Technology - Google News

Apple performs U-turn on right to repair iPhones and Macs - Financial Times
HaptX says Meta copied its patented design for haptic glove - The Verge
Streamlabs OBS controversy, explained - Polygon

Apple performs U-turn on right to repair iPhones and Macs - Financial Times

Posted: 17 Nov 2021 09:54 AM PST

Apple will allow customers to repair their own devices in a move that could bring down the cost of fixing iPhones and Macs, and extend the lifecycle of consumer electronics.

The iPhone maker on Wednesday launched a self-service repair programme that would allow customers to purchase Apple-made components to replace worn out or broken parts.

The service will be first available in the US early next year for the iPhone 12 and iPhone 13 ranges, enabling customers to repair their screens, batteries and camera at home. The service will be extended to other markets throughout 2022 and cover Mac computers with M1 chips.

The company did not disclose how the spare parts would be priced.

The U-turn is abrupt. As recently as last month Apple was fighting a shareholder proposal in support of right to repair. The iPhone maker said its own experts were best placed to service its products.

This move comes after an executive order from the Biden administration in July, directing the Federal Trade Commission to address "unfair anti-competitive restrictions on third-party repair or self-repair of items".

"This is an important move from Apple. It shows that it is possible to make spare parts for consumers, something they have refused to do for many years," said Ugo Vallauri, co-founder and policy lead at the right-to-repair advocacy group Restart Project.

Apple's shift is the second big victory for right-to-repair advocates in as many months, following Microsoft's landmark agreement in October to make its devices easier to fix.

Apple has long been criticised by consumer protection bodies for fiercely guarding its monopoly on the repair process, which has become so strict that iPhones cease to function properly even if two identical models have their parts swapped.

Consumers have been forced to choose between third-party technicians that use parts purchased from non-certified suppliers, or paying for "official" repairs at Apple stores whose costs can be so high that many consumers feel inclined to buy a new device altogether. For instance, the cost of replacing the back glass on an out-of-warranty iPhone 13 Pro Max can run to $599 — about half the price of a new model.

Right-to-repair advocates say that when a consumer replaces a broken model, it serves Apple's bottom line but taxes the environment, so this step is likely to be widely welcomed assuming parts are easily accessible and affordable.

"Depending on how they handle it, this could be the most environmentally friendly thing Apple has ever done," said Zack Nelson, who reviews gadgets by taking them apart and inspecting the components on his YouTube channel JerryRigEverything.

In the UK, which is the second-highest per capita producer of electronic waste globally, 30 per cent of Britons threw away their devices after not being able to repair them themselves, or because professional repair options were not available or too costly, according to a recent YouGov poll.

"There is a risk that Apple is trying to increase the cost of spare parts by freezing out third-party manufacturers," said Vallauri. "Regulation needs to force manufacturers to make products that are easier to repair at an affordable price so devices can be in use for a longer time, limiting the environmental impact."

Adblock test (Why?)

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

HaptX says Meta copied its patented design for haptic glove - The Verge

Posted: 17 Nov 2021 02:04 PM PST

Haptics company HaptX claims Meta (formerly Facebook) copied its patented designs in a glove that the tech giant revealed yesterday. HaptX — a longtime player in the virtual and augmented reality industry — says parts of the glove appear "substantively identical" to its own work using pneumatics to simulate physical touch.

"We welcome interest and competition in the field of microfluidic haptics; however, competition must be fair for the industry to thrive," said HaptX founder and CEO Jake Rubin in a statement. "While we have not yet heard from Meta, we look forward to working with them to reach a fair and equitable arrangement that addresses our concerns and enables them to incorporate our innovative technology into their future consumer products."

The Meta glove is an in-progress design that won't be commercialized for years, if ever. However, Meta Reality Labs — a VR- and AR-focused research division — believes touch is a vital piece of future consumer-focused VR / AR systems. The glove uses inflatable rubber pads and a sophisticated control system to create a sensation of pressure or resistance when users touch virtual objects. HaptX developed a similar inflation-based system that it sells to professional clients rather than consumers.

HaptX, formerly known as AxonVR, debuted publicly in 2016 after four years in stealth mode. Meta researchers say they developed their first glove prototype in mid-2015, not long after the tech giant acquired VR startup Oculus. However, Meta has substantially expanded on its initial prototype, and HaptX claims the two companies have had extended interactions. "Over the years, we've hosted many engineers, researchers, and executives from Meta to demonstrate our groundbreaking haptic technology," said Rubin.

Meta has been accused of unfairly competing against VR software developers by cloning their products while limiting access to the Quest platform. This situation is slightly different because HaptX is accusing Meta of direct patent infringement — something that could potentially lead to legal action. Reached for comment, HaptX declined to comment on what it would consider a fair agreement with Meta, as well as whether it might pursue a lawsuit if it fails to reach one.

A Meta spokesperson declined to comment on the allegations.

Adblock test (Why?)

Streamlabs OBS controversy, explained - Polygon

Posted: 17 Nov 2021 02:55 PM PST

Streamlabs OBS, a leading company for live-streaming software, is removing the phrase "OBS" from its name after facing criticism from multiple sources, including popular streamers and other companies. Starting today, the company will be known as "Streamlabs."

On Tuesday, the company also faced allegations that it had copied its website descriptions and design from a competitor called Lightstream. Streamlabs responded to this claim from Lightstream in a public Tweet: "Text on the landing page was placeholder text that went into production by error. This is our fault. We removed the text as soon as we found out. Our intended version is now live. Lightstream team is great and we've reached out directly to them to apologize."

On Wednesday, Streamlabs issued a statement saying that it would drop the "OBS" from its name and that it takes "full responsibility" for its actions. (The statement did not make reference to the accusation from Lightstream.) Polygon has reached out to both Streamlabs and Lightstream for comment but did not hear back before publication time.

Streamlabs' decision to drop "OBS" from its name comes on the heels of a public tweet from the original creators of the open-source software OBS. OBS' tweet claims that Streamlabs reached out ahead of its launch to ask about including "OBS" in its software title. OBS asked Streamlabs not to do this, but Streamlabs did it anyway. "We've tried to sort this out in private and they have been uncooperative at every turn," the tweet from OBS said.

Near the launch of SLOBS, @streamlabs reached out to us about using the OBS name. We kindly asked them not to. They did so anyway and followed up by filing a trademark
We've tried to sort this out in private and they have been uncooperative at every turnhttps://t.co/r1eXr3VxcJ
— OBS (@OBSProject) November 17, 2021

For those unfamiliar, Streamlabs OBS is a free open-source software that makes streaming more user-friendly. Its software is built off of a different open-source software called OBS (Open Broadcaster Software), which came before it. A way to think about it is that Streamlabs OBS is a newer, shinier version of OBS that is easier to use. But the name wasn't the only issue facing the company.

On Tuesday the company launched Streamlab Studio, a cloud-based software for streaming that allows content creators to share live gameplay without a capture card, PC, or third-party software. It also allows streamers to customize the look of their stream using their phones. It's meant to give console players the chance to stream without needing all the fancy tech. It was announced as part of partnership with the streaming platform Twitch.

The main issue is that a similar software already exists. It's called Lightstream, and just like Streamlab Studio, it offered creators a way to stream from their consoles and customize their streams through a mobile browser. If that wasn't enough, the actual website for Streamlab Studio also looks very similar to Lightstream's website for the software — which Lightstream pointed out on their official Twitter account.

This resulted in many people piling on Streamlabs and accusing the company of copying from Lightstream, both in terms of its software concept and in the actual website. That coupled with the fact that this new service would come as a premium service, with subscriptions starting at $4.99 per month or $49.99 annually, garnered criticisms as well.

Popular streamers Hasan "Hasanabi" Piker and Imane "Pokimane" Anys called the company out, with Piker threatening to "never use" Streamlabs again if the company didn't resolve the matter. Anys similarly said that she would ask for them take her face off the platform if Streamlabs did not resolve these issues.

streamlabs better resolve this entire thread of issues or i'll be asking them to take my face off the platform + look to use another donation service. https://t.co/jfJoxIvc0y
— imane (@imane) November 17, 2021