EU plans 'right to repair' rules for phones and tablets(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
EU plans 'right to repair' rules for phones and tablets
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/eu-brings-in-right-to-repair-rules-for-phones-and-tablets
5 comments
This looks like a positive step in a healthy direction. Attacking the garden walls, upgrade ratchets and incompatible proprietary formats and protocols would also be positive steps with related benefits. Locking customers into one platform and then changing the software and protocols that form the foundations of that platform in ways that break backward compatibility results in a lot of unnecessary wastage in all of physical equipment, user data and the financial costs paid by users.
they should focus on making rules around product obsolescence. phones and computers should work with latest OS for 10 years or more
They should also have a replaceable battery if you want them to work for 10 years. And an SD card slot to keep up with storage requirements. Not many decent phones like that in the last year:
https://www.gsmarena.com/results.php3?nYearMin=2019&nDisplay...
(I also included at least FullHD resolution in the search)
https://www.gsmarena.com/results.php3?nYearMin=2019&nDisplay...
(I also included at least FullHD resolution in the search)
You have to keep in mind that that removable battery has disappeared from devices for a reason: it’s inefficient. Even having a case around it and providing the connector and latch means you’re making the battery smaller and the device bigger.
That said, I do feel like there’s a reasonable middle ground to be had: not a swappable battery, but a very easily replaceable one. No special hex screws, etc. Sure you can’t carry around six of them, but if you can replace it once a year you probably won’t need to... and you can always carry a power bank with you instead to recharge it on the go.
I think the SD card requirement is short sighted. As often as storage (and cables, not to mention other things) change I think the added space requirements in something like a phone, even for something as small as an SD card (plus the adapter and the spring mechanism, housing, etc.) is a waste. In a decade you may not be able to even find the same kind of storage anymore. Even if you can it’s not like the latest game that rings in at a bazillion gigathings that would so totally easily fit on your new SD card is actually going to run on your 9.5 year old phone - the processor, memory, etc. simply wont be up to the job.
That said, I do feel like there’s a reasonable middle ground to be had: not a swappable battery, but a very easily replaceable one. No special hex screws, etc. Sure you can’t carry around six of them, but if you can replace it once a year you probably won’t need to... and you can always carry a power bank with you instead to recharge it on the go.
I think the SD card requirement is short sighted. As often as storage (and cables, not to mention other things) change I think the added space requirements in something like a phone, even for something as small as an SD card (plus the adapter and the spring mechanism, housing, etc.) is a waste. In a decade you may not be able to even find the same kind of storage anymore. Even if you can it’s not like the latest game that rings in at a bazillion gigathings that would so totally easily fit on your new SD card is actually going to run on your 9.5 year old phone - the processor, memory, etc. simply wont be up to the job.
I guess the SD card thing depends on your requirements, but I like carrying my music library with me and a few movies, so I don't mind if the volume of my phone is a few cubic millimeters more.
I would be fine with an easily replaceable battery though... but again, I don't mind a little more volume.
I would be fine with an easily replaceable battery though... but again, I don't mind a little more volume.
Speaking of SD cards, phones really should begin implementing support for UHS-II and UHS-III MicroSD cards since right now the transfer speeds are lagging behind that of internal UFS storage
I fear this will end up being big on inefficient recycling instead of reuse and actual repair.
Why?
Not OP, but I’m guessing they were referring to the drastically higher costs involved in actually opening, diagnosing, and replacing a part in something as complex and intricate as an iPhone.
Since it will be prohibitively expensive to take your phone to a store and have someone actually do that (ie: repair it), instead the rule will amount to some complex and less-than-ideal alternative where you can turn in your phone and get a refurbished one instead...
They then “recycle” your old broken phone - ship it back somewhere with significantly cheaper labor (and less strict disposal regulations) where they do some very basic component harvesting (such as screens and storage for those refurbs) and then melt down or simply trash the rest.
In the end you still can’t actually repair your old device (and really, that’s often just an unrealistic expectation this day in time, they’re just too small and complex) and we’ve just institutionalized a wasteful system to make ourselves feel better.
Since it will be prohibitively expensive to take your phone to a store and have someone actually do that (ie: repair it), instead the rule will amount to some complex and less-than-ideal alternative where you can turn in your phone and get a refurbished one instead...
They then “recycle” your old broken phone - ship it back somewhere with significantly cheaper labor (and less strict disposal regulations) where they do some very basic component harvesting (such as screens and storage for those refurbs) and then melt down or simply trash the rest.
In the end you still can’t actually repair your old device (and really, that’s often just an unrealistic expectation this day in time, they’re just too small and complex) and we’ve just institutionalized a wasteful system to make ourselves feel better.
That's absurd. The plan is to make devices repairable. Current devices not being repairable is the problem being solved. What you've described is the status quo.
Riighhttt, but you missed the part where they aren’t repairable for a reason.
If you want your iPhone to be the size of an old bag phone then it can probably be repairable by any idiot with a screwdriver and soldering iron. If you want to keep it the size of something that fits in your pocket, that’s just not going to happen unless you’re fine with it doing the exact same things as a phone from 20 years ago did. I don’t think you’d be willing to pay $1200 for a smart phone that only makes calls just because you could replace every part in it.
If you want your iPhone to be the size of an old bag phone then it can probably be repairable by any idiot with a screwdriver and soldering iron. If you want to keep it the size of something that fits in your pocket, that’s just not going to happen unless you’re fine with it doing the exact same things as a phone from 20 years ago did. I don’t think you’d be willing to pay $1200 for a smart phone that only makes calls just because you could replace every part in it.
Stop the strawmanning please.
Instead of dictating an arbitrary and likely unrealistic featureset via government force, we can all vote with our wallets and not buy phones that aren't repairable.
Clearly, the demand for repairable phones is not sufficiently high to sway people from buying ones that are not repairable, and, more importantly, it may not be possible to make a phone meaningfully repairable with how small delicate technology in phones is nowadays.
Not to mention, how do we determine what level of repairability is sufficient, and by what metric? What parts should be interchangeable? Battery and camera? Should we merely make the phone's case easy to open? Why is any one or a combination of these things something that consumers are entitled to and need to have protected by law?
Clearly, the demand for repairable phones is not sufficiently high to sway people from buying ones that are not repairable, and, more importantly, it may not be possible to make a phone meaningfully repairable with how small delicate technology in phones is nowadays.
Not to mention, how do we determine what level of repairability is sufficient, and by what metric? What parts should be interchangeable? Battery and camera? Should we merely make the phone's case easy to open? Why is any one or a combination of these things something that consumers are entitled to and need to have protected by law?
> Instead of dictating an arbitrary and likely unrealistic featureset via government force,
Strawman.
> we can all vote with our wallets and not buy phones that aren't repairable.
"Voting with one's wallet" just doesn't work.
> Clearly, the demand for repairable phones is not sufficiently high to sway people from buying ones that are not repairable,
Yes, that's the problem.
> and, more importantly, it may not be possible to make a phone meaningfully repairable with how small delicate technology in phones is nowadays.
Then the technology has to get bigger again. It's called a trade-off.
> Not to mention, how do we determine what level of repairability is sufficient, and by what metric? What parts should be interchangeable? Battery and camera? Should we merely make the phone's case easy to open?
It's almost as if making decisions involved making decisions. What's your point?
> Why is any one or a combination of these things something that consumers are entitled to and need to have protected by law?
That's in the article. Besides, "because they (resp. their elected representatives) want" is a perfectly valid and sufficient reason.
Strawman.
> we can all vote with our wallets and not buy phones that aren't repairable.
"Voting with one's wallet" just doesn't work.
> Clearly, the demand for repairable phones is not sufficiently high to sway people from buying ones that are not repairable,
Yes, that's the problem.
> and, more importantly, it may not be possible to make a phone meaningfully repairable with how small delicate technology in phones is nowadays.
Then the technology has to get bigger again. It's called a trade-off.
> Not to mention, how do we determine what level of repairability is sufficient, and by what metric? What parts should be interchangeable? Battery and camera? Should we merely make the phone's case easy to open?
It's almost as if making decisions involved making decisions. What's your point?
> Why is any one or a combination of these things something that consumers are entitled to and need to have protected by law?
That's in the article. Besides, "because they (resp. their elected representatives) want" is a perfectly valid and sufficient reason.
I meant the exact opposite.
Recycling is inefficient. Repair requires skill, but is possible, energy-conserving as well as reduces pollution generally. See Louis Rossmann.
Recycling is inefficient. Repair requires skill, but is possible, energy-conserving as well as reduces pollution generally. See Louis Rossmann.
I guess this will had nothing to do within the availability to use good Nokia Lumia Phones within them extraordinary 42Mp Carl Zeiss camera within a Linus' based Operating System.
Wondering what Louis Rossmann thinks of this EU plan. He has been big on promoting right to repair in the US.