this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
142 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
59733 readers
3299 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
I dunno if that's exactly comparable. Yes, you're technically correct...but then we should expect phones to either be thicker or have smaller battery capacity to compensate. That's probably a fine trade-off for you (and probably for me), but that's not universally true.
Personally, I think 'form factor' is another silly argument.
Add a few mm in thickness in return for a device that lasts many years longer? That's an obvious benefit to the consumer (imo) and an easy way to reduce electronic waste.
Moreover, these paper-thin phones need big, sturdy cases to prevent bending in the pocket, so why not build a sturdier phone, and attach a thinner case, for the same resultant thickness?
To me, these are flimsy excuses the c-suite uses to justify unjustifiable levels of planned obsolescence, and the accompanying profit margins.