Traumatized IPad 3 owners may be demanding “justice” for the terrible precipitation of their buyer’s remorse, but no injustice is involved in Apple’s bringing out a successor to iPad 3 faster than expected. The capacities of the iPad 3 are not impaired by the arrival of iPad 4, and Apple is not contractually obligated to adopt a slower update schedule than is feasible and that Apple deems appropriate simply because some customers would have preferred a slower schedule. Buyer’s remorse comes with the tech territory. There’s no “injustice” implied by rapid technological development or by a firm’s desire to produce better products than rivals are producing.
October 25, 2012
No, Apple did not commit a crime by introducing the iPad 4
Would it be bad if Apple were able to introduce substantially improved versions of the iPad, or of any of its flagship products, once a month? On the contrary, it would mean a much faster pace of technological development than is currently possible. It would mean a net benefit for all new customers of these products. This would be “unjust”?
Leave a Comment »
No comments yet.