When buying an expensive product, I usually tend to consider the price, usage and effectiveness the product will bring me. Just last year, I along with a group of mine purchased Macbooks. Given that the total sum of each Macbook we purchased was priced around $2000 we had to think the decision well. One factor that I did not think about was, what is the life expectancy of this product, will it last me a year or two?
A while later I watched a video, titled " Are Apple Product Made To Break?. Within the video the topic of planned obselence is discussed. The concept of planned obsolescence dates back to 1932, when it was used to identify a scheme by which the government would impose a limited shelf life on products in an attempt to help the world emerge from the Great Depression. For now, the term is used to refer to the practice of continuosly improving and reinventing products in an attempt to influence consumsers into replacing their purchases more often. In the video, many tech experts accuse Apple of building products that consistantly need replacing on an annual bases so Apple can keep sales and profits at a high level. New York Times columnist Catherine Rampell notes that Apple's software updates make older products run slowly. This happened to be the case for Marco Tabini, when he upgraded his iPhone 4s to the new iOS7 update but could'nt help but notice that the user interface felt sluggish and that the battery did not last as long as it used it. Furthermore Rampell, notes that the releases always coincide with the release of a new product and that the cost of replacing batteries within Apple products or a screen repair are nearly the same as buying a new product. Rampell isnt the only one to point out planned obselence within Apple.iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens agrees, saying Apple uses its own patented five-point screws which prevents users from repairing product themselves. He says when Apple introduced the new screws in 2009 they replaced normal screws in old products taken in for repairs without warning or getting the permission of customers. Personally I believe planned obselence is a matter of regular wear and tear along with advancing technological advancements. In the case of Marco, I know a battery is supposed to hold it maximum charge for about 400 or so charge cycles. This means within a year, the battery will begin to hold less and less charge eventually needing to be replaced. Furthermore, for the upgrades, it makes sense that an older device is not able to operate the same pace given that the software was written for different features and the new update has new features. What do you think? Do companies utilize planned obselence for profits?
11 Comments
Every now and then, a real world controversial event will occur that leads to a major discussion and debate on social media networks. Usually these events are filled with emotion and lead people to voice their opinions online which is followed by either support or opposition from other members. Events such as these have raised awarenessed for several topics but have also cost the life's and jobs of others. This occurance is known as bandwagon aggression.
One of the most recent occurances of bandwagon aggression was on May 28, 2016, the day Harambe, a gorilla, was shot and killed. The incident occured whena three year old boy fell into the moat at the Gorilla World habitat. The shooting was viewed heavily controversial as several onlookers noted that it was unclear whether Harambe posed any real danger to the boy.Furthermore, others blamed the parents and or the zoo for the death of the gorilla. On social media the mother of the boy became an easy target for others to voice their hatred for her "lack of parenting skills". One thing to note was that often in debates, people would repeadtely note how gentle gorillas are by nature . Most deiscussion revolved around the same sentences and responses, "Gorillas are kind", "Horrible mother" "He could have been saved". People who epreviously never showed any signs of admiring gorillas or such an opinion were now jumping in dicussions and admitting they always cared for gorillas. Personally, I do not think bandwagon is truly a horrible thing but I do believe it to be unethical that people begin caring after an event occured and almost seems fake. One usually tends to join a discussion is a majority of people have done so, hence the name bandwagon aggression. The only pro I can say about bandwagon aggression is that it raises awareness and makes people take notice. |
AuthorFirst generation computer scientist that loves football. Archives
May 2017
Categories |