Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Forced to upgrade

herman.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 303 posts

Re: Forced to upgrade

#141

Post by tonyedgecombe »

xorcist wrote: post #74
keiferski wrote: post #38

To play devil’s advocate here, I actually think iPhones have some of the best longevity and resale value, compared to virtually any other product or brand - except perhaps if we go back decades to appliances made near the middle of the century. The fact that a device can be perfectly usable for 5+ years is pretty good compared to most other things I find myself buying and replacing in less time. Otherwise I think the…

> The fact that a device can be perfectly usable for 5+ years is pretty good No. No, it's not good at all. For almost every other product it would be deemed unacceptable. Beyond unacceptable even. We should not normalize this. My car is > 10 years old. My desktop computer is > 10 years old. My laptop has had both the screen and battery changed. And the fan, multiple times. I don't know how old my laser printer is, pr…

My wife’s Thinkpad which is less than five years old won’t run Windows 11.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#142

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

immibis wrote: post #121
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Actually, I have a negative example for FOSS for you. I have a laptop with an Nvidia GPU on it from 2012. I cannot use it under Linux since Linux world is terrible at API / ABI stability. So Nvidia driver has stopped working. Your example of FOSS not working... is the proprietary nvidia driver breaking? Even though it would almost certainly work if your card were supported by the open source drivers?

The proprietary Nvidia driver works fine. Linux from this decade refuses to work with it. Linux broke it, not Nvidia.

Linux is very explicit (and always has been) about not having a stable driver API or ABI; if nvidia tries to target that unstable interface, they are absolutely responsible for the result.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#143

Post by thescriptkiddie »

dataflow wrote: post #8

When you make the decision to not support older hardware (whether directly or indirectly), you're making a decision that the maintenance burden you're trying to avoid is more important than the environmental impact of users disposing of & buying hardware. Which... maybe it is; who am I to suggest different priorities for other people. But it would be nice for engineers and businesses to at least think about this and…

This is an example of the difficult (politically not technically) problem of companies externalizing costs. Apple washing their hands of the burden of maintaining software for old hardware is no different than Exxon washing their hands of the burden of capping abandoned oil wells. In both cases the company saves money by costing society more.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#144

Post by dilap »

putzdown wrote: post #126

The main message I take from this story is that a decent quorum of consumers want Apple to offer a smaller phone in each generation. The OP seems not to have minded having to upgrade eventually, just not to a “virtual tablet.” I’ve heard others express the same desire.

I was going thru a box of old things the other day and came upon an old iPhone 4. God, what a beautiful device. In my opinion, the peak of iPhone design. I would love to have a phone that small again.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#145

Post by vundercind »

gregoriol wrote: post #138
zitterbewegung wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Apple did this for two generations and not enough of people one bought it but it is still available used . https://www.apple.com/by/iphone-12/specs/ (12 mini) https://support.apple.com/en-us/111873 I would recommend to return the phone and get the 13 mini which should last awhile

The SE3 is good enough and not too big

The only, only reason I ever buy anything but the smallest phone they offer is because the best cameras are never on the smallest devices. The extra size is pure down-side for me, and I don't really give a shit about slightly faster processors or what have you (I hardly burden the low-end ones), but I do find when looking back at older photos I always appreciate when I've had better cameras, so I hesitate to go too low-end on those.

I'd pay about the same (or maybe even exactly the same, but feel a little annoyed about it) for a small Apple phone with the same camera as the expensive big models.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#146

Post by lsaferite »

keiferski wrote: post #59
skrebbel wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that a device can be perfectly usable for 5+ years is pretty good compared to most other things I find myself buying and replacing in less time. Woa. Nearly every other device in my house lasts for 10+ years. Coffee machine, printer, laundry machine, oven, TV, every single one of those is over 10 years old. Our car isn't yet but I very much expect it to last at least that long. The only device I replace ab…

I think you’re probably buying higher quality items, yes? Because there’s no way a $50-100 coffee machine or printer is lasting a decade. This can probably be explained by the fact that an iPhone is a “cheaper” (comparatively) high end item. In other words, it’s one of the few high end items that many middle and low income people own. And thus compared to the coffee machines, printers, and other cheap electronics tha…

I'm using the same $9 (yes, 9) drip coffee machine to make my daily coffee for more than 10 years currently. It has an on/off switch and no 'smarts'. It works fine, why should I change it? It's plugged into a smart outlet that I use to make sure it's turned off after an hour. That plug is getting close to 10 years old as well.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#147

Post by xmprt »

I think a big part of this is that upgrading from iPhone 8 to 16 is such a huge jump that all the muscle memory that you've built up has changed. You might as well switch to an Android phone. I wonder how OP's opinion would change in a few months once they're used to the phone.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#148

Post by obmelvin »

IndrekR wrote: post #9
nextlevelwizard wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to be quite cynical if you see Apple's transition to ARM only as a ploy to get people to replace their Intel based machines. I am sure it is a nice bonus, but performance and efficiency just went through the roof. With yearly iPhone releases it is harder to justify upgrades. Like for author - upgrading from working phone to newer model while not gaining anything significant is stupid.

If the computer here is 20 years old, then we are talking about PowerPC based Mac. So two transitions over this devices lifetime: PowerPC -> Intel -> ARM.

Apple had good reasons for both transitions. In the scheme of 'forced upgrades' these are about as good as you're going to get. Also, if the OPs dad is using the computer for so little that it would last another 30 years, they certainly have no need to upgrade computers. No reason one can't keep using an intel iMac to browse the web

Re: Forced to upgrade

#149

Post by codr7 »

I'm running an iPhone SE that's probably older.

Love it, it's perfect for me, I dread the day it stops working.

I've been forced to use various newer models over the years, and they just keep getting worse to me.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#150

Post by thescriptkiddie »

harywilke wrote: post #66
thefz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are talking about Apple, who is willing to chop off a feature from a product just to sell you the 39$ dongle later. The couldn't give less shits about the environment.

Ah yes, the company that famously designed their headquarters with zero regard to the environment. The company that included a leaflet titled 'Why the brown box?' back in the 90's when they switched to unbleached cardboard shipping boxes for their computers. Nope they have never given a though about the environment. It's just not in their corporate dna.

You're being sarcastic but they actually did design their new headquarters with zero regard for the environment. They built it in an area where there is not enough housing for their employees and public transportation is non-existent. The parking structure is larger than the office building. The building itself is like a giant greenhouse requiring cooling even in the winter.
Post reply on HN