Linked by gsyoungblood on Tue 20th Jul 2010 18:01 UTC
Permalink for comment 434209
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-06-18
Are you sure the consumer wouldn't be happy if they heard about planned obsolescence?
A (regular) consumer only wants a phone that will last them until their next upgrade cycle. Would the consumer really care if their phone they upgraded from broke after they upgraded? Why should Motorola over-engineer a phone that will last 15 years when it'll be used heavily for 2?
Further, most people (at least the ones I know) don't upgrade phones out of cycle and pay $400 to do so, they wait until their carrier heavily subsidizes their new one on a contract renewal period. If the phone breaks beforehand and must buy a new one, they'll buy the cheapest one so they can still use the service (and be soured on the carrier that charges them money), not the Droid Y.