EEVblog® Electronics Community Forum

Notice something. This crowd from badcaps was crying "right to repair" for sometime now. Availability of manuals and schematics and reparability, etc. While they were crying wolf the resource was free. People contributed, boardview and schematics could be uploaded and downloaded. Now that the bill has passed, and they got what they wanted, now they made the resource paid. 

 

Personally I never liked badcaps, it was shady, advice was on amateur level back when people did actually contribute, now they want you to subscribe and pay monthly fee for advice that was shitty back when badcaps was at its peak best which still sucked.

Personally I prefer other sites which are more professional and quality for advice and resources, all of which has similar scheme. Advice is free resources are for credit which you earn by participating in forum i.e. providing advice and resources. This type of herding works and those resources I am referring to are invaluable. 

I did post on badcaps several times over the years and advice I got was always reddit level bs, amateur. But it was admittedly good resources for credit free resources, boardview and schematics.

So what is the alternative for FREE boardview and schematics these days? Telegram groups:

(Attachment Link)

https://t.me/biosarchive
https://t.me/schematicslaptop
https://t.me/DeviceDB
https://t.me/BIOSARCHIVE_PHOTOS
https://t.me/notebookschematic
https://t.me/ITHINKHS
https://t.me/afsschematicfree
https://t.me/BoardviewSchematics
https://t.me/Schematics_boardviews
https://t.me/boardviews
https://t.me/EstechSchematicsChannel
https://t.me/pepeelectronica
https://t.me/one5technology
https://t.me/LaptopsBoardview
https://t.me/generalbios

These are not all by any means, there are more and my personal collection of groups always gets bigger.

I liked Badcaps it was a great site for repairs and had decent knowledge there.
I saw them struggling to find a revenue model, a means to keep the servers going, it's not easy.

Bashing the site in order to promote your commie Telegram links - How exactly do they earn enough money or is it all state funded?
The issue is who's paying for the server space.

I happen to know the guy who runs Badcaps.net and I won't describe the exact financials but suffice to say the site loses a lot of money every month and he's trying to make the business work.  Paying for manuals might be one way, but if that doesn't work then it could become subscription only, or if that doesn't work it dies a death, that's just how things work.

Isnt it effectively subscription only already? 6 euro per month to download files.
If they made it subscription only access to the forum, I would expect it to die off due to that.

If the cost is mostly due to bandwidth, wonder if it could be handled with torrents instead.

Let's hope that if the site has to die, then at least let it be archived at the Wayback Machine, or upload the tech data to Elektrotanya or similar sites.

My usage history doesn’t invalidate any of the criticism I raised. People use resources even when they dislike the platform because sometimes it’s the only place to obtain certain files. That’s exactly why the paywall matters: it restricts access to something that used to be free and was aligned with the community’s stated values.

The points I raised weren’t about hosting costs or your personal financial situation. They were about the contradiction between years of “right to repair” advocacy and then placing repair documentation behind a paywall. That contradiction still stands, and your reply didn’t address it.

You also didn’t address the quality of advice, which has historically been amateur-level compared to other repair communities. Nor did you address why other communities manage to keep resources free or contribution‑based while Badcaps moved to a subscription model. And the timing of monetization — immediately after the bill passed — remains a valid concern.

For context: Badcaps’ library grew because technicians purchased schematics and boardviews with their own money from sites like elvikom, alisaler, and others, then uploaded them. Badcaps wasn’t the original source of these files. It was a redistribution point.

And Badcaps is not the only place offering free or contribution‑based schematics. Many communities use point systems, VIP tiers, or contribution models. Some even have newer schematics that Badcaps doesn’t, simply because no one has purchased and uploaded them yet.

That’s the core issue I was highlighting: the shift from a community‑driven, contribution‑based resource to a paywalled one, in direct conflict with the values the site publicly advocated for years.


/////

Here is more resources for boardview and schematics, these are paid, these contain newer resources which badcaps does not yet posses:
1. https://www.elvikom.pl/
2. https://xn----8sbafotoqlagnhme.xn--p1ai/forums
3. https://www.alisaler.com/
jest a few

Here is my library of telegram groups and channels which offer free boardview and schematics, this list have grown from my last post: https://t.me/addlist/FKbLmoCI2j80MGNi


P.S. Here is the post he is referring to made on June 18th. I made this same post in several other forums, and I received my answer through other forums. Badcaps, offered zero advice, there was no reply. The forum is dying behind that paywall.



You want to know when I made a post before that recent post? On 10-06-2025. Also ZERO replies.

In reply to floobydust...

We tried ads but to get any revenue we had to make them very obtrusive. For example Vignette ads on every page transition and several ads per page. It just wasn't workable. The reason is that we sit outside the high paying electronic component category. We also had 65% of our audience in low or zero paying ad countries. We could only get generic low paying ads on a small percentage of our audience. We could not attract higher paying networks like Supplyframe (used on EEVblog). We do not have other revenue sources to fall back on.

It's thanks to the badcaps forum that about 4 years ago I was able to diagnose and repair my Philips/TPVision flatscreen TV. Problem wasn't bad caps (I don't need a forum for that that ) but in the display. Just as the problem was diagnosed down to the display and I concluded 'impossible to repair', someone suggested to try the cellotape-trick (disabling clock-lines); I hadn't heard of that method before, it was new to me at the time. After quite a bit of cutting and pasting bits of cellotape on the flatcable I ended up with an excellent result. The TV has since ended up in my living room.

Must admit I haven't revisited the forum since (nor contributed), but my personal (limited) experience with it was very positive.

Whether 'amateurish' or not (I'm an amateur myself anyway), the problem got solved. It's the result that counts.

Thanks for the reply gabiz_ro. In its heyday there was a decent turnover from board repairs. That business has gone and it's trying to move onto a new firm footing. I think you'd struggle to find and website that doesn't operate as a business. EEVblog is a business too.

Until recently the percentage of boardviews and schematics on our site was quite small. Most of our files were bios files that have been repaired by the team. I purchased collections of schematics and boardviews (through a prominent notice on the site). We took large archives from several well known hardware repair shops. You can see these on our advanced search. This took our unique file count from 400,000 to 2.3 million.

We combined this data with new filters and a Lucene based search to allow users to search within the schematics. It's not perfect yet but getting better. We knew ads weren't working for us and we needed to change to a subscription. So we have tried to combine it with new functionality that makes it more worthwhile to the user.

Time will tell if users take to it. I accept and understand the change is not great for everyone. I can't stress that enough.


 

Many of the files are embedded into 20+ years of posts. The quality and selection of files available is what helps drives discussion and resolve hardware issues.

Many of the files are embedded into 20+ years of posts. The quality and selection of files available is what helps drives discussion and resolve hardware issues.

I don’t see how that is incompatible with moving the file hosting elsewhere.

For example right now ,  OVH/Kimsufi has in Canada datacenter an AMD Epyc 7451 (24core/48core) with 128 GB of memory and 2 x 4 TB drives or 2 x 500 GB nvme  and 500mbps unmetered bandwidth for 62EUR a month : https://www.kimsufi.com/en-ie/ks/ks-7/

if a forum needs more power than that, something is terribly wrong or very unoptimized.

Easy to say, but in reality it's more complex. The main issue is scalability. How well can a platform be scaled up for more users/usage? Web 2.0 platforms usually run on PHP and SQL databases. So it starts with the design of the PHP scripts and the database tables. If the developer doesn't a good job you'll get a performance penalty multiplied by the number of users. As long as the platform sees only a few users this doesn't matter much. But with more and more users you'll have to add more and more hardware to keep the UX acceptable. With tons of AI crawlers things become more challenging. Based on the performace penality factor and the number of users running the platform will become so expensive at some point it doesn't make sense to keep going. You could hire someone to improve the performance or migrate to a more efficient forum framework, if feasible. It's the curse of an easy start with PHP and the lack of reasonable scalability. And PHP is also a security nightmare.

PS: The way the web server is set up to run PHP has also an impact on performace and security.

In reply to u666sa...

Your 94 post history, 350 downloads, and 1240 logins consistently over the last 12 years feels like a valid point. You have used Badcaps excessively. You have accessed information and help over that time at no cost. The community has helped you several times. Now you deliver your gratitude to them here by bashing their quality and efforts as amateurish. The site has over 640,000 posts thanking our users for their efforts. That speaks for itself.

Posting and receiving help remains free on the forum and always will remain free. Our users can continue to advocate for "right to repair" if they wish. That is their personal decision. Something you seem to be conflating with the website owners decisions.

My usage history still has nothing to do with the validity of the criticism. People use resources even when they dislike the platform because sometimes it’s the only place to obtain certain files. That’s exactly why the paywall matters — it restricts access to something that used to be free and was aligned with the values the site publicly promoted.

Pointing to my logins or downloads doesn’t address any of the issues I raised. It’s simply not relevant.

I didn’t criticize the community. I criticized the direction of the platform and the decision to place repair documentation behind a subscription. The community’s volunteer efforts are not the same thing as the owner’s business model.

Badcaps spent years publicly aligning itself with “right to repair” values. That wasn’t just individual users — it was part of the site’s identity. The shift from free repair resources to paid access directly contradicts that stance, and your reply still doesn’t address that contradiction.

You also didn’t address the quality of advice compared to other repair communities, the existence of free or contribution‑based alternatives, or the timing of monetization immediately after the bill passed.

Those are the points I raised. They remain unanswered..


P.S. I raise these concerns because despite my criticism of badcaps, I don't want it to end up same as https://hardw.net/ which also tried to monetize their resources, and end up shutting down completely.

Yesterday I didn’t even plan to go further with this discussion, but today’s reply from produco — which avoided the points I raised and focused instead on my usage history — made it clear that additional context is needed.

I’m going to show an example of another repair forum that operates differently. It’s free to join, has a simple entry test to filter out beginners, and requires around 15 posts before file downloads are allowed. Files are exchanged for credit, and credit is earned by contributing advice or sharing resources such as boardviews, schematics, and BIOS files.

This model keeps the community active, maintains quality, and preserves free access to repair documentation. It also results in a larger and more up‑to‑date library than Badcaps, without requiring a subscription.

I’m sharing this because it demonstrates that sustainable, contribution‑based models exist, and they address the concerns I raised earlier about paywalling repair resources.

First of all, Badcaps's Schematics and Boardviews section -- https://www.badcaps.net/forum/document-software-archive/schematics-and-boardviews



Secondly, Badcaps's Troubleshooting Laptops, Tablets, and Mobile Devices section -- https://www.badcaps.net/forum/troubleshooting-hardware-devices-and-electronics-theory/troubleshooting-laptops-tablets-and-mobile-devices



As the screenshots show, both the Schematics/Boardviews section and the Troubleshooting section have a large number of unanswered requests — whether for boardviews, schematics, or repair advice. This aligns with what I mentioned earlier: the response rate and depth of technical guidance on Badcaps has been inconsistent for years, especially compared to other repair communities.

Furthermore, on Badcaps, typical Boardview & Schematics answered post looks like this. 1 file, and 5 replies saying "Thanks". Thus absolutely everything in Badcaps numbers is inflated — because we are counting "Thanks" which are completely irrelevant. On forum I'm going to show you bellow it is illegal to write off-topic messages, you can say thanks by pressing the "thanks button" if you wish.



Now I want to show an example of another repair forum for comparison. I’ve redacted topic names and changed colors so it can’t be found through search engines — this is only to illustrate the structural differences, not to harm Badcaps. The model used there is simple: free access, a basic entry test to filter out beginners, and a requirement of around 15 posts before file downloads are allowed. Replies are consistent, and unanswered threads are rare.

The first number in each screenshot is the reply count. Notice that none of them are zero. On Badcaps, zero‑reply threads are common, both in the schematics section and in the troubleshooting section. This aligns with what I mentioned earlier about response consistency and advice quality.



This is the notebook repair section for ASUS platforms. It’s just one category — the forum has separate sections for ASUS, Dell, Samsung, Rover, Apple, HP/Compaq, Toshiba, Sony, LG, BenQ, Fujitsu‑Siemens, Lenovo/IBM, Acer/eMachines, Packard Bell/NEC, MSI, Xiaomi, Huawei, Honor, Clevo, Gateway, and others. Not to mention sections for PC motherboards, video cards, TVs, SSD's, data recovery, cell phones, tablets, power supplies, printers, and others. Across all of these sections, reply counts are consistently above zero. Unanswered threads are extremely rare.

Now, looking at the Boardview & Schematics section: this forum has 2,270 topics and 20,525 messages. Each message corresponds to a file, because the structure is “one platform per topic.” As shown in the screenshots, none of these topics have zero replies.

By comparison, Badcaps has 3,429 topics and 4,729 messages in its Schematics/Boardviews section. Badcaps uses a “one model per topic” structure, so each topic may contain multiple files — but even accounting for that, the total number of files is still far below 20,525.

The first number in each screenshot is the reply count, and the second is the view count. The difference in activity and resource volume between the two models is clear.



It’s also worth noting that this discussion isn’t happening in isolation. Across multiple repair forums and technical communities, there have been recurring threads expressing dissatisfaction with Badcaps’ direction, especially after the introduction of the paywall. The concerns raised here — declining activity, unanswered troubleshooting requests, and reduced availability of repair documentation — are echoed by many users on other boards. This isn’t a single‑user perspective; it’s part of a broader trend that has been visible for some time.

We’ve already seen how similar decisions played out elsewhere. https://hardw.net/ implemented a comparable monetization model and eventually collapsed as participation dropped and uploads slowed. The pattern is consistent: when a community built on shared contributions moves to a subscription‑based access model, engagement declines and the resource base stagnates.