When you launch a new program, it's not really surprising that older devices might not be included. There is more than one reason for why that might be. We'll have to wait and see for how long a device is supported in this program. I think it should be at least for as long as it gets software updates.

But the fundamental problem is that availability of spare parts is generally not guaranteed. It might be that once their stock is gone, they're gone. That's one of the differences between consumer and business. Businesses often need extended support and they pay for it. Which tends to lead to longer lifecycles. So, unless law says for how long parts must be available, you can hit a wall. And even if such legal requirement exists, it might be shorter than you'd like. Do not forget that a manufacturer can honour warranty by giving you money back or offering an equivalent alternative (at least around here). Meaning, they might not even have spare parts for warranty work. They can give you a new unit if it's still in production and alternative when it's not.

This is not necessarily about DIY. It depends on how exactly the relevant law is written, but for example, in automotive in the EU, it's about independent garages being able to service modern cars. About preventing manufacturers from locking customers into their service networks which opens up competition. Still, you'll probably use a dealer for more specialized work. But ordinary maintenance can be done anywhere and a manufacturer can't condition basic warranty on using its dealer network. But they can when it comes to warranty above and beyond the legal minimum.

And yes, there is the question about the pricing of spare parts and also available volumes. If you can't use aftermarket parts, you've got a monopoly on your hands. And again, depending on how the law is written, supply could be far less than demand while still compliant. I've been quite a few times in a position where spare parts were listed as out of stock and they were never available again. And if you have to wait six months for a part, are you going to bother? This is not a trivial problem and if you put strict requirements in, it can be quite costly and you will have to pay for it. It can, for example, mean that many spare parts will be made that will never be used = waste.

Also, fundamental problem is durability and longevity. Ideally, you want the thing to last a long time to begin with. Being able to repair something that breaks twice a year is of little consolation. But that doesn't help if people throw away things that still work (if the goal is reduction of waste and energy/ material use). So, the question is, how many people are actually interested in this?

This article is brilliant, and it goes to show clearly the shenanigans Apple is trying to pull. In my experience, companies that do that are in a state of complacency and are only years away from the next big thing upstaging them. Give it five or ten years and Apple will become the proverbial second-place Microsoft, and so the cycle never ends. The industry is always in flux, and right now open source and user empowerment are big bold red lettered features that if they do not do, it will open the door to a competitor to do and bite big into their market share.