Discussion on:

Five ways manufacturers make devices hard to repair

While this doesn't fall into the consumer device catagory we have one industrial product that we try to work on, that has a soldered battery, Desoldering the old battry is easy but installing the new one often destroys the equipment. This product is designed to run continuously so there is no power switch. This means that the final battery connection must be made cleanly (like a switch) and then soldered without disturbing the connection. Any disconnect/connect made during soldering caused the onboard processor to hang/crash and the unit becomes a dead box.

I only had to do this once and luckily had enough room to add in a holder which meant I didn't have to risk it like this. Worth remembering that when you make a change like this you can add 'improvements'

Thank You Bill... I was going to attempt this, there are a lot of kits offered accomplish this. They all have the disclaimer, "You may damage other components", but they don't disclose the risk or suggest not doing it. Clary Walker

It's about time the "greens" started exerting pressure on manufacturers who deliberately make products which are difficult or impossible to repair. In today's world where we're all encouraged to recycle, why are manufacturers allowed to do exactly the opposite? Whereas I do appreciate a portable device that's lightweight, this obsession with thinness (Macbook Air and Ultrabooks) is imho just crazy. Add another couple of millimetres and make it repairable - and advertise this as a selling pooint - and it could improve sales, but no, it's style and fashion (another eco-hostile industry) that are all-important. Is there any manufacturer willing to stand out from the crowd?
One reason I don't like Apple products is because they're the classic eco-hostile company, even to the point of avoiding having memory card slots or removable batteries so that to upgrade, you have to dispose of your existing iPod, iPhone, iPad or whatever and buy a new one - totally wasteful of resources.

...if it were possible. What happened to eco-consciousness? It's all about being cool. "I've got the coolest device." Nice if someone could reply: "yeah, well, it's at the cost of my children's health. Good on ya, mate. A bit entitled, ya reckon?"

What we waste to satisfy our obsession over style and fashion - it's really sad. Every time they dangle the lastest "cool" gadget in front of us, the drooling masses practically trip over each other to be the first in line.

1. What does someone's health care costs have to do with someone else's obsession with the latest gadgets?
2. Entitlement - I bet you have some new & trendy products lurking around you home. How eco-friendly are your home, car, clothes, electronics? I bet you could find some room for eco-improvement. I know I can.

This law has forced auto engineering (particularly) to simplify designs and make them far easier to disassemble. This also makes disassembly for repairs much simpler and less costly.

Interesting that the German economy is still one of the strongest in the world. What was it? Unemployment 5.4% with the "Euro crisis". Even in the best of times Canada's unemployment is around 6.x%
Perhaps there is some thing interesting here!
And hey, it is fun to fix things!

...Germany & Canada's low unemployment rates are due to people repairing instead of buying electronics. Connect the dots for me here.
Also, Germany's unemployment rate is more like 6.8% & Canada's is 8%

Canada's is like 40% (made up figure), nearly half our population doesn't work, they just aren't counted cause they aren't actually looking for jobs. Canadian's know which group of people I am talking about.

But not many accept that Politician's are a Drain on the system and should be destroyed to improve Life, Liberty and The American Way.

Col

"Destroying" politicians for what they do (which is mostly charm people for their votes) is like beating the dog for pooping in the house when you forgot to let it out. Politicians don't vote themselves into office, the people do. Get active and politically involved if you want things to get better. Otherwise you;re just like millions of other of the masses, just complaining.

You ask how do Pollies get Elected. That's easy some people vote for them but most defiantly not a majority of People in the US just a Majority of people in the US who Vote.

I live in Australia and here we have to vote but there is a benefit. If 25% of the electorate do not think that a Proposed Polly is worth their vote and say so on their Ballot Paper that Polly is not allowed to run again and another Election has to be held in that Electorate with different Candidates.

I'm unaware of anything similar that is even possible in the US let alone voting for the President which simply is not in the hands of the people. If it was possible for the people to demand different candidates Pollies would be far more likely to be part way honest.

Of course here they hide the fact that they can be thrown out and wear Brown Pants when they see a Informal vote approaching 12%.

Col

You have a good point. "The unemployment rate can be defined as the number of people actively looking for a job divided by the labour force." according to http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/unemployment-rate. IMHO, the true unemployment rate should be the number of unemployed adults of working age divided by the labor force.

But, the funds are consumed by the bureaucracies which impose them. So when you buy a can of paint, you pay $0.85 even if you return the can empty. If you buy a CD/DVD you pay $0.21 in case you might pirate a song or movie. When you buy a monitor (any kind), you pay by the size. It can be high but no one seems to know how to recycle an LED screen. Actually, the "recycling" fee is not for recycling. Recyclers make their money from the "scrap" value or gov't subsidies. Guess that makes sense since you pay a Goods & Services tax anyway when you buy new or used stuff. But still, the imposition of digital TV has contributed tons of working TV sets with lead and other heavy metals in them just so someone/gov't can make money selling bandwidth or new sets. As Alexei Sayle used to say, "It's a Strange, Strange World, Innit?".

The picture is bit more complicated than this. There is a so called Environmental Impact Assessment and Product Lifecycle Management. Manufacturers and designers use these fused with their ideologies to find the optimal size.
As for the impact:
A small product means smaller material throughput: less mining, transport of raw materials, energy used in processing, and again less energy used in transporting the final product...less energy need for the recycling process (if properly implemented) and finally there is less trash left. Bigger products mean more of all these.
As for the lifecycle:
First of all, bigger products end up being trash too even if you repair them once or twice. On the other hand there is no sense of making a device solid as Stonehenge when it is outdated in a couple of years at best. It is hard to estimate the pace of development, I know.
I have an eight years old laptop. It is solid as a brick and almost as heavy. There was (i guess) possibility to repair it but no need. I'm sure It's no surprise that it is still just a big heavy piece of trash by now even though it is running as perfectly as it did before.
There are competing interest in this for sure, not even just two of them...

The sealed for life policy of the smaller more efficient units may incur greater frequency of replacements. This may outweigh their smaller per unit eco impact against one longer lived large old unit.
However I do not believe eco is the force 4 change as much as the bottom line.
Many Business users have not changed their XP pc's because they are considered still fit for purpose, so will stick more RAM in it, replace Hdd's to increase return on investment.
Sealed for life takes that option away placing the risk of premuture replacement costs through failure or under specing on them. So the onus should be upon the manufacturers to prove to the users that the inherent reliability from these production methods are capable yielding the required return on capital.

Would most companies or businesses fail if their technology lasted a couple of years longer? What if they were made to be of value for recycling? After all, the data and output is still the same as it always was; information being the reason for doing business, not the speed, especially milliseconds. If you break the law by speading 10mph over the limit and drive from New York to Los Angeles (about 4000mi by road) and not counting sleeps and eats and off-gassing, you would save 2 or so hours. Is that worth it? Only if you want to kill yourself and the whole world. After all, every great "civilization" has crashed in the last few millenia. But since the effects were local. But survivors just moved on to a new location. Today, there is no where else to go if/when, our current worldwide "civilization" crashes. Everything and everyone will be impacted. Read Ronald Wright's "A Short History of Progress".

I don't care about the so-called "eco" aspect...however, I agree with the repair statements. The problem is, consumers just don't care. They want the "cool" gadgets - they never plan on repairing them anyway. Us techies want to be able to repair the phones like we do with computers, but until the overall marketplace demands it, it will never happen.

The manufacturers don't want you to fix the device ....... they want to sell you a new one !

I guess the millions of dollars they spend in customer support & tech support to help consumers use the products counts for nothing. You try helping someone with a short temper, short attention span and even shorter desire (not capacity!) to actually listen and learn to use their devices. BTW, most companies are in business to make profits, it's like fundamental.

Why did HP not write or provide the solution for a Win 7 driver for millions of its 1010/12/15 Laserjets? After all they provide a pre-paid box and label to return the old toner cartridge. But they didn't and their forums are full of thousands of flames.

There are simple ways of getting the old machines to work, even better in some cases by using Vista drivers and "pretending" the machine is something else. And there is a German site which provides an English page with a modified .inf file to replace the XP one. Once you do this, you insert your old CD and tell your computer which model you have and it gladly accepts what you have. And you mean HP won't tell you this? Green and Eco friendly? Only Public Relations.

And who "sponsored" digital TV, huh? Why the good ole Federal Gov't of the USA so they could auction off the spectrum for billions and get almost everyone to help the economy by buying new digital TVs. Whereby, millions of tons of lead based CRTs and heavy-metal based parts are dumped in landfills, ditches, lakes, swamps and at the back of farms to rot away and release their time-bombs. Like anyone really cares.

Hey wars are for oil. Oil is for cars. Cars are for pollution. Cars need more roads but Freedom is the Right of Anyone to go where and how they want any time. Sorry, no such thing as human eco-friendliness. Until the end of the road comes. (Unless Apple gets to you first. Sorry for that, fankidz.)

Funny how many people around the world are more concerned with where & when their next meal may be or whether they will spend another night in the cold or rain while the rest of us gripe about what version of some device we have is. Consumerism is a terrible thing. Once upon a time people replaced things that could not be repaired, now we make things that cannot be repaired on purpose.

There is nothing wrong in producing light and thin computers!
For less volume and weight in my bag, I can have an MacBook Air *and* an iPad (with a case) than an "normal" notebook. Yes, it costs more. But if it is possible to do technically and is still affordable why not do it? With this combo you get well over 17 hours of computing in two different form factors.

These devices are of course repairable. Might be not with the typical low-tech tools "normal" users have, but after all, those are high-tech computing devices. It has also nothing to do with being environment friendly. The MacBook Air and the iPad are made out of Aluminium, which is an well-recycling material -- unlike the typical laptop that has all kinds of weird materials.

I believe this is all non-issue - just to fill the idle time arguing.

In the industry it's called Congealed Electricity because it eats electricity to make. When talking about buildings which are supposed to last several decades at the very least concrete is considered as Unfriendly to the environment and not green.

All Electronic Devices do not get recycled and you need to remember that there are a lot of other materials in them which is far more valuable than the bit of Aluminum on the outside of them. The Gold Miners here consider it economically viable to get 1.6 grams of gold per ton of earth that they dig up. Electronic Devices have over 2 grams of gold per ton so they are most defiantly worth recovering the gold from.

However making things smaller and lighter has it's advantaged as they cost less to ship and far less packaging is involved in their shipping to their new owners. The down side however is the massive waste of resources that they are when it's easier to throw away than to repair. There are limited amounts of every material used in their construction and I'm not limiting this to just Apple but to all Electronics which need to be preserved not sensesly wasted for short term gain now at the expense of everyone else who will come latter.

Of course that is supposing that you as a Person believe that we as a Civilization have a responsibility to leave the world in a better place for our children than what we received it in. If you don't by all means contribute to that pile of garbage that will be the planet and don't have a second thought about anything, after all it's not going to adversely affect you unless you are young and still have 50 or so years to live.

Col

Most users of gadgets have them as a fashion statement and these, the majority, would not want to repair anything. Indeed, they dump their latest iPhone when the new model comes out.
I on the other hand build everything that I use in computing and phones last me for years. My hobby since retiring from engineering (mechanical) spend time trying to revive computers, that have been condemned by the shop repair people, and I have about an 80% success rate. The costs for repairing these are never silly making it worthwhile. Most of those that bring their machines to me are retired or are families with school children; people who cannot jump and buy the latest fad.
The manufacturers are unlikely to change their ways because they have the majority of their customers in the fashion, throw away mentality range. Thats why I use my equipment until it dies of old age.

I commend you for your public service, I too (being also a mech engineer), to my childrens annoyance, take a delight in rebuilding & refurbishing not only the familys (& friends) pc's,laptops, tv's ect, but cars, bikes & anything else that can be cost effectively fixed, after consideration of the cost/availibilty of spares, tools & skill. Being brought up in post WW2 austerity has had its effect.
The benefits of a greater appreciation how things work & the confidence that this yields I fear will be lost to the future generations to the detriment of industry & country, if this no entry, go buy another trend continues.

Oh how I hate Samsung. Their engineers have quoted 4.5 million Rupiahs to replace the screen board of my 32inch LCD TV which has not been used for more than 15 thousand hours and is in excellent condition. The retail price STILL ON THE SHELVES
3.5 million Rupiahs!!!!! Also, their air conditioning units are crap - 3 year warranty during which the engineers called 17 times (on two of the visits they sent the unit back to the manufacturers) on the 18 visit told me that the unit had been fitted with non-standard parts (by them I hasten to add) and wanted half the price of a new model to replace the generator. Many of their most expensive tv sets sold in the US have had identical breakdowns forcing class actions to get anything done - in nearly every case the sets were using sub-standard (copy) capacitors which they had bought from S/Korea and given to the Chinese for assembly. The previous post referred to "Fashion" - this is Samsung in a nutshell - beautifully designed products but sick inside.

I agree with the comments of JohnOfStony. However, the simple answer as to why make a device hard to repair is because you can sell more devices....period. The manufacturers want us to discard and upgrade, rather than preserve and refurbish the device. That is one of the reasons I hate devices that you cannot service your own battery, which is usually what goes first. Until I got my I-pod Touch, I avoided all personal media player devices that had a battery that could not be changed by the consumer. I finally gave in to the the I-pod because not a one of the replaceable battery devices had the features of the I-pod. Along with that purchase, I had to eat some crow. My I-pod Touch is now a couple months into its third year. The battery is pretty well deteriorated. I have overcome that somewhat by having chargers convenient, like my car and the office, and my briefcase. I have to charge it everyday with normal use. I have a Nook Color, and again had to suck it up on the battery issue because I know of no readers or tablets that have replaceable batteries. I have to charge my Nook about every three days and have had it from the day the Nook Color came out last year. I am careful to let it run down almost completely before recharging as a strategy to extend the battery life. As for other devices, I go through cell phones about once every two years, again because it is so hard and expensive to get them repaired, and also because the replacements always have better and more features than the one you would like to keep running. However, just from normal use, cellphones last about 3 years. Finally, I think that there is built-in obsolescence. The technology is changing so fast that even perfectly running devices start becoming unattractive or inconvenient well before they expire from use. Manufacturers probably depend on this aspect as much or even more than the useful lifetime of a device. Still, there are some things I wish could be reasonably and easily repaired, like cellphones and personal media players.

This isn't just a repair issue: these items are also much more difficult for even the best-performing electronics recyclers to deal with, so recovery rates for recyclable materials are lower than they otherwise would be. Result? More hazardous materials in scarce landfill capacity and ultimately higher prices for virgin raw material for manufacturers and higher prices for consumers.

But with manufacturers focused on designing for a fashion cycle rather than with any kind of sustainability in mind, it is unlikely that this issue will be addressed properly until manufacturers are *forced* to include *full* lifecycle costs in their accounts (rather than obfuscating them in greenwash-style CSR reports).

In addition to an obsession with thinness, there is the manufacturer's intent to control their customers by forcing them to buy new equipment when an old one breaks. Not only is this wasteful beyond belief (anti-green thinking), but it also is typical marketing tactics to control customers and reach into their wallets more often to boost their own bottom line. Too many companies do not really care if they keep their customers poor by fleecing them as often as possible. This is another reason why we have the economic problems we have today - unemployment, tight wallets, decreasing sales, all from ever poorer customers who can no longer contribute to the economy beyond basic living expenses - driving 10 year old cars, keeping everything like appliances longer. Seems self-defeating to me.

It is not only the hardware makers that are guilty, software too must take its fair share of responsibility of obstructing repair of potentialy servicable equipment.

The increase in processing power & storage that has been reqired to run both newer OS's & applications that bring new features of negligable benifit to the majority of users, forcing unnecessary upgrades if not in parts but in total.

The potential introduction of an unswitchable EUFI, walled gardens & other measures designed to "protect us!"

1) Lowers manufacturer cost to make
2) Insures them repeat business (cost to fix is more that buying a new one)

The premise of this article is fundamentally flawed. Electronic manufacturers are not setting out to "make devices hard to repair" rather they are trying to make them as small and thin and light as possible. I'll give you tamper resistant screws but the rest is misrepresentation at best.

Unfortunately, all market forces push in the direction of "hard to repair":

1. Gluing mechanical components and soldering electrical components (rather than socketing them) makes the product more-compact and (arguably) more-reliable.
2. The technology cycle runs six months to a year. Users are expected to toss out "obsolete" items and buy new ones.
3. Both #1 and #2 discourage the "green" approach of "buy something good and //keep// it".

I purchased a Palm T3 and iRiver H120 at Christmas, 2003. Both are working fine (the T3 needed a battery replacement after seven years, which wasn't hard to do). I recently bought an HP 4530s ProBook, which I expect to last at least five years (hopefully twice that). My Asus P4T desktop computer is 11 years old (!) and has given stellar service. I'll be replacing it in a few weeks, mostly because Windows 2000 won't run a number of applications I want to use.

As long as customers want cheap high-tech devices, and are willing to update them annually, there will be little motive to produce products that can be fixed.

While most 'modern' electronics are designed to last 2 years.. I'm in the process of restoring a 45 year old Dynaco Amplifier (Made uin Philly!). Each step is thoroughly doable. In fact, the amp was also sold as a kit in its day. PS.. the old stereo 70 will trash anything you might find at Best Buy and the like. Many modern components are as hard to deal with as those phones and laptops.

Manufacture your own devices.

The downside to that is Aunt Nanny State trying to regulate you out of existence because the existing companies sponsored the legislation as a means of protecting them from competition.

All the things mentioned in the article (with the exception of the oddball screws) do two things: First they make the device sturdier and more reliable. Second, they make the device less expensive and more green to manufacture. Soldered and glued components are not only faster to assemble, they take less materials. A few screws and sockets may not seem like much, but multiply that by a billion devices and you have a significant impact. Glue and solder means fewer trucks moving parts to the factory, less materials going into the device means less material coming out of factories and less material going into the ground at the dump.

The cost of this is, of course, that these devices are difficult to repair. However, I'd argue that even if they were repairable, only a tiny fraction would ever be repaired. Technology is moving so fast that a new device is obsolete in less than two years. While there will always be some people that hang on to old devices, most people will get the newest device because they want something that will work with current technologies

If the device manufacturers need to focus on something, it's improving the devices' recyclability rather than it's repairability.

I wonder whether you'll say the same if your car were to face the same fate, and how much junk there would be.

With the exception of security screws, all of the technologies listed are product cost and size reduction strategies. Like it or not, the market rewards smaller and cheaper so it should come as no surprise that these are used. The market (overall) does not consider serviceability at time of purchase, so it's not a factor.

Security screws are also a cost reduction tool - warranty cost reduction. Security screws form a (minor) barrier to opening a product and are very effective at helping to identify opened product returned for warranty. If the manufacturer doesn't have to pay for warranty repair of consumer damaged items, cost (and hopefully) purchase price go down.

Most consumers replace their phones every 2 years when the contract renews. During that 2 year time frame, I would rather have a product that is flawless than have one that breaks, and is easily repairable. Apple has expended considerable effort to make sure batteries do not have to be replaced during the lifetime of the phone, and have enough power to carry you through most of the day without recharging.
I suspect the cost would be much higher, and reliability reduced, if components were easily replaceable. That would require connectors for each component. Anyone who has worked on anything electrical understands that connections are where most problems occur.

This article has confirmed that the main cause of e-garbage is the police of the manufacturer for no repair, no recycling, not conservation to increase the sales. Our descendants will die in the middle of the huge mass of electronic garbage.