Yes because the “right to repair” your phone is important even when manufacturers of most Android phones don’t bother about supporting them with operating system upgrades or security upgrades for more than two years if at all.
This is obviously bigger than android phones is updates.
I’m sorry you don’t feel your particular pet peeve is being addressed on day zero and I’m doubly sorry to see such a negative attitude toward a clearly constructive initiative.
Not every single issue will be solved immediately or perfectly.
This is about turning a huge ship around - and changing whole industries in the process.
Once they change for Europe, the rest of the world is more likely to change, too.
I'd expect housing, healthcare, education, food, clothing, and transport to be bigger.
Anecdotally, I spend more on optical care and on fresh apples and oranges than I do on smartphones most years. Clothing, much more. Housing costs, orders of magnitude more.
Or did you mean "confining ourselves to goods with semiconductors in them"? Then cars are a bigger market. Probably kitchen appliances too.
It's relevant to cars, computers, kitchen appliances, most other electronics in houses from TVs to clocks to washing machines.
Right to repair and android manufacturers being shit are 2 separate issues. And fixing one of those issues is worth it on its own.
This would be a win even if they excluded smartphones completely.
Not sure what your problem is exactly. You are all ower this thread arguing with everyone. But other the smartphones not being updated, which doe not have much to do with right to repair in first place, you haven't really said really made any argument.
And there are a lot more people who own phones than cars or washing machines. How many washing machines does the average family have compared to phones?
What good is the “right to repair” the most ubiquitous device people own if it isn’t getting security updates? I don’t have to worry about my kitchen devices being secure and most of them cost less than $100. There has never been an issue with refrigerators or washers being relatively easy to repair or even TVs for that matter.
My 65 inch TV costs less than my phone.
None of the other devices you mention have parts that always wear out like smartphone batteries.
Phones are essential in even third world countries. None of the other things you are mentioning are.
It’s the typical EU lawmakers who passed a 11 chapter 99 section law that made the web worse with nothing more to show for it but cookie pop up banners.
TLDR: Right to repair is important for more than just for smartphones.
And is important for smartphones too. What good are security updates for old phones if they have busted screen or battery that wont charge anymore.
> And there are a lot more people who own phones than cars or washing machines.
So what, doesn't mean it's still not relevant. Cars being the big issue, where repairs often cost more than most phones.
> How many washing machines does the average family have compared to phones?
Again so what, it's still an issue. And if you count dishwashers, microwaves refrigerators, coffeemakers, toasters, ovens, tv's, radios etc.
Average family has more of them than phones and they combined, often cost more than phones. Remember majority of people don't own flagships but cheap phones.
> What good is the “right to repair” the most ubiquitous device people own if it isn’t getting security updates?
What good are security updates for old phones if they have busted screens or battery that wont charge anymore.
Besides Right to repair would be worth it even if it explicitly left of smartphones. But it doesn't.
> There has never been an issue with refrigerators or washers being relatively easy to repair or even TVs for that matter.
That is changing. Even Mile appliances that cost a lot more than 100 bucks are hard to repair and often have to replace.
> My 65 inch TV costs less than my phone.
Majority of people in my country have phones that cost less than 200 EUR. Most decent TV's cost more than that.
> None of the other devices you mention have parts that always wear out like smartphone batteries.
Pretty much everything except TV's have parts that wears out, even if it's just the hinges and seals. but the thing that most often craps out is electronics. Source my brother works for Mile distributer in our country.
> Phones are essential in even third world countries. None of the other things you are mentioning are.
People in 3rd world countries rely on cooking much more than people in developed countries.
And you can always buy cheap feature phones, that last almost forever and can change batteries and have small attack surface.
> It’s the typical EU
They are at leas doing something. Unlike American lawmakers that just lube their assholes and bend over to the corporations.
What's important here is that right to repair might require an unlockable bootloader so you can install something that does get updates instead of relying on your crappy phone manufacturer's planned obsolescence timeline.
Most Android users don’t get support. iOS users can just go to Settings and get official updates from Apple without trawling the internet hoping some volunteers decided to support their phone.
Until apple decides to no longer update their phone. And then they’re in an even worse position.
So if that is cause it’s just an old device and new feature don’t have what they need. But others is a decision they make.
Look at the recent redesign of the Reminders app, the fact that the new and old version are incompatible is not because of hardware. Nor is their choice to not backport it.
No you can’t which is why I switch over a while ago.
But why should the phones have to stop getting security updates? Both apple and android manufacturers will abandon those phones at some point. (And security updates are different from feature parity) why should those devices be condemned simply because the manufacturers cannot be bothered.
Why should I not be able to update my device simply because the manufacturer can no longer be bothered to do it themselves?
It is much much much more complex than that.
I have several old Android tablets that I could use for a hundred projects after installing a proper FOSS operating system and software, from IoT monitoring to communication, media playing, electronics etc. if only their manufacturer didn't tight close them to ensure they become obsolete when they decide so. These devices didn't turn (yet) into a couple Kg of electronic waste just because I know there still is potential to make them useful, but the reality for most people is way different: as soon as a device becomes obsolete, it is thrown in some landfill and replaced.
If right to repair would also mean manufacturers forced to unlock bootloaders and release enough documentation so that software can be ported to old devices, the implications will be huge.
So they are going to force all Android OEMs to keep their phones updated? Will they get updates as long as iOS? An iPhone 6S from 2015 can still run the latest OS. Apple released a security patch within the last year for phones back to the 2013 iPhone 5s.
Going to an Apple store or authorized dealer isn’t as big of a deal to get a $69 battery replacement as it is to ask an Android user to hunt the internet to hopefully find a community supported Android variant that still supports their phone and still not have access to Google Play Services .
The right to repair is not the same as the right to maintenance or whatever you might want to call forcing the manufacturer to keep updating your device. The issue is when manufacturers make it so that it is impossible for anyone except THEM--actively excluding the so-called "owner" of the device, who somehow doesn't actually have many rights currently (and what thereby needs to be fixed)--to be able to develop fixes or updates.
Using the term "secure" to describe the property "the supposed-owner of the device is disallowed from having any control over the software running on the device" is a perversion of the term; I would prefer the locks on my house be secure in a way that prevents people I don't want to enter my house from getting inside, not in a way that prevents me from daring to using unauthorized furniture or having the gall to replace the door on one of my cabinets... Apple's version of the word "security" seems to often be more about helping developers implement DRM than about helping the user know their data is safe or private.
Probably not but it's speculation at the moment. Maybe support for open source firmware versions allowing the user to switch should they need to. In terms of drivers these could be opened but that'd require a huge amount of change from chip manufacturers.
So yeah, good luck with getting Qualcomm and the other chipset manufacturers to open source their drivers and then depending on volunteers to support your phone.
Even Google once had to drop support for some Nexus devices because it couldn’t convince chipset makers to support their latest OS on the phone.
A point system seems fun and pretty good. A manufacturer could be able to score points by providing a date (any date) at which they intend to end support. Perhaps some extra points if they provide information if it will turn into a brick. (just yes/no scores points) More points for extra years and a proper after-life.
We have tons of products and services with a TOS stating things like service is not guaranteed, we are not responsible for damages etc Line by line they make the product more terrible because they have good reason to, any kind of support costs money and no one reads the TOS.
If we could however express each of those terms into 2-5 numbers on a score card it would all of a sudden become interesting for the manufacturer to review those.
Who knows? Maybe if one of our widgets explodes we should pay up to 1000 dollar worth of damages if it means 10 points in responsibility in stead of -100
If replacement parts or even upgrades makes our brand stick out head and shoulders above the competition in official ratings then we should at least have someone do a powerpoint about it, perhaps even a spreadsheet.
Scores for existing devices can be improved later. Lowering them could involve fines and/or compensation.
Perhaps there is even some market logic to be had: Perhaps if one is stuck with a low score one should pick cheaper parts that have a similar score in stead of bragging about how awesome some components are. I must have purchased more than 50 iphone chargers by now. The expensive ones break just as fast as the cheap ones. Apple should get lots of points for all the parts of their show they got right but also -1000 for the charger quality. Some of the unofficial ones should probably be rated -5000 which is fine if it costs 5 euro. Even if it costs 20 euro I shouldn't be complaining if durability was rated -5000?
"Good luck getting online trackers to require consent"
Except the EU pulled that one off already. When you have one of the biggest markets in the world and the ability to levy high fines, you can make companies do all sorts of things.
Of course I do. I can choose not to be tracked, how could you not consider that a win?
If somebody followed you around in real life, watching your every move, would you not consider it a win if he asked you if that makes you feel uncomfortable and they should stop?
Would you consider it a worse experience than them just continuing to follow you, unasked?
I do. Websites now have to be upfront about their cookie usage and I can make the decision not to use that website (especially if they intentionally make rejecting them as much of a hassle as possible).
