Tech Used to Be Bleeding Edge, Now it’s Just Bleeding | After a decade of scandals and half-assed product launches, people are no longer buying the future Big Tech is selling.::After a decade of scandals and half-assed product launches, people are no longer buying the future Big Tech is selling.
Nobody wants to invest 2 months paycheck into hardware that the developer is going to drop support for in 6 months.
Hardware is too expensive for the average Joe to buy and those of us who can afford it are tired of being burned by companies that provide subpar service then drop support for the thing. Cool, bleeding edge tech means little if there is little use for it or if nobody can afford it.
On the nose.
I used to love the bleeding edge, then my father (retired engineer) enlightened me on why important (electro-mechanical stuff) runs on older, slower, (but insanely reliable) engineering.
It’s that insanely reliable part. Kind of a hare vs the tortoise kind of thing. It’s more important to be able to predict when the tortoise arrives, than to be unpredictable like the hare, even if the hare finishes first 90% of the time. That last ten percent could be a massive cost.
Look at the ECU in a car - over the 40 years I’ve been working on cars (and my brothers and friends), we’ve seen exactly ONE ECU failure, and we think that was caused by an external event (a voltage spike).
I’ve bought a few “new tech” solutions only to have the company disappear within a couple years. For example, software for replicating a Windows install that could then install on any computer, retaining all the config and software. It was intelligent enough to update drivers as needed. They were around for 2 years, and the license has to validate against their servers. Bastards. Lol. (I’m guessing Microsoft acquired them to keep people from using it).
And that’s also why it was designed to need their servers to authenticate against: because they could charge Microsoft more if their product could be switched off remotely. They likely built the product with the aim of getting bought up. Who wants to run a company for 40 years when you can just skim a few million off of Microsoft and retire?
Lol, probably true.
They know how valuable the tech was. I still have the software and all the licensing info. Part of me feels like doing a Wireshark to see what it’s trying to do. I should’ve done that while they were around, to see the traffic.
There are free solutions that are open source, hell there’s older commercial solutions from Acronis and whatever Symantec calls Ghost these days. You made a poor choice in selecting a losing horse in a race that’s been run many times - how is that a reflection of the state of modern tech? You didn’t choose the Hare, you chose poorly.
The article and this discussion isn’t about reliable solutions vs new fangled stuff that doesn’t realise, it’s about what we do now that stuff realised and we didn’t think about what we signed up for. I’m really glad your dad encouraged you to think about the value of well-worn approaches but you’re being extremely reductive as are many in this discussion. What I find interesting about that is I feel this trend towards reductive thinking probably reflects a world seemingly happily with sliding the Overton window right inch by inch.
The kicker is that the devices are usually locked down so even if you have the motivation to get your hands dirty, you can’t. The device dies as soon as support dies.
You know what I want to look at devices prices and their typical lifespan and see what their monthly cost is once adjusted for inflation. I’m curious how device prices have evolved…
Edit: I asked ChatGPT (so not verified info) and yes it gave me a md compatible table lol
Edit2 added iPod and iPhone 13 Pro and more coming as I think of it. Feel free to suggest things in the comments.
Edit3 added android phones.
While this is true, I feel like this tank misses a few things.
People replace things too often imho. But to go with this theme, I used to do so as well… swapped my iPhone 3GS for a 4s and then the 6. I’d build a new desktop every 18-24 months near the late 90’s and 2000’s. Things were improving so fast in those times, it was worth it… but then things have stagnated. I don’t see a good reason to get a new iPhone, and while I love the M2, it’ll easily tide me over for 10 yrs. My wife still uses her Lenovo laptop from 2011. Cost is only part of the equation. Sure I don’t want to drop the coin, but also there’s really no big changes worth it to me.
I do miss my Nokia 3110 though. Stability and battery life were awesome. Those were simpler days.
I think you want to use hourly cost, or maybe some other measure of the utility of something. I can own a rock, and it may be a magnificent rock that will last centuries, but it isn’t going to give me much benefit.
Same with an old cell phone. I may be able to use it for 8 years, but I’m not going to use it for navigation, taking pictures, video chatting with family/friends, replacing my laptop when I’m out, etc.
Your table is a good start, but it’s missing some really important information
Please what info is it missing? I added the iPods for that reason.
The entire android ecosystem
Very good pint.
Maybe add a popular budget android phone too as opposed to flag ships.
Basically, I don’t think think monthly cost of ownership is a good metric for value.
I probably used an old cell phone maybe 3 hours a week. I use my smartphone at least 3 hours a day communicating with people, reading news, studying, games for kids, work, etc. I don’t think monthly cost of ownership reflects the value that those devices bring me. Your table needs a different column that measures the value more appropriately. Perhaps ownership cost per hour of usage?
You have another issue in that smartphones replace cameras, radios/Walkmen, maps, and even laptops In many cases. An iphone doesn’t just replace an old Nokia, it replaces all those other items as well.
I don’t think you need more rows, you need different columns.
Put another way: I’m not going to believe in a new product more than the vendor does, because that’s stupid. And we’ve had it demonstrated time and time again that the vendors don’t believe in their products.