Repair goes mega mainstream with the launch of Lenovo’s new T-series business laptops, which earned our highest honor with a 10/10 repairability score.
Yes, this, it’s all good that megacorps “embrace™” reparability (laws?), but the financial aspect is a key aspect of reparability.
If parts aren’t cheap the theoretical ease of reparability is almost irrelevant (apart from the parts so standardised & open that multiple manufacturers offer their parts).
And it can change with time depending on the company - if a manufacturer wants more profit or new units sold, it can just make the parts more expensive. So the actual reparability score can change daily & depending on region.
We need reparability laws that also cover overall cost regulation (including eg software locks of fees).
If so, then the sum of the parts is truly greater than the whole - explaining why Lenovo would want to get into the parts business badly enough to do this. I imagine they’ll reduce the cost noticeably to encourage adaption, then jack it back up once they feel they’re firmly entrenched enough.
No, parts are a complementary business (bcs of how the business/market is set up, life cycle of the laptops, the price of the parts is arbitrary, not marketed, etc - it doesn’t exists without the core business).
What makes financial sense doesn’t really have to make any economical sense unfortunately.
But I would want to live in such a place where it would.
Having said that, Lenovo sure seems to be making some sensible headlines recently.
I wonder what the parts pricing would be like. A genuine lenovo screen replacement is usually about 80% of the ticket price of the laptop.
Yes, this, it’s all good that megacorps “embrace™” reparability (laws?), but the financial aspect is a key aspect of reparability.
If parts aren’t cheap the theoretical ease of reparability is almost irrelevant (apart from the parts so standardised & open that multiple manufacturers offer their parts).
And it can change with time depending on the company - if a manufacturer wants more profit or new units sold, it can just make the parts more expensive. So the actual reparability score can change daily & depending on region.
We need reparability laws that also cover overall cost regulation (including eg software locks of fees).
If so, then the sum of the parts is truly greater than the whole - explaining why Lenovo would want to get into the parts business badly enough to do this. I imagine they’ll reduce the cost noticeably to encourage adaption, then jack it back up once they feel they’re firmly entrenched enough.
No, parts are a complementary business (bcs of how the business/market is set up, life cycle of the laptops, the price of the parts is arbitrary, not marketed, etc - it doesn’t exists without the core business).
What makes financial sense doesn’t really have to make any economical sense unfortunately.
But I would want to live in such a place where it would.
Having said that, Lenovo sure seems to be making some sensible headlines recently.