[KptMarchewa]

That argument made sense 10 years ago, but since then we've seen a lot of slowdown in computers, consoles and mobile phone progress, while TVs have overcome the LCD slump.

The value difference between 10 year old console (PS4!) and new one, can be smaller than 10 year old LCD vs new OLED.

[inetknght]

> > Without trying to defend this particular carve-out, I would suggest that things like computers and video game consoles are improving in capability over a much faster time scale than TVs and video cameras. Hence there is much less of an expectation of longevity / relevance than with other tech goods.

I disagree with your point, but I'll reply to this one:

> That argument made sense 10 years ago, but since then we've seen a lot of slowdown in computers, consoles and mobile phone progress

That argument doesn't made even less sense 10 years ago in my opinion. When things are moving fastest (eg, most profitable) is when parts must be made available for consumers to repair themselves. When things are moving slower, then the IP/schematics should absolutely be provided if nobody is willing to make the parts.

[anonymousab]

Video game console gens last longer and have continued software support for longer than Android phones.

[inetknght]

Honestly though: how long something lasts shouldn't matter, companies should still be forced to provide support for things they sell, or else to provide their IP/schematics so that other people can support the trash that was sold.

[mcpackieh]

This is absolutely true when you look at hardware from today vs 10 years ago, then do the same comparison between the 90s and 80s or even 00s and 90s. People are playing basically the same manner of game now and 10 years ago, but between the 80s and 90s there was radical change in technology in a way that shaped the development of entirely new video game genres. Video game development since about the early to mid 00s has been mostly a matter of refinement, very little has been truly revolutionary.