Well, the article says: “Google says it will continue to push software and security updates to its newer devices without specifying which ones.”.
So only newer devices (and we don’t know which ones), and if you are a bit familiar with technology, you would very well know that they will just quit updating the software anyways after some time as they stopped making the whole Chromecast line.
That’s still a lot of devices that would be perfectly usable and will eventually go to waste. So imo my remark about the fact that we should have laws forcing manufacturers to make their software open source as soon as they’re no longer updated is still valid!
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to not expect a company to perpetually support a sub-$100 device. Especially if said device has been around for 5+ years at least.
I agree with you that it would be foolish to believe that any company would support a cheap device perpetually but I think it should be common practice (or mandatory) to open the software so that people can extend the life of these devices. Generally speaking, as a species we cannot afford to waste electronic devices simply because the software is not up to date.
You only read the headline, didnt you?
That’s what clickbait aims to achieve. Just make people rage. People need to learn to read the article before raging.
I come down to these comments to have someone angrily explain it in simple terms to me.
Fair enough.
That’s not angry enough
Sucks for you then
Well, the article says: “Google says it will continue to push software and security updates to its newer devices without specifying which ones.”.
So only newer devices (and we don’t know which ones), and if you are a bit familiar with technology, you would very well know that they will just quit updating the software anyways after some time as they stopped making the whole Chromecast line.
That’s still a lot of devices that would be perfectly usable and will eventually go to waste. So imo my remark about the fact that we should have laws forcing manufacturers to make their software open source as soon as they’re no longer updated is still valid!
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to not expect a company to perpetually support a sub-$100 device. Especially if said device has been around for 5+ years at least.
I agree with you that it would be foolish to believe that any company would support a cheap device perpetually but I think it should be common practice (or mandatory) to open the software so that people can extend the life of these devices. Generally speaking, as a species we cannot afford to waste electronic devices simply because the software is not up to date.