Many of those examples are disingenuous. Planned obsolescence could explain some, but to suggest there's no such thing as price/durability trade offs, regular wear and tear, or just poor construction, and instead it is "hardware changes" is a weird take. Of course physical objects change over time!

▲

coldtea an hour ago | parent [-]

What exactly sounds "disingenuous" to you?

Someone bought the hardware. It worked. Then it stopped / was damaged, and not for bad use (e.g. operating it in the sun or dropping it or something).

>but to suggest there's no such thing as price/durability trade offs, regular wear and tear, or just poor construction, and instead it is "hardware changes" is a weird take.

Nobody suggested that, so that's an even weirder take.

The things mentioned are not "regular wear and tear" nor price/durability trade offs.

As for "poor construction", yes, that leads to hardware that changes to worse under you over time. Mind blown?

	▲	andsoitis an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It sounds like you expect products to have zero defects, under any circumstances. There's a wide margin between shitty products and perfect. Show me a single product EVER that doesn't have failure modes or that lasts forever. None of this is to say I excuse poorly made products. But they generally are known before most people buy them, so a buyer can make an informed decision.