[Delk]

I'm not an Apple apologist by any measure, but I don't think that's really true. At least last time I looked into it, Apple supported their devices with software updates for longer than the majority of other vendors in the market (for the majority of their devices at least).

Of course Apple is a company that likes to keep a tight control of their market and their image, and you could maybe say they go to the point of control freakiness in that regard. Any potential loss in image regarding the quality of their products is a significant cost to them; being able to charge a premium for replacement parts probably doesn't hurt either. If independent repair shops and consumers lose something in repair costs and freedom, that probably doesn't tip Apple's scale in any way. For the rest of the society it could, and if needed, Apple (or any company) needs to be able to be criticized for that, and legislation needs to cater to that and not to the needs of any single corporation.

Edit: It might be worth pointing out that while yes, Apple would probably like you to buy a new phone within five years, e.g. many Android devices aren't supported for more than a couple of years. I agree you shouldn't necessarily be forced to buy a new device even every five years, but most other vendors aren't any better in that regard.

[ClumsyPilot]

>Apple supported their devices with software updates for longer than the majority of other vendors

The situation is exactly the opposite when it comes to computers/laptops. I can still have latest version of Windows on my father's 2011 laptop.

Secondly, this whole 'loss is image' is a giant smoke screen. Consider that you can repair a BMW in a random garage with unauthorised parts and incompetent repairmen - and you might even die as a result. Does BMW's image suffer? Is their brand worth nothing?

The consumer can comprehend the consequences of repairing his device where he chooses, this is not medical equipment. Using copyright to restrict repairs is a bastardisation of copyright law - it's intended purpose is wholly different.

[Delk]

I didn't say I agree with preventing unauthorized repairs. I don't, and my comment wasn't meant as apologetics.

I was merely speculating on why it might make sense for Apple to want that kind of control even if it isn't in the best interests of anybody else. The costs to everybody else just have no weight to them, as long as their customers keep paying, and thus even a small potential matter of image could weigh more to them. That doesn't mean you, me or anybody else should support that line of though.

BMW might not mind having that kind of control either if their customers and the legislation were to put up with it.

Your point about computers is valid.

[ClumsyPilot]

Apolliges, i see what you are saying now