Your statement implies that Macs used to have more than a decade of software support.
Do 2006 Macs stop receiving support after 2017 or later?
Is this true?
To me physical media has a larger carbon footprint print due to physical logistics.
Apples profitability is not solely from the Mac so should they provide money-losing support?
Did any iPhone ever have replaceable batteries?
Were old feature phones water resistant?
The way you read my statement might have implied that but no implication was meant. The 2007 iMac I bought I still had as of 2013, (and sold to someone else whose daughter was going to use it I believe). I’ve typically received 6 years of software support out of hardware. I’d have to check the actual stats to see what the average official supported supported life of products are, but anecdotally it’s lengthy. My outlook is to resist endless consumption, repurpose a device once it needs to be replaced, and harvest the raw materials as available once it no longer works. The same logic is why Reduce, Reuse, Recycle is in that order.
I would agree almost unequivocally that at the scale humans interact with the world, physical objects have a larger carbon footprint than digital counterparts. I don’t believe that I implied to the contrary anywhere either.
I didn’t mean purchasing a physical disk to upgrade the device, I meant purchasing the software in whatever form it is delivered. I believe it was Lion or Mountain Lion that still had to be purchased but on the App Store? I’ve forgotten the OS X naming scheme already.
My point was that I would rather pay their software team money instead of getting their product “for free” (though many argue that free is built into the cost of Apple products) if it meant they would take less of a margin in hardware by incorporating more eco-friendly features like interchangeable and user-replaceable batteries, more repairability and even upgradability of devices. Which isn’t to say that they don’t already lead in many areas on Eco-impact, it’s just that nobody is doing enough fast enough to address the issues of runaway consumer capitalism on our planet.
I’m not sure I understand your comment about profitability and support, but 1, Apple’s support and replacement fees are often rather high for out of warranty customers, 2, they make money from AppleCare (though I’m unsure if it covers the expenses) and 3, part of their name brand is based on the Genius Bar and support, which directly underlies their net worth and balance sheet as goodwill and other intangibles. They’re in no way obligated to do it (except where bound by law) but their name brand reaps the rewards for doing it.
No, no iPhones had replaceable batteries, the original one was a beast to tear into, though I felt 4-7 were very easily workable at the consumer’s end with the right patience and help. Still isn’t as good as being able to press and button and unclip a battery that only holds 30% of its charge to replace it with a new one. What I said above about the 4-7 relies a lot on the patience and understanding of tech, which I will admit a lot of consumers do not have.
As for old feature phones being water resistant, I think the Nokia I had before I got my iPhone either was able to be used in water or had a case that allowed that (though basically you were only talking or texting on it). You’re right to point out that the integratedness of the battery to the phone allows for much more water resistance, but I don’t think it precludes other options.
But again, all of this was just a hypothetical trade off.
