Dec. 17-Dec. 23: Apple and Planned Obsolescence
This week, a conspiracy theory that Apple was intentionally slowing older iPhones was confirmed. Why are we so surprised?
Welcome to the Zeitgeist Chronicle. Every weekend we catch you up on the past week’s most noteworthy current events. Sometimes it’ll be what everybody’s talking about, other times it may be something we’d like to bring attention to. Our goal is keep you informed enough to be able to have a conversation about any of these current events. This week:
An Apple Conspiracy, Partially Confirmed
Have you ever had a feeling that your iPhone started slowing down as soon as a newer iPhone comes out? Perhaps you took it as a sign to look into getting the new iPhone? This week, we learned that this is not quite the coincidence it may appear to be, as Apple confirmed that it does in fact intentionally slow down older iPhones. Apple claims that this is to preserve the batteries on older devices and not to subtly nudge you towards getting a new device, but there is no reason both explanations can’t be true.
Apple releases new iterations of their devices every year. They make it a big spectacle. It is very much in their interest to encourage us to continue buying their devices. Apple holds one of the most dominant positions in the Smartphone market. Increasingly, everybody that walks on two feet owns a smartphone, and if the number of people who own iPhones grows, then, theoretically, there would be less “new” customers, which would stagnate Apple’s growth. One way to bypass this is to give old customers a reason to return, and if Apple is dead-set on releasing a new line-up each year, there is no better way to highlight “the best iPhone we’ve ever made” than by slowing down the one you already own.
This is called “Planned Obsolescence.” We would like to think that the things we buy are made with the utmost quality and that they’re intended to be able to last as long as possible, but this goal is one that is in conflict with making money. The longer a product lasts, the less likely it is for you to buy a second one. Planned obsolescence basically sets a determined lifespan lifespan for a product. Instead of including the best available battery that will last as long as technologically possible, companies include the best option that lasts for about, say, two years. Planned obsolescence, like many of the things Apple claims they invented, was not created by them. They just made it fashionable.
That being said, planned obsolescence is also part of the reason why your $1000 smartphone isn’t $1500, even though paying $1500 for a phone that lasts 5 years is a better than buying two $1000 phones that last 2 years each. Apple’s battery explanation is plausible. Older devices can get slower over time if the hardware cannot keep up with the software, but Apple’s lack of transparency is what’s adding fuel to the conspiracy theory fire. Their explanation is also disingenuous. If they cared about preserving batteries so much, you would get notifications about your phone’s performance and the battery in your iPhone wouldn’t be so hard to replace.
When the news broke this week, segments of the internet seemed to be collectively surprised. “What? Surely Apple would never do this!” I ask: Is it really that implausible? This comes after last week, when Net Neutrality was ended in what can be summarized as the FCC and telecommunications corporations saying “Place your faith in us”, even though many of them have a history of doing what they think we think they’re going to do. Corporations exist for one reason and one reason only: to make money. Is it really that hard to believe that a corporation put making money above providing the best possible product?
