Back in the day there wasn’t 56 versions of $product for cheap. There were maybe 3, and people talked. Products cost real money and we were concerned about quality and lasting power.
So yeah, we had better shit because reputation was a big deal.
Nowadays the main question is whether it’s open source or not. Anything closed source sucks, or will imminently suck. The more open source it is, the more modular, the more repairable, etc.
Yes this goes for hardware too.
Another point: Avoid ‘smart’ devices at all costs. They are hardware spyware, full stop, and will stop working whenever it is deemed you need to buy a new one.
What we’re avoiding is capitalist opportuism hidden in tech and the solution for that is not to find a good provider. The solution is to find a provider that has a ‘business model’ that protects against the brunt of this extractive BS.
This is the real answer to me. Often, the premium version is still out there but people go for the budget version anyway. That’s not necessarily a bad thing though. When we can furnish a whole room for what a couple pieces used to cost, that’s a win for a lot of people even if some of those items wear out prematurely. It also depends if we’re talking about a mostly mechanical and utilitarian item, vs something that relies on modern software ecosystems. Toasters haven’t changed much in 40 years, but a 10 year old cell phone is pretty much useless, possibly not working at all with current network technology. Durability is less important when an item becomes technologically obsolete anyway.
There may be premium versions that are high quality, but too often the premium version is made with planned obsolescence as well these days. There’s generally no way of knowing if you’re paying extra for quality of for the privilege of showing off the money you spent
