you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 7 months ago (3 children)

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.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago*

    Yes, this, it's all good that megacorps "embraceβ„’" 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).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago*

    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.

  • source
  • parent