I think you grossly overestimate the number of people who are as mind-numbingly stupid as you are. Yes, even on Slashdot.

Isn't it funny how trolls will grasp at straws to make a point that isn't really there? In point of fact, California is among the smallest per capita user of energy in the entire United States.

Artisanal compilers, no doubt.

To be fair, Samsung sues Apple too. They just usually lose.

You were expecting that any manufacturer should stop improving their products the moment you buy in?

You're being far too reasonable. Where's the inchoate rage at the existence of any product not tailor-made for linux geeks? Where's the cognitive dissonance caused by other people liking something that you yourself do not approve of?

Occam would like a word with you. In private.

Oh, they go higher than $75,000. A lot higher. Patek Phillipe in particular.

But if you (by your own admission) don't know much about luxury watches, then why spout off about the comparison between the Edition watch and luxury watches?

Oh, right. This is slashdot. Smart people have this blind spot about what they actually know vs. what they think they're qualified to speak about.

As a rule, there are no quartz (battery) watches in the stratosphere of luxury watches. As a general rule, there are no luxury watches worth talking about below the $5000 mark, though that is obviously very subjective. Gold versions of Rolex and Breitling start in the several tens of thousands range.

Well, there's the problem of finding a qualified watchmaker, which is becoming increasingly difficult because most of the watchmakers are old and generally succumbing to the effects of age. And then there's the problem of finding replacement parts for in-house mechanisms, which (surprise!) obey the same laws of scarcity seen in long-obsolete tech components.

So, to summarize: you don't really know much about watches, your comparison is riddled with unintended problems, and you should at least consider not spouting off in anger about that which you don't know, lest someone call you on it.

You might be surprised to find out that owners of mechanical watches are lately having a bit of trouble finding qualified watchmakers to service their watches. This isn't uniformly true, some cities are better represented than others with appropriately skilled people. But they're also finding it difficult to get parts for in-house mechanisms (i.e. very custom) from a few years back, which is awfully reminiscent of the problem you're pointing out in tech.

Mechanical watches were, after all, one of the original consumer tech products.

It's not a bug. It's a text limit. And you're clearly not very smart.

Nope. The very best watches all recommend approximately the same service regimen. The fact that you have an old watch that still runs does not in fact mean that it doesn't need to be cleaned -- it means you are not taking good care of it.

Cars will run without oil for a while, too. Doesn't mean that cars don't need oil.

Why waste good thought-power on a racist troll?

Congratulations. You have succeeded in changing my opinion of you. I no longer think you are a shitty programmer. I think you're a shitty programmer that can't even properly edit a sig line.