|
|
|
|
|
|
by br_smartass
3237 days ago
|
|
|
Or maybe all companies saw the better strategy for the profit of the industry was for people to need to keep buying new phones frequently and so they all removed that option from the customer hands, on a backdrop of design efficiency and 'innovation' and then it was done because consumerism is a big pile of bullshit. Most people when I see they talking about it, and I suppose most people in general, would like stronger screens and more battery even if it meant a thicker phone, but the illusion of "last generation" and stuff like that make so, for marketing purposes, supported by the profit motive, that it should not be this way because "customers"... I'm sorry, I just think it's absurd that people take those tales uncritically like that. My current phone is a middle-end Sony, it's screen already has that kind of shatter that starts to spread, the p2 connector stopped working these days, and after I bought it I could not find any of the accessories to help me preserve it(screen protection, cover, etc), had to buy some chinese stuff online that were worthless, it's less than a year old. We're systematically made of idiots. I still have an S3 that I used for 3~4 years, it's screen is intact and all the rest works fine. |
|
|
That line of reasoning makes some sense for Apple - an iPhone user will probably replace an iPhone with another iPhone -- but makes little sense for an Android manufacturer.
There is no great likelihood that Android user is going to buy another Android device from the same manufacturer two years later.
On the other hand, Apple also gets continuing revenue from Its customers after the phone is sold. It has every reason to keep the software updated. I've never replaced an iPhone for poor battery life. It's been because I wanted more speed, more storage or a larger screen.