HN is biased towards the sort of people who keep computers from 2009 to play with and wish they could get more use out of their 12 year old iPad Air. That's great, but it's simply not a thing for most people so i don't see how it significantly reduce ewaste.
If mobile devices would routinely last twenty years, which they very well could, that would reduce a lot of e-waste. Software getting more demanding is also a function of hardware churn.
> If mobile devices would routinely last twenty years, which they very well could, that would reduce a lot of e-waste.
Unfortunately, battery technology doesn't - and even if we had long lasting batteries, we'd also need fall-resistant screens. And no matter what, even if you have a device held together by screws and allowing easy repair instead of messing around with glue and click-tabs... screens still are really expensive, making it often enough more worthwhile to take the opportunity and upgrade the whole device rather than to repair the screen.
Not in most phones. You always have to mess with glue and unless you take extreme care and caution to remove _all_ pieces of it you will end up with compromised water-tightness, not to mention risking the screen cracking or being exposed to air (ruining OLEDs).
> my main desktop monitor
We were talking about phones. Phones get dropped, scratched by keys, ... the list why phone LCDs/OLEDs can get broken is loooong.
You clearly haven't met a lot of your average PC or phone user then. Most people don't care about getting the newest and best thing. If a thing still works, they'll use it until it doesn't anymore, however long that is. You have no idea the kinds of PCs I saw people using when I worked as a technician. People just don't have an interest in getting new tech unless they're forced to, because they largely aren't interested in tech. They're interested in document processing, watching videos, listening to music and dealing with their pictures. And they don't care how old the device is they're doing it on.
In addition, they don't want to spend money on it. They'd rather spend money on things they actually care about. Festivals, clubs, vacations, a new TV, a car, restaurants, whatever. Your average non-tech person is happy if they don't have to spend anything on gadgets for 10 years.
My mum was still happily on some 8 year old iphone, I'm not even sure which one that was, and then got really annoyed that she had to upgrade just because her banking apps stopped updating and wouldn't log in anymore. It's just pure and complete e-waste.
The iOS ecosystem graduated to status symbol for many, $66k average salary doesn’t really matter when society will just take whatever carrier trade in deal they can use to status up.
>You're living in a bubble to think people don't want to get more time out of their family's iOS devices.
No, at least for Apple devices, the overwhelming majority are replaced before they reach EOL. According to https://telemetrydeck.com/survey/apple/iPhone/models/, only around 25% of people are using iPhones that were released more than 3 years ago.
Maybe more people aren't running older hardware because it's too difficult, rather than because they don't want to. The basic idea is here is taht if a device can still hold a charge and the user is OK with limited features, they should be able to keep using it as long as they feel like it.
Citing large absolute numbers for rhetorical effect is dishonest because multiplying a huge number with any percentage will result in a shockingly large number. The original claim is that "people who keep computers from 2009 to play with and wish they could get more use out of their 12 year old iPad Air [...] it's simply not a thing for most people", which is true even, if there are millions in absolute terms.
The PC ecosystem is the exception to the rule. 20 year lifetimes are typical, but in the smartphone world 10 years is treated as an impossibility. It is all disposable by design
I'm not sure about today's conventions, but it used to be that every component inside a car had a minimum standard of 10-year-life. The Toyota Landcruiser famously had a minimum 25-year-life for each and every single component. I have worked closely with some older Toyota engineers in Japan. It is possible but not conventional.
And if something didn't work he included a complete debugger inside "Apple II Machine Language Monitor" in ROM so you could always just disassemble and poke at things, pipe disassembly to the printer, read memory, change code, add own macros to CTRL+Y and rerun stuff. All that without extra software or a massive pile of printed assembly.
from BASIC:
CALL -151 (short for CALL 65385, but BASIC can't handle unsigned INT so that wouldn't work)
F666G
Renaming anything (without a manifest) setup.exe will cause Windows to ask for UAC elevation. The user cannot opt-out. There are a few other hard coded strings like "install" that cause this AFAIR. You can also use its_a_setup_mr_bond.exe for example.
Funny, you are right. But it needs to be something without correct .exe metadata. "you_are_an_install_wizard_harry.exe" also triggers different behaviour/query for UAC.
I'm weird. I'm still using the RoR Plugins for NetBeans. It still works pretty great (including haml and coffee autocomplete and code highlighting) for maintaining some legacy apps if you don't intend to reinstall it from scratch (which is a nightmare).
Huh?