We're ending our Samsung collaboration

Samsung–iFixit breakup and repair policies

• Many see Samsung’s behavior as confirmation it does not prioritize repairability: high parts prices, restrictive quotas (e.g., ~7 parts per 3 months per shop), and rules forcing replacement of multiple components at once.
• Several report official Samsung repairs costing 1⁄3–3⁄4 the price of a new device, making replacement more rational than repair.
• Some think the partnership was mainly PR; Samsung already had internal refurb/repair channels and little incentive to empower independent or DIY repair.

Views on iFixit’s role

• Supporters credit iFixit with making repairs accessible to ordinary users and pushing OEMs on repairability.
• Critics argue iFixit mostly sells expensive “modules” rather than enabling real board-level repair (no schematics, detailed service docs), and that some iFixit parts/tools are mediocre or overpriced, sometimes even pricier than first‑party repair.
• iFixit’s defenders say higher prices reflect quality control, warranty support, and OEM-imposed costs.

Right to Repair, regulation, and consumer attitudes

• Several compare Right to Repair (R2R) to Free Software: morally compelling but hard to make mainstream buyers care.
• Others argue regulation is more important than consumer choice, citing EU “right to repair” moves and proposals for mandatory disclosure (repairability scores, support lifespans).
• A hardware engineer contends R2R is messy to legislate; prefers long, legally mandated warranties (e.g., 5+ years full repair/replace/refund), which would force OEMs to design more durable or repairable products.
• Counterarguments say warranties don’t cover accidental damage and don’t directly cut e‑waste; open parts and documentation would.

Repairability, longevity, and economics

• Many anecdotes: phones and laptops working well for 5–10+ years if batteries and screens can be replaced; others replace every ~3 years and don’t care about repairability.
• Labor and parts often dominate cost: e.g., modern OLED assemblies and glued designs make screens particularly expensive, sometimes more than a used phone.
• Some emphasize security-update lifetimes as the real limiter, not hardware wear.

Samsung vs other phone makers

• Samsung praised for hardware (screens, stylus, some mid‑range models) and long Android support on newer devices, but heavily criticized for:
  • Bloatware, duplicate apps, ads/dark patterns, telemetry on TVs, and ecosystem clashes.
  • Locked bootloaders (in some regions), hindering custom ROMs.
• Apple is seen as better on long-term software support and service experience, but also criticized for parts pairing, high official parts prices, and form‑over‑function designs.
• Alternatives discussed: Pixels (especially with GrapheneOS), Fairphone (modular and repairable but pricey and bulkier), OnePlus, Motorola, “dumbphones,” and avoiding smartphones altogether.

Broader hardware and appliance experiences

• Multiple horror stories about Samsung appliances (washing machines, fridges) and monitors failing early or being uneconomical to repair; some report good experiences.
• Broader complaint: spare parts for many appliances and cars are priced so high that repair becomes irrational, driving systematic e‑waste and distrust of major brands.