If there’s one certainty in tech, it’s that it’s always changing. From one perspective this is a good thing as it means technology is continually advancing. It’s something we’ve become quite used to, even expect, but is there a point where tech companies take it too far by actually planning for obsolescence?

This is a bit of a tricky debate for the tech industry, but one that is vital to have. We are so entrenched in believing that new is essential and much better, and there are many arguments for it, especially cybersecurity. However, planned obsolescence is not really about progress, it’s about driving revenue.

Make a product unusable or glitchy and it forces people to buy new. The cost of inefficiency or experiencing frustration at not being able to get a system to work, is usually enough to get companies and individuals to open their wallets. Apply that principle more frequently and it’s not hard to double or triple revenues over time.

Many big tech companies are guilty of this. Slowing down operating systems, limiting battery life, changing components, ports and adapters or software so that it’s not compatible with earlier versions, or stopping operational support. It may be seen as progress, but it’s responsible for relegating a very large percentage of tech devices to the rubbish heap, and the cost of this is mounting up.

Also, while the general belief is that upgrades are essential, they’re costly and time consuming to implement. It’s a frustration for companies to review their network to upgrade systems, and set aside the budget to do so. Especially with the knowledge that it’s a recurring expense. It’s the reason that so many companies have a mish mosh of components on their systems. Budgets are tight and often the major upgrades only happen when absolutely essential.

Of course, this creates a nightmare for security teams that have the task of keeping ahead of system vulnerabilities and threats. The ideal solution is always a whole system upgrade, always aiming to have the latest technology.

But that of course is an impossible task. The industry is simply too competitive. They have to keep ahead, be seen to be innovative. Within months of an install, there’ll be newer versions. The problem is that it’s been globally recognized that tech waste is a major problem. A problem that planned obsolescence is making much worse by systematically increasing the volume of tech waste discarded each year.

While many tech companies don’t think that this is something to be concerned about, well at least not to change their current growth plans, global awareness of the issue is growing. In many countries, regulation is being introduced, placing responsibility on manufacturers for the end life of their products. And this is coming at a cost, either as levies and taxes as part of EPR (End Producer Responsibility), or penalties for non-compliance. The USA may not be as affected as other countries by this yet, but it is something that will impact those with global supply chains or distribution networks.

The takeaway from this is to be aware of the changes that will be impacting the industry in the future and factor this into design of products. Compatibility and repair options need to influence how tech is developed. Advancement is still possible, but it needs to have a broader definition.