3 ms·
It could not be used for my (really pretty standard) purposes. So I stand by "bricked". Unless you consider it a light source. In which case I'd say ok yeah it
by mherrmann 4y ago
It could not be used for my (really pretty standard) purposes. So I stand by "bricked". Unless you consider it a light source. In which case I'd say ok yeah it could still have had some uses as a (not very bright) lamp.
- null_object 4y ago> Unless you consider it a light source. Obviously if you're claiming that the only application that was still working on your iPad was the lamp, then there's really nothing left for me to discuss, as I don't think that's factually the case for even the oldest existing iPads.
- mherrmann 4y agoI was being sarcastic.
- incongruity 4y ago“Bricked” has a pretty generally accepted meaning as non-responsive/completely non operational — it does not mean reduced functionality or incompatible with modern operating systems. By abusing the term, you’re being disingenuous rather than having an honest discussion about how to deal with the aging of technology and how to balance security and forward progress with efforts required for backward compatibility. Where’s the moral outrage about my Macintosh SE not being able to run any version of OS X? Yes, that would be absurd. So where do we draw the line? It must be drawn somewhere - but Apple didn’t brick your device and claiming that gets in the way of reasonable discussion.