Public transport is nonexistent in several places here in Texas for example - you have to have a car (or know someone who does) to get to your job in the first place. But commuting puts wear and tear on the car, especially if you can't find work particularly close to where you live.
I read a book once on extreme early retirement that advised to pick your place of work and house so that they were within walking distance of each other and also walking distance to a grocery store. The quality of the work and even your income weren't as critical as this. The idea being the goal was to finish work as soon as possible in your life when investment income could take over. Live in a one room rental, have one plate, a pot and a fork. Be a Spartan. That was the gist of it. Retire in five to ten years. Was compelling on some levels but orders of magnitude more difficult when you consider trying to bring a spouse and family into this.
One might begin to wonder if there's more than mere correlation between those who adopt socially conservative beliefs and those who seem unable to paint their environment in anything other than such broad strokes...
Do you have a source to cite for "the approach that the vast majority of purchasers prefer"?
That seems pretty speculative.
The market can be manipulated or directed by more than simply consumer choice, e.g. by business incentives of product manufacturers.
> Do you have a source to cite for "the approach that the vast majority of purchasers prefer"?
I mean, gestures at every consumer-targeted product made since at least the early 'oughts.
People want things that are some combination of more capable, more convenient, more reliable, and less expensive. Different consumers obviously make different decisions, but there's a reason you can't go to a car lot and easily find a car with a stick shift. There's a reason you probably don't know anyone who has a Speed Queen top loader (pre-redesign model of course ;)) in their house, even though it is infinitely more reliable and repairable than the competition.
Those offerings are less capable, less convenient, and more expensive than the alternatives, so customers don't want them.
Given a choice customers would very likely prefer a toaster that costs ten dollars less and has a 1 in 10,000 chance of burning down their house instead of 1 in 1,00,000 even though saving 10 bucks and accepting a in in 10k chance of burning up your kids, cats, and stuff is an insane choice.
The free market is in short pretty garbage on its own.
Customers are incredibly short sighted when it comes to purchasing new things - shaving 10% off a price while cutting the expected lifetime of the product down from ten years to three is likely to capture most of the market.
I think this is a case where actors are acting in an irrational manner (i.e. not adhering to the perfectly rational actor assumption that's required for free-markets to function) and that necessitates government or other intervention to ensure that consumers are protected.
It's depressing because I absolutely agree with you that users aren't purchasing devices with an emphasis on being able to repair them. It is a pain point but not one that comes up at the register and so manufacturers are free to exploit the situation to provide marginally cheaper goods that require full replacement more frequently to ensure consistent sales.
Nobody wants to be like Hoover in the 90's that offered free plane tickets with vacuum purchases[1] and caused such an oversupply in the market that first party vacuum sales dwindled to nearly nothing over the next decade and that's fair. But we need to have a balance where we aren't rewarding manufacturers who build products that frequently break and for the consumer to make another purchase.
The problem is that this wasn't the only way they were gathering this info, and that they misled consumers by allowing them to turn off a setting that supposedly stopped this kind of tracking, while still continuing to track due to a different setting defaulting to "on".
Definitely worse, but also the next logical step given that an ad company has achieved relative browser dominance and has such weight to throw around in defining web standards.
Moves like this were inevitable. Writing's been on the wall a while now too.
