Android
DROID DOES
Welcome to the droidymcdroidface-iest, Lemmyest (Lemmiest), test, bestest, phoniest, pluckiest, snarkiest, and spiciest Android community on Lemmy (Do not respond)! Here you can participate in amazing discussions and events relating to all things Android.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules
1. All posts must be relevant to Android devices/operating system.
2. Posts cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
3. No spam, self promotion, or upvote farming. Sources engaging in these behavior will be added to the Blacklist.
4. Non-whitelisted bots will be banned.
5. Engage respectfully: Harassment, flamebaiting, bad faith engagement, or agenda posting will result in your posts being removed. Excessive violations will result in temporary or permanent ban, depending on severity.
6. Memes are not allowed to be posts, but are allowed in the comments.
7. Posts from clickbait sources are heavily discouraged. Please de-clickbait titles if it needs to be submitted.
8. Submission statements of any length composed of your own thoughts inside the post text field are mandatory for any microblog posts, and are optional but recommended for article/image/video posts.
Community Resources:
We are Android girls*,
In our Lemmy.world.
The back is plastic,
It's fantastic.
*Well, not just girls: people of all gender identities are welcomed here.
Our Partner Communities:
view the rest of the comments
I think the difference is that Apple products can be repaired, as parts are plentiful for third party repairers and apple will also repair it (for a premium).
The article is saying how no-one, not even Google, can repair a pixel watch as there were no spare parts produced.
Edit: I understand their repair policies re MacBook repair shops etc, but for a consumer being told that even the manufacturer can't do anything is a bit galling and cause for reflection on future purchases.
Thank you for helping with a drill down on that comment, instead of making fun of the commenter. You are lawful neutral. Keep up the good work.
There, fixed it for you.
I recommend that you watch Louis Rossmann on YouTube. He regularly presents how Apple prohibit repairs by third parties either by adding software locks to simple parts, prohibiting parts contractors from selling spare parts, donating to anti-repair lobbying group among many other practices.
Migrating to Apple because Google didn't repair a product is a very weird move. Both of those companies are to be blamed, but Apple much more in my instances.
But the point of the article is that the watch literally can't be repaired - no first or third party can do it.
But I can get any apple watch repaired. Yes they are scummy about third party, but apple will gladly repair it for money.
I can understand the shift.
Apple does the same. Not a third party, Apple themselves will NOT repair some broken devices that have broke because of Apple's design issues. Again, I urge you to watch Louis Rosmann. He has covered many instances of these.
You should give Google a hard time because what they are doing it is shitty. But Apple is not the answer. They do the same and more. The difference is that unlike Google, Apple won't let someone else repair it either.
You’re making a very narrow point and asking people to just watch an entire YouTube channel (and one where the subject goes on and on and on an about everything) to hopefully find proof?
Narrow point? The argument was that Google themselves don't fix the smart watch, but Apple wouldn't do such a thing. My point is that Apple does the same. How else would you want the counter arguments to be?
I presentes you Louis Rosmann, a subject expert in the field and one of whole world's leading advocate on right to repair. His channel has investigations on thousands of right to repair violations and scams from companies. What else would you expect? You don't want trust a random commenter on the internet but you also don't want to listen to the leading advocate in this domain either? Then maybe use the search function in YouTube, Google or in ChatGPT because please don't expect the said random commenter to spend their own time curating to spoon feed you information.
if you have a timed stamp example of the point that would be one thing. Citing an entire channel, and particularly one where he rambles on forever is a bad source.
I just came across a specific video and I remembered your comment. This whole video is good but you can start watching from 8:42 and 10:49 marks since you requested for a timestamp.
https://youtu.be/Z0DF-MOkotA?si=fvqW4_rqwnKfsuVz&t=522
And if you have 24 minutes to spare here is another video with packed full of examples.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8