In your example you described the phone that needed replacing as "Ancient".

When you get to "Ancient", it doesn't really matter whether its apple or android. It's out of support on either, and yes, app support starts to fall apart at that age too.

My brother in law just updated from a Galaxy S5 this year (10 years old).

I find it to be the case that as long as their apps keep working. When the OS is too old, some apps cannot be updated and stop working. Any streaming app for example just stops working if the version is too old. For some phones, the OS cannot be updated anymore.

Personally I'd like a plug-in hybrid (PIH), and hope those are perfected soon. It gives one more fuel options. For normal commuting I could plug in at night to charge and never have to visit a gas station, yet have gasoline as an option for longer trips or blackouts.

I expect more pandemics, civil wars, Yellowstone eruptions, petulant Presidents, and/or zombie apocalypses. PIH's are a better fit for chaos.

The key thing you said is “As long as it just works". I can assure you that some apps stop working if they are not updated especially if there is an online component. Also apps stop working with prior versions of the OS if it is too old.

Again what happens is "Hey this app stopped working. Oh, it needs an update. Oh the latest version does not work with my version of the OS. I need to update the OS. My OS can’t be updated anymore?! Well, crap."

It has happened with a friend who had an ancient smart phone. Everything would have been fine except that he could no longer use any 3rd party messaging apps. They required him to replace his phone as the Android was so out of date, it was not supported by any of them.

A shutdown would cause a political stir in the US because it's a popular app.

But this shut-down threat may be a ploy to scare USA regulators etc. If the algorithms were really that unique, they'd patent them to protect them, and then agree to license them to the split-off as part of the settlement as long as the split-off doesn't use or sell them for other apps.

If they are relying on trade-secrecy instead of patents to protect their ideas, they are probably already swiped via mole employees, and/or deemed obvious by others.

Disagree. Perhaps it _should_ be a big factor, but it's really not.

People text, and snapchat, and tiktok, and watch youtube and play spotify, a mobile game, and take pictures, and maybe once in a while even make a phone call.

As long as that all just works, they don't really care, and will use the phone until they break it or it stops holding a charge.

Or if they're on some sort of subsidy-treadmill, they replace it every 2 years regardless.

Very very few people are 'oh noes, Samsung/Apple/HTC is no longer sending me annoying updates that make me reboot my phone... I need a new phone now!'

My cat is related to Chairman Meow.

I've heard that also. Plants don't have to outrun predators and thus can waste more DNA weight on marginal genes.

A species known as "the cops". We warned you about your tentacle porn.

Looks like somebody beat us to it.

They'd be better typists. And while at it, put arms on top of heads and eyes on the back. You'd be the best basket-baller out there. And give them 3 wankers to compensative for all the jokes classmates will make about them.

Big co's spend a lot of lobbying and bribe money to rid competition. It's more cost effective than doing a better job.

> Ford made the Ford Ranger EV 1998 to 2002

It seemed designed as mostly a company fleet vehicle, not a consumer vehicle. If there is a lot of wait time between deliveries, then you don't need big/efficient batteries. For example, for repairs, the average onsite repair may take two hours. The EV doesn't have to use batteries during that two hours.

Many believe it's a reinforcement mechanism between flowering plants and insects. Once both plants and insects got into the symbiosis pattern, it flowered (pun half intended) as both sides gained a big advantage: one was able to disperse its DNA further, and the other got an easy meal.

Why nature didn't invent it earlier is hard to say. Maybe because most insects have crappy eyesight. One then happened to have good-enough eyesight that they could spot flowers at a distance, and evolution improved both bug eyes and flowers after that.