Samsung and apple lag behind: repairability scores reveal a shocking truth

The smartphone industry’s obsession with sleek designs and walled gardens has come at a significant cost: crippling repairability. A new report from the US PIRG Education Fund has exposed a troubling reality – Samsung and Apple are at the bottom of the pile when it comes to how easy it is to fix their devices.

A failing grade for the giants

The study, dubbed ‘Failing the Fix,’ assesses the repairability of smartphones using the EU’s EPREL system, a far more rigorous metric than previous attempts. The results are stark: Samsung received a disappointing D grade, while Apple landed with a dismal D-. This puts both tech titans behind practically every other major brand vying for a better score.

Motorola topped the rankings with a solid B+, followed closely by Google’s C-. But the real issue isn’t simply a matter of grades; it’s a fundamental disconnect between these companies and the expectation that their users should be able to extend the life of their devices.

Software support: the key bottleneck

A significant portion of the low scores stems from a critical oversight regarding software support declarations. While Samsung and Apple both boast over five years of promised updates, they’ve only officially committed to a paltry five years within the EU’s EPREL database. This discrepancy severely impacts their software support scores, effectively tanking their performance in that category.

Adding fuel to the fire, both companies are actively involved in trade groups – TechNet and the Consumer Technology Association – that actively lobby against Right to Repair legislation. The report penalizes them for this stance, highlighting a clear conflict between their corporate interests and consumer rights.

A limited sample and uneven comparisons

It’s worth noting that Samsung was only evaluated on five models, due to incomplete EPREL data for some of its phones. This creates a somewhat skewed comparison with Apple, which scored ten models, and Motorola, which also utilized a broader range. However, the underlying message remains consistent: these companies are prioritizing design and control over repairability.

Beyond spare parts: the missing piece

While the EPREL system primarily focuses on physical disassembly, it crucially neglects the cost of spare parts. This is a substantial blind spot, as the expense of replacement components often outweighs the cost of a new device. The report’s authors rightly point this out, urging the EU to address this critical omission in future iterations of the system. It’s a glaring oversight that fundamentally undermines the value of repair.

Ultimately, this isn’t about a preference for DIY repairs; it’s about a failure on the part of two of the world’s biggest smartphone manufacturers to embrace a sustainable and consumer-friendly approach. Until they prioritize repairability, their phones will remain stubbornly difficult to fix, perpetuating a cycle of planned obsolescence.