[GTALUG] Ontario Bill 72: "Right to Repair"

[Gary]

Its planned obsolescence.

At one time many companies were run by engineers; sadly, now the MBA's 
are in charge so "the art of the scam" takes centre stage, which means 
that, rather than providing value, it is better to fool people into 
paying up for something that is of less value than is generally perceived.

/gary

On 19-03-07 11:17 AM, Don Tai via talk wrote:
> It is not advantageous for hardware companies to make devices 
> serviceable. A device that is not serviceable can be designed to be 
> more cheaply manufactured. Consumers, apart from the geek crowd, don't 
> seem to care about repairability when they flip their devices every 
> 2-3 years. Batteries are also close to exhausted around the 2-3 year 
> mark. Gluing together pieces is a really pain in the butt. I much 
> prefer screws.
>
> If it broke, I will likely take it apart, if only for fun. You can 
> tell a lot about the quality of a manufacturer from the inside of a 
> device. I don't think this proposal will go anywhere, but hope that it 
> does. Keeping an old laptop or desktop in service has led me to Linux, 
> the only OS that is still mildly viable.
>
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 10:02, Giles Orr via talk <talk at gtalug.org 
> <mailto:talk at gtalug.org>> wrote:
>
>     On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 08:50, Stewart C. Russell via talk
>     <talk at gtalug.org <mailto:talk at gtalug.org>> wrote:
>
>         On 2019-03-05 10:04 p.m., Howard Gibson via talk wrote:
>         >
>         > One of the basic rules of Design For Manufacture and
>         Assembly is that
>         > you should not use screws.  The preferred way is for
>         everything to
>         > snap together.
>
>         Snaps are okay for a short time if you can access the service
>         manual to
>         see where they are. Slide the spudger in the wrong place and
>         you'll
>         break a snap, ending up with a case that sags in one spot. So
>         /design
>         for manufacture/ can be counter to /design for repair/.
>
>         The original Apple Macintosh was one of the first /design for
>         manufacture/ computers. It required the dealer-only "case
>         cracker" tool
>         - a long Torx T15 bit with a spudger lever on the end:
>         https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/a/118/439 - that told
>         the story
>         that Users did not belong inside the case*. Apple's previous
>         computers
>         invited you inside - the Apple II's top just lifted off
>         without tools.
>
>         Right to Repair is important. I'm slightly disappointed by the
>         general
>         reaction on this list. We'll spent lifetimes fiddling with
>         software
>         configs to keep it running against all odds, but hardware gets
>         short
>         shrift. I know that processing power and storage improvements
>         have made
>         it poor business practice to get sentimental about keeping older
>         computers running, but some curiosity over how repair and
>         replace is a
>         good thing. We can't live on a growing mountain of e-waste,
>         after all.
>
>          Stewart
>
>         *: the Macintosh had a CRT inside and thus hilariously fatal
>         voltages
>         for the unwary. It could be said Apple were only doing the
>         right thing
>         keeping Users out. But other computers had built-in CRTs with
>         only the
>         usual warnings and mounting screws. One example would be the
>         Commodore
>         SX-64, a device clearly designed for confusion. The SX-64
>         appears to be
>         a random collection of boards held together by ... another random
>         collection of boards and little else.
>
>
>     Totally with you on snaps: even with cautious disassembly you're
>     likely to have breakage by the third time you go into the case. 
>     Screws are definitely the way to go.  Tedious, yes, but sturdy and
>     repeatable.
>
>     Also totally with you on Right to Repair: I volunteered for Repair
>     Cafe ( http://repaircafetoronto.ca/ ) for about three years, and
>     even in that time saw how much harder it was getting to get inside
>     a standard laptop.
>
>     Upgrading RAM used to be a common activity, even on a laptop.  But
>     now the manufacturers solder RAM to the board (and glue the case
>     shut even if it's not soldered down).  Yes, this makes the machine
>     marginally slimmer, but it also makes it totally non-upgradeable. 
>     Same with hard drives (spinning, SSD, NVMe ... just give us an
>     access hatch.)
>
>     Another major argument in favour of right-to-repair is something
>     as simple as cleaning dust out of your processor fan.  I think
>     it's a bit crazy to have to pay the manufacturer several hundred
>     dollars to do that for you.  These are all things that used to be
>     simple and still could be, but consumers have been deliberately
>     locked out for a small increase in profits - and to the detriment
>     of the environment. <sigh>
>
>     -- 
>     Giles
>     https://www.gilesorr.com/
>     gilesorr at gmail.com <mailto:gilesorr at gmail.com>
>     ---
>     Talk Mailing List
>     talk at gtalug.org <mailto:talk at gtalug.org>
>     https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
> ---
> Talk Mailing List
> talk at gtalug.org
> https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20190307/2b0c3118/attachment.html>