I was thinking primarily about appliances - lightbulbs (dumb or smart), washing machines, cars, cellphones / smartphones, etc. Those two points you added don't apply to most of them.
That said, I'm not sure if I agree with the first one. At least not completely. I'd like to have some ability to recover old/special features but I wouldn't mind if it required some extra work (like tracking down that motherboard model that still has parallel port on it). In the reality where all technology is being obsoleted fast and my two points hold, whatever you want to program over parallel has probably broke down already anyway.
As for the second one - we don't have anything like that even today in wide use, and we cope :). On Unix you end up moving your dotfiles; on Windows I used to spend an hour or three for setting things up "my way". Personally I don't expect a new machine to immediately feel like the old one - but I do expect to be able to make it so.
I guess that my overall point is that I dislike almost everything about the idea of disposable possessions, and I would resent being forced into it. I could imagine leasing a car, my washing machine, or another appliance if the TCO was reduced, compared to outright ownership for 10 years, but nothing that I actually care about.
> I'd like to have some ability to recover old/special features but I wouldn't mind if it required some extra work (like tracking down that motherboard model that still has parallel port on it). In the reality where all technology is being obsoleted fast and my two points hold, whatever you want to program over parallel has probably broke down already anyway.
If they're willing to replace the parallel device with a functionally-equivalent piece of hardware that connects to a bus that the new hardware provides, then that would be equivalent. I'd just want to avoid situations like this: If I took pains to keep OtherOS on my PS3, the replacement hardware must not have a firmware that's incompatible with my use of it. If I've got a gaggle of microcontrollers and a parallel-port programmer for them, the new hardware must either let me program them.
> On Unix you end up moving your dotfiles; on Windows I used to spend an hour or three for setting things up "my way".
On Unix, I move my dot files, a couple hundred gb of data, install about 500 packages, and end up tracking down, compiling, and installing a few things that aren't usually included in my repos. In Windows, a lot of the data was already transferred from the Linux side ("Unix" is invariably "Linux", on my machines), and I spend the next week tracking down installers for software, re-downloading games, etc. For the next 6 months, I'll be running into things that I need to track down and re-install. I cope with this by keeping hardware until it's absolutely unusable for what I want to do. If someone expected me to upgrade more frequently through a forced process, I'd expect them to ease my way as much as humanly possible.
That said, I'm not sure if I agree with the first one. At least not completely. I'd like to have some ability to recover old/special features but I wouldn't mind if it required some extra work (like tracking down that motherboard model that still has parallel port on it). In the reality where all technology is being obsoleted fast and my two points hold, whatever you want to program over parallel has probably broke down already anyway.
As for the second one - we don't have anything like that even today in wide use, and we cope :). On Unix you end up moving your dotfiles; on Windows I used to spend an hour or three for setting things up "my way". Personally I don't expect a new machine to immediately feel like the old one - but I do expect to be able to make it so.