this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
872 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
60022 readers
3338 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
it's too bad they don't make cellphones like this
Kinda goes against capitalism. Planned obsolescence has been around for a long time and if somebody goes against it, they will be removed by the big players.
I'm not saying planned obsolescence isn't a thing (because it is), but that's not the only reason. Making phones smaller, lighter, faster, and more feature-dense all mean that the phone has to be built with tighter manufacturing and operating tolerances. Faster chips are more prone to heat and vibration damage. Higher power requirements means the battery has a larger charge/discharge cycle. And unfortunately, tighter operating tolerances mean that they can fall out of those tolerances much more easily.
They get dropped, shaken, exposed to large environmental temperature swings, charged in wonky ways, exposed to hand oils and other kinds of dirt, and a slew of other evils. Older phones that didn't have such tight tolerances could handle all that better. Old Nokia phones weren't built to be indestructible, they are just such simple phones that there isn't much to break; but there's a reason people don't use them much anymore. You can still get simple feature phones, but the fact remains that they don't sell well, so not many are made, and the ones that are made don't have a lot of time and money invested in them.
Now Voyager is an extremely simple computer, made with technology that has huge tolerances, in an environment that is mostly consistent and known ahead of time so the design can deliberately account for it, had lots of testing, didn't have to take mass production into its design consideration, didn't have to make cost trade-offs, and has a dedicated engineering team to keep it going. It is still impressive that it has lasted this long, but that is more a testament to the incredible work that was and is being put into it than to the technology behind it.
There’s also the fact that the mass market wants their cheap shit. Make something to last 10x as long at 3x the price, and sure folks will buy it but the market share would be minuscule.
Its not only that the market wants cheap shit, but also that you would need to trust a company to not just be overpriced shit
Too true
Yeah. I'd totally buy an $800 million phone.
Realistically you can buy something like a Fairphone that lets you replace most parts that wear out or get damaged, which definitely increases the overall longevity of your phone. Or that CAT phone that's supposed to be super durable if you're prone to breaking your phone. Or if smart phones aren't your deal you can maybe find the old reliable Nokia 3210, that phone does not break and the battery can be replaced.
If you have phone longevity issues then stop buying phones that are not designed to be used for a long time.
How much does the plutonium battery fairphone cost these days?
Interesting about about 2k, to give a nice round number.
Voyagers is estimated to have insufficient power for communication by 2032, so from its launch we'll get a rounded 60 year battery life. Fairphone doesn't have plutonium batteries (though that would be pretty cool) but you can replace batteries. Let's say you replace the battery every 2 years which means you need 30 batteries. At 40€ a piece the cost of batteries is 1200€(and you get one extra battery with the phone). Add in the cost of the phone with the delivery of phone + 30 batteries and it comes out to about 2k.
you have to charge those though, Voyager doesn't need charged
I guess that's the downside of not having a miniature reactor in your phone.
Honestly I'd be happy even with just user-replaceable battery so that I can swap it every year or two, and go maybe 4-5 years this way. That's the most I've needed since I've been using a mobile phone. Beyond that a phone is bound to feel morally obsolete, unless you also replace the mainboard/chipset, which I reckon isn't easily doable.
Luckily user replaceable batteries are coming with an EU regulation some time within the next 5 years, but so far fairphone is the most repairable phone you can have. I don't think you can replace mobo or chipset, but it does allow replacing quite a few things. For me the 3 most important ones are battery, charging port and screen, as those are the most likely for me to get worn out or broken. I haven't bought it yet because my current phone is still somewhat chugging along, but my next phone will definitely be a fairphone.
Fair point (ba-dum-tss), I had forgotten about that ruling, but I'm afraid that manufacturers will still find a way to weasel out of this. Let's see.
The satellite dish would press against your hip bone.
Ah, the old Lemmy dish-a-roo.
they do work. my dad still has Nokia phone with black and white screen.
do they still make them like this? i have to buy a new pixel every few years
I cant even get a decent wifi signal from a router 15ft away from me, but somehow we’re sending and receiving data from a satellite, that’s practically outside of our solar system. Isn’t that wild?