you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 109 points 2 years ago (4 children)

The fact they can legally charge a subscription for a fitted feature that does not pose any continuous cost for the company is insane

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 58 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    It should be forbidden by law.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Next we're going to get a subscription fee to unlock the full potential of our phone batteries. But if we don't pay, at least we'll have 50% of the battery 🤮

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    Look, just go buy a different phone if you don't like it. Doing it this way subsidizes the price for those that don't need the extra battery size. Plus studies have shown it's actually good for the battery!

    /s in case that wasn't obvious

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    But since it's not, don't buy anything from those companies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    The fact they can legally charge a subscription for a fitted feature that does not pose any continuous cost for the company is insane

    It's called "Rent-Seeking Behavior" and it has infected essentially every single fucking millimeter of the market.

    You'll own nothing and you'll fucking like it.

  • source
  • parent