1533
graceful degradation: the opposite of planned obsolescence (slrpnk.net)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@slrpnk.net
89 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 years ago (11 children)

I don't own iPhone and don't know how it does not work with microphone broken, but I would hope that everything supposed to work as long as it doesn't require microphone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I'd hope my scanner works when I'm out of ink, but here we are.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    That's not planned obsolescence though. Your printer/scanner isn't made obsolete because you run out of a consumable portion. I mean yes, it's purposely disabled to force you to buy more ink, but buying ink instantly restores the functionality. It's super anti-consumer behavior for sure.

    If your printer was made to perform worse over time to force you to replace the entire device, that would be planned obsolescence. Like devices with non-replaceable batteries that degrade over time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (6 children)

    Sure, they can also make the camera a microphone for when microphone A stops.

    Where is the line and and at what cost point? I like how the conversation went from batteries on a light to iPhones lmfao.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    How does one turn a camera into a microphone? Also the thing being discussed is that one part of the whole not working shouldn't cause the whole to stop working.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    But in doing so increases costs and can create even more dangerous situations they could be putting them up for liability wise.

    But yes make everything about iPhones because they “bad” lmfao.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Sorry, but that's a bullshit. What kind of liability? Why other manufacturers don't have liability problems when it happens to them?

    You are drinking Apple kool-aid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Uhh they do. They get litigated all the time because stuff doesn’t work the way people expect it. I have also explained it in my other comments.

    I’m sorry you live in this magical bubble where everything is perfect and people don’t sue because something came with dead batteries.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    This is some weird brain yoga you are doing here, mister. Also the cost is the capitalist way of thinking, which as everything has pros and cons. It is not an iPhone is bad thread, it is a thread about anti-consumerism and keeping electronics out of landfills.

    Apple was for some time (iPhone 4 era) very easy to fix, I fixed some myself at the time but today it is unnecessarily (even wasting money as you argument) complicated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    Which has nothing to do with OPs meme… the thread got derailed by a completely different topic from an idiot circlejerking about iPhones bad.

    But yes I am the one with Brain yoga for sticking to the original Discussion lmfao.

    Oh wait, you’re actually the one that made this about iPhones instead of what the topic was about. You are the fucking idiot lmfao. Oh well this conversation isn’t going anywhere blocked.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent