Kinda interesting that people seem to agree here that John Deere is abusive, but Apple does the same thing with consumer electronics, and tends to have a favorable view on this subreddit.
The people who would run to Deere's defense don't hang out on HN.
Tech companies named after fruit and car manufacturers (yes, plural) who's names begin with T and end with A can do little wrong around here. Sure they catch a little flak because they engage in less than ideal behavior (just like every other sociopaths BigCo engages in) but they get at least a partial pass or benefit of the doubt because they make products the HN demographics like and would at least consider owning. Comparatively nobody here sees themselves using their bonus as the down payment on a swather so the narrative devolves into a simplistic and nuance free "Kubota good, Deere bad".
I think the apparent scale of the abuse by John Deere is what puts it in a different class for many people. It's the same shitty philosophy, but companies like Apple and Toyota are tolerable to most people because it's relatively subdued compared to what John Deere is doing.
If my iPhone or my Toyota breaks, I can go to any of a dozen locations in my city and get it fixed in a few days. And basic repairs don't have to be done by a professional. I can still change the oil, brakes, fuel pump, water pump, belts, etcetera on my toyota. I can fix the screen on an iphone pretty easily. From what I hear, John Deere requires official access to the on-board software for even the most mundane of repairs. Something a farmer could fix in 15 minutes turns into a months-long affair. If your Deere tractor breaks, supposedly it's almost impossible to get a tech out to your farm in a timely fashion. So your $1 million piece of equipment is broken during harvest and your crops are dying in the field.
Tesla is pushing the same anti-right-to-repair angle and also seems to get (mostly) admiration by the "tech community" at large. As seems to always be the case, it's a lot easier to be critical when the company/group/individual isn't "on your side".
Tesla avoids supporting third party repairs because repairing a potentially damaged self driving system or damaged batteries can have really bad outcomes. People scrutinize Tesla enough as it is without shoddy repairs making it worse
You do know that is EXACT same flawed logic that Auto Manufacturers have been making for Decades... and the EXACT same aurgument that John Deere, Apple and every other Anti-Repair advocate makes
The plebs just can not be trusted to repair their own things, it is far too dangerous. If you repair you iPhone you might burn down your home, if you repair your brakes you might kill grandma, and if you repair are Tesla you might .....
Safety has never, and will never be a valid reason to prohibit independent / self repair
A potentially damaged fuel system or potentially damaged hydraulic brake system can also have really bad outcomes, but I can buy a replacement fuel pump or brake caliper over-the-counter at O'Reilly Auto and install them with no interference from the manufacturer.
Which is luckily illegal in the EU. Tesla will be sued big time at some point as they do not play by the rules like the other manufacturers. Tesla makes VW look like pure angles.
I don't know, Louis Rossmann (an independent Mac repair technician who campaigns if favour of right to repair) has become a bit of a celebrity in recent years[1], and Apple has been forced by public pressure to soften their stance with regards to independent repair shops[2].
It wouldn't surprise me to learn that when someone mentions right to repair, more people think about Apple rather than John Deere. (Especially considering that, in my experience, many city people don't even know what John Deere is, this is definitely the case outside of the US at least).
Perhaps the shorthand of “sub” would be a better generic term, as in a community of people isolated underwater, smelling our own farts, threatened by hull breaches and whose interaction with the outside world mostly involves pings. :)
I think a differentiating factor could be history. Historically farmers have always been able to work on their equipment and this has been long factored into the cost of running a farm. Slowly they are being pushed out of that repair model and their costs are going up. Farm equipment gets a massive amount of physical abuse and it is expected they will break and the farmer can fire up that old generator welder, get out the magic mallet of repair and give 'er a few good whacks. Most of the diesel engines are even designed to be field repaired. On some of them, you can even pop the cylinder sleeves out, swap out the piston rings and you are back in business. People are still coming up with newer simpler tools to do this quickly. If you want to see some amazing ad-hoc repair jobs, watch Andrew Camarata's youtube channel. [1] He brings old rusty equipment back to life and then uses them to make money.
Apple devices have always been designed with limited end-user serviceability. You can reload the OS, change some firmware settings, but not much more. In my opinion, the majority of people buying these devices expected them to "just work". When that ceases to be the case, people go to the Genius Bar.
I could really use an accessible YouTube channel about basic electronics diagnosis - how to diagnose a failed unit from power supply forward through components. I like EEVblog but it assumes a little more prior knowledge than I have.
Not just Apple, but also any video-game console manufacturer.
There are justifiable reasons to limit users' ability to modify firmware. Piracy prevention is one. Also warranty. Users might run modified software that breaks the vehicle, then restore OEM software. A potential compromise might be to release keys, but cancel warranty for customers to opt to do so.
It is not the same. John Deere is taking predominantly mechanical devices and embedding technology for the purpose of artificially locking them down.
Apple is building devices that are inherently difficult or impossible to service without a supply chain of bespoke parts—and refusing to open their parts supply chain.
That is the exact same thing. Apple even glues stuff just to fuck with people that want to repair anything. If anything Apple is worse than John Deere (by far IMO).
To imply that adhesives are chosen “just to fuck with” repairers is absurd, paranoid and trivially falsified. The use of adhesives is widespread in the industry and are necessary for effective IP-rated waterproofing of these thin devices.
Consumers wanted phones that didn’t die when accidentally dropped into the bath. Apple, Samsung, etc complied.
Devices are still repairable, you just need knowledge of techniques and replacement adhesives. But now the chances of needing a repair in the first place have greatly lowered. That seems like a consumer friendly win to me.
Just because it is used for other reasons doesn't mean it can't be used to fuck with repairers too. Apple has a long history of doing just that. I take it you are not a fan of Louis Rossmann?
Louis Rossman is a moderately competent microelectronics repairer who found his calling as a YouTube entertainer and low-grade anti-Apple meme celebrity. He produces entertainment content where Apple features as 'the bad guy' and many people find it utterly captivating. He is barely qualified to have an opinion about why complex electronics products are made the way they are.
Tech companies named after fruit and car manufacturers (yes, plural) who's names begin with T and end with A can do little wrong around here. Sure they catch a little flak because they engage in less than ideal behavior (just like every other sociopaths BigCo engages in) but they get at least a partial pass or benefit of the doubt because they make products the HN demographics like and would at least consider owning. Comparatively nobody here sees themselves using their bonus as the down payment on a swather so the narrative devolves into a simplistic and nuance free "Kubota good, Deere bad".