Surprise! When you force Big Tech to do the right thing, it turns out not to be such a "world-ending" event as they'd like you to believe:
"#Apple is opening up iPhones and Macs to at-home repairs. The company plans to start selling parts and tools and offering instructions on how to repair Apple products at home, without having to bring them into a store or a third-party repair shop. Apple plans to start with the iPhone 12 and 13, followed by Macs with M1 chips."
@rysiek This is great news. Hopefully, this will also give them the incentive to design for easy repair in the future.
@rysiek Idk what to think about this. Like, who'll buy parts to fix stuff at home? A fraction of their customers maybe.
And if they're giving people what they're giving to the shops, from what I learn from Louis Rossman that's not much, not really useful.
I have a feeling this is just to make people shut up and curb repairspeople's attempts to push Right to Repair.
Guess I'll wait and see what Louis has to say about this.
@rysiek glad to hear it! As a former third party Apple repairman though I can’t help but wonder how they’re going to use this “at home repair” as leverage to undermine third party repair businesses 😕. Maybe I’m too jaded
@rysiek This feels like an important note in the article
> But Chamberlain notes that this still isn’t “the open-source repair revolution we’ve sought through our fight for the right to repair” because it appears to still support restrictions that require parts to be bought straight from Apple.
@email@example.com I don't know if I want to accept this or be sceptical because it's Apple.
@anymouse_404 yeah. But it is a step.
Don't get me wrong, I am praising Apple. Just saying: forcing Big Tech to do things works.
@rysiek I don't know if you came across this, but I there's a lot of interesting things about this that are worth taking into consideration.
See Twitter Thread:
@rysiek this is wonderful to see.
The current FTC's early actions (and Lina Khan's history, empowered by the executive order 14036) have at the very least instilled in me some small hope that the US can build effective competition policy with just enough threat of enforcement to move the needle in the near term.
Hopefully this is the first of many (at least partial) reversals of long term corporatist trends that have existed since Reagan redefined "anticompetitive," and a return to the prior decades' deterring of *ability* for market abuses, rather than waiting for the damage to occur first and expecting miniscule individual cases/settlements to move things.
@rysiek like, is it not enough? Sure. But in my book, any improvement over the miserable status quo is a step (and momentum!) in the right direction. In this case, now the focus can move to the parts market, etc.
@rysiek and yes, corporations will always comply in a manner that maximally benefits them; in some regards their officers are legally required to ensure they do that. But in spite of all this, imho I agree that it's still worth recognizing this as a step that's mostly forward for competition.
This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!