The right-to-repair conversation around smartphones has been active for years and has produced meaningful changes through 2024-26. The big manufacturers have published parts catalogues and repair guides. The independent repair shop market has had better access to parts than it did three years ago. The legislation in various jurisdictions has continued to develop. And yet the practical experience of trying to get a smartphone repaired in 2026 is often still frustrating.

This is a working view of where the market has actually moved, where it hasn’t, and what the practical implications are for buyers in 2026.

What has actually changed

Several specific changes have happened that are worth recognising as real progress.

The major manufacturers — Apple, Samsung, Google — have all published parts catalogues and repair documentation that didn’t exist five years ago. The information that was previously confidential and accessible only to authorised repair providers is now more widely available.

The parts pricing has, for some categories, become more reasonable. The screen replacement parts in particular have moved closer to a sensible price point. The battery replacement parts have improved in availability and pricing.

The independent repair shop market has access to parts and tools that was significantly more constrained a few years ago. The certified independent repair networks have grown. The bring-your-own-device repair shops have more legal capability than they did.

The legislative environment has continued to develop. The European Union’s regulations have continued to push manufacturers toward more repair-friendly designs. Various US state-level laws have produced specific changes. The overall direction of legal pressure has been toward more repairability.

The aftermarket parts market has matured. The third-party screens, batteries, and other components have improved in quality across the past several years. The lowest-quality budget options remain available; the mid-tier and premium aftermarket options are noticeably better than they were.

What hasn’t changed

Several frustrations remain that the policy and market changes haven’t fully addressed.

Smartphone designs have not fundamentally shifted toward repairability. The displays are still glued in. The batteries are still glued in. The internal components are still arranged for assembly efficiency rather than repair convenience. The mechanical design fights repair work even when the parts are available.

The pairing requirements between specific components and specific phones remain a barrier. Some component swaps require software pairing or “calibration” that only authorised tools can perform. The independent repair shop with the parts can do the physical work but can’t always restore full functionality without the manufacturer’s tools.

The repair cost relative to the device cost is still often unfavorable. The screen replacement that costs 60% of the price of a new phone is a frequent point of friction. The decision to repair versus replace is often economically biased toward replacement.

The replacement market for older devices continues to be supply-constrained. Devices that are three or four generations old have limited parts availability, even from manufacturer-supported channels. The “support window” beyond which official parts become hard to source has not extended significantly.

The data and authentication restrictions on repair create their own frustrations. The phone that requires the original owner’s account credentials for some repair operations creates real problems for second-hand devices and inheritance scenarios.

Specific manufacturer pictures

The patterns across the major manufacturers have specific differences worth understanding.

Apple has been more responsive to right-to-repair pressure than many expected. The Self Service Repair program has been extended across more devices. The parts pricing has moved closer to sensible levels for some components. The repair documentation is more comprehensive than it used to be. The mechanical design of recent iPhones is somewhat more repair-friendly than the designs of five years ago, though still not what enthusiasts would call repairable. The component pairing remains a friction point.

Samsung has had a mixed picture. The flagship Galaxy devices have parts available through authorised channels. The independent repair access has improved. The mechanical design has been more variable than Apple’s, with some models more repairable than others. The mid-range and budget Samsung devices remain harder to repair than the flagships.

Google’s Pixel devices have been the most repair-friendly of the major flagships. The parts availability through iFixit’s partnership and other channels has been good. The mechanical design has been better than competitors’ for several generations. The pricing of repair parts has been reasonable.

Various Chinese manufacturers have had varied pictures. Some have improved alongside the broader market trend. Others continue to be repair-hostile, particularly outside their home market.

The Fairphone and a small number of other devices specifically designed for repairability remain available but at small market share. They demonstrate what’s possible with deliberate design choices but their market success is constrained by other factors.

The practical picture for buyers

For a smartphone buyer in 2026 who’s thinking about long-term ownership and repairability, the practical considerations:

The flagship devices from the major manufacturers are more repairable than they used to be but still not designed for easy repair. Plan for some repair friction over the device’s life.

The independent repair shop access to parts has improved enough that the repair option is more viable than it was. For battery replacements and screen replacements in particular, third-party repair is a reasonable option for many devices.

The total cost of ownership over a longer device life (4-5 years rather than 2-3) has improved as the device support has extended and the repair access has improved. For users willing to keep devices longer, the economics have shifted modestly in favour.

The expected support window matters as much as the design repairability. Apple’s seven-year iOS support is more valuable than Samsung’s now-extended Android support, which is more valuable than the shorter support windows of mid-tier Android manufacturers. Plan around the support window.

The data and authentication ecosystem requirements affect long-term usability beyond the hardware questions. Plan around the account requirements as well as the device’s hardware.

The right-to-repair legislative trajectory

The legislative environment will continue to develop through 2026 and beyond. The trajectory is broadly toward more repair-friendly requirements but the specific timing and scope vary across jurisdictions.

The EU’s continued legislative attention is the strongest driver of manufacturer behaviour change globally. Manufacturers respond to EU requirements with global changes because doing so is more efficient than maintaining different products for different markets.

The US state-level activity is producing meaningful but uneven changes. The federal-level prospects remain limited.

The specific provisions that produce the most behavioural change have been parts availability requirements, pricing transparency requirements, and software pairing-removal requirements that prevent the device from blocking repaired components. The provisions that produce the least change are aspirational design-for-repair requirements that lack specific enforcement mechanisms.

The aftermarket parts ecosystem

The aftermarket parts ecosystem has matured but with continuing variability.

The screens for major models are now widely available in multiple quality tiers. The OEM-quality screens are sometimes substantially below the manufacturer pricing. The mid-tier and budget options vary in quality but the floor has lifted. The risk of a bad aftermarket screen has reduced compared to a few years ago.

The batteries for major models are similarly available. The OEM-grade replacement batteries deliver reasonable performance. The lower-tier options vary; some are fine, some are problematic.

Smaller components — chargers ports, speakers, cameras, internal flex cables — have varied availability. The popular models have substantial aftermarket parts availability. Less popular models have less.

The tools and equipment for smartphone repair have continued to develop. The tooling that’s available to independent repair shops in 2026 is meaningfully better than what was available five years ago.

What I’d actually do

For a buyer in 2026 who values long-term ownership, the practical priorities I’d suggest:

Choose flagship devices from the major manufacturers with longer support windows over mid-tier devices with shorter support windows.

Plan for screen replacement and battery replacement at some point in the device’s life. Budget for these as expected ownership costs rather than as failures.

Use authorised repair channels when the cost difference is reasonable. Use independent repair when the cost difference is meaningful and the shop has good reviews.

Avoid the cheapest aftermarket parts. The mid-tier aftermarket options are usually fine; the budget options often produce poor results.

Take device backup and account management seriously. The repair experience is much smoother when the data and accounts are properly managed before the device needs work.

Consider repairability as one factor in purchase decisions but not the only one. The most repairable devices on the market often compromise on other factors that matter for daily use.

The smartphone repairability picture in 2026 is meaningfully better than it was three years ago but still not where the right-to-repair advocacy would like it to be. The trajectory is positive. The pace remains slow. The practical implication is that repair is more viable than it was but still requires attention and planning to navigate well.