Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil_liS
But we don't have any device that we are going to be using for at least a decade. If you would use a reader for only a year before you get a new one with better features, why would it matter that the screen could work forever?
|
I fully expect every reading device I own to last a minimum of a decade. My PDA's already nearly a decade old and works fine and my first Kindle is still just as horrible looking a display as the day I bought it. I also have laptops I bought as old as 2001 which I still use daily. Typing is typing and nothing other than a backlight to replace maybe once in that timespan. Of course the battery issue is the same for any device.
Personally I feel any device with a non-user replaceable battery should have a 100% levy added to them.
Cell phones which have a live expectancy or less than a decade also need a 100% fee, based on MSRP, added to the cost. Maybe then rather than promising things these parasitic companies would begin to deliver service improvements rather than promise or ever newer and "better" technology, the idea that everything in life is disposable and if it's over 6-months old it's no longer of any use.
Any reader which lasts less than a decade should be considered to have a environmental footprint well in excess of the printed versions. Hence the need to use forced compliance of the tax for such non-trivial things like a user replaceable battery.