If you work in the field of industrial design please consider suicide
>>100175355This constantly changing of things to make life more inconvenient was hinted at by Ted K. I hate technology so much it's unreal.
>>100175446I'm with you bro. As if making shitty products on purpose wasn't enough
works on my machine and the machines of billions sounds like a you problem
>>100175618read the file name
>>100175618Don't work on my or anybodys machine cause its fucking broken thanks to intentionally frail design
>>100175664maybe stop being a lardass and breaking your cables?
>>100175355>*moves pc connected phone*>*windows usb unplugged sound*>*windows usb plugged sound*>*windows usb unplugged sound*>*windows usb plugged sound*
>>100175618you know you are defending one of the biggest scams in history right?
>>100175688Fucking retard, this >>100175712
usb has done nothing but unify things more and morebefore usb you has serial, parallel, ps/2, adb, gameport/midi, proprietary interface cards for anything unique or high speedwhile usb has had a few variants of their smaller connectors, compared to all the proprietary connectors devices had before it, where basically every device had its own bespoke connector, i'll take usb any day, so what if i have to keep a micro-b cable around for a couple devices, and a mini-b for a couple really old devices, it's only a few easily replacable cables, anything made earlier and you needed a specific cable for that specific device (range of devices /if you're lucky/)like i remember getting second hand phones before they all went straight usb micro-b was a pain in the ass, because if they don't have the specific charger or data cable to go with it, you're just fucked, while with usb, any usb cable will do, for charging and datanow usb-c is taking over even more tasks, like there's monitors now that can run from just usb-c, power and data, laptops that charge with usb-c, etcyou need less unique cables now than ever, and you're complaining about it? i don't think you lived before usb came out
>>100175741this picture basically sums it up, you think usb is bad, look what it replaced
>>100175741>>100175775can you faggots read the file name? OP is talking about planned obsolescence!
>>100175797that's the part i'm responding to, given the name and picture of an older usb cable, i inferred that op is talking about how usb has gone through mini-a/mini-b/micro-b/usb-c and usb3 variants of thoseto which i've responded pointing out that while sure, one cable forever would be nice, what we have with usb now is better than what we had before usb took over
>>100175835To be exact I'm referring to intentional frailty of these things. Perhaps didn't do very good job on that but the problem is multifaceted.
>>100175904frail? i haven't broken any of my usb cables or ports
>>100175712This stupid lightbulb only lasts forever because it's dim as fuck and never turns off. Real lightbulbs have a limited lifespan because they're cycled on and off all the time and have to put out useful amounts of light
>>100175917Good for you. I have. I have a habit of using devices while they are charging. Go on and insult for I don't handle them like ancient artifacts, fact remains that they and fucking everything is designed to generate long-term sales volume by reducing the time between repeat purchases which in turn generate more and more electronic waste. This isn't about you or me or usb cables in particular. Think broader.
It's a big problem. Many industries are involved in a process of a continuous stream of "new" versions of their product. I suspect it has a lot to do with what I've started calling "the unspoken agreement", which is something like the willingness of workers (and other people in similar roles) to do wasteful, superfluous, meaningless work in order to maximize some measurable quality -- which isn't necessarily something that actually matters. It also gives these people something to do -- there's no reason at all for a company to exist if it's not actively working on something. The entity, once it exists, is committed to continuing its own existence, no matter how useful or useless it may be.So maybe there are two main contributors to this problem, in my view:>The tyranny of metrics (please read "The Tryanny of Metrics", by the way)>Pournelle's iron law of bureaucracyWe've stopped caring about real value, and instead we've focused on return-on-investment. We've confused the map for the territory. Unfortunately, each of us is probably doing this unbeknownst to ourselves, because we have financial needs to support our selves, families, hobbies, etc. Thus, the unspoken agreement:>Yes, I will gladly do this pointless work in exchange for some money (or a degree).>Please, if you have any more pointless work, I will do that too (nevermind that I will half-ass it and it will only /technically/ meet the criteria you say you care about).>I have mouths to feed, after all.
>>100175932NTA.It is however true that the big producers of lightbulbs did conspire to artificially limit lifespan of their products.
>>100175775Oh yes it was so much better before when every phone had its own propietary charger that lasted its production run.kys.
>>100176139meant for>>100175797Sorry
>>100176106No, they "conspired" to make them more energy efficient at the expense of lifespan.To make a bulb last longer it has to operate at a lower temperature.This not only makes the light they produce more red (literally a lower color temperature) it also makes them produce less total light per Watt.2700K was an optimal balance between efficiency, color rendition and lifespan, so they all agreed to make that instead of something like 2300K used in indicator bulbs where lifespan is more important than efficiency and color doesn't really matter.
>>100176542>No, they "conspired" to make them more energy efficient at the expense of lifespan.that's the opposite of what they do now, nowadays they drive leds harder so they can use less led chips at the cost of both lifespan and efficiencyleds are more efficient the lighter you run them, but then you need more chips for the same amount of light
>>100176619Yes, companies today are objectively worse than companies in the past.
Mini USB > Micro USBI don't know why they made it more fragile for no benefits.
>>100176729No benefits for you that is. It breaks more easily which generates more sales. Mini usb was the shiet (not shit)
>>100176542Please Sir. Those agreements were entirely done because it's smarter to sell 10 lightbulbs than just one.You are welcome to prove me wrong, the burden lies on you...or are you trying to say all those companies conspired because they wanted to save ze Planet?
>>100176341Not everything that can be counted counts.Not everything that counts can be counted.Some things are easily measured:>test scores>do you have a degree, yes or no>antibody count>cholesterol levels>clicks, views, retweets>search engine ranking>etc.But they are often not actually the thing you are interested in learning about:>competence>industriousness>intelligence>health>quality web content>etc.These things are much harder to define and measure, so we focus too much on the metric (that which is countable) and devalue the actual thing (that which counts).
>>100175355MicroUSB isn't terrible, it at least has the little hook things which prevent it from accidentally disconnecting. The worst USB connector was the early USB3 thing they put on hard drives and DVD drives, that thing unplugged itself constantly.
>>100176096>>100176965Hear hear. Sorry I went full retard for a moment and thought abaut metric system
>>100175355why would i? i'm getting paid and study postgraduate to fiddle around in cad software
>>100175707>DodaDo>Dodalo>DodaDo>Dodalo>DodaDo>Dodalo>DodaDo>Dodalo
>>100175355they consider it
>>100176030i've never broken a cable even using the stuff while it's plugged in, just try being white like me
