iFixit tells the sad story of how Samsung “ruined” its upcycling program • Hacker News Board

Re: iFixit tells the sad story of how Samsung “ruined” its upcycling program

#51

Post by webmobdev » Tue, May 25, 2021, 8:16 PM UTC

slownews45 wrote: post #49

webmobdev wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they do issue security updates for Webkit / Safari as even that can be exploited to Jailbreak a device. I was however talking about feature updates for the default apps. Currently bundled apps appear to be tied to ios updates.

The idea that Android phones are getting these feature updates and iOS security updates is an absolute joke. Seriously. HTC Wildfire E3 just came out, running android 10. Released 2019. And chances of it getting updated to Android 11 (released 2020) or Android 12 and 13 (coming out in 2021 and 2022) are pretty much zilch. HTC U Play was on Android 6 maybe forever? Did they EVER release an update? It might STILL be st…

Disregarding the fact that even Google offers long-term updates for certain Android mobile phones, and even a small company like Jolla provided Sailfish OS updates for 7 years to its first phone, it's kind of disingenuous to highlight only those features of Android OS that make Apple's iDevices look good.

I can also the throw the same argument back at you by pointing out that even if I can't update the Android OS on some devices, I can still update the default browser (Chrome) or even install a different browser, like Firefox, that is totally independent of the OS (unlike in ios where every browser is forced to use Safari / Webkit as the rendering engine, and thus will be stuck with an older version whenever Apple decides to not update it). The argument can even be stretched further - I can also buy an Android phone with an unlocked bootloader (like Sony Open Devices phones) and install other Android and other mobile OSes on it too, if I so desire.

When compared with that perspective, don't some Android phones seem better than Apple's iDevices? Anyway, that isn't the point - the criticism here is that Apple users like me are demanding more from Apple are not satisfied with their current practices.

Re: iFixit tells the sad story of how Samsung “ruined” its upcycling program

#52

Post by virtue3 » Tue, May 25, 2021, 10:36 PM UTC

ramphastidae wrote: post #38

virtue3 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk about that. I'm pretty sure that people who constantly want a new BMW just lease. BMW has this real awful spot with their 5yr warranty so a lot of people buy a pre-owned BMW off a lease and then drive it for 3 years and then get absolutely wrecked by the maintenance costs. Apple's business model is reliant on people buying a WHOLE NEW PHONE for ~1000$ every 2-3 years. And you get to sell your old phone for what?…

So ... what’s your example of a company besides Apple currently providing first-class mobile OS support for their 5+ year old devices?

It's five years. Not 5+ (according to their website).

I don't have to provide a counter example because that wasn't even remotely the argument I was making (that no companies really do this because their objective is to SELL NEW DEVICES).

Re: iFixit tells the sad story of how Samsung “ruined” its upcycling program

#53

Post by quadrangle » Thu, May 27, 2021, 4:35 AM UTC

tootie wrote: post #18

quadrangle wrote: post #6

Conflict-of-interest. If your business model is based on artificial obsolesence and 100% of the cost of e-waste and disposal is externalized, then anything that truly encourages effective continued use of older models is directly opposed to the business model. And while it's something to have marketable trust-building by taking some responsibility for the waste and longer life-span, that also invites people to start…

I don't think that's really the issue here. The upcycling program was based around repurposing old phones. Not keeping them in use as phones. In fact, this likely helps them sell more phones because fewer end up in the secondary market and the Samsung ecosystem becomes more valuable because the old phones can make up whatever IoT network they had dreamed up.

I did clarify my suspicion that any sort of concern for the "what happens later" question is fundamentally in opposition to the entire mindset, the premise of a business based on people constantly upgrading to the latest devices.

There's some fundamental cognitive dissonance in being part of a business that thrives specifically (not incidentally) on externalizing the costs of the constant turnover of devices and somehow also keeping in mind concern for this. As soon as you take on the tiniest slice of care about the issue, the cognitive dissonance comes on board. If e-waste or longer life-cycle of products is a PROBLEM, then how can we justify X Y Z A B C… the entire business model being questioned is the logical conclusion.

Far easier to belittle and minimize the whole issue, pretend it's nothing, make minor half-assed programs like the one they are actually doing. The business model does not permit of actual responsibility around these things.

Re: iFixit tells the sad story of how Samsung “ruined” its upcycling program

#54

Post by quadrangle » Thu, May 27, 2021, 4:35 AM UTC

seventytwo wrote: post #16

quadrangle wrote: post #6

Conflict-of-interest. If your business model is based on artificial obsolesence and 100% of the cost of e-waste and disposal is externalized, then anything that truly encourages effective continued use of older models is directly opposed to the business model. And while it's something to have marketable trust-building by taking some responsibility for the waste and longer life-span, that also invites people to start…

The solution is for elected government to impose rules for this kind of thing. This kind of “tragedy of the commons” is one of the downsides of a market system. There are all kinds of other guard rails we put in place to limit the downsides of unfettered capitalism. With air pollution, the market has never solved that problem. Regulation addressed it. If there had been a market solution invented, why is air pollution…

Yes, everything you say, indeed. Market failure is a real phenomenon. We need effective regulation here. To get there, we need consciousness-raising first. Politicians act mostly only when there's already massive public demand for it.