• PlutoParty@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    While it is certainly nice to have continued support, I think I’d disagree that forcing companies to maintain software on legacy/outdated hardware is something that should be legislated. I think that would greatly stifle innovation in a lot of cases.

    • piece
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, Apple does it for 10 years old devices and it’s not stopping them from churning out phones every year

      • PlutoParty@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not saying I think it would be a bad thing for support to continue. I just don’t think it should be legally required. If a small company decided to develop and produce a device, knowing they’d have to perpetually support it, legally, makes it exponentially cumbersome to continue further development. Newer software may not be able to run on older hardware, meaning they’d have to develop and maintain multiple versions of any security fix. For Apple, it’d hardly be a problem (financially) to continue support.

        On the other hand, I understand that this creates a situation where new phones keep being churned out that are hardly different hardware-wise. It’d be lame to stop supporting the older devices just to push people to buy another one (Apple). There’s probably some middle ground to be found here.