The article claims that Tim Cook said a certain thing
"Tim Cook laid it out for his investors: when people can repair their devices, they don't buy new ones. When people don't buy new devices, Apple doesn't sell them new devices"
It also provides a link to a source... in which Tim Cook said something totally different
"While macroeconomic challenges in some markets were a key contributor to this trend, we believe there are other factors broadly impacting our iPhone performance, including consumers adapting to a world with fewer carrier subsidies, US dollar strength-related price increases, and some customers taking advantage of significantly reduced pricing for iPhone battery replacements"
It seems to be a pretty big jump from "one of the reasons we didn't perform as well as possible this quarter is because of customers taking advantage of our reduced price battery replacement program" which could impact their bottom line by just operating on thinner margins than normal battery replacements, to "repairs are stopping people from buying new phones"
The whole article is bad faith. It links to a Vice article claiming that Apple is lying about its environmental stances because it doesn’t reuse old iPhones and MacBooks. Then, they breeze over the fact that Apple literally breaks these devices down into their core materials for use in new devices and falsely claims that they’re “shredded into immortal e-waste”. How is that not reuse? Are they suggesting that the parts from an iPhone 4 can somehow be reused more effectively? How many old iPhones are still out there that would even be able to use any of those parts?
And what they could do instead is yes sell those parts, or extend their certified refurbished program. It currently only goes back to the iPhone 12, even though their newest OS supports much older phones. To say nothing of how far back security updates are still (selectively) being released.
Technically "reuse" means wholesale reuse of components, shredding them would be recycling.
But you're right. The whole right-to-repair is just lobbying from independent iPhone repair companies who want to make a quick buck at Apple's expense.
It's part penny-pinching, part fake environmentalism and lots of hate for everything Apple. Even if Apple would bring out the most repairable phone ever it wouldn't be enough since it's all about the control they don't want Apple to have (even if that control is advantageous to the customer)
> The whole right-to-repair is just lobbying from independent iPhone repair companies who want to make a quick buck at Apple's expense.
That is a very interesting take. Basic repairability, whether by an independent shop, or a skilled individual (aka you), should be a goal so the manufacturer doesn't have a monopoly on repairs. Market economies abhor a monopoly, and the vendor-only repair scheme is a big one. Looking at cars, The US has the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which was fought for in the courts, to force vendors to accept that aftermarket parts didn't void the warranty of the part wasn't related. Which isn't directly applicable here, but the point is that an outside vendor could create a replacement part, better in some way (cheaper is a kind of better), and repair shops and customers could choose to use that part instead. Apple shouldn't have that much control. We decided this for cars, the same should be applicable with ebikes for the mind.
I staunchly refuse to buy an iphone or whatever else Apple sells. I both support right to repair and am affected by many non Apple companies that do anti-consumer stuff. The article here actually lists several companies that aren't and hate right 2 repair, including Wahl (learn something everyday).
I can't understand why anyone who isn't a manufacturer would be against this.
How is it advantageous to the customers? Are there commonly shady phone repair people doing bad work? I've never had a phone repaired(Rugged cases prevent the need pretty effectively!) so I might be out of the loop.
This isn't specific to repair shops, but there are a plethora of 3rd party battery options for many, many cell phones. iPhone included. Even stuff sold from companies like ifixit. My experience with replacing those batteries with anything except the OEM battery has been always
.. let's just say underwhelming.
Maybe I've just been consistently unlucky, but there doesn't seem to be any quality control and plenty of outright lying from 3rd party vendors on battery capacity and expected performance on aftermarket cells.
That’s fine. It’s not the Apple Reusing Program. It’s the Apple Recycling Program. Why are they complaining about reuse when the market for reuse would be a drop in the bucket. Recycling and making new phones that people actually want to buy is a better strategy than attempting to salvage components. Yes, reuse parts would be better if people wanted to keep the same phone for that long. The problem is that they don’t.
The complaint about trademarks on refurbished parts also sounds a bit off, implying that nothing used with a logo on it can be legally imported. There may not be a good and legal solution, but it seems like refurbishing operations and repair shops are trying to avoid having to tell end customers that the assemblies they use for repairs are "a mix of used Apple components and third-party components not approved by Apple". If a disclaimer like that can't get the parts through customs, then maybe we have a problem.
"Tim Cook laid it out for his investors: when people can repair their devices, they don't buy new ones. When people don't buy new devices, Apple doesn't sell them new devices"
It also provides a link to a source... in which Tim Cook said something totally different
"While macroeconomic challenges in some markets were a key contributor to this trend, we believe there are other factors broadly impacting our iPhone performance, including consumers adapting to a world with fewer carrier subsidies, US dollar strength-related price increases, and some customers taking advantage of significantly reduced pricing for iPhone battery replacements"
It seems to be a pretty big jump from "one of the reasons we didn't perform as well as possible this quarter is because of customers taking advantage of our reduced price battery replacement program" which could impact their bottom line by just operating on thinner margins than normal battery replacements, to "repairs are stopping people from buying new phones"