"It is our belief that the bill’s current language around parts pairing will undermine the security, safety, and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow the use of parts of unknown origin in consumer devices."

Key Points:

  • Apple opposed a right-to-repair bill in Oregon, despite previously supporting a weaker one in California.
  • The key difference is Oregon’s restriction on “parts pairing,” which locks repairs to Apple or authorized shops.
  • Apple argues this protects security and privacy, but critics say it creates a repair monopoly and e-waste.
  • Apple claims their system eases repair and maintain data security, while Google doesn’t have such a requirement
  • Apple refused suggestions to revise the bill
  • Cybersecurity experts argue parts pairing is unnecessary for security and hinders sustainable repair.
  • highfiveconnoisseur@lemmy.worldEnglish
    9·
    9 months ago

    Can’t vs won’t. I have no doubt that they could do it, but apple didn’t get to be one of the most powerful companies in the world by doing the thing that is cheaper for the user.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      9 months ago

      Oddly, these hard to repair things in apples case are actually cheaper because of it, and probably in many cases makes them more durable due to less failure points.

      The problems only come up if/when something does fail.

      Having to replace a whole board instead of just the ram isn’t cheaper, but that board per unit is cheaper.