3 ms·

“Planned obsolescence” implies that a device is made obsolete to force people to buy newer devices as opposed to other reasons. Just because a device becomes ob

“Planned obsolescence” implies that a device is made obsolete to force people to buy newer devices as opposed to other reasons. Just because a device becomes obsolete doesn’t mean it’s “planned obsolescence”, even with total control over the whole ecosystem. That’s at least how “planned obsolescence” is commonly used and defined. “Planned obsolescence” as a term implies a reason (forcing people to buy newer devices), so not all forms of planned obsolescence (not as a term, notice the lack of quotation marks) are really “planned obsolescence” (as the term implying the reason). Since we can’t read minds it’s definitely akin to reading tea leaves when you want to find out whether “planned obsolescence” plays any role for Apple.

gurkendoktor 14y ago
So do you imply that the iOS6 features missing on the iPhone 3GS are missing for hardware reasons - or that intentionally leaving out features is not planned obsolescence? Whatever it is, I don't think Apple is maximizing hardware lifetime here. http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/new-features-in-ios-6-receive-spotty-support-from-older-devices/ http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/new-features-in-ios-6-re... (I'm not complaining about the average lifetime of my Apple devices here, the iPad 1 and iPhone 3G were abysmal but my laptop & Mac Mini made up for it. I actually think that's why they have to add stronger, artificial incentives.)
- mkaltenecker 14y ago
  You can debate about this forever. It's like reading tea leaves. The real world consequence, however, is this: if you want to be able to update your device for as long as possible you should get an iOS device. I'm talking consequences, not so much intentions.
  - gurkendoktor 14y ago
    I agree with the consequence and buy accordingly. I don't have anything to add to your first posting, where you've stated how things factually work out. But I haven't seen anyone argue that Apple's feature cut-off is hardware-bound. This is not reading tea leaves by a far margin. It's a business decision (like many) that goes against the interests of users. No harm in keeping that in mind.

gurkendoktor 14y ago

So do you imply that the iOS6 features missing on the iPhone 3GS are missing for hardware reasons - or that intentionally leaving out features is not planned obsolescence? Whatever it is, I don't think Apple is maximizing hardware lifetime here. http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/new-features-in-ios-6-receive-spotty-support-from-older-devices/ http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/new-features-in-ios-6-re... (I'm not complaining about the average lifetime of my Apple devices here, the iPad 1 and iPhone 3G were abysmal but my laptop & Mac Mini made up for it. I actually think that's why they have to add stronger, artificial incentives.)

mkaltenecker 14y ago
You can debate about this forever. It's like reading tea leaves. The real world consequence, however, is this: if you want to be able to update your device for as long as possible you should get an iOS device. I'm talking consequences, not so much intentions.
- gurkendoktor 14y ago
  I agree with the consequence and buy accordingly. I don't have anything to add to your first posting, where you've stated how things factually work out. But I haven't seen anyone argue that Apple's feature cut-off is hardware-bound. This is not reading tea leaves by a far margin. It's a business decision (like many) that goes against the interests of users. No harm in keeping that in mind.