I don’t understand what you want to say with the headphones jack removal.
Apple went there, people believe apple products are genius, people embrace wireless only audio, people now have another gadget that needs charging (colleague keeps complaining that they have no battery, still won’t part with their object of religious desire). Other companies soon follow the trendsetter: less consumer choice.
I am a kind of an audiophile myself (not a heavily obsessed one mind you, but fairly educated), and I have decent pair of headphones that perform as expected on bluetooth and more than adequately wired.
I do use my telephone (android) as a portable audio device, and have figured out how to get the maximum out of it. Apple will not gain me as a customer anytime soon with their wireless only tactics; furthermore, it is an obvious move of them towards closing their ecosystem even more by trying to shift from a universal standard to a proprietary one.
As for the part that you code on an ipad - indeed I read the part where you said that you can code on it (even though you also need the mac to compile).
But it seems you didn’t you read the part where I wrote that Cory’s post isn’t a “bad ipad review” but the point is elsewhere.
Anyway, I did mention that it has some computing capabilities, but I mainly see it used as a portable entertainment device.
Who’s giving them a pass? I think Apple shouldn’t be supporting those laws, but they haven’t stopped anyone making anything. All you’ve done is pick a convenient scapegoat.
I don’t think the free market is going to solve all our problems, or even that it’s particularly free most of the time, but you can’t hold Apple responsible for the sins of an entire industry, of which they are merely a part. There are plenty of things to complain about Apple about, but if you removed them from the Earth, this problem would still exist. If you pin everything on Apple you’re no closer to solving any problems at all.
But we keep seeing this sort of thing. Blaming corporations or governments and leaving individuals/consumers off the hook.
I’ve said it before, but fifty years ago the average home had very little electronics. Every purchase tended to be thought through carefully because of the cost. Buy this and !ikely you couldn’t afford that. That changed tremendously starting about 1976. New things that people were glad to buy, and even gladderwhen they became cheaper. My friend in 1980 bought a VCR, big clunky and expensive, but he was willing to pay the .price. Because he and others bought early, companies could sell cheaper and streamline manufacturing.
At some point things became cheap enough that consumers didn’t have to make choices, and maybe started buyingnot because of need, but because “everyone” had one.
Consumers are part of the problem.
And decades ago when most electronics was for hobbyists, we tended to know about the equipment.
Then it got big, people paid way less, and only used the equipment to an end
True, but those cars were also objectively worse in terms of safety, handling, comfort, gas mileage, and (more often than not) longevity and reliability.
There are still plenty of options out there for the gearheads who think of their cars as a hobby. Most people don’t do their own automotive maintenance anymore because they don’t need to or particularly WANT to.
What’s your stance towards digital watches? It used to be the case that a watch could be easily opened up and serviced either by the user or (more often) the local repair shop. Well maintained watches could last many years, and be handed down between generations. Most owners knew at least a little about how they worked. Then, starting around the 1970s, digital watches started becoming ubiquitous, and eventually much cheaper and more capable than the devices that preceded them. Most people don’t really understand much about how they work, and it’s extremely rare to attempt to have one repaired instead of replaced. Was the introduction of these watches a net negative for the world? The good news is that the old fashioned watches still exist for those that prefer them. As do non-Apple computing devices.
As frustrating as it sometimes it for tinkerers like me, I do recognize that modern manufacturing techniques that can make it so hard to open and repair electronics also have some real advantages. Using modern adhesives for assembling components instead of screws can often make the device smaller, more durable, water resistant, etc on top of being cheaper and easier to fabricate. And some advanced manufacturing techniques like additive manufacturing (AKA 3D printing) allows for building devices and machines that simply could not be built at all using traditional methods with discreet components due to the geometry.
Lol, my $50 pebble time is fully disassembleable and I’m actually planning on replacing its battery and main gasket in a week or two.
It is a slight bit bulkier than an apple watch, but not any bulkier than the $200+ fitbit ionic I bricked last week just doing a software factory reset. I’d need to use a hacksaw to get into that case for a hard reset. Instead of just a spudger.
It’s a damn shame pebble got bought by fitbit and decommed, then in turn fitbit got bought by Google and is now circling the drain.
Whaddaya think of Polar watches then?
sorry! I mean uh, Google gave you 100% cred. towards a fresh ionic? (What, nothing with magnets involved?) They have defibrillators in the ionic, right? Shark tasers? Salt shaker? Raman spectrography stuff? Just GLONASS or whatever location thing?
Who’s giving them a pass? I think Apple shouldn’t be supporting those laws…
You, right there. You admit they shouldn’t be doing what they are, but then follow it with:
All you’ve done is pick a convenient scapegoat…you can’t hold Apple responsible for the sins of an entire industry, of which they are merely a part.
A scapegoat implies they aren’t doing anything wrong. A premise that already flew out the window. You can’t say ‘oh well the rest of the industry is a shitstorm too, so "just keep on, keepin’ on Apple". They are wholly responsible for their conduct, and it is reprehensible.
There are plenty of things to complain about Apple about, but if you removed them from the Earth, this problem would still exist.
The existence of other evils in the world does not negate the very real harm Apple does.
If you pin everything on Apple you’re no closer to solving any problems at all.
Weak strawman there. Who said I’m pinning everything on Apple? Almost all the big players in tech have horrendous records and miserable behavior. Apple is one of many, but that doesn’t make their offenses less important. If anything it makes them more dire. They are no mere bit-player. They are the largest tech company by revenue and they use that wealth to unethical ends to drive more money into their coffers.
It’s one thing for a device to not be easily repairable as others have pointed out, but Apple takes it to another level, making things deliberately non-repairable by third parties in a way that is both wholly unnecessary and wholly self-serving. Not content with mere technological and cryptological means to assure their revenue, they supplement this with legal bullying.
But we keep seeing this sort of thing. Blaming corporations or governments and leaving individuals/consumers off the hook.
I see the other way 'round far more often. Companies and governments love it when people blame each other for all the problems: “If only those poor people would make better choices…why aren’t they driving a hybrid like me?”
People can only buy what the companies are willing to sell, and the companies limit what can be sold by competitors through a complex web of regulations/lobbying, standards manipulation and subversion, patent and copyright wrangling, and straight up threats and bullying.
And decades ago when most electronics was for hobbyists, we tended to know about the equipment.
That was a time when it was possible to know about most equipment. Now? Practically everything has an SoC with secret design, secret instructions and secret firmware. yes, even most of the “open” tinker boards like Raspberry Pi typically do on some level.
Then it got big, people paid way less, and only used the equipment to an end
well, even if it was Ive’s design, even he is answerable to Tim, and Tim’s a savvy guy. i really think they felt they were good, but then once they hit the real world usage… not so much. but the doubling-down on them and ignoring a year or more worth of consumer complaints was distinctly un-Apple-like to me.
I avoid Apple’s products - in spite of the fact (and while fully appreciating (from the perspective of someone involved in making electronic hardware)), that they embody superior design and build qualities in most respects. The company has raised the bar by introducing metal, glass and top-tier detail oriented industrial design into an otherwise good-enough plastic and lowest bidder OEM driven consumer products marketplace. The reason that I don’t want to support them with my purchase dollars or chain myself to their ecosystem is that I see that; while having one company control the entire experience can yield fantastic results in the short term - over time enclosure is the end game. A world with fewer vendor options (especially one with a hobbled regulatory environment (i.e. little antitrust enforcement)), is one with less user freedom, higher prices and eventually worse products.
Computer technology is unlike other manufactured objects in that it comprises a potentially open-ended world in which users can become (in theory) co-creators within. When different companies are in charge of the hardware and the software - to some extent it places the user in a position of responsibility for having to mind the gaps - but the fact gaps exist allows interesting things to grow.
There seems to be a collective ignoring of what the point of the story was. The main points of the article were about the transition from computers that encouraged repairing, modding, upgrading, and sharing to computers that thoroughly discourage users from doing any of those things. In the 10 years since the original article, these trends have continued and become even more pronounced. Through the dozens of comments ridiculing the OP, I don’t see one that actually says this is a positive change. Nor do I see one that addresses why those things need be abandoned to gain the benefits of an iPad.
Yes iPads have plenty of uses and are well made, but thats beside the point. The point is what we are unneccesarily sacrificing for those benefits.
No, using an iPad or other apple device doesn’t make you a bad person (which no one said). Personally I’ve used at least one apple computer daily for ~35 years, and the OP used early apples as the example of what should be done - i.e. publishing repair manual, schematics, diagnostic tests, etc.
Arguing that you can still write code for your iPad (if you have another computer), and you can still distribute it (if apple gives explicit permission), isn’t a counter argument. Its describing the problem.
And yes many other companies make similar, closed, unrepariable items. Despite the straw men this thread keep creating, the point wasn’t that apple was worse than everyone else. The point was that the iPad was a harbinger of the shift in tech to a world that discourages repair, free exchange of ideas, and interoperability.
And none of those things need to be sacrificed to get the benefits of the simplicity and usability of an ipad.
Lastly, anyone arguing that iPads aren’t in landfills by the millions is deluding themselves. Maybe not moreso than other manufacturers, but what the fuck does that have to do with anything. If you insist that environmental improvements should only be made if we can do it one device at a time based on landfill tonnage, I hope you’ll enjoy your warm beachfront property in Vermont
A bit like Apps on mobiles. Instead of a software that allows for complex stuff, you get a very specialized app that does one thing, but it becomes harder or impossible to do the more complex stuff even for those who would put up with the learning curve.
Instead of the computer being an universal machine each instance is now highly specialized, does exactly one thing, and can’t be repurposed.
The infrastructure required to build and run that stuff becomes ever more complex though.
Which gives us smart lightbulbs which stop working when the vendor goes bust and shuts down their server.
