When a company like Apple says that only their app store can run on iPhones, HN crowd usually sides with Apple, with the justification that "It is a free market. People can buy another phone if they don't like it." Why doesn't the same principle apply here? If your car company does not offer the right to repair, then buy another car. What is the difference? Both are instances of big companies gating access to their devices.
Why do you think so? My impression is that the majority of HN is super critical when you mention Apple and right to repair, and rightfully so. Thinking especially of the Macbook keyboard disaster, or discussions that involve Louis Rossmann.
In TFA, the Tesla is rendered inoperable. An IOS AltStore doesn’t contain much other than ROMs. Even if it contains more, no one apparently can browse the altstore app lists until they go through the effort of installing it —- so no one cares. Also HN has tons of Tesla fanboys.
So I was downvoted but no one has still provided any lists of apps or tweaks worth side-loading onto a iPhone in 2021. This isn’t 2012 when the only way to listen to Pandora or another music app while having another app open on IOS 6 is to jailbreak your phone and use Cydia to install backgrounder.
There is a right to repair on cars, it's a law. But there's not a right to repair on cars someone else owns, ie. a lease, like the customer in the article got his car via.
I agree with that sentiment. If I am renting my car to you and you somehow damage the bumper, I do not want you to duct-tape it and claim that it is fixed without any damage.
Right to repair and sandboxed/secured device operating system have very limited overlap. The intersection happens when the vendor uses a locked operating system to try to enforce parts-marriage or remotely bricks aftermarket-repaired devices. And, in the few places where this happens with Apple, I think HN are very much on the right-to-repair side.
I think you are conflating two separate conversations with only a small overlap.
Without arguing whether your premise is even correct, the difference is that in this crowd, people know Apple's walled garden exists. Perhaps the fact that you never "own" a Tesla is less set-in of a fact.
Same reason HN goes against Apple when it comes to battery repairs. App Store is optional extended functionality. A battery impacts your ability to use your phone or car for its fundamental purpose.
The Web browser is built-in. I personally don't install almost any apps on my smartphones, because I don't need much beyond that. It is extremely useful without any additional apps. Not as much without a battery.
Does Tesla include this information in the sales pitch? the contract? I doubt it.
If they don't, then it's a bit deceptive. I'd fully expect to be able to buy OEM parts for any car I buy, and to have the car repaired at an independent shop. If you're defying the norm it's your responsibility to inform your customers.
