There's been various attempts over the years at marketing easily
upgradeable computers, but invariably by the time you were ready to
upgrade, the cost of a new CPU module was a sizable portion of the cost
of a whole new PC, as well as the rest of the major components were
showing their age.


The upgrade of electronics would not be a significant cost if the true
cost of a computer was borne by the company and not the public.

We keep hearing how the economy of electronics lowers the cost of a
product but one of the greatest costs to society is the cost of
production, distribution and disposal of electronic items.

It occurs because it is allowed to occur.

TMT
James Sweet wrote:

And I want to add something about "planned obsolescence" because it
is often misused. If people are choosing to buy cheap, it's hardly
that the manufacturers are making things so they will break. The
consumer often wants that cheaper tv set or VCR.



Rather than planned obsolescence, it's normally more a case of how many
cost reducing corners can they cut and still have it last "long enough".
It's hard to blame the manufactures, they're supplying what the average
consumer is demanding.



If my computer from 1979 had been intended to last forever, it would
have been way out of range in terms of price. Because they'd have to
anticipate how much things would change, and build in enough so upgrading
would be doable. So you'd spend money on potential, rather than spending
money later on a new computer that would beat out what they could
imagine in 1979. And in recent years, it is the consumer who is deciding
to buy a new computer every few years (whether a deliberate decision or
they simply let the manufacturer lead, must vary from person to person.)



There's been various attempts over the years at marketing easily
upgradeable computers, but invariably by the time you were ready to
upgrade, the cost of a new CPU module was a sizable portion of the cost
of a whole new PC, as well as the rest of the major components were
showing their age.