Right to repair bill defeated in Canada

So sad

https://motherboard.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/9kxayy/right-to-repair-bill-killed-after-big-tech-lobbying-in-ontario

A right to repair bill that would have forced manufacturers selling electronic devices and other consumer products in Ontario to provide consumers and small businesses with the tools and knowledge to repair brand-name gadgets is officially dead. The failed vote follows lobbying against the legislation from major tech companies including Apple, according to the bill’s sponsor./quote]

When I was in the power electronics field (controllers for battery powered vehicles), I worked with a guy who used to have an electronics repair shop.  This was back in the late 90's, early 2000s.  At one point he made good money repairing things, but as stuff became cheaper, people just started buying new and tossing the old away.  He said it was often only one component that went, but people still didn't bother.

I'm not surprised about this, but it sucks.  Realistically, we may not have many people who could, or would want to, do repairs.  It's no surprise that Apple is against it; even their software ramped down battery life for planned obsolescence.

The right to repair bills are doing well in Europe so far.  No wonder they want to keep it out of North America.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46797396


It's one of the things I search for before I buy something new.  "how do I fix SUCHANDSUCH".  I hate shopping so I would much rather repair or have repaired stuff I love.

I am not surprised. They're not even attempting to hide the efforts they made to defeat the bill. It's so transparent and disgusting.

We need tech- and business-savvy permies to go in and take over one of these smaller companies and make a phone/tablet/whatever that is designed to be reconfigured, to use different body and screen styles, to be repaired, and to be upgraded and retrofitted. What we need is for the clone building/DIY movement to hit things like smartphones and electric cars/electric car technology for retrofit kits on internal combustion engine vehicles.

If such a company existed, it could be set up to buy back, or at least accept donations of, broken or obsolete components, perhaps for a discount on replacements, such that it closes its own reuse/recycling loop.

One of the issues in industry generally these days, I think, is the vertically integrated business. If a company is growing their primary resource, doing all the processing, packaging, shipping, and retailing, they can charge whatever the market will bear, pay the going rate for their employees, and everything else is gravy. It sounds great for the company, but then ideas like making it possible for others to make profitable businesses off the product crop up and look threatening to the company, making money off their product where they could be making even more.

I hate this shit. No wonder there are mountains of e-waste in the world.

-CK

Timothy Markus wrote:When I was in the power electronics field (controllers for battery powered vehicles), I worked with a guy who used to have an electronics repair shop.  This was back in the late 90's, early 2000s.  At one point he made good money repairing things, but as stuff became cheaper, people just started buying new and tossing the old away.  He said it was often only one component that went, but people still didn't bother.

I'm not surprised about this, but it sucks.  Realistically, we may not have many people who could, or would want to, do repairs.  It's no surprise that Apple is against it; even their software ramped down battery life for planned obsolescence.

I was a professional electronic repair tech back in the early to mid 1990's and saw the writing on the wall back then. I ended up getting out and retraining in a new career. The component densities and complexity is so hoigh in a lot of devices, you need specialized equipment and training to fault find and repair them.

One of my day jobs is for a company that makes things.

They offer technical support, spare parts, and repair instructions for anything they made after 1975 and offer spare parts and advice for anything they made since 1930.  

Because of this, they are the largest manufacturer in their field.  People know if they buy from this company, the item will last them several generations.  What usually happens is they buy a used one, love it so much, they save up and buy a new one (the new ones have more features and improved construction so it's worth the money).  The used ones sell for about 80% of the new price.

It's that level of support that helps people choose that brand over any others.

---

Imagining for a moment, a big company choose instead of fighting the Right to Repair bills, they saw how the tide is turning.  They took the money they would have spent fighting and lobbying and they take that money to create a product that is repairable, with tutorials, instructions, extra support.  Maybe if the battery exploding is an issue, they create a system with an easily replaceable and returnable battery.  Cannon has some pretty snazzy parts recycling programmes in place already, so it could follow that.  Use repairability as a marketing ploy.  I bet it would cost less than hiring lobbyists and layers to prevent this legislation.  

I was surprised when my Kindle stopped working, The battery just wouldn't charge, they said they do not repair anything but offer a discount on new. I ended up buying a new one (I had previously had the original Kindle Fire). I hate it. The ads they force on me with it. I didn't want to pay to get them taken off. I just don't think ads should be something I have to pay to get away from on a device I pay over $100 for. I miss my old Kindle.

Nick Kitchener wrote:I was a professional electronic repair tech back in the early to mid 1990's and saw the writing on the wall back then. I ended up getting out and retraining in a new career. The component densities and complexity is so hoigh in a lot of devices, you need specialized equipment and training to fault find and repair them.

Point well taken.  But I still resonate personally with what Chris wrote, above.

I use Apple products, but it’s not like they never break down or develop issues.  I separate my feeling about what I've experienced as the good qualities of Apple products — like ease of use, and general dependability — from my feelings about their planned obsolescence… and about the smug nature of the big monolithic company Apple became.

I’m a DIY’er at heart.

I liked what I learned about Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak’s early idealism.  But it’s well known that Jobs gradually became authoritarian and ultra-competitive.  It seems like he found no way to resist the pervasive business-world patterns.  They transformed him and the company he’d started.  Just one example.

elle sagenev wrote:I was surprised when my Kindle stopped working, The battery just wouldn't charge, they said they do not repair anything but offer a discount on new. I ended up buying a new one (I had previously had the original Kindle Fire). I hate it. The ads they force on me with it. I didn't want to pay to get them taken off. I just don't think ads should be something I have to pay to get away from on a device I pay over $100 for. I miss my old Kindle.

Actually, the adverts made sense to me.  It was a way of subsidizing the product.  The real cost of the fire is expensive, so they found a way to make it affordable to more people by including advertizing.  

I decided I didn't want the adverts so I saved up for a few more months and got the ad-free kindle.  

r ranson wrote:

elle sagenev wrote:I was surprised when my Kindle stopped working, The battery just wouldn't charge, they said they do not repair anything but offer a discount on new. I ended up buying a new one (I had previously had the original Kindle Fire). I hate it. The ads they force on me with it. I didn't want to pay to get them taken off. I just don't think ads should be something I have to pay to get away from on a device I pay over $100 for. I miss my old Kindle.

Actually, the adverts made sense to me.  It was a way of subsidizing the product.  The real cost of the fire is expensive, so they found a way to make it affordable to more people by including advertizing.  

I decided I didn't want the adverts so I saved up for a few more months and got the ad-free kindle.  

The price was the exact same as the old one though. Why were they able to do that one without ads and the new one has to be subsidized?

elle sagenev wrote:

r ranson wrote:

elle sagenev wrote:I was surprised when my Kindle stopped working, The battery just wouldn't charge, they said they do not repair anything but offer a discount on new. I ended up buying a new one (I had previously had the original Kindle Fire). I hate it. The ads they force on me with it. I didn't want to pay to get them taken off. I just don't think ads should be something I have to pay to get away from on a device I pay over $100 for. I miss my old Kindle.

Actually, the adverts made sense to me.  It was a way of subsidizing the product.  The real cost of the fire is expensive, so they found a way to make it affordable to more people by including advertizing.  

I decided I didn't want the adverts so I saved up for a few more months and got the ad-free kindle.  

The price was the exact same as the old one though. Why were they able to do that one without ads and the new one has to be subsidized?

Were they built out of exactly the same materials at exactly the same time?

My understanding is that each generation of Kindle was (for the most part) an improvement on the older ones.  Which means different materials.  Plus inflation.

When I was upgrading my kindle, I went to the local computer store and saw some samples of the kindle with adverts.  I decided it was worth my money to save up and get the better version.  I'm very happy I did.  

r ranson wrote:One of my day jobs is for a company that makes things.

They offer technical support, spare parts, and repair instructions for anything they made after 1975 and offer spare parts and advice for anything they made since 1930.  

Because of this, they are the largest manufacturer in their field.  People know if they buy from this company, the item will last them several generations.  What usually happens is they buy a used one, love it so much, they save up and buy a new one (the new ones have more features and improved construction so it's worth the money).  The used ones sell for about 80% of the new price.

It's that level of support that helps people choose that brand over any others.
 

This is why I have a kenwood food mixer, mine is from the 1960's and works fine. I want a new one so am saving for it but I've replaced various bits on other peoples machines and every bit is replaceable and buy-able from kenwood.