Why France's new 'repairability index' is a big deal:
Our electronic devices take a serious environmental toll, and one of the best ways to mitigate that is to use them for as long as possible before replacing them. But it's hard to know how long a new gadget will last if you're unsure how easy it will be to fix. Now, companies are going to have to start coming clean about that — in France, at least.
In a world first move last month, France began requiring makers of certain electronic devices, including smartphones and laptops, to tell consumers how repairable their products are. Manufacturers selling these devices in France must give their products a score, or "repairability index," based on a range of criteria including how easy it is to take the product apart and the availability of spare parts and technical documents. While France won't be enforcing use of the index with fines until next year, some companies have already begun releasing scores for their products.
The repairability index represents part of France's effort to combat planned obsolescence, the intentional creation of products with a finite lifespan that need to be replaced frequently, and transition to a more circular economy where waste is minimized. But it also has global implications. Repair advocates say that the index will serve as a litmus test for other nations weighing similar regulations, help consumers make better choices, and hopefully incentivize companies to manufacture more repairable devices.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26 2021, @10:52PM (6 children)
Apple's new iPhone has a reported French repairability score of 10/100.
Who cares, I love it, it's sooo thin and sexy. I'm going to stand in line to buy it when it comes out!
(Score: 1, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday February 27 2021, @12:03AM (1 child)
More like, it'll have a score of 98/100 because those scores are set by the manufacturers. They add -2% to their score because you're too smart to believe a 100/100% score, but dumb enough to believe everything else. Also, Jews.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @02:08AM
Yeesh, it's like you don't want to be taken seriously.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @12:39AM
(Score: 2) by zocalo on Saturday February 27 2021, @07:34AM
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 2) by driverless on Saturday February 27 2021, @10:50AM
Unless you're German, in which case it offers to collaborate in repairing itself.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2021, @09:56AM
It is between 4.5 and 6 points out of 10. Sure you can take it apart and physically change some things if you have the parts. But getting the parts and getting the software to cooperate is something else altogether.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/26/22302664/apple-france-repairability-scores-index-law-right-to-repair [theverge.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @12:34AM (1 child)
That's the archetype of the business model they are decrying.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by fakefuck39 on Saturday February 27 2021, @08:10AM
It's the exact opposite of what you say. "Disposable razor" literally is marketed as a product meant to be thrown away after use. A $2000 TV, that after a year will cost you $1000 and two weeks to fix, is not marketed as disposable, but actually is. What France is trying to do is make it known to the consumer what TVs are actually Disposable TVs, and have them labeled as such, like the razor is.
The business model they are decrying is not things being disposable. It's the business model that lies to the consumer. They want the business model the disposable razors follow.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by SomeGuy on Saturday February 27 2021, @12:39AM (1 child)
Does this address IOT shit or other devices that stop getting software updates after five minutes, turning them either in to a must-replace-already security hazard or a useless brick because some feature does not work any more. What about devices that completely rely on an external service to operate? Can we use them for something else when the company goes under?
How about devices that are digitally programed to stop working (or pretend to have problems) after X number of uses. I'd like to see that punishable by death.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @12:48AM
Printer ink and toner cartridges, printers themselves. We feel your pain.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @04:07AM (1 child)
Devices that are sealed and non user repairable should be required to have unlimited warranties for the useful life of the device (a minimum of five years). If you make a device where the user can easily swap parts (e.g., user replaceable battery), and offer reasonably priced replacement parts over the useful life of the device (min. 5 years), then you are allowed to offer a shorter hardware warranty (but still a minimum of two years).
Software updates (if applicable) should be required for a minimum of five years since the last date of sale of the device.
We throw away way too much stuff simply due to it being too difficult to replace normal wear items like batteries.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 27 2021, @12:27PM
That would be far better than what we have today, but I think five years only seems like a good target because we're used to pure garbage. The real target should be ten or fifteen years.
The technology industry would also have to shift its practices to handle these longer product lives. Even if my first few Android phones still worked, they can't run any modern software because 512MB of RAM is a joke in 2021. But that's only true because the tech industry has no financial incentives to care about software efficiency.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Nuke on Saturday February 27 2021, @02:16PM (2 children)
I repair a lot of stuff. Many failures that would result in most people replacing the whole item are caused by one small and cheap (to manufacture) component. But often I can't obtain a replacement, so I make a new component myself - and I'm not talking about 3-D printing (I hate plastic BTW)*.
But a problem is often that the item has obviously been assembled by robots and is almost impossible to repair unless, like the robot, you have three hands, only 2" wide but with 10" long fingers of immense strength - and X-ray vision. This was not a problem with older stuff because it had to be assembled by humans.
* Cases in point:
1) 5 years ago I repaired a HP CP1700 printer. The plastic latch holding down the print heads broke (fatigue). I made a replacement latch of brass, it required some soldering. This printer is now ~20 years old and suits me fine.
2) Only yesterday the toilet flush stopped working. The link between the lever and the lift pump was a square plastic rod, 4" long and 3/8" square (fatigue failure again). I replaced it with a square steel rod from a door handle mechanism (I have a box of old ones).
3) Last week I bought a new washing machine. The main bearing of the old one had failed. Ball races of this size cost only around £10-20, but they designed this one to be impossible to replace. You have to buy an entire new outer-and-inner drum assembly. This would cost almost as much as a new machine, plus the cost (or DiY effort in my case) of almost entirely dosmantling and re-assembling the machine. In othe rrespects the old machine was fine, and in fact I dismantled it anyway to keep the main motor, pump, pressure switches etc as spares for the new one.
As I said, I hate plastic, at least when used structurally.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 28 2021, @05:54AM (1 child)
Speaking of plastic, the most *infuriating* use is when they *design* a key element from plastic that is a key part subject to wear. Steel is cheap. Very cheap. I can only see making a key bearing out of plastic as a form of planned obsolescence. It's like software with a license counter that decrements every time you use it until it reaches zero and refuses to run again until you repurchase it.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Nuke on Sunday February 28 2021, @11:38AM
Having been using and repairing stuff for years, and what I notice is that in successive models, structural metal parts are often replaced by plastic parts to exactly the same design. I have no doubt that they used the previous metal part as the moulding pattern for the plastic one. There is no allowance for the lower strength or fatigue resistance of plastic. An example in my washing machine is that the big belt-drive wheel on the drum is now plastic whereas in the previous machine it was aluminium. I don't think it is a issue in this case, but it comes to mind as I was changing the machines over yesterday.