3 ms·

My original iPad Pro from 2015 is still used and is still perfect for not just everything I want to do with it but always has no issue with new stuff... except,

by saurik 2y ago

My original iPad Pro from 2015 is still used and is still perfect for not just everything I want to do with it but always has no issue with new stuff... except, Apple finally decided that it won't get OS upgrades, and so the few bits of software on it that I use are going to rot -- even the web browser these days doesn't work long as people no longer believe in progressive enhancement... the few-year old version of iOS on my iPhone would just render blank white pages for major websites, which is what finally forced me to upgrade: the device has devolved to not much more than a dumb phone -- and so this iPad, with its glorious large screen, will soon be trash. If I could install an alternative third-party web browser -- though it would have to be one by someone who also understood the importance of supporting the old OS -- or if I could pitch in and help maintain the operating system myself, even using binary patches if required (look into who I am if you laugh here, and then stop laughing: we can do quite a lot without source code) I would be able to keep using it, but only Apple can save it now, and they have absolutely zero in incentive to do so.

paulmd 2y ago
Yes, but android devices still have objectively inferior software support lifecycles. They have objectively inferior parts-supply lifecycles too, Android tablets and android phones do not offer an m.2 port either, or swappable memory, or whatever the silly ask is this week. iPhones are literally compared against objective perfection while all their competitors are worse on every single repair-lifecycle outcome. More iOS devices are used for longer than most android devices in the real world, and your n=1 cherry-picked example of your android tablet from 2008 isn’t really a useful or meaningful rebuttal.
- saurik 2y ago
  I don't understand where this 2008 Android tablet storyline came from? I didn't mention Android, nor did I mention 2008, nor do I believe that there existed an Android tablet of any form in 2008?... I certainly owned some early Android Honeycomb tablets, but neither they--nor my iPads from that era, by the way--are still usefully in service. I honestly do not at all understand what you are replying to :(. I am just saying that Apple has gone out of their way to lock me out of being able to maintain this perfectly good, old iPad Pro. This is interesting as, frankly, the iPad hasn't really aged as a platform now in almost a decade, seemingly as almost no one is making software for it which needs new hardware (...likely in no small part due to Apple's restrictions on the otherwise very-general device, but the reasons don't matter much). And yeah, sure: I happily agree that Android devices tend to be worse on many of these fronts... but, they also kind of don't matter, as effectively no one buys Android tablets and frankly no one wants to buy an Android tablet ;P which is a fact I don't see changing in the near future. Insisting that I should redirect my frustrations with Apple onto some no-name Android tablet maker is a big distraction from trying to make a difference in the world.
  - paulmd 2y ago
    I’m confused by your confusion - not only is it the topic of this thread, it’s also literally the comment you were replying to. > Most iPads are vastly overpowered and last for a long time. If someone needs more power/storage, then one usually passes them to the next person which might use it for many more years. like again, this is in the context of tablets. Can you show a current-production model of an expandable, upgradable alternative from a vendor like google or Samsung or similar? If not, I think it’s pretty clearly just wishful thinking and double-standards. Apple doesn’t need to solve the whole right-to-repair problem by themselves to go above and beyond the very low bar set by the market alternative vendors. Android’s lifecycle is abysmal for repairability and waste in practice - they are even more disposable devices than the iPad, with shorter software lifecycles and shorter parts lifecycles and much lower volume/worse parts commonality. The wishful ability to install a custom rom and some Amazon knockoff parts doesn’t actually make that a significant factor within the actual realized lifecycle of these devices.
    - ffsm8 2y ago
      Does Samsung and apple market their products as eco friendly though? If they do, it went entirely over my head, but I'm usually not really paying attention to their marketing material either. But let's address your argument itself by applying it to two other companies to see if it holds up: would you consider a "sustainable/green" marketing campaign done by BP, the oil company to be disingenuous, even if they're better then Shell? I would consider such marketing by them downright offensive and thats why the comparison to android devices seem pretty useless to me, honestly. In comparison to pretty much all android devices, Apples are better from an environmental perspective. I mean most android devices had an EOL cycle of roughly 2 years until 2023 iirc... But that doesnt change the fact that apple is hardly doing anything either, which makes their marketing claims disingenuous (at least to me).

by saurik 2y ago

paulmd 2y ago

Yes, but android devices still have objectively inferior software support lifecycles. They have objectively inferior parts-supply lifecycles too, Android tablets and android phones do not offer an m.2 port either, or swappable memory, or whatever the silly ask is this week. iPhones are literally compared against objective perfection while all their competitors are worse on every single repair-lifecycle outcome. More iOS devices are used for longer than most android devices in the real world, and your n=1 cherry-picked example of your android tablet from 2008 isn’t really a useful or meaningful rebuttal.

saurik 2y ago
I don't understand where this 2008 Android tablet storyline came from? I didn't mention Android, nor did I mention 2008, nor do I believe that there existed an Android tablet of any form in 2008?... I certainly owned some early Android Honeycomb tablets, but neither they--nor my iPads from that era, by the way--are still usefully in service. I honestly do not at all understand what you are replying to :(. I am just saying that Apple has gone out of their way to lock me out of being able to maintain this perfectly good, old iPad Pro. This is interesting as, frankly, the iPad hasn't really aged as a platform now in almost a decade, seemingly as almost no one is making software for it which needs new hardware (...likely in no small part due to Apple's restrictions on the otherwise very-general device, but the reasons don't matter much). And yeah, sure: I happily agree that Android devices tend to be worse on many of these fronts... but, they also kind of don't matter, as effectively no one buys Android tablets and frankly no one wants to buy an Android tablet ;P which is a fact I don't see changing in the near future. Insisting that I should redirect my frustrations with Apple onto some no-name Android tablet maker is a big distraction from trying to make a difference in the world.
- paulmd 2y ago
  I’m confused by your confusion - not only is it the topic of this thread, it’s also literally the comment you were replying to. > Most iPads are vastly overpowered and last for a long time. If someone needs more power/storage, then one usually passes them to the next person which might use it for many more years. like again, this is in the context of tablets. Can you show a current-production model of an expandable, upgradable alternative from a vendor like google or Samsung or similar? If not, I think it’s pretty clearly just wishful thinking and double-standards. Apple doesn’t need to solve the whole right-to-repair problem by themselves to go above and beyond the very low bar set by the market alternative vendors. Android’s lifecycle is abysmal for repairability and waste in practice - they are even more disposable devices than the iPad, with shorter software lifecycles and shorter parts lifecycles and much lower volume/worse parts commonality. The wishful ability to install a custom rom and some Amazon knockoff parts doesn’t actually make that a significant factor within the actual realized lifecycle of these devices.
  - ffsm8 2y ago
    Does Samsung and apple market their products as eco friendly though? If they do, it went entirely over my head, but I'm usually not really paying attention to their marketing material either. But let's address your argument itself by applying it to two other companies to see if it holds up: would you consider a "sustainable/green" marketing campaign done by BP, the oil company to be disingenuous, even if they're better then Shell? I would consider such marketing by them downright offensive and thats why the comparison to android devices seem pretty useless to me, honestly. In comparison to pretty much all android devices, Apples are better from an environmental perspective. I mean most android devices had an EOL cycle of roughly 2 years until 2023 iirc... But that doesnt change the fact that apple is hardly doing anything either, which makes their marketing claims disingenuous (at least to me).