Anecdotal, but back in those "good old days" when you could get a screen replaced in 5 mins like this article said, on the three occasions I did this I ended up with the worst cheap Chinese knock off screens I have ever seen, the last time I ended up spending even more to get a genuine one.
Hard to avoid this with small businesses when they need to make the enough of a margin at those cheaper retail prices.
I'm sure this is fine for a lot of people, but I'm much happier to pay for AppleCare+ and get components that keep the experience that I've paid a grand for.
I do not think this is a small business issue, but rather a dishonest small business owner working for disrespectful customers issue.
A few months ago, I had to get a screen replacement and straight upfront asked the repair guy how much it would really (emphasized) cost me to get the screen replaced after he gave me a quote indicating that either the screen would cost nothing, or the work hours cost almost nothing.
He smiled and admitted getting the original replacement unit would almost double the quote he had just given me, plus I'd have to wait a week until the unit arrives. I told him that's what I wanted.
Eventually, the repair cost me a bit more than double what he asked first. But I am satisfied, I noticed no defaults at all on my phone since the repair, it feels exactly like the original model. He cleaned it, and installed a screen protector on it (offered).
This is clearly a case of "theory built on one single personal experience", I agree. But honestly, I don't know anyone around me who would agree to pay a bit more just to get better service and I think that's the core issue.
When I called to ask for a quote when the screen on my phone cracked, the repair guy said upfront that it's going to cost more than a used phone of the same model.
To that I replied that this is fine, brought the phone, got a loaner free of charge (probably because the guy saw that I came in with a flip phone as replacement) and the next day it was ready for pickup.
Honest business, five stars.
I think they get rid of a lot of troublesome customers by persuading them to just get a new phone instead.
I'm having a hard time trying to find a country with a reputation of consistently underpricing their electronics parts.
Perhaps one would do that to get its name on the map as a newcomer, but soon enough investments need to be repaid and the prices would naturally raise up to match the increase in reputation and pad the margins.
Imagine if Apple sold OEM parts at a reasonable price. Imagine if they weren't pairing OEM parts to prevent repair shops from parting out broken devices. Imagine if they weren't making deals with manufacturers to prevent the sale of standard parts to third parties - even parts with no Apple IP like the ISL9240 [0]. Imagine if they weren't abusing Customs and Border Patrol powers to prevent distribution of legitimate parts via false acusations of counterfeiting [1]. Maybe then you could get a good screen from a small repair shop.
It's not about margin. It's about parts availability.
Apple stores are few and far between, but Apple products are ubiquitous. Official Apple repairs have them ship the device across the country to repair shops, which takes a lot of time. And they don't do things like component-level repair (i.e. specific chips, resistors, and other board components). They just replace the entire board and charge you for the new one.
An independent repair shop doesn't have to compete on price. They can compete with fast turnaround, minimal travel, and component-level repairs. Or at least they could if they could get the parts.
in your case you got screwed up bc you got a bad part, but you're saying your solution to that is to screw everyone by disallowing even genuine parts for repair not blessed by apple?
Wasn't this partly by Apple's own making? Apple shreds devices to prevent people from salvaging parts for repairs[1], even phones that were usable[2]. and hasn't sold genuine components until very recently.
Use of knockoff parts will occur no matter what Apple does because those parts are always going to be cheaper.
That said, I think maybe the solution may be closer to something like allowing fake parts to function when placed in iPhones, with a couple of caveats:
- A prominent top level section in Settings appears listing all non-genuine parts
- When the phone has been factory reset, an alert appears at the bottom of the “welcome” screen and can be tapped to view the same list as above, so any prospective buyers of the device know exactly what they’re buying (and hopefully, can negotiate a better price as a result)
This addresses the cases of both dishonest shops and dishonest sellers trying to pass off the used devices they’re selling as fully genuine.
As for parts in used phones, I think those should remain device-locked until the user has explicitly unlocked them with a process that requires a second confirmation from the user after a week with a code sent by snail mail so thieves can’t coerce victims into part unlocking.
The auto repair industry has been getting along just fine with aftermarket parts in the mix. As a customer you have a choice, and need to be aware that the choice exists to competently engage with the market. Being slightly informed about the high level aspects of an industry you're interacting with is just part of being an adult. If you don't want to have a frank conversation with a repair shop about which aftermarket parts are adequate and which are less than ideal, then you can always overpay for the whole job at a dealership to avoid breaking the illusion.
From what I understand, getting to this point has been a long fought battle of pushing manufacturers to open up parts availability and basic documentation (which continues to this day with Automotive Right to Repair and whatnot), Magnuson-Moss on the legal front, etc. Apple is at the early stages of its industry, and due to the power of digital restrictions technology has delusions of completely shutting out the third party ecosystem. But in a free society there's only one way for this topic to evolve, and so the authoritarian arguments about the guarantees of centralized control aren't particularly compelling.
The question is, how do we go about making sure that the general public as a whole is aware of the choice? For phones it seems like more of an uphill battle because people generally don’t think a whole lot about the quality of the parts going into their electronics repairs and the quality of the repair work itself until they’ve had some kind of disaster (phone catching on fire or something), whereas it’s more of a consideration for cars (perhaps due to the price difference or obvious mechanical nature of cars).
At the very least though, I do think that buyers of used phones deserve to know what kind of parts were used in repairs. On cars this can be verified by looking up the car’s service records and taking it to a trusted mechanic prior to purchase but it’s not so simple with phones, which is where I think it could be useful for the OS to indicate use of aftermarket parts.
The scale of operation you need to steal and sell cars for parts or sell stolen cars is in a different order of magnitude in difficulty than doing the same for phones.
We are at a stage where the only ones stealing Apple devices are the ones too stupid to know they’re next to impossible to resell and the ones that are really good and know exactly what they’re doing.
We have a different view of "individual ownership".
You probably see smartphones like computers, but I think they're more like game consoles.
I don't complain to Microsoft because I can't install Arch or sideload games on my Xbox.
I'm perfectly fine not being able to install random applications on my phone if in exchange it becomes a harder target for malware and unappealing to thieves.
One of the reasons I switched to iPhone was that Google only does their repairs here through third parties. Even though it was with official parts, the repair quality was never great and it often needed to be manually calibrated or go in for another repair to fix the things they broke in the first repair. My experience (YMMV!) with AppleCare has always been stellar.
YMMV indeed. How does it go for folks who buy a device second hand, beyond apple care, perhaps because they can't afford Apple's first hand prices. No one is saying Apple shouldn't provide Apple care or first rate service within coverage. This is about a broader picture. As noted in the article Apple knows how long Apple care extends for any given device, and if components have been replaced. It would be fairly easy for them (and their gobs of money) to perhaps do something equitable like disable the replaced parts warnings once a device leaves apple care. IMO they shouldn't display those at all but in the interest of equity and compromise I'd settle for removal after Apple has self selected not to "care" about the device anymore.
Not really defending it as such, just offering my experience.
That being said if I was trying to see it from Apple’s perspective, it does address a lot of problems pretty easily: thieves breaking devices down for parts or coercing users, customers having issues with their devices due to low quality repairs, users buying second hand phones with unofficial parts, various security concerns, etc. Apple do also sell old and refurbished devices also.
That being said, I do think Apple should be solving this in a way that allows unofficial repairs, even if that involves taking your ID and proof of purchase into an Apple Store to get your device “unlocked” for free so you can do whatever you want with it, knowing it may hurt the resale value and impact the device’s security. More than that, I think it should be legally required under right to repair legislation.
< My experience (YMMV!) with AppleCare has always been stellar.
In my experience AppleCare repairs are stellar because they're never actually repairs. I've never once had them repair a phone/laptop/etc. Every single time they're like here's a new/refurb instance of the same phone(not that I'm complaining!). I'm hoping they're eventually refurbing the old one and reselling it, but I suspect they're often just tossed(ahem "recycled").
In my experience, getting the insurance or whatever for google phones is worth it since they often just replace your phone. I busted a screen and the authorized repair shop broke the mobo trying to replace it. Google replaced my phone but it was an irritating process.
Do you assume that Apple would be forbidden from offering repairs, if they stopped locking their hardware from the consumer?
This is such a common comment in these kinds of threads: "I'm happy with the choice they've forced on me, therefore the force itself is desirable." Like being happy your prison cell has a nice view.
I've seen this happen so many times around these discussions on HN:
There is a valid argument in the source. There is discussion around the argument. There is some proof, there are political discussions. Etc. everything totally normal. But then there is this ONE comment. Usually just one:
Anecdotal evidence to spread FUD. And it's up above all that usually discussion.
Where is this coming from? Is this natural behavior of people who are also afraid of the freedom to be able to buy parts elsewhere? Is this advertising?
Nah, it’s the kind of experiences you expect in a low-regulation market. You either pay a premium—beyond what would be justified if “defector” manufacturers and vendors weren’t a factor, i.e. if effectively-enforced regulations were mandating a higher quality floor—to a vendor with a good reputation you expect them to want to maintain, or you pay in expertise and time-cost. If you don’t pay in one of those two ways, you probably get screwed. Folks who already possess relevant expertise and have a hobby that looks a lot like the time-cost it takes to achieve the best measured-in-currency outcome in the above, may regard the situation as entirely fine. Folks with enough money not to care that simply paying for a decent product is priced above where it “should” be, also may not care. Everyone else just has to live with a bad situation, and sometimes people who’ve run into that post on HN.
It’s a bit surprising to me how little regulation there is concerning the quality of replacement electronics parts, especially those that handle power (battery, power delivery) which can be very dangerous when the wrong corners are cut.
> Nah, it’s the kind of experiences you expect in a low-regulation market.
Nah, it's not. The market for Android devices has been there for years and it works.
Sure, you can be screwed over, like in everything in life, but it's not such a common thing that it would make it an equally relevant argument against liberalization.
I agree, though: people who can afford premium won't bother. Neither with alternative ways nor with people who can't afford premium. Maybe it's even intended to keep the brand somehow exclusive and special...sad world.
The rest is the usual price for parts and work. Like every normal service, too.
No reason to deliver crap, as you want to have the customer recommend you and come back again if they have another issue. Since there are enough alternatives, you have to deliver.
Hard to avoid this with small businesses when they need to make the enough of a margin at those cheaper retail prices.
I'm sure this is fine for a lot of people, but I'm much happier to pay for AppleCare+ and get components that keep the experience that I've paid a grand for.