this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
540 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

33574 readers
132 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 242 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Even more dramatic is that if a repair service provider discovers a third-party spare part that was installed in a Galaxy device as part of a previous repair, they must immediately disassemble the smartphone, tablet or notebook into its individual parts and inform Samsung of the details of the respective incident.

Well this feels illegal (or certainly should be). Imagine taking your car in for a repair only to find out the shop functionally scrapped it and told on you to Ford, all because they noticed you had changed a tire.

[–] Got_Bent 127 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Funny you mentioned that. I was out with my daughter a couple days ago and she got a flat that had to be replaced. She was legitimately worried that Toyota would void her warranty for not buying a tire from the dealership. Nevermind that we were out in rural nothingness with no Toyota dealership to be found.

[–] [email protected] 107 points 1 month ago

Honestly, that's pretty close to what could've been if the Right to Repair act for cars didn't pass back when it did.

[–] snekerpimp 72 points 1 month ago (1 children)

“You used a non-Ford approved part. For your safety, we have disassembled your vehicle and reported you to the consumer protection police. You have lost your license and the full balance of your loan/lease is due in 24 hours.”

[–] Duamerthrax 7 points 1 month ago

Ford: "Please only use certified Firestone Tires with your Explore. We'd hate for your SVU to unpredictably roll over. Better for it to predictably roll over."

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 month ago

Ferrari be like "That's not normal?"

[–] [email protected] 140 points 1 month ago (2 children)

God bless iFixit, and God damn Samsung.

[–] Zekas 5 points 1 month ago

Feels great to have settled for a phone with the features I mostly wanted(where 3.5mm), it ending up a Samsung and then hearing all this.

[–] catalog3115 134 points 1 month ago

The use of aftermarket parts in repair is relatively common. This provision requires independent repair shops to destroy the devices of their own customers, and then to snitch on them to Samsung. 

That's just pure evil and bully. If you have aftermarket parts they will destroy the device and force you to pay for it. This is the reason we need right to repair. Every consumer should support it.

[–] Red_October 113 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's honestly impressive to find out that someone is WORSE than Apple when it comes to repairing and customer rights.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Is this worse? It sounds pretty similar.

[–] Red_October 48 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Apple will tie themselves in knots to make it impossible to repair your tech 3rd party, and maybe even refusing to fix it if it WAS repaired 3rd party before, but I've never heard of them also requiring that it be destroyed and your personal information given over.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They'll brick your device if a part can't be verified so that isn't much different they destroying. Maybe they don't require repair shops to hand over personal info, but they do require device identifiers so I wouldn't be surprised if that is basically identical.

[–] Ptsf 14 points 1 month ago

They don't brick shit, don't lie. It not booting until you swap the part back to a verified part isn't even remotely close to a full bricking.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] someacnt_ 3 points 1 month ago

If you knew Samsung for real, you'd know it only care for its owners and ready to send anyone else to damnation.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"...prohibits repair stores from repairing components on the mainboard. Instead, the entire component must be replaced..."

A flagrant disregard for the costs of e-waste on the environment. What a surprise.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

Not to mention data recovery

[–] [email protected] 74 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I think the part that bothers me the most is that, the customer is likely completely oblivious to the fact that a repair person used a third party part in their device.

I don't think most cellphone users are discerning enough to start checking if the repair place is actually licensed by Samsung to perform repairs or not. They just see the Samsung logo under the banner of "we fix these brands" and go in. As long as it's fully working when they walk out, they couldn't possibly give fewer shits whether genuine Samsung parts were used to fix the device.

This is essentially victim blaming. Anyone who can fix the phone themselves with non-Samsung parts is going to do it themselves and never get "caught" doing it. So instead of "catching" the "bad actors" putting non Samsung parts into phones, they're putting that responsibility on customers? That's a PR nightmare. What the fuck are they thinking?

[–] Restaldt 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

$The$same$company$that$bundles$ bloat/mal/spyware$on$new$devices$

$$$Whatever$$$could$$$they$$$be$$$thinking$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

It’s insane how their smartphones ever became so popular to begin with!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Fair point.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I mean even before that, what VP thought this was a good move?!?! Like who is going to buy your brand again? It’s more amazing Samsung is so out of touch with reality.

Companies are getting away with way too much these days.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Eh most people will never hear of this and if they do probably won't care

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

I'm guessing that samsung probably has a link on their website for people looking to repair their phones and on order to get your shop listed there you have to agree to use samsung certified parts

[–] snekerpimp 64 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Apple: bricks phone with unapproved part. Samsung: “hold my beer”

[–] Dasnap 16 points 1 month ago

Apple: "You've just gotta brick their phone if they use 3rd party parts!"

Samsung: "Brick it, you say?"

[–] Fallenwout 4 points 1 month ago

Samsung is doing the same now with their latest one ui 6.1 update. It makes 3rd party screens unresponsive. There are reports that even rolling back to a previous version doesn't fix the problem.

[–] [email protected] 62 points 1 month ago

Interesting timing, these practices are about to be super illegal under Oregon’s SB1596 right to repair bill that just passed

[–] Dasnap 46 points 1 month ago (3 children)

There are some things I don't really understand after reading this article:

  1. Why exactly does Samsung want the customer data? Are they wanting to ban their Samsung account or something?

  2. How exactly does Samsung police this? Surely the repair shop could just... not tattle?

  3. What the hell does the repair shop tell the customer when they return their phone in literal fucking pieces?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (2 children)
  1. Data sells
  2. Legal TOS
  3. See Samsucks TOS
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

A TOS doesn't give you the legal right to destroy someone's property... At worst they could deny service

[–] MisterFrog 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Something tells me this isn't going to fly in Australia, unless they're willing to be giving out refunds for bricked phones.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

How exactly does Samsung police this? Surely the repair shop could just… not tattle?

Well there is a contract in place and there would be consequences for not upholding the agreement. Sure, they could probably get away with it for quite a while. But it likely isn't worth the risk, they would rather just out Samsung as being a piece of shit and go on their merry way.

It would be pretty easy to catch this as well. Samsung can just occasionally submit a phone with a known third party part for repair and see if the expected report comes in.

[–] Dasnap 5 points 1 month ago

Haha like the kids cops send into shops to buy beer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

To your first point, I just automatically assumed that it was to feed into Samsung AI. I'm not a values customer, but my data sure is 🤡

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 month ago

Fuck Samsung

[–] TrickDacy 31 points 1 month ago

Wow, I didn't know Samsung could really get much less appealing but they absolutely managed to up the ante by a lot. Samsung and Apple will never get another dime from me

[–] Nosavingthrow 15 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Who actually makes a decent phone anymore?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It would be cool if they sold the thing in (or were willing to ship to) my country...

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I ordered mine from http://clove.co.uk/ and they happily shipped to Canada. It has worked fine in Canada, the US, and Barbados (eSIM and physical SIM).

I like the phone a lot, but whenever it's talked about I'm surprised how many people feel the urge to chime in on why it wouldn't work for them.

I'd say my biggest gripe is lack of accessories. I paid the huge price for the official screen protector twice. They both cracked relatively quickly and there are pretty much no other options. I'm using a flexible matte-finish screen protector from Amazon now, but it scratches really easily and will slide around on the screen if I keep my phone in my back pocket.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I didn't say it wouldn't work for me, only that they make it hard to get here.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UncleGrandPa 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It is the many stories like this... That have kept and will continue to keep me from ever buying a Samsung product

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Same with Apple. Saying they'll prevent independent repair from stealing our deleted photos by stealing it themselves.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Almost makes me want to dig my old lg out of mothballs

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I miss using my old lg phones, I had the v30, v40, and v50 and they were basically perfect. Now when I shop for phones it's like looking for the least bad option

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

I was an LG customer for years but let's not pretend they wouldn't be like this or worse if they were still in the game.

load more comments
view more: next ›