No. I don't think they're going to buy a niche phone. I'm advocating for repair-ability in general. All of my comments have been in response to the original comment I replied to, which was about AppleCare and iPhones.
Also, as for poor folks. Many of them buy iPhones. They do this because appearing poor with a cheap phone from Walmart hampers your career trajectory. These folks are essentially "faking it til you make it". This isn't even wrong, it's just a fact of the way society perceives people. Unfortunately, folks look down on you if you don't own a Samsung or iPhone and wonder why you have a budget flip phone.
These very people are those who would benefit from affordable phone repair. They can easily replace a battery or a screen without paying another $1000+ for an iPhone. This helps them keep up appearances while saving money. I know many, many folks like this. It's important we fight for these repair options to help all of us out.
Yes, there is no denying that self-service repair would help the people who are willing and able to do so.
However, I'm just saying that market is not incentivized to do so. The BOM cost would be too high and the volume too low for it to be a cheap phone to begin with, so the affordability angle is a non-starter. Cheap high-volume glued-together phones will always be cheaper.
If people really can't afford a screen replacement at a repair shop, the market will sell them a <=$50 phone. If people really don't want to buy a $50 phone and want to spend more for an iPhone, they have demonstrated that they are willing to make the sacrifice to do so.
If people want an iPhone, then the Fairphone is not a solution to that problem either.
> Cheap high-volume glued-together phones will always be cheaper.
I appreciate your cost focused perspective on this. I really do. What I'm trying to argue is that it is necessary to stop doing this. I foresee that just like the EU forcing USB-C into the iPhone, we could also see more repair-ability to combat climate issues, e-waste, etc.
The world is going to have a hard pill to swallow, not everything is about profits. Sometimes things need to be done because they are good for us and our society.
> If people want an iPhone, then the Fairphone is not a solution to that problem either.
I don't think the Fairphone is necessarily the solution either. That was never what I was arguing about. I'd appreciate it if you'd stop bringing it up. I'm not talking about the Fairphone. I'm explicitly talking about why an iPhone user might care about repair-ability.
Cost is a good proxy for resources expended. How many devices exactly are thrown away due to damage vs being EOL'd for other reasons, like vanity, or other obsolescence? Repairability does not equal infinite product lifetime, however it does increase material on the BOM and increase the energy required to manufacture the device. Are you sure that those additional increases in material and energy would be offset by a longer observed lifetime of the device?
I mean, I'm not against repairability laws as a matter of consumer protection, but I think it's pure conjecture to jump to the conclusion that it is undoubtably better for the environment.
If you add 10% of material to the average device to gain 5% average lifetime, you're not decreasing waste. I don't think it would add any lifetime personally, as repair and refurbishment shops already know how to open phones that are glued together and there is a huge industry that refurbs these phones already. I doubt screws will increase the average lifetime of the average phone, it'll just increase the number of screws in the landfill.
If people can't be seen with a cheap phone, a $730 Fairphone will satisfy the "people can see you paid a premium for this" bar, but then if a piece of it breaks the cost is $105 instead of another $730.
It looks like it's made of quality materials (because it is), if anyone looks it up they can see that it isn't a cheap device, if anyone asks you about it you can earn status points by telling them how much you care about the environment etc.
I'm honestly not intending this to sound snarky, but this sounds like something someone with a green bubble would say. If those things matter to a person's audience, they weren't the iPhone crowd anyway.
And it's the exact reason that people keep wanting Apple to make a repairable phone. Someone else can do it, and do a fine job, and you say "green bubbles" and turn up your nose. Well then, where's the repairable phone with blue bubbles, pray tell?
You're dangerously close to an admission that "the iPhone crowd" wants the logo as a status symbol and excluding underprivileged aspirants by increasing the cost of entry is the point.
I'm not doing it, I'm saying that the crowd that cares about iPhone brand image, cares about iPhone brand image.
> You're dangerously close to an admission that "the iPhone crowd" wants the logo as a status symbol and excluding underprivileged aspirants by increasing the cost of entry is the point.
I don't know why you think I would pretend otherwise. Apple's brand image is as a premium product, and Apple has been openly hostile to unauthorized repair for the stated reason that many aftermarket parts are of lower quality than OEM parts. Apple obviously doesn't want low quality refurbs floating around and diluting their brand image.
> I'm not doing it, I'm saying that the crowd that cares about iPhone brand image, cares about iPhone brand image.
The company obviously has a bit of a cult following, but the point is that there are crowds who would have no objection to any premium phone whether it be iOS or Android but would put you in the outgroup if you showed up with a flip phone or anything else that cost <$200. A repairable premium phone checks the box.
There are also crowds that want to see the Apple logo or they'll cast you out. Which makes it hard to argue that there is no market for a repairable phone from Apple -- because there are clearly people who would buy it.
> Apple's brand image is as a premium product, and Apple has been openly hostile to unauthorized repair for the stated reason that many aftermarket parts are of lower quality than OEM parts. Apple obviously doesn't want low quality refurbs floating around and diluting their brand image.
That is indeed their stated reason, and yet Toyota maintains one of the highest brand ratings for reliability even while anyone can have their Prius repaired at an independent shop with third party parts.
> You're dangerously close to an admission that "the iPhone crowd" wants the logo as a status symbol
That's all it is in the US and has been for a long time.
Android was superior for the longest time. I was shocked when I used a friend's iphone and saw they couldn't create folders to organize apps, didn't have widgets, etc.
People in the US just want to be in the club, which is where the ridiculous 'green bubble' snobbery comes from.
Also, as for poor folks. Many of them buy iPhones. They do this because appearing poor with a cheap phone from Walmart hampers your career trajectory. These folks are essentially "faking it til you make it". This isn't even wrong, it's just a fact of the way society perceives people. Unfortunately, folks look down on you if you don't own a Samsung or iPhone and wonder why you have a budget flip phone.
These very people are those who would benefit from affordable phone repair. They can easily replace a battery or a screen without paying another $1000+ for an iPhone. This helps them keep up appearances while saving money. I know many, many folks like this. It's important we fight for these repair options to help all of us out.