Apple has changed its self-repair program in a way that makes it a terrible option for consumers, but it could make a lot of sense for business computing, especially for those who want to repair iOS devices, whether it's for company devices or consumer devices. BYOD user.
It should be noted that the need for users to always have their phones along with the mass distribution of employees from a remote workforce could make this less attractive. Still, for the large number of users still in large corporate buildings, it's an attractive option.
Let's start with the fun part, describing how ridiculously bad these changes are for some. MacRumors was wonderfully immersed in the experience; These are some of my favorite lines.
"The repair kit comes in two separate packages, and both boxes weigh 79 pounds."
For some consumers, dealing with such heavy packaging (I want brownie points for resisting the urge to call it a "weight problem") is a problem. If Apple wanted to discourage consumers from using this service, that's a great start.
"You get it for a week before you have to return it via UPS, or Apple charges you $1,300."
What if life interferes and the consumer can't finish it in a week? Why not give them a month or, better yet, three months? That would provide much more flexibility.
Also, repackaging nearly 80 pounds of gear and shipping it to UPS, which may not be close by, is a huge hassle. And why only UPS? We may have a lead on that. Another Apple-focused site, AppleInsider, did a great article on a strange deal between Apple and FedEx.
What was so strange? FedEx sent a message to a customer who had lost an AppleWatch returned to Apple, saying "'we must respectfully decline your claim' as there was an addendum to the delivery contract" stating that you agreed not to file any claims arising out of the services transportation provided by FedEx. "The "User" eventually discovered that the addendum was an agreement by Apple to hold FedEx responsible for lost packages headed for Apple."
And when was Apple going to tell everyone about this fix? It appears that the agreement only allowed Apple to dispute the loss of a package by FedEx, not the sender, which is not the case with other packages. In general, it seems best to avoid FedEx shipping for Apple.
Back to auto-repair details. After MacRumors detailed various costs for the show, he did the math.
"That means it costs a total of €95.84 to do a battery change on the iPhone 12 mini, and comparatively it costs €69 for Apple to change it, so it's not really cost-effective to do this repair yourself."
Let this sentence sink in for a moment. It apparently costs 39% more to use the self-service option than to let Apple do it. How does this price make sense? It's like a mechanic saying to a customer, “You've got a dead carburetor. You have two options. You can have a seat in the lounge and we'll replace it for €69 or you can do all the work yourself for €95.84. Your decision."
The only obvious conclusion is that Apple wants to offer this program because of right to repair legislation, but doesn't want anyone to use it.
My favorite: Apple insists that consumers use Apple's proprietary and expensive repair tools. Again, from MacRumors:
"Note that you can order the parts yourself without the tool kit, but Apple's repair manual instructs users to use tools in the kit that they might not otherwise have on hand, such as a battery press designed by Apple. You can buy all the tools individually so you have them on hand for repairs, but Apple components are expensive. A battery press is $115, a torque screwdriver $99, a pocket $116 to remove the screen heated and a €216 screen press, and all these are necessary to remove the battery according to Apple's repair manual.
Wait, it's getting worse.
“As for the actual repair process, Dan found it difficult, even with Apple's instructions and tools. It was frustrating to get into and lacked the kit components the manual required, like tweezers and heat-protective gloves. Dan had to go to the store twice to get more supplies, so the repair took most of the day. Dealing with the adhesive was time consuming and almost killed off auto repair. »
This is the interesting part. As ridiculously bad as Apple's self-healing program is for consumers, it could be a very profitable mechanism for enterprise computing.
Mobile device repair is complicated for IT. There are four categories of users for this purpose. One, office users who have one or more company-owned iOS devices. Two desktop users who own iOS devices (BYOD). Third, remote users who own one or more company-owned iOS devices. Four, remote users who own iOS devices (BYOD again).
To be explicit, options one and two assume that users are working in a building with an IT presence. If there is no significant IT presence where they work, they are considered remote for that specific purpose.
What this Apple self-repair program would do is make it profitable for the IT department to do their own repairs. Being cold and corporate for a while makes more sense for the first option, but much less for the others. If users can just walk up to the IT floor, drop their phone (presumably they would have pre-arranged it with IT so someone has time to help), that makes sense to everyone. It's a cost saver for IT, most of the time.
But the cold corporate truth is that most BYOD users will pay out of pocket to get their phone repaired, even when the repair directly activates a corporate feature they wouldn't otherwise need. For example, your phone may be fighting against IT's chosen VPN or company firewall. The most explicit situation is when the user wants to be without a phone for a while, but needs to use it to log into corporate systems. Even then, those users might say to IT, “Do you want this feature? You pay my phone to greet you.
Realistically, most BYOD users won't mind, especially if they're far away and close enough to an Apple Store that performs such repairs. This is the classic BYOD argument. Since the phone belongs to the user and the user uses it for many personal matters, the question of who should pay for the various repairs is open. Either way, the company is betting on the fact that the user needs the phone enough that if IT makes them wait long enough, it will break and pay for the repairs to do so.
While I've discussed the few drawbacks of working remotely many times, having the IT department perform on-site repairs is one of those rare drawbacks. Users don't like to leave their mobile devices for several days unless absolutely necessary. Of course, if the phone is completely dead, it doesn't really matter.
Copyright © 2022 IDG Communications, Inc.