Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I understand all that. Nevertheless, it has nothing to do with planned obsolescence.

> You need to pay the developers for a new version, that's obsolescence by definition

Sure, but you don't have to pay Apple.

The entire point of the idea of planned obsolescence is companies intentionally making their products last less time than they should, so you have to pay that company more money.

This is a company making it so you might have to pay other companies more money, because backwards compatibility isn't a priority for them. You can be annoyed by that, sure, but it is not the same thing, and is not obviously corrupt like planned obsolescence is.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: