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.
Research released by the Federal Reserve last month concludes that each additional year companies delay upgrading equipment results in a productivity decline of about one-third of a percent, with investment patterns accounting for approximately 55% of productivity gaps between advanced economies. The good news: businesses in the U.S. are generally quicker to reinvest in replacing aging equipment. The Federal Reserve report shows that if European productivity had matched U.S. investment patterns starting in 2000, the productivity gap between the U.S and European economic heavyweights would have been reduced by 29 percent for the U.K., 35 percent for France, and 101% for Germany.
Yeah, no shit. No one wants to buy a new $1200 phone that does the exact same shit as the last $1200 phone.
Phones peaked around 2012. Now they are more cameras. If they had user replaceable batteries like 20 years ago no one would need to replace them.
Institutions and businesses need to stop the 2 year cycle on phones.
Phones peaked around 2012. Now they are more cameras.
Folding phones only came out about 5 years ago, but I bought it used and true to the article my current folding phone is over 24 months with no plans on it being replaced.
Flip phones folded first. NEXT!
If they had user replaceable batteries like 20 years ago no one would need to replace them.
I’ve only had 1 without a removable battery and decided never again. Can recommend Fairphone, or maybe Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro.
The Fairphone is particularly repairable and more sustainably and ethically produced than pretty much any other phone FWIW. Almost any component can be replaced in minutes, including the screen and camera($106), as well as microphones, speakers, usb ports, etc ($20~40). It uses de-Googled android and has a variety of built in security and privacy features other phones lack. They’re a good company trying to improve the industry, so I think more people should be aware of them.
The Galaxy XCover Pro is the best of the very limited number of removable battery phones from major well known brands, IMO.
I’m all for replaceable batt but it is usually at the expense of being more costly and/or less water proof.
Maybe “the economy” should give some more money back to working class people, ya dingdongs
The consequence of squeezing every last cent from people
I have a Skylake box that still functions perfectly.
Yes, there’s more power draw then I’d prefer, but why would I upgrade when I use nix and don’t game?
I always have a spare phone on hand, because I literally use my phones until they no longer turn on.
Again, I don’t game, and Pixel’s have an active ROM community and long-term updates, why would I upgrade any earlier than that?
Technology is hardly worth the bother these days. It’s jumped the shark.
Won’t somebody please think of the economy?!?
Stop releasing new devices that are worse and/or much more expensive.
Sacrifice yourselves for the economy
And the planet.
Yeah, I mean, it came up from my phone company lately, and I didn’t see a point in changing yet. My phone is fine, the battery is the only thing that could be a bit better.
Good, fuck the economy
They already did, that’s the problem. If they want more consumer spending they need to fix the wealth gap, but they don’t want to do that. They want to keep the pump running that transfers wealth from the poor to the rich but it’s starting to stall and they’re panicking, hence pieces like this.
This is utter bullshit. I’ve not bought a new phone in 7 years and even then the economic damage causes by my purchasing habits in those 7 years is an insignificant spec in the face of the economic damages wrought by the single Walmart in my home town each month.
I remember in the 00’s when you’d upgrade your phone every year because the service providers would give you a new phone. And it would be leaps and bounds better than your previous phone with tons of new features.
Now, Samsung wants to kvetch because I won’t spend $1,500 on their new whatever that is functionally identical to the one I have from 2020? Feh! Rot!
Edit: Come to think of it, my old phone has more features than the new one since they got rid of the stylus. Maybe one day they’ll figure out “AI” isn’t a feature, it’s bloatware.
They never “gave” it to you, it was always priced into the contract.
I got a new phone from Visible when they upgraded their network and my old one supposedly wasn’t compatible.
My bill was always the same.
They could’ve also said CEOs are hoarding more wealth than ever and it’s costing the economy.
Also, phone manufacturers, for one, took my headphone jack, removable storage, removable battery, crammed in more crapware, made rooting even harder, and keep aggravating my RSI with bigger and bigger screens. Why the hell would I look forward to an upgrade?
Man. What a shitty headline. This is actually impressive.
You know shit’s bad when US media starts using the ‘China bad’ classic “but at what cost?” byline toward US consumers
Im guessing there’s a sister article somewhere on Forbes reporting lower than anticipated earnings for US phone manufacturers
What are they even trying to say with the whole thing about Europe vs the US? If Europe had used their devices for shorter lengths of time, ie higher capital amounts spent on tech replacements, then they would have had higher productivity?
But that necessitates a level of investment that doesnt exist. Its like saying “if investments in the Congo were on parity with the US they would have increased productivity by 2 million percent”. Which is neither guaranteed to be true, as there are limitations in a smaller country, plus fairly useless to even say as there are limits on what is reasonably investable in the Congo without more risk than reward. Its literally useless econobabble arguing in favor of hypotheticals that make no sense on paper
Even the tech investments that occur already in the US make no sense on paper, consumer nor commercial. People dont need a new iphone every year. I get 5 years out of mine on average
God forbid we sacrifice one-third of a percent of productivity to reduce our impact on nature.
