffins@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Same with the Brussels Effect

    source
• Nurgle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  They supported this legislation before it was passed. Still not out of the goodness of their hearts, this version includes provisions that they had wanted previously.

  source

  • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    They “supported” this legislation by implementing a system where parts still require users to call in to activate them, you are “strongly encouraged” to rent or buy specialized tools from apple, and the price of parts plus rental generally comes out as only slightly less than paying an apple store to do it for you.

    It is malicious compliance that they get to use for a PR boost.

    source

    • Paradachshund@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Still a step forward, and it will make it easier to pass further steps.

      source

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        It really isn’t.

        Because this has highlighted the “loophole” to these kinds of laws. Strict control of parts and equipment to manipulate pricing so that third parties cannot exist and this becomes “your phone is under warranty” by another name.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • AA5B@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      parts still require users to call in to activate them

      How else would you do it? Phone theft used to be way too common. I’m fine with Apple reducing phone theft by making it harder for thieves to get value from stolen devices

      I’m buying my nine as a functioning device: I may need to repair it or replace the battery but why would I want to mod it? Those who do, can go through the extra steps

      source

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        So you are arguing this is to prevent some Gone in 60 Seconds like movement where Giovanni Ribisi and Scott Caan are in the wings waiting to rapidly replace a single component to sell those stolen phones before the farrady cage bag mysteriously dissolves?

        This has nothing to do with thieves. This has everything to do with keeping third parties from not being able to exist. And I should not have to explain why someone might want to buy a third party version of an apple accessory.

        source
      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Why would preventing someone from replacing a broken part without calling in to Apple, prevent phone theft?

        The phone isn’t going to magically disconnect from Apples network just because you replaced the screen.

        And what about those who would rather mod their Apple phone than have phone theft security? Their opinion does not matter because you decide you don’t need it?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Mango@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      So everyone’s still on leashes. Got it.

      source
  • TehBamski@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    IIRC: They battled this talking point/discussion and legislation for years. Up until a week before it was voted on and passed.

    They are not your friend.

    source
  • themurphy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Maybe because EU passed this before California. Then it’s easy to on board.

    source
• UnspecificGravity@lemmings.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  In this case, they managed to delay the bill long enough that they now have a bunch of programs in place to actually profit from third-party repairs of their devices. This gives them an advantage over their competitors, so they are now in support of this bill.

  source