this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
608 points (95.0% liked)

Technology

59593 readers
4603 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

SO. MUCH. THIS.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"One reason or another"

Given that one big reason is "Planned obsolescence", you're still pointing the finger entirely in the wrong direction.

You can't scroll Facebook for five minutes without seeing people complain that "They don't build stuff like they used to anymore" or "All this Chinese junk just falls apart in 5 minutes."

Consumers want reliable, long lasting products that they don't have to replace all the time. They just have no way of reasonably obtaining them.

If consumers were actually as hungry for constant upgrades as you claim, phone manufacturers wouldn't put so much effort into making their products impossible to repair.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Consumers want reliable, long lasting products that they don’t have to replace all the time.

This is the thing that I'm genuinely not entirely convinced of. More than anything, I think a lot people want shiny new stuff as cheaply as they can get it, and that most consumers will generally opt for that over a more expensive but more durable alternative, even if that's not what they'll actually tell themselves. "Chinese junk" succeeded because masses of people preferred a cheaper product over a more expensive domestic one. Plenty of people raged against removing headphone jacks, for instance, but ultimately, those phones still sold very well. If there was really a huge demand for phones with headphone jacks, why would Samsung etc. not plop one in there and capture that demand? I would speculate it's because it doesn't actually exist to a super significant degree. Plenty of Android phones had removable batteries for long while, but as they started to go away, you didn't see a huge group of people flock to the phones that kept them. Ultimately, consumers generally showed that they would opt for better waterproofing and slimmer design with a more annoying battery replacement procedure than a bulkier phone with easily removable batteries (though I am intrigued to see if the EU will actually be able to successfully mandate them).

So, while I do agree that consumers do want reliable and long-lasting products, they also want maximally cheap products, and products that feel new and sleek and luxurious. These are contradictory aims, and it seems to me that consumers' revealed preferences are towards novelty and price, not durability, though I'd also say that I think this is shifting somewhat. Each new generation of phones is offering fewer genuine innovations and improvements, and at least in my experience, consumers are noticing more and more that even mid-range phones are perfectly adequate and that any phone can last several years. As I understand, this has been reflected in declining sales over the last several years.