And if Amazon decided to not give them any more software updates, they’d be fine.
But actively taking away working functionality is inexcusable, even after 100 years. If the device itself is still working, its functionality should not be reduced.
The headline is misleading. You can continue using the device with the books you have downloaded onto it for as long as you’d like. There also seems to be some homebrew alternatives as well.
Ticking time bomb seems a little dramatic for a device of this age. Anyone who actually cares enough to resurrect this hardware can use homebrew solutions. No vendor on the planet supports a product longer than this. Maybe you could argue the entire industry needs to change, but absolutely nothing about this situation is uniquely diabolical.
That’s not an excuse. Anything short of letting you keep all existing behaviour is a failure. It might not quite meet the literal definition of “bricked”, but it’s not much better.
Linux just ended support for the i486 chipset. Is that out of line by your standards as well? Are vendors obligated to support products for an eternity? What would be a reasonable amount of time to continue providing support if 14 years isn’t long enough? I really think the existence of homebrew solutions negates any major concerns here. Even if that didn’t exist, there’s nothing particularly unique about this situation. In fact the support window was like twice as long as the closest competitors. I think the language here is a little over dramatic to be honest.
That means Linux chose to stop updating those devices. If Linux somehow stopped you from being able to use your existing Linux version on you i486 chipset, the analogy would work. But your analogy in the real world just supports my point even further.
They are not required to “support” products in the form of updates. They are required, ethically, to support them continuing the functionality they were sold with for as long as the device is in use.
If they don’t want to continue operating a backend that’s necessary for it to work, they should put out a patch so the same functionality can be obtained through local-only behaviours. This is really no different from the “stop killing games” movement, except that it deals with actual hardware that is sold under the promise of certain behaviour, rather than a purely-software game.
14 years of software support is basically unheard of. These devices had a good run. This story seems completely blown out of proportion.
And if Amazon decided to not give them any more software updates, they’d be fine.
But actively taking away working functionality is inexcusable, even after 100 years. If the device itself is still working, its functionality should not be reduced.
The headline is misleading. You can continue using the device with the books you have downloaded onto it for as long as you’d like. There also seems to be some homebrew alternatives as well.
It literally says they won’t be able to be registered after a factory reset. That’s a ticking time bomb for anyone that might not be aware.
Ticking time bomb seems a little dramatic for a device of this age. Anyone who actually cares enough to resurrect this hardware can use homebrew solutions. No vendor on the planet supports a product longer than this. Maybe you could argue the entire industry needs to change, but absolutely nothing about this situation is uniquely diabolical.
That’s not an excuse. Anything short of letting you keep all existing behaviour is a failure. It might not quite meet the literal definition of “bricked”, but it’s not much better.
Linux just ended support for the i486 chipset. Is that out of line by your standards as well? Are vendors obligated to support products for an eternity? What would be a reasonable amount of time to continue providing support if 14 years isn’t long enough? I really think the existence of homebrew solutions negates any major concerns here. Even if that didn’t exist, there’s nothing particularly unique about this situation. In fact the support window was like twice as long as the closest competitors. I think the language here is a little over dramatic to be honest.
That means Linux chose to stop updating those devices. If Linux somehow stopped you from being able to use your existing Linux version on you i486 chipset, the analogy would work. But your analogy in the real world just supports my point even further.
They are not required to “support” products in the form of updates. They are required, ethically, to support them continuing the functionality they were sold with for as long as the device is in use.
If they don’t want to continue operating a backend that’s necessary for it to work, they should put out a patch so the same functionality can be obtained through local-only behaviours. This is really no different from the “stop killing games” movement, except that it deals with actual hardware that is sold under the promise of certain behaviour, rather than a purely-software game.