Except they don’t become bricks. They still work just fine. In fact, on some more recent unsupported devices, you can still redownload apps (but only up to the latest version supporting your device). Did the Apple II become a brick when Apple stopped supporting them? The IBM PC? Why is an older iDevice a “brick”, but not BlackBerrys or Nokias?
Security issues are found in browsers every day. You get no updates anymore and you are not allowed to update yourself. If you care about (not) leaking any of your data, this is effectively a brick.
Not really - I don’t expect a 7 year old device to be a good browser - that technology is a moving target, but I do expect it to still work as a notepad, music player, etc.
> 1. So why did you mention laptops? Seems like a false comparison.
Linux laptops have a proven track record of being supported for >10 years. Since the GNU/Linux phones also run mainline Linux, they are effectively the same kind of devices. There is no reason to expect that GNU/Linux phones will stop being supported.
> 2. What 11 year old GNU/Linux phone is supported today let alone ‘forever’?
> 1. So why did you mention laptops? Seems like a false comparison.
Linux laptops have a proven track record of being supported for >10 years. Since the GNU/Linux phones also run mainline Linux, they are effectively the same kind of devices.
1. No they aren’t. The hardware is different. Laptops are not the same as phones. It’s a false comparison.
They may run the mainline kernel, but they certainly don’t run mainline distributions usefully.
PinePhone isn’t even considered supported for consumer use today.
It’s sold for developers and most users say it doesn’t even work as a daily driver
2. Is the Nokia 900 supported? It’s not obvious. What makes you think it is? Even you used a ‘?’.
3. Why is this relevant?
Anyone who wants one can buy a PinePhone or Librem.
Why would someone who wants a GNU/Linux phone buy an iPhone?
An iPhone 4 with the “last supported OS” is significantly slower than when it had the OS it launched with.
This is true across the board, which leads to this very convenient “they can buy used iPhones, but we don’t want them to use them, so we’ll gently guide them to new devices by making it inconvenient and annoying”
And before someone argues: Yes, much of the slowdown is because of new features, BUT Apple could simply allow users to disable most of them (such as ML-processing photos in the background, or deep-indexing file contents for spotlight. Those are not required for the phone to function as a phone).
If someone wanted to use the iPhone 3GS with the original iOS, not sync to the cloud, replace the battery every couple years, and install a firewall to prevent intrusion via known attack vectors, they could realistically have a perfectly snappy and solid experience in any future decade. Doubly so if they kept a 2.4Ghz AP when the industry is on some unknown future frequency.
However: Apple has taken many steps to prevent exactly that sort of thing, and they will continue to make as many as they can get away with.
> An iPhone 4 with the “last supported OS” is significantly slower than when it had the OS it launched with.
This ignores the fact that later iPhones with the newest OS are significantly faster than what they launched with, which contradicts the conclusion that this is intentional.
Ah, so no evidence at all was presented to support your claim that it was international, and your suggestion that the court found it so turns out to be bullshit since the court didn’t even rule.
Unfortunately we can no longer look at court decisions as arguments either way.
Large companies simply settle out of court in order to silence the facts.
- If they are wrong and are successful in getting out of it, they might walk away with a judge "confirming" that they did no wrong.
- If they are wrong and the evidence is overwhelmingly conclusive, they might write a cheque and walk away.
In either case the public does not have any convincing argument based on evidence. Therefore we have to go by subtext.
Apple was accused of slowing down the devices intentionally. They admitted the bare minimum (low power mode), then wrote a cheque that made the rest of the accusations go away.
To me, that's as convincing as a verdict by a judge.
Large companies and small companies settle out of court when the cost of fighting the battle isn’t worth it - nothing more and nothing less.
We can deduce that there as no evidence of intent, since if the plaintiffs had such evidence they wouldn’t have settled for so little. Remember that this was a class action with a huge class, so the settlement amount is diminimis for the plaintiffs but a decent payout for the attorneys. I.e. they had no case, and Apple paid to end the inconvenience.
This is obviously nothing like a verdict by a judge and provides us no information about the facts whatsoever, because no facts were presented.
The presence of a court case does not provide evidence for the michaelmrose’s subtext.
If it did, you would be able to reference some.
Also, this further confirms that the original claim by michaelmrose that they lost a court case and that the court found intent, was complete bullshit.
I am impressed concerning how much you defend Apple. I suggest that you look at my favorites list about them. Maybe it will tell you that they aren't as good as would like to think.
Precisely, the iPhone does not work like an Apple ][ or an IBM PC. After "support" is ended you cannot install software on your device. How insane is it, I'll repeat: you cannot install software on “your own” device.
I personally don’t care about installing my own stuff on my iPhone. I bought it knowing full well I couldn’t do it. But you’re right: when support ends, it is pretty crazy how the only way to install unapproved apps is through jailbreaks. If a manufacturer isn’t going to support a mass produced device anymore, they shouldn’t be able to just fold their arms and say, “we have a newer model!”
You can redownload supporting apps, but the problem is that the official App Store doesn't have them once a new version of OS comes out.
I remember when in 2014 I decided to give away my unused iPad 1st gen, just as a e-reader. So I've erased it but no apps were supporting this device already. Even the official Apple Books app.
Yes, techicaly it wasn't bricked, it worked, you still can turn it on and off. But without software it's useless.
First gen is the operative word. That device is not representative.
4 years was an eternity in device capability at the time the first gen of the iPad was released.
I’m writing this on a 6 year old iPad Pro that I use every day. Everything runs on it, and it shows no sign of being too slow or even needing a battery replacement.
It wasn't a problem with the device. It was Apple decision that one day disallowed to download existing working software. They had the software, and I don't think it was too expensive to keep it downloadable for a few more years.
Or you mean that there was a problem with Apple servers and now it's fixed?
