Apple Admits The Obvious: User Repairs Harm The Bottom Line
from the well-duh dept
It should probably go without saying, but Apple has never looked too kindly upon users actually repairing their own devices. The company's ham-fisted efforts to shut down, sue, or otherwise imperil third-party repair shops are legendary. As are the company's efforts to force recycling shops to shred Apple products (so they can't be refurbished and re-used), and Apple's often comical attacks on essential right to repair legislation, which only sprung up after companies like Apple, Microsoft, Sony, John Deere, and others created a grass-roots counter-movement via their attempts to monopolize repair.
The motivation for these behaviors is obvious: if users are repairing or recycling their iDevices, that means fewer sales. As such, Apple has increasingly become more and more obnoxious on this front, regardless of the impact on consumer satisfaction, customer rights, or the environment. You know, like that time it claimed that Nebraska would become a "mecca for hackers" (oh no!) if the state embraced legislation protecting a consumer's right to repair their own devices.
Fast forward to last week, when Apple CEO Tim Cook was forced to write a letter to investors announcing that it had to dramatically scale back revenue projections after it sold fewer iPhones than it had hoped. Part of the problem is that, contrary to the traditional gushing mainstream tech press narrative, Apple's products (and smartphones in general) have become arguably more derivative and less innovative than in recent years, slowing the upgrade cycle. Though Cook states the primary culprit was a slowdown in the Chinese economy (caused in part by Trump's "easy to win" trade war), resulting in fewer iPhones being bought.
But buried in the letter is a notable admission Apple has long tried to avoid. That the company's revenue dip was, at least according to Apple, partially due to users repairing and extending the life of their devices:
"While macroeconomic challenges in some markets were a key contributor to this trend, we believe there are other factors broadly impacting our iPhone performance, including consumers adapting to a world with fewer carrier subsidies, US dollar strength-related price increases, and some customers taking advantage of significantly reduced pricing for iPhone battery replacements."
Journalists like Jason Koebler, who has been at the lead of the right to repair beat for years, was quick to appreciate Apple finally admitting the obvious:
"Right to repair advocates have long argued that Apple customers would be able to get a lot more out of their devices if Apple gave them the ability to repair them, but say the company doesn't want to do that because it will hurt its bottom line. Here is evidence that they might be right."
To be clear, Apple appears to simply be talking about its decision to cut its $79 battery replacement fee down to $29 (free, for some) as a way of apologizing for revelations it was intentionally slowing down some older iPhones, something Apple claimed was necessary to protect the integrity of older devices with aging batteries. Still, right to repair advocates like US PIRG, long frustrated by Apple's misdirection on this subject, applauded the otherwise unremarkable admission:
"Over the past year, I’ve spent a lot of time talking to lawmakers and consumers about Right to Repair, and it’s clear that “ThrottleGate” has fundamentally changed the way we think about our smartphones in two key ways. We now know that batteries can be replaced, extending the life of our older phones. We’ve also developed a sense of skepticism about upgrading our smartphones, due to feeling coerced in an underhanded way toward an unnecessary new phone purchase.
“Long-lasting devices are best for consumers, and best for the planet. Which begs the question: Why isn’t Apple out in front of this trend, instead of being caught off-guard by it?"
Granted Apple's arguably minor acknowledgement is not going to stop companies like Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Verizon, or John Deere from continuing their all-out war on a consumer's right to repair, while simultaneously radiating branding that heralds innovation and a breathless adoration of the "user experience." That's particularly obvious in Apple's ongoing assault on the eighteen states currently eyeing right to repair legislation, opposition the company likes to pretend is exclusively driven by Apple's ethical concern about user safety and security.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: battery replacement, disposable society, iphones, repairs, right to repair
Companies: apple
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Yeah, but we've always known that! The fact that Apple ever tried to claim otherwise is particularly despicable in and of itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Planned Obsolescence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Planned Obsolescence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Planned Obsolescence
https://www.fairphone.com/en/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Planned Obsolescence
It was released in December 2014, meaning the thing didn't last a year and a half. Unless someone other than the manufacturer is still supporting it. The FairPhone 2 appears to have been around for about 3 years, so we'll have to wait to see whether it gets to "more than a few".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Planned Obsolescence
Whoever thought this stupidity up needs to be drug out behind the shop, beat with a shock strut, then put out of our collective misery.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Planned Obsolescence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Planned Obsolescence
TBF, in the first few years of rapid smartphone development, 3 years of support was a perfectly reasonable expectation. The difference between the original iPhone and the iPhone 4 was massive, as were the differences between circa-2008 and circa-2011 Android phones.
But things have changed. We're getting our annual spec bumps, but there's no good reason why a 5-year-old phone shouldn't be good enough for most users. (Trust me -- I'm still using a Nexus 5. Or was until its power button quit working yesterday.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Planned Obsolescence
All of them still do exactly what I bought them for; I have no reason to throw them out and replace them.
Apple hardware, both laptops and phones, leveled out around 5 years ago, and everything since then has been feature enhancements, not true game-changing improvements in the technology.
Back when Apple set the 2-3 years schedule, 3 years was night and day difference between hardware; it was faster, more powerful, and had more usable features. That's no longer really the case; the only reason for upgrading software on the devices from back then is to apply security fixes.
So either Apple needs to expand the cycle to a more reasonable (these days) 4-5 years, or they need to provide new hardware that includes indispensable new features. That's not going to happen until 2020 at the earliest for laptops and phones, although I hope that the Mac Pro finally sees the light of day this year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Planned Obsolescence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Planned Obsolescence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Planned Obsolescence
From my parents' home in Wyoming, I stab at thee!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Planned Obsolescence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
For example, the reliance upon oil.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Might be about time for to force Apple to work sustainably
Just so the company with some of the highest profit margins on the planet can make even more money?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cook was referring to their own $29 battery replacement program
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cook was referring to their own $29 battery replacement prog
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apple is one of the worst companys with regard to repairs ,they make it hard to replace ram or hardrives
in their laptops .
Right to repair is good for the environment ,it makes products last longer .
Theres a limited amount of people who buy phones ,
at some point any company can only sell x no of
high priced products.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds like the words of the title should be rearranged:
Apple Admits The Obvious: It Harms Users For Its Bottom Line
[ link to this | view in chronology ]