The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.

While squeezing as much life out of your device as possible may save money in the short run, especially amid widespread fears about the strength of the consumer and job market, it might cost the economy in the long run, especially when device hoarding occurs at the level of corporations.

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 168 points 11 months ago

People are returning to normal device lifecycles and the greed can't cope

  • source
  • [–] 106 points 11 months ago (21 children)

    Oh no, we're being so selfish. Why not buy a 10% performance upgrade every two years for $1000 while wages stagnate? Oh, and carriers don't subsidize the cost at all anymore. They call it "free" then lock you into their most expensive plan so you spend thousands more on the plan than if you could have afforded to just buy the phone outright.

    Fuck this out of touch reporting.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 11 months ago (19 children)

    It's all over the place. In the middle of the article they suddenly talk about how software updates, modularity and repairability is important so that old devices can be made to keep up with contemporary demands, blaming the fact that this is an issue on big tech.

    Then again, other parts are completely nuts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 11 months ago (18 children)

    Noticing some em dashes in there, so at least some of this is AI.

    The parts about corporate infrastructure sound like a c suite dipshit trying to sound like they know what they're talking about.

    "Our networks run slower because we have to be compatible with older devices!"

    No, Judith, your IT department just keeps 2.4ghz wifi available for the old devices while also running 5ghz. Those devices stay slow, but it doesn't impact anyone else.

    "Back in 2010, 100Mb internet was the fastest! No one could imagine gigabit becoming widely available! Stuff needs to be upgraded to handle it!" Judy, tons of businesses were running gigabit in 2010, and common network gear has had gigabit ports for years. You have no idea what you're talking about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    I would have little respect for a journalist who didn't know how to use an em-dash, so I don't think that proves anything. But I agree that there is a lack of coherent thought throughout, though that's something humans are also fully capable of.

    But yeah, fully agree. Never mind that network connection speed is not really the relevant bottleneck for most office situations these days. If Germans are less productive due to technology it's because they still use freaking fax machines over there, not because employees are stuck with five year old smartphones.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    I -- to a certain extent -- know how to use an em-dash.

    (Source: Former journalist.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    Can we please stop with the em-dash bullshit? That's a literary tool, not a sign of an LLM in play. That people did not encounter them ahead of ChatGPT speaks more to their news diet than the ability to be a literary critic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 11 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

    I'm not sure whence your animosity comes. I've been a columnist since the '90s, and I assure you: Em-dashes are on the menu.

    To claim proof of LLMs is to say it was never done until then. It most assuredly was.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 11 months ago (7 children)
  • [+] 0 points 11 months ago (7 children)
  • [+] 1 point 11 months ago (7 children)
  • [+] 0 points 11 months ago (7 children)
  • [+] 1 point 11 months ago (7 children)
  • [+] 0 points 11 months ago (7 children)
  • [+] 1 point 11 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    When posting on other instances be sure to follow their rules in future.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    What rule did I break that he did not also break? "Hostility can only come from beehaw users, not outsiders?"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    You can report any comments you think are not following the site rules, as someone did with yours.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Not a problem, I have zero interest in dealing with beehaw again if your mods are allowed to instigate fights, then hide behind the rules after their feelings get hurt.

    If you're not going to let people talk shit, fine. But if your own mods are going to get their comments removed too, maybe they shouldn't be mods. This is the exact type of behavior people hate about reddit.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    You're speaking to a mod. If you don't care for how Beehaw works, please look elsewhere.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I don't respect your authority as a mod any more than I respect your authority as an editor. Just because you have a title doesn't mean you're right or just.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago*

    Sadly, for you, it does, in fact, give me authority, regardless of your opinion on the subject. You don't seem a particularly enjoyable individual. Perhaps look into why that is before lashing out at others.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 78 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Oh look, it's the consumers who threaten the economy, not the fucking ghouls in the C suite, killing jobs and cutting wages. How dare they not having enough money? How DARE they?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    I'd argue it's actually more the fault of the politicians than the CEOs, because the politicians cut taxes for the rich and set the rules of the game for companies to operate in; companies merely take opportunity of the exploits presented to them.

    I'd also say that companies have a so called "fiduciary duty" to maximize shareholder values, as typically understood by economy classes. the way to change that behavior is to change the rules to which the companies have to keep. that means, instead of exploiting workers, they should pay taxes and benefit the community that way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 66 points 11 months ago* (3 children)

    Jesus Christ what a dumb take. But at least they didn't say that millennials are killing the cell phone industry. I guess that doesn't make for good clickbait anymore.

    Reminds me if the parable of the broken window, in which French economist Frédéric Bastiat explains the painfully-obvious truth that breaking windows is generally a bad thing, even though it drums up business for the glass maker.

    But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! Your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen."

    It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    I like the analogy with a surgeon or a firefighter.

    Of course, the surgeon has to be available in case somebody needs an operation. But the best that can happen to society at large is that the surgeon is never needed because nobody's sick.

    Same with firefighters. Of course they have to be there to fight fires, but it's better if houses don't start to burn down in the first place!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 48 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    While it may seem to be a smart money move, it can result in a costly productivity and innovation lag for the economy.

    For the love of god! Won't somebody think of the economy?!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 42 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Why would that hurt the economy? If you want people to spend money, make things affordable and useful. They make things shittier and more expensive and then wonder why people aren't buying

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 37 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    At this point my phone from 2022 is way overpowered for every use case I have for it. So why upgrade? It was a bit different years ago, when new phones actually did exciting new things older phones couldn't do. But now the technology has pretty much matured, and upgrades are incremental at best.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    I am typing this on a 5 year old Android phone. It has 128GB of memory and 8GB of RAM, very decent cameras, a beautiful OLED screen and a processor that is more than fast enough for everything I do with it. And even now the battery still lasts two days with normal use. It cost me about €300 at the time.

    Unfortunately the Android version is getting so far behind that some apps are starting to get a few issues, so I have been checking out some black Friday deals for new phones, but they look very disappointing.

    In the current market it seems like I'd have to pay about €500 to effectively just get a side-grade. All €300 offerings look like just a straight up downgrade in any way apart from the more recent android version.

    So I think I'll hold on to this one a while longer. Hardware-wise it's still in perfect condition, and if software support really becomes an issue then perhaps I'll try out a custom ROM.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Also if you keep it for longer, the performance boost from a new one is noticeable. If you replace every 2 years, you get an imperceptible change and have to waste more money for it lol

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 35 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 34 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    That's not even 3 years, gotta get those rookie numbers up

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago

    Fr, my phone was over 3x as old when I traded it in, and it wasn’t even broken. I just knew I had to replace it in the next 4 years and didn’t want to get hit with tariffs.

    2 years is a good start for people who trade in annually, though. Gotta start somewhere!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Kevin Williams, the author of this article is a very special breed of stupid.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago

    Kevin, if thats even a real person at this point in media, is just pushing stories and discourse aligned with corporate speak. Let's consider it less stupid and more complicit, which I argue, is even worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    I dislike having the comma of direct address thrown at me. At least close the aside!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 11 months ago

    capitalist propaganda

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    The person who wrote this must be absolutely insane. How I'd it a bad thing for the world that people are holding on to their devices? Less e-waste and people don't spend impulsively. It's also very logical: smartphones reached a plateau and people aren't exactly swimming in money with the rising price of everything.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    The person is writing from a business prospective. If people are replacing their phones less often, it means that fewer phones are being purchased each year. If your company makes phones, that means adjusting to a shrinking market no matter what your company does.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago*

    that means adjusting to a shrinking market no matter what your company does.

    Which is good. Markets are supposed to go up and down, and responsible businesses would have the capital reserves to weather the troughs, but no (public) companies are responsible anymore, and they waste any capital reserves on appeasing short-term shareholders who don't give a rat's ass about the long-term prospects of the company.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 11 months ago
    [–] 60 points 11 months ago* (4 children)

    "Companies aren't innovating anymore and it's costing the economy" is what it should say. When late stage capitalism leads to consolidation and cost cutting, stock buybacks, and other short term profit when competition is no longer necessary, that's what kills the economy. That's why monopolies and anticompetitive behaviors are bad, but the US doesn't punish that anymore.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    “Companies aren’t innovating anymore and it’s costing the economy”

    companies aren't innovating anymore because physical limits have been reached. Moore's law holds no longer true. Transistors can't be packed more tightly into space anymore while also making the computer chip cheaper at the same time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago*

    There's lots of things that could be innovated without faster processors. I mean if we're just talking cell phones, adding a camera was an innovation, adding a touch screen and eventually touch keyboards that actually worked, different form factors. These things were aided by faster processors, but not directly dependent on them. But these could be totally unrelated devices to phones or even computing at all. Innovation across the board including med-tech, business models, city planning, and tons of other industries have suffered from privatization, deregulation, and leading then to consolidation and thus little need to compete and thus little need to innovate.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 11 months ago

    Oh my bad, I need to consume more to increase shareholder value. Almost forgot

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    I am not an economist. I am not an expert on anything consumer. It is, however, plainly obvious that companies are trying to squeeze blood from a stone at this point. They can't make money anymore with pay to own and innovation like they used to for a variety of reasons. From greed to enshitification. If you look at it with a different view, everyone is poorer because they are greedy, they've ruined everyone's lives but must make numbers go up. So they find new and terrifying ways of screwing you over for diminishing returns. Like this. Relying on turnover sales and nothing else.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    From greed to enshitification. If you look at it with a different view, everyone is poorer because they are greedy, they've ruined everyone's lives but must make numbers go up...

    This is the leading concept behind Capitalism. It's a self-devouring system. Every. Single. Time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah. I'd even say we went beyond late stage capitalism. We are now on the cusp of a feudalistic society more akin to the corporate dominance in Blade Runner or Eve Online, maybe The Expanse, then anything resembling capitalism. Corporations are more powerful than nation states, many people are indentured to their workplace via healthcare needs or non competes, etc. So there's that. This is an entirely new thread though so I'll stop it there. TL;DR - This shit sucks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Relying on turnover sales and nothing else.

    The best way to grow the economy is to develop spaceflight. If you fly to mars, there's millions of acres of free real estate waiting for you. Time to construct and grow the market.

    There's no more meaningful growth on Earth possible, because the physical limits have been reached. This effect has been predicted as far back as in 1970 with the report: The Limits To Growth. We're finally seeing the effects of that now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 11 months ago

    I don't like to comment twice, but holy fuck ... what the hell did I just read?

    The framing here puts the Louvre to shame (they've currently got their own problems). Perhaps the purest perversion of capitalism is the idea that sufficient is never enough.

    Look: Phones are commodities at this point. You only need a new one when the old one breaks. You don't call a plumber to replace your pipes every two years; it's generally because something shitty happens. Sometimes literally.

    This feels like the pendulum swinging back, to the alarm of capital. I'm old enough to remember appliances being expected to last 20 years. Fridge, oven, TV, washer and dryer: All were expected to be single-time replacements over the course of a 30-year mortgage.

    Hence growing up with a fridge in almond and a Kenmore set of laundry machines in mustard yellow. And a console Sony TV that made it through my entire console gaming time.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 11 months ago* (6 children)

    29 months is too long??? I consider that the absolute minimum.

    If my device doesn't last at least 36 months I look for a new company. I aim for at least 48 months.

    I refuse to buy Samsung or Google devices anymore, since they definitely did not meet my 36 month criteria. They didn't even make it to 24. Google did at first with my Nexus 4 and I loved it but they shit the bed real quick after that.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Either I've had weirdly good luck with Samsung, or I'm exceptionally gentle on phones. I expect 6 years minimum out of my Notes, and so far that's held up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (1 child)

    I spent $1000 on my Samsung (S6? I can't even remember anymore) and it's battery shit the bed after like 12 months and the charging port no longer worked unless the cord was exactly in a specific angle and pressure on order to recharge it. It was a pain in the ass and cheaper to buy a new phone than to fix it.

    Bought a OnePlus 5 after that which lasted 4 years, them a OnePlus 9 which lasted another 4 years, and currently on year 2 of my OnePlus 13 with no issues.

    Samsung could have had another 2-3 phones from me if they had decent quality but nah they prefer to design to fail.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Man, I must be weirdly lucky or gentle with phones. Note 3, Note 9, and finally whatever the S25 Note equivalent is actually called, and the only reason I updated from the Note 9 is because it was outdated enough that apps started going "dude, you need something more modern." Everything hardware wise still worked fine on it.

  • source
  • parent
  • i had a samsung s4 mini (one of those really old phones, which are closer to a nokia brick than a modern smartphone IMHO) for years and it worked well. it lasted for 5+ years minimum. i bought a new samsung smartphone in 2022 (second hand though) and it shipped broken. randomly shut down, some kind of power issue. i never bothered to return it because it was rather cheap anyways and i had installed a custom OS on it at that point, which voids the warranty.

    I bought a motorola afterwards but am only semi-happy with it. everything seems to work well with it, but i don't feel like it's a good phone. it feels kinda sleazy, somehow. i'm not sure whether it's only because of the color scheme it uses or sth else, but it doesn't feel alright. i'm still looking for a new phone.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago*

    I bought an older Samsung and only use it for doom scrolling, 2FA, and podcasts. Its fine stripped down to nothingness. My next purchase, once the cracks from me dropping it spread, will be an older Pixel so I can run GraphineOS. I'm hopeful that like my Linux experience, it'll extend the devices life given my use case. Like buying old laptops and kicking windows to the curb in favor of Linux buys you tons of time and product life.

  • source
  • parent
  • any recommendations for long-lasting phones?

    for desktop computers it used to be acer (laptop) for me. i bought one in 2012 and it lasted close to 10 years, which i consider really long. even then, i didn't buy a new one because of hardware defects, but because the hardware specs were long out of date. i bought a new acer (laptop) in 2021 and it enshittified heavily, lasting only 18 months before i had to buy a new computer.

    then i bought a thinkpad (laptop) and have been happy with it ever since. it's been running for at least 2-3 years by now and shows no signs of aging at all, even though it's already second-hand. great device.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 11 months ago

    have had my phone for close to 5 years now. it could use a battery replacement, but other than that it’s perfectly fine, so im gonna keep it for as long as i can

    and if that makes tim cook cry… so be it lol

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    29 months is a long time?

    I've had this one since 2019

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 11 months ago

    The nerve of CNBC to use the word "hoarding" and and not mention the actual cause of the problem being the declining wealth of the median household relative to wealth hoarders.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, well, what has the economy done for me lately?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 11 months ago (12 children)

    What a load of bullshit. Maybe I misread it but it says that German companies would be 101% more productive if they bought newer laptops and phones (American ones no doubt). They also claim that businesses are trying to use old hardware for modern workloads. Apparently a six year old laptop can’t handle Outlook and Word.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    To be fair, current laptops don’t handle Outlook and Word very well.

    It’s probably not the hardware that is the issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    You can't polish a turd ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)
    They used the dorodango technique to create dung spheres in order to bust the myth that one "can't polish a turd". Using a glossmeter, they measured gloss levels substantially higher than the value of 70 gloss units, which is considered "high gloss". Savage's 106-gloss unit dorodango used an ostrich's feces, while Hyneman's 183-gloss unit specimen used a lion's feces. They therefore deemed the myth "busted".
    
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    Hell, Windows 11 is broken enough on my work laptop that it sometimes struggles with fucking explorer.exe, and this damn thing will run multithousand part CAD models without too much hassle while Windows isnt fucking up.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    It genuinely floors me that few medium and large-sized companies don’t use Linux for desktops. You can customize gnome or KDE to work very similarly to windows from a UI/UX perspective, especially with the number of web based apps companies rely on. Windows and Office might start sucking less if they had real competition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    There is a lot of specialized shit that Excel does that calc isn’t up to par on.

    You also can’t easily cripple calc with group policy (no pesky macros or external connections, you little babies! Copy and paste or get dead)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago

    The main reason is tech debt and proprietary software. Most companies have decades of software infrastructure all built on Microsoft based systems. Transitioning all that stuff to Linux is a massive investment, especially taking into account the downtime it'll cause combined with the temporary decrease in productivity when everyone has to get trained and build up experience with the new platform.

    And then you have to deal with proprietary software. A lot of niche corporate or industrial hardware only supports Windows. And you probably have to regularly interact with customers who use Windows and share files with you that can only be opened in Windows only proprietary software.

    Linux also frequently struggles with a lot of weird driver issues and other weird quirks, causing an increased burden on the IT department.

    Basically you're looking at a massive investment in the short term, for significantly reduced productivity in the long run. And all that mostly to save a bit of hardware costs, which are only a fraction of the operating costs for most companies. Just sticking with Windows ends up being the more economical choice for most companies.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›