Innovation or e-waste? Apple rumored to ditch headphone jack

[Purple Lady]

Originally Posted by Shane R

I guess we all have our own opinions.

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global...-clean/#report

That link refers to green Internet only. It reports on and gives Apple high marks for iCloud only.

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by Purple Lady

That link refers to green Internet only. It reports on and gives Apple high marks for iCloud only.

Yes. That's the data center infrastructure.

But the same attention to detail is to be found in the material us consumer electronics division and in post-use recycling. It's a big deal for the CEO, moreso than it was for the previous one.

[Shane R]

This article about planned obsolescence is good, and it tells me we'll never reach a consensus.

Some suggested that yes, Apple is deliberately limiting its technology’s lifespan to harvest more sales from its existing user base. Others said no — the brand hit that Apple would take for doing this would be too damaging, and Apple knows it. Since the column was published, I have likewise seen plenty of reader emails and technology blog posts insisting that Apple is either obviously engaging in planned obsolescence or obviously not.

But the answer is not particularly obvious. The best one can do is look at whether Apple would even have the incentive to cause its products to deteriorate more quickly over time. Economic theory is somewhat ambiguous on this point; it really depends on your assumptions about the competitiveness of the high-end smartphone market.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Shane R

Yes. That's the data center infrastructure.

But the same attention to detail is to be found in the material us consumer electronics division and in post-use recycling. It's a big deal for the CEO, moreso than it was for the previous one.

Which is better? To spend more time recycling, or making the gadget more durable, so it has to be recycled less often?

(I'm still using my bebook 1st gen e-ink reader. But it has a user replaceable battery and a removeable battery...

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Which is better? To spend more time recycling, or making the gadget more durable, so it has to be recycled less often?

That would end up being a circular argument.

Apple sold tens of millions of iphones and iPads last quarter.

What if you impact the environment more, by using less materials to produce your products, which over time, leads to a far lighter carbon footprint through more efficient fuel use given that there is less total weight being shipped?

[Conan46]

It is worth considering, what if cars were like some smartphones with built in obsolescence every few years. That would be a nightmare. Soon we would all be living on top of junked cars.

[Cyberman tM]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

The question is, why can one phone have a user replacable battery and not the other. My Lumia 950XL for instance has a battery I can replace. It's not more expensive than the Iphone.

But the company is probably earning less on it.

Why do some cell phones have SD card slots and others don't?

I'd say user expectation and target group is a big factor. The customers apple targets apparently as a whole don't relly need or want all that - or at least don't complain loud enough. (Probably because they don't have much choice - like the OS but not the hardware? Tough luck.)

I'm not saying they (apple, in this case) are unhappy at the thought of customers re-buying their devices.
It's just that I think the idea of a company actively devising ways to force re-buy is too simple.
(And, in some cases, way too complex - devising methods to ensure a device fails *just* when the warranty is off...)

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Conan46

Soon we would all be living on top of junked cars.

Ah, the Stacks...

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by Conan46

It is worth considering, what if cars were like some smartphones with built in obsolescence every few years. That would be a nightmare. Soon we would all be living on top of junked cars.

Actually, Wikipedia says that cars are a prime example of planned obsolescence.

In the United States, automotive design reached a turning point in 1924 when the American national automobile market began reaching saturation. To maintain unit sales, General Motors head Alfred P. Sloan Jr. suggested annual model-year design changes to convince car owners that they needed to buy a new replacement each year, an idea borrowed from the bicycle industry, though the concept is often misattributed to Sloan. Critics called his strategy "planned obsolescence". Sloan preferred the term "dynamic obsolescence".

This strategy had far-reaching effects on the auto business, the field of product design, and eventually the American economy. The smaller players could not maintain the pace and expense of yearly re-styling. Henry Ford did not like the model-year change because he clung to an engineer's notions of simplicity, economies of scale, and design integrity.

GM surpassed Ford's sales in 1931 and became the dominant company in the industry thereafter.

Light bulbs too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

[shalym]

Originally Posted by Shane R

Actually, Wikipedia says that cars are a prime example of planned obsolescence.



Light bulbs too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

...except that cars from 9 years ago are still drivable with no issues at all--can you still use an original iPhone?

Shari

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by Cyberman tM

I'm not saying they (apple, in this case) are unhappy at the thought of customers re-buying their devices.
It's just that I think the idea of a company actively devising ways to force re-buy is too simple.
(And, in some cases, way too complex - devising methods to ensure a device fails *just* when the warranty is off...)

I know people still happily using the 4 series iPhones. We'll be onto the 7's this fall.

[Shane R]

Originally Posted by shalym

...except that cars from 9 years ago are still drivable with no issues at all--can you still use an original iPhone?

Shari

Would you want to?

It had precious little memory, inferior connectivity, very few specialized apps, and its software is considered insecure these days.

The world moved on. At some point, practicality has to take over. But yes, I suppose I could Google and find someone using one.

Smartphones and cars are really bad comparisons though.

[ApK]

A couple quick comments following the slightly off-top tangents:
1. My car is a 2002 model. It's a approaching 200,000 miles, and I hope to keep it going as long as possible. Lately the trend seems to be encouraging people to buy new cars for reasons of financing, fashion, features, or fuel economy, not by artificially rendering previous models obsolete. That's fine.

2. Light bulbs: My biggest fear about the new, wonderful push toward LED lighting, is that, while the LEDs will last 10s or 100s of thousands of hours, manufactures will make the driver components and internal connections as cheaply as possible, ensuring that they fail long before the LEDs would, thereby undoing the best thing to happen to lighting since Edison.

[Conan46]

Originally Posted by ApK

Ah, the Stacks...

That's on my to-be-read list.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Conan46

That's on my to-be-read list.

It's very good. A must-read if you're a geek child of the '80s.
I recommend the audiobook read by Wil Wheaton.
If for no other reason,

Spoiler:

it was fun to hear Wil Wheaton talk about Wil Wheaton when he's mentioned briefly in the story.

...