I'd argue that this is serious enough that EOL doesn't apply. Yeah sure EOL for updates, features, minor issues etc.

But this is literally "Anyone in the world can remotely make your product unusable and destroy everything on it while you use it as intended"

I don't care if a car manifacturer EOL'ed a car model, if an issue gets discovered that will make the engine explode at random they better do recall.

But it's EOL. EOL means end of life, not just "no longer sold". EOL means we agreed it's trash and you are using it at your own risk.

It's not the manufacturer's fault if your expired fire extinguisher or medicine fails.

Internet things are out durable goods. They require maintenance or they fail.

If EOL is unreasonably short, that's a factor in purchase decision or contract or commercial code violation if they surprised you with accelerated EOL.

That works if they said the EoL date explicitly at checkout. I think they should also have to say the per annum cost, so "£120, equivalent to £240 per annum to our EoL date" (ie if the EoL is in 6 months).

For reference - my 13 yr old BMW just got a recall repair due to a potential problem with the air conditioning system.

That's an interesting case. BMW knew about that back in 2012 but covered it up for 5+ years before finally agreeing to a recall. They perhaps are covering their butts against lawsuits due to thirty negligence. And they wouldn't want a new fire triggering extra attention to an old fire, and also they want to burnish (ha!) their brand image, unlike WD who has practically no competition.

https://www.forensicdjs.com/blog/bmw-hvac-blower-wiring-reca....

Really? Huh. It's the second recall it's had in the last 4 years or so, the first one was a power connector of some sort...

> But consumer electronics are written off on much shorter timeframes than cars.

They are, but it kills the planet.

We have 12 year old PCs in the family. Well, back then they were high-end models bought for work. Now they are running Linux just fine for general family purpose. They use a bit more of energy than a new model, but where we live you have to heat buildings at least 8 months a year anyway. I am sure producing a new one would have required much more resources.

It's also important to point out that despite using more energy because it's older hardware, it'll use considerably less energy during its all life, than it takes to produce a new computer.

Replacing old hardware with "more energy-efficient" hardware is a trap from green capitalism and the numbers do not add up usually.

I find this claim a little hard to believe. Data centers routinely replace ~3 year old computers because the number of old computers they would need to keep running and cooling exceeds the cost of new more efficient hardware. The price of new hardware includes all the energy costs of producing it. Obviously the environmental externalities of energy aren't fully priced in, but that is also the case for data center energy.

What might be a more useful comparison is a $20 5W raspberry pi vs. a 2009 100W (at best) desktop computer where a month of continuous desktop operation costs more in energy than the new raspberry pi and ~1 year of usage.

It depends on scale. In my home I need heating 8 months of the year despite having a couple of computers. Data centers need cooling.

NB: The average age of a car in the US hit 12.1 years last year.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/averag...

Squeezebox touch still going strong here. Maybe I'm an outlier, but things shouldn't be disposable after a couple of years.

In my opinion the difference should be whether something is the first generation of a product or an iteration. Basically somehow using the Lindy effect to determine how long it should be supported.

E.g. if I had bought the very first generation of the iPhone it would have been much more out of couriosity, not long time usage expectation. But I think there now has been enough development on it, that I should be able to expect the iPhone I bought in 2020 to last say to 2030 somehow if I want to stick with it.

OK, well now come up with a formula that says (from a series of objective and not-readily-gameable characteristics) for a random electrical/electronic device (or, if you want to separate the two, provide a way to do so - is a 1980's microwave with an 8-bit controller for the timer 'electronics' or 'electrical'?) how long the warranty should be, how long it should be 'supported' (for a definition of 'supported') and how long critical errors should be fixed. Also specify which issues, and at which time point, should be paid for or not.

There is a lot of 'everything should be supported for eternity for free' in this thread, but I see no (at least somewhat) concrete suggestions for better solutions. If it was easy, we would have done it people.

"If it was easy, we would have done it" is just not true.

Companies have little to no incentive and consumers have little to no power. Barring some very unlikely industry-wide agreement, it requires legislation.

(Note I'm not replying to your first paragraph at all, only the last)

> concrete suggestions for better solutions.

Here's a concrete solution -- The US Consumer Product Safety Commission should be given regulatory power over all consumer products, such as to enforce a minimum five (5) year support for repairs and parts availability, and standardized safety + recall notices.

NHTSA already does all of this for cars and vehicles. (They require a minimum 10 year parts availability. They handle recalls via VIN for auto manufacturers, including notices and matching effected model lookups, etc) - https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle

US-CPSC should run a matching mirror'd program exactly like it, but for consumer goods sold in the US.

> There is a lot of 'everything should be supported for eternity for free' in this thread, but I see no (at least somewhat) concrete suggestions for better solutions. If it was easy, we would have done it people.

That's the easy, concrete solution. It's just not "profitable" from a capitalist perspective, and that's why no manufacturer is doing it.

Well not exactly nobody. Some manufacturers like FACOM (probably others) that are not into electronics have (or used to have) lifetime warranties and will happily repair or replace a product that is decades old.

The question is: as a society, do we want to pursue everyone's good and make things more efficient and ecological? or do we want more profits for the industry owners and more inequality and damage to the environment?

These two paths are fundamentally opposed. There is no conciliating them. If you want "nature" and "consumer rights", then you need to abolish "capitalism".