No, big differences at play here. Nintendo won’t plan obsolescence, they will give you a base version at launch (multiple, if they can, since they’re handheld devices and a single family may conceivably want a couple) and then they will iterate on the form factor with a cheaper, slimmer alternative and a bigger, premium alternative. None of those will stop working or break at any point, though. They don’t care about them being replaced. In fact, they prefer if they aren’t, given they make a cut of the software, too.
They are planned to stack on each other. Sell you multiples for multiple users. Apple can’t do that trick, because everybody already owns a phone and the software is backwards compatible and interoperable, so they need to push you to replacement hardware. Nintendo’s on a different business.
The remote bricking is not planned obsolescence, it’s Nintendo’s draconian opinion that they own every part of the hardware and the software fundamentally, so emulation, user modding and jailbreaking are crimes against humanity. They are wrong, but they will continue to enforce it aggressively even beyond what is legally established. This is because it goes fundamentally counter to their hardware design, which relies on cheap-but-robust devices you can give to kids that are built with imaginatively repurposed older tech. They see enthusiasts improving on their price-optimal design as a threat and will send ninjas to stab you if you disagree.
I disagree, but there are degrees of separation here. Nintendo still needs to be forced to provide replacement parts, specs and so forth, though.
I feel like you’re biased in favor of Nintendo. “They make durable products” while also being infamous for the joysticks drifting. Those don’t seem to gel together. Maybe they’re hard to totally break, but they seem to be fine with selling products that degrade pretty quickly.
I don’t think I am. They had a significant isue with joycon drift. I do think some of it was overreported, in that a big issue with joycons is that they have absolutely garbage-tier connectivity, which can also manifest as the stick being “stuck” as the receiver keeps the last direction held to mask intermittent connectivity. But even with that, the sticks were prone to physical issues, at least in the earlier runs. It’s unclear how well newer sticks hold up in comparison.
But that is perhaps the biggest technical issue Nintendo has ever shipped, and their handhelds have been knwon for being insanely rugged since the original Game Boy. The Switch is perhaps the most prone to cosmetic issues, but it’s still a remarkably solid little tablet. It breaks under extreme abuse, just like the DS ended up with torn hinges and scratched plastic screens, but it’s nowhere near fragile. It’s a toy built for kids, so it’s built for more physical abuse than your average phone. That’s not a defense of Nintendo, it’s a very conscious decision they’ve made as an industrial design approach and a business model. It’s not good or bad in itself.
If you design a product to be intentionally difficult to repair, using subpar parts, is it not planned obsolescence? I really don’t get what you are about there. Unless you require some sort of an internal clock to force brick the device to be considered planned?
It’s not planned obsolescence if your device is meant to last for decades. You could argue about the joycon if they had done that on purpose, but given that they ended up having to replace a bunch of them it seems pretty likely that their business model is to sell you four pairs to play with friends, not to keep reselling you more as they break.
Nintendo’s business is not based on the product becoming worse artificially to upsell you on a replacement. Their model is to keep making incremental replacements and then drop a generational upgrade every decade or so. That’s not how planned obsolescence works. You don’t get artificial performance degradation, deliberately fragile parts or artifical restrictions to repair via signed components. People can (and many do) repair Nintendo hardware on third party repair services with third party replacement parts, and from what iFixIt is saying that doesn’t seem to have changed.
Which is not to say Nintendo put ANY thought into repairability here. They clearly expect you to buy a Switch 2 and keep it until you buy a Switch 2 Lite. This thing is very new and that may yet change in both directions. But so far all I see here is the same old “we built this to be cheap and durable”, which is fundamentally not Apple’s “you’ll buy one of these every two years and if it breaks you will come to us for a replacement and like it” approach.
You’d think, but I have Nintendo handhelds from the 2000s that still hold a charge fine, and so does my launch Switch 1, which is about a decade old.
The Switch 2 is the first one of these they ship with a battery care charge mode, too, which is interesting. I think as they abandon their old single-threaded, no-multitasking design, for a more mobile-like architecture they’re also having to make similar adjustments to their battery management, so it’ll be interesting to see if the Switch 2 battery struggles with degradation more than older devices. It sure is more power hungry, and it does get hotter so you’d expect more charge cycles per year and less durability. It’s going to be an open question for a while.
Still not the worst battery health in a Nintendo product, no matter what happens. That’ll always be the WiiU controller. That sytem laster just a couple of years and I still had to replace the battery for an aftermarket one and ended up using it plugged in anyway.
The problem with the battery is that it’s glued in and requires basically destroying the foam it sits on, with no available replacement for the foam or specifications given AFAIK.
Also, if we’re just talking anecdotes here, I have at least two Nintendo devices from the 2000s that ended up with swollen batteries. This has actually reminded me that I might need to check again.
Fundamentally true of everything with a battery. For old Nintendo devices that just… hold on to that charge forever I also strongly recommend pulling them out of mothballs every year or six months and giving them a full charge cycle, just in case. Gives you a reason to revisit old games, while you’re at it.
I wanna say they did the foam thing on Switch 1 (never needed to replace it, so I’m not positive, speaking from memory), but these things are typically popular enough you get aftermarket replacements specifically built to fit, so I’m not too worried about getting a replacement down the line, even with Nintendo not providing the requried documentation (but seriously, they have to for legal reasons, so they better get to it).
I’m more concerned about getting to the thing in the first place on this one. Plus the battery life is worse, so there’s conceivable a market for larger capacity replacements.
This conversation reminds me I need to swap a suspicious battery on an old Samsung S10 I had in storage and I’m NOT looking forward to dealing with that, either. Maybe I’ll just dunk it in alcohol and hope for the best…
No, big differences at play here. Nintendo won’t plan obsolescence, they will give you a base version at launch (multiple, if they can, since they’re handheld devices and a single family may conceivably want a couple) and then they will iterate on the form factor with a cheaper, slimmer alternative and a bigger, premium alternative. None of those will stop working or break at any point, though. They don’t care about them being replaced. In fact, they prefer if they aren’t, given they make a cut of the software, too.
They are planned to stack on each other. Sell you multiples for multiple users. Apple can’t do that trick, because everybody already owns a phone and the software is backwards compatible and interoperable, so they need to push you to replacement hardware. Nintendo’s on a different business.
The remote bricking is not planned obsolescence, it’s Nintendo’s draconian opinion that they own every part of the hardware and the software fundamentally, so emulation, user modding and jailbreaking are crimes against humanity. They are wrong, but they will continue to enforce it aggressively even beyond what is legally established. This is because it goes fundamentally counter to their hardware design, which relies on cheap-but-robust devices you can give to kids that are built with imaginatively repurposed older tech. They see enthusiasts improving on their price-optimal design as a threat and will send ninjas to stab you if you disagree.
I disagree, but there are degrees of separation here. Nintendo still needs to be forced to provide replacement parts, specs and so forth, though.
I feel like you’re biased in favor of Nintendo. “They make durable products” while also being infamous for the joysticks drifting. Those don’t seem to gel together. Maybe they’re hard to totally break, but they seem to be fine with selling products that degrade pretty quickly.
I don’t think I am. They had a significant isue with joycon drift. I do think some of it was overreported, in that a big issue with joycons is that they have absolutely garbage-tier connectivity, which can also manifest as the stick being “stuck” as the receiver keeps the last direction held to mask intermittent connectivity. But even with that, the sticks were prone to physical issues, at least in the earlier runs. It’s unclear how well newer sticks hold up in comparison.
But that is perhaps the biggest technical issue Nintendo has ever shipped, and their handhelds have been knwon for being insanely rugged since the original Game Boy. The Switch is perhaps the most prone to cosmetic issues, but it’s still a remarkably solid little tablet. It breaks under extreme abuse, just like the DS ended up with torn hinges and scratched plastic screens, but it’s nowhere near fragile. It’s a toy built for kids, so it’s built for more physical abuse than your average phone. That’s not a defense of Nintendo, it’s a very conscious decision they’ve made as an industrial design approach and a business model. It’s not good or bad in itself.
If you design a product to be intentionally difficult to repair, using subpar parts, is it not planned obsolescence? I really don’t get what you are about there. Unless you require some sort of an internal clock to force brick the device to be considered planned?
Everything else is correct and I agree.
It’s not planned obsolescence if your device is meant to last for decades. You could argue about the joycon if they had done that on purpose, but given that they ended up having to replace a bunch of them it seems pretty likely that their business model is to sell you four pairs to play with friends, not to keep reselling you more as they break.
Nintendo’s business is not based on the product becoming worse artificially to upsell you on a replacement. Their model is to keep making incremental replacements and then drop a generational upgrade every decade or so. That’s not how planned obsolescence works. You don’t get artificial performance degradation, deliberately fragile parts or artifical restrictions to repair via signed components. People can (and many do) repair Nintendo hardware on third party repair services with third party replacement parts, and from what iFixIt is saying that doesn’t seem to have changed.
Which is not to say Nintendo put ANY thought into repairability here. They clearly expect you to buy a Switch 2 and keep it until you buy a Switch 2 Lite. This thing is very new and that may yet change in both directions. But so far all I see here is the same old “we built this to be cheap and durable”, which is fundamentally not Apple’s “you’ll buy one of these every two years and if it breaks you will come to us for a replacement and like it” approach.
I mean, it’s clearly not meant to last decades given the battery situation.
You’d think, but I have Nintendo handhelds from the 2000s that still hold a charge fine, and so does my launch Switch 1, which is about a decade old.
The Switch 2 is the first one of these they ship with a battery care charge mode, too, which is interesting. I think as they abandon their old single-threaded, no-multitasking design, for a more mobile-like architecture they’re also having to make similar adjustments to their battery management, so it’ll be interesting to see if the Switch 2 battery struggles with degradation more than older devices. It sure is more power hungry, and it does get hotter so you’d expect more charge cycles per year and less durability. It’s going to be an open question for a while.
Still not the worst battery health in a Nintendo product, no matter what happens. That’ll always be the WiiU controller. That sytem laster just a couple of years and I still had to replace the battery for an aftermarket one and ended up using it plugged in anyway.
The problem with the battery is that it’s glued in and requires basically destroying the foam it sits on, with no available replacement for the foam or specifications given AFAIK.
Also, if we’re just talking anecdotes here, I have at least two Nintendo devices from the 2000s that ended up with swollen batteries. This has actually reminded me that I might need to check again.
Fundamentally true of everything with a battery. For old Nintendo devices that just… hold on to that charge forever I also strongly recommend pulling them out of mothballs every year or six months and giving them a full charge cycle, just in case. Gives you a reason to revisit old games, while you’re at it.
I wanna say they did the foam thing on Switch 1 (never needed to replace it, so I’m not positive, speaking from memory), but these things are typically popular enough you get aftermarket replacements specifically built to fit, so I’m not too worried about getting a replacement down the line, even with Nintendo not providing the requried documentation (but seriously, they have to for legal reasons, so they better get to it).
I’m more concerned about getting to the thing in the first place on this one. Plus the battery life is worse, so there’s conceivable a market for larger capacity replacements.
This conversation reminds me I need to swap a suspicious battery on an old Samsung S10 I had in storage and I’m NOT looking forward to dealing with that, either. Maybe I’ll just dunk it in alcohol and hope for the best…