26 ms·

> Shipping 27 batteries from amazon or china so you can replace them every 2 months is carbon-intensive and resource-intensive You seem to be criticising some

> Shipping 27 batteries from amazon or china so you can replace them every 2 months is carbon-intensive and resource-intensive You seem to be criticising some fantasy scenario that has never happened in the real world, and likely never will. > people want to know that a used phone isn't going to be full of shitty parts How often does this happen? I have never seen this issue come up in my life, I bought my phone second hand. Have you ever bought a second hand phone ? Parts avaliability bites all the time. The manufacturer told me to throw away previous phone because a microphone jack is broken. > we are trying to bias towards longer device lifecycles You are not if there are no repair parts avaliable. Things break, thats normal, you can't overengineer every screw to make them last forever. > sue apple for "breaking their phone" when their knockoff part uses a legacy driver As they should, it is my phone after all. Imagine your car manufacturer shows up in your garage at night and removes something because it's "legacy"

paulmd 3y ago
> You seem to be criticising some fantasy scenario that has never happened in the real world, and likely never will. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37258203 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37258203 > Parts avaliability bites all the time... You are not if there are no repair parts avaliable well, apple has better parts availability and supply lifetimes than any other brand on the market, so sleep easy. You are getting 8+ years more parts availability than most android vendors. That's great for the planet. > As they should, it is my phone after all. Imagine your car manufacturer shows up in your garage at night and removes something because it's "legacy" your car manufacturer is under no legal or moral obligation to support your modifications to the car. practical example: if you replace the head unit (which ties into the rest of the control electronics nowadays) with a third-party model, and the car manufacturer does an OTA software update which changes the way the car interacts with the head unit, and it breaks the third-party integration: wow, sucks to be you. they don't have to keep supporting legacy cruft forever just so that a third-party modification doesn't break, just like anything in the software world. if it's not advertised as being a publicly-exposed interface then it's subject to breakage at any time. Carplay is a supported interface, swapping in a new head unit and a CAN interface to try and mimic the OEM head unit's CANbus traffic is not. if you use sun.misc.unsafe, you're gonna have a bad time, period. That's on you. Tinker all you want but don't cry and sue when the unstable ABI is changed. Linux kernel explicitly formalizes this philosophy. You're approved (in-tree), or you're subject to breakage and we don't care about the consequences, you brought it on yourself. again, you can say that's software and it's different because we need to keep phones out of landfills, but apple is providing long-life availability guarantees of OEM parts at OEM rates for 3-4x the total lifecycle of their competitors' products. If apple advertises somewhere that you can use older phone screens then fine, sue, but otherwise they’re under absolutely no obligation to support them when misused on other models. The fact that it worked for a while is irrelevant - you touched com.sun.unsafe.

paulmd 3y ago

> You seem to be criticising some fantasy scenario that has never happened in the real world, and likely never will. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37258203 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37258203 > Parts avaliability bites all the time... You are not if there are no repair parts avaliable well, apple has better parts availability and supply lifetimes than any other brand on the market, so sleep easy. You are getting 8+ years more parts availability than most android vendors. That's great for the planet. > As they should, it is my phone after all. Imagine your car manufacturer shows up in your garage at night and removes something because it's "legacy" your car manufacturer is under no legal or moral obligation to support your modifications to the car. practical example: if you replace the head unit (which ties into the rest of the control electronics nowadays) with a third-party model, and the car manufacturer does an OTA software update which changes the way the car interacts with the head unit, and it breaks the third-party integration: wow, sucks to be you. they don't have to keep supporting legacy cruft forever just so that a third-party modification doesn't break, just like anything in the software world. if it's not advertised as being a publicly-exposed interface then it's subject to breakage at any time. Carplay is a supported interface, swapping in a new head unit and a CAN interface to try and mimic the OEM head unit's CANbus traffic is not. if you use sun.misc.unsafe, you're gonna have a bad time, period. That's on you. Tinker all you want but don't cry and sue when the unstable ABI is changed. Linux kernel explicitly formalizes this philosophy. You're approved (in-tree), or you're subject to breakage and we don't care about the consequences, you brought it on yourself. again, you can say that's software and it's different because we need to keep phones out of landfills, but apple is providing long-life availability guarantees of OEM parts at OEM rates for 3-4x the total lifecycle of their competitors' products. If apple advertises somewhere that you can use older phone screens then fine, sue, but otherwise they’re under absolutely no obligation to support them when misused on other models. The fact that it worked for a while is irrelevant - you touched com.sun.unsafe.