What is being discussed here isn't software. It's practices like serialization that makes repairing iPhones expensive. If your iPhone 6 needed a repair, the economics would probably drive you to a new iPhone, which is the issue.
When an Android device stops getting official updates, you can unlock the bootloader and install LineageOS or something to keep getting community updates indefinitely. Apple goes out of their way to keep you from being able to do that on an iOS device.
Given that "other" marketshare is consistently measured to be less than 1% of usage observed in the wild -- and LineageOS would be a fraction of that -- I think this is safe to say is not quite relevant to actual consumer behaviour.
It is very far from trivial, plus plenty (most?) devices have no open drivers, or will wipe the proprietary firmware on root, leaving you with much worse hardware.
Targeting iPhones is deliberate - the changes they're against are the ones which make it hard to hack. If they were truly interested in this goal they'd be targeting devices which aren't made from recycled materials, are poorly constructed, made from environmentally harmful processes and sold cheaply to flood the market (and subsequently landfill.)
I look at this cynically: Child safety is the pretext to removing encryption, yet low-hanging fruit to protect children from these harms is not enacted.
Easy repairs are the pretext to removing secure hardware, as if normal people are just lining up to do at home repairs (which are already available contrary to the slant of the article, as well a simpler device construction which iFixIt themselves state as easier to repair than earlier models.)
The cynic would say that Apple doesn't give a damn about privacy, only about control. Locking down their devices is only a pretext to prevent competition and abolish general-purpose computing so that they can continue to enact their rent-seeking on their captive population of digital serfs.
No-one is bringing up one of the reasons for serialization of parts.
Apple put security into iPhones to make them much harder to sell after they have been stolen. iCloud Activation Lock makes it very hard for a thief to resell a stolen phone, thereby making it less attractive to steal in the first place.
So, the thieves that I was in jail with told me they continued to steal the phones then just took them all to the phone repair stores who would break them all down for the spare parts and give them cash. They would then use all the stolen spares to repair other people's phones.
Now that the parts are serialized this channel is closed and it again makes it less attractive to steal the phones.
So, I for one am OK with the serialization, BUT there needs to be a balance. I realize Apple now hands out repair tools and instructions, with a system to reserialize your authentic parts, but what to do with a mountain of half-broken phones that could be legitimately cannibalized for their working parts?
That's the stated reason yes, doesn't mean we have to buy into it. Every time they want more control, they say it's for "security", we're used to it now.
If Apple would supply the parts.. This would also not be a problem anymore.
Besides, I'd rather that my stolen phone is useful to someone (even if not me) then thrown away by me after a year. As long as the software made sure nothing of my data is recoverable.
No, I'm sorry but this tactic is nothing but anti-consumer and anti-green.
You seem to be saying "if stolen iPhones are worthless, iPhones will be stolen and become e-waste", but if stolen iPhones are worthless, very few people will steal iPhones.
There are, of course less anti-consumer options than requiring active first-party involvement in any parts replacement. One would be keeping a registry of stolen phones and having the OS phone home after detecting a new part. Of course, that would cost Apple a bit of money (I think they can afford it) and only work with a locked-down OS (not to my taste, but I see no signs of Apple changing it), but it serves the legitimate goal of disincentivizing iPhone theft without raising the barrier to repair and creating extra e-waste.
My first and only iPhone became unusably slow with a major OS upgrade about 2 years into its life. I haven't bought an Apple product since.
I don't like Google either, but I've had several Galaxy phones since then and every one has lasted until I was ready to replace it on my own schedule. My current one is 2.5 years old and feels no worse off than the day I bought it.
That is roughly the opposite experience of most iPhone users.
For my personal experience, iOS upgrades tend to make the phone go faster or at worst simply let it run at the same speed.
I mean, ok, but I get 3 years out of an iPhone most of the time now, and by then I'm pretty okay getting a new one because of the accumulated incremental improvements, especially with the camera.
Only three years? I wouldn't have switched to this XR (2018) if a family member didn't have a good use for (and prefer the size of) my SE (2016). I still use a Samsung S3 (2012?) and laptops from ~2010. These things can last awhile, and should- they cost a lot to make, including the human cost of mining the materials.
We're moving fast and breaking ourselves, and while that seems to be human nature over the millennia, maybe we have some choice in how culture develops?
I usually end up on about a 3 year cadence for a similar reason and then use the n-3yr phone for a couple of secondary purposes like driving Apple Music to my stereo (at which point the prior phone's battery is probably shot and/or is otherwise not really useful any longer).
Not to mention mobile devices, being mobile, are often lost or stolen or irreparably broken by the 3 year mark.
Designing them to last 10 years doesn't make a ton of sense when shit happens -- being left behind in a cab or being dropped on concrete or falling into the pool or snatched when you left it briefly unattended.
It's like when people wish for medical advances so we can live for a million years, not realizing you'll probably be hit by a bus long before that.
I rather have a competitor outcompete them with a repairable product rather than forcing Apple to make better phones, or that Apple is forced to add repairability in order to compete.
That is not to say regulation is unimportant, but that I rather that regulations tilt the playing field toward more consumer friendly companies.
2 is a magic number on the mobile platform, capitalism is not some magic tool to solve every problem — there is not enough financial incentive to create an app for the majority of corporations for more than 2 platforms. So no new competitor can turn up, see Microsoft that is no small fish, and spent a shitton of money on it, to no avail.
On the other hand, Apple is like the best player in this category with almost a decade of proper, first-class support, compared to every android device that will die in 2 years, only recently may survive the 4 your mark.
I believe regulations are needed when it would beneficial for all providers to collude and form a cartel, which destroys the competition neccesary for innovation
Apple is indirectly nudging you to get rid of your older Apple products and buy their new ones. For example, let's use a high level example. When you buy an iPhone, the camera will never change. The camera features and picture quality will be the exact same on day 365 as on day 1.
Apple as a company is set up to only build and focus on software for newer hardware. They don't spend one minute extra to optimize for older hardware.
… imagine if Apple did improve the camera software. Someone would find a corner case it behaves worse in, make a YouTube video about Apple degrading cameras for planned obsolescence, and nine months later the EU has a committee to approve camera software changes.
Readit News
Many Android devices are supported for timeframes practically measured in months. Meanwhile my iPhone 6 from 2014 still gets updates…
Fortunately it never does. There have been some mistakes in the PC lines, but iPhone has always been rock solid from the first.
on a laughably small subset of devices
>and install LineageOS or something to keep getting community updates indefinitely.
false and only partially true for an even smaller subset of devices
Apple devices become fancy paperweights over time.
Unfortunately it's the end of the line for that era. My SE (the iPhone 6 internals) just got cut off with the iOS 16 update last fall. Sad times.
I look at this cynically: Child safety is the pretext to removing encryption, yet low-hanging fruit to protect children from these harms is not enacted.
Easy repairs are the pretext to removing secure hardware, as if normal people are just lining up to do at home repairs (which are already available contrary to the slant of the article, as well a simpler device construction which iFixIt themselves state as easier to repair than earlier models.)
The cynic would say that Apple doesn't give a damn about privacy, only about control. Locking down their devices is only a pretext to prevent competition and abolish general-purpose computing so that they can continue to enact their rent-seeking on their captive population of digital serfs.
Apple put security into iPhones to make them much harder to sell after they have been stolen. iCloud Activation Lock makes it very hard for a thief to resell a stolen phone, thereby making it less attractive to steal in the first place.
So, the thieves that I was in jail with told me they continued to steal the phones then just took them all to the phone repair stores who would break them all down for the spare parts and give them cash. They would then use all the stolen spares to repair other people's phones.
Now that the parts are serialized this channel is closed and it again makes it less attractive to steal the phones.
So, I for one am OK with the serialization, BUT there needs to be a balance. I realize Apple now hands out repair tools and instructions, with a system to reserialize your authentic parts, but what to do with a mountain of half-broken phones that could be legitimately cannibalized for their working parts?
Besides, I'd rather that my stolen phone is useful to someone (even if not me) then thrown away by me after a year. As long as the software made sure nothing of my data is recoverable.
No, I'm sorry but this tactic is nothing but anti-consumer and anti-green.
There are, of course less anti-consumer options than requiring active first-party involvement in any parts replacement. One would be keeping a registry of stolen phones and having the OS phone home after detecting a new part. Of course, that would cost Apple a bit of money (I think they can afford it) and only work with a locked-down OS (not to my taste, but I see no signs of Apple changing it), but it serves the legitimate goal of disincentivizing iPhone theft without raising the barrier to repair and creating extra e-waste.
I don't like Google either, but I've had several Galaxy phones since then and every one has lasted until I was ready to replace it on my own schedule. My current one is 2.5 years old and feels no worse off than the day I bought it.
Certainly major software updates can break things, but that is why you can (though not always quite easily) downgrade for a while after an update.
The phones still typically work fine.
Designing them to last 10 years doesn't make a ton of sense when shit happens -- being left behind in a cab or being dropped on concrete or falling into the pool or snatched when you left it briefly unattended.
It's like when people wish for medical advances so we can live for a million years, not realizing you'll probably be hit by a bus long before that.
That is not to say regulation is unimportant, but that I rather that regulations tilt the playing field toward more consumer friendly companies.
On the other hand, Apple is like the best player in this category with almost a decade of proper, first-class support, compared to every android device that will die in 2 years, only recently may survive the 4 your mark.
https://www.irs.gov/faqs/sale-or-trade-of-business-depreciat...
Apple as a company is set up to only build and focus on software for newer hardware. They don't spend one minute extra to optimize for older hardware.
shudder