During a recent episode of The Verge’s Decoder podcast, Logitech CEO Hanneke Faber shed some possible insight into the company’s view on one of its most important products. Saying that “the mouse built this house,” Faber shares the planning behind a Forever Mouse, a premium product that the company hopes will be the last you ever have to buy. There’s also a discussion about a subscription-based service and a deeper focus on AI.
For now, details on a Forever Mouse are thin, but you better believe there will be a catch. The Instant Pot was a product so good that customers rarely needed to buy another one. The company went bankrupt.
There’s also a discussion about a subscription-based service and a deeper focus on AI.
This line made me think that maybe the subscription was a different thing? So I googled and found this interview: https://www.theverge.com/24206847/logitech-ceo-hanneke-faber-mouse-keyboard-gaming-decoder-podcast-interview:
I’m going to ask this very directly. Can you envision a subscription mouse?
Possibly.
And that would be the forever mouse?
Yeah.
So you pay a subscription for software updates to your mouse.
Yeah, and you never have to worry about it again, which is not unlike our video conferencing services today.
But it’s a mouse.
But it’s a mouse, yeah.
I think consumers might perceive those to be very different.
[Laughs] Yes, but it’s gorgeous. Think about it like a diamond-encrusted mouse.
Okay…
Also from that interview:
Some only have a mouse or only a keyboard, but many of them have both. But the thing that shocked me was that the average spend on that globally is $26, which is really so low. This is stuff you use every day, that sits on your desk every day, that you look at every day. That’s like the price of four coffees at Starbucks or less than a Nike running shirt. There is so much room to create more value in that space as we make people more productive — to extend human potential.
Guys, you are not giving Logitech enough money! You can do better!
premium mouse that receives constant updates
Come on. How many firmware updates can we really expect for a mouse?
I’ve had an m570 for about 10 years. Every time it broke, I fixed it. Why do we need a subscription?
This is not about you, but about them. It’s not that you need a subscription. It’s that they need you to have a subscription.
But they need to convince me that the subscription is worthwhile!
If you are going to ask questions maybe you are not the target demographic.
Damned straight! I’ll stick with my boring old non-ai grandpa mouse.
Back in my day the mice had a tail, no scroll wheel, and only 2 buttons!
Back in my day, mice had balls.
I’ve already got a Forever Mouse though… I’m using a $25 Logitech M705 I bought 10 years ago, before they cheaped out and replaced the metal scrollwheel with a plastic one. Works great. I have to replace the battery once every two years or so. I’ve got an 11-year-old Logitech mouse at work too.
Logitech’s desire to put AI in my IO devices is exactly why I am moving to a different manufacturer. I want solid hardware, not hardware as a service. HP also is trying this with printers and it’s total bullshit.
If I am paying a monthly fee, I’d better not also have to buy garbage hardware. That better be provided for free and replaced when it inevitably fails.
Logitech pissed me off years ago when they didn’t honour a warranty because I bought a flawed product before they extended the warranty on them.
I have not even been tempted by their products because there are so many other peripheral manufacturers out there that put out great products.
Businesses could save a lot of money by just firing their CEOs
Instant Pot was a product so good that customers rarely needed to buy another one. The company went bankrupt.
Bull-fucking-shit. That’s just not how any of this works.
There are plenty of companies that make appliances that last a long fucking time, and don’t have to rely on fucking DLC micro transaction AI bullshit. The reason Instant Pot went bankrupt is the same reason a ton of popular companies have recently had issues: They got bought by private equity (who also owned Pyrex and fucked them over), saddled with a shitton of bad debt, squeezed of every bit of brand value they had, and then left to fall apart as the PE firm made off with millions.
The fact that the writer correlated “quality, durable good” with “unsuccessful business and bankruptcy” is absolutely one of the worst takes, and really shows just how pervasive this disgusting idea of “must be disposable to be profitable” really is.
Partially true, but also they wouldn’t invest in something that lasts forever (without it costing an absurd amount of money or the subscription requirement). I like this video that shows the issue pretty well. (TLDW: Communist Germany made glass so durable it didn’t break as a product to sell to the west. No company would purchase it though because they made most of their profit from selling replacements. The glass is now what we call Gorilla Glass, which is really only available on phones, which are designed to be replaced every few years anyway.)
100 years ago there was a meeting amongst lightbulb manufacturers that all collectively agreed to only design light bulbs to last about 1,000 hours. They were known as The Phoebus Cartel and Included Phillips and GE. Up until this agreement lighbulbs were typically lasting up to 2,500 hours. The manufacturers essentially created the concept of planned obsolescence because people weren’t buying as many lighbulbs as they wanted and it was decided to stop making longer lasting bulbs with higher costs. The whole thing started falling apart (competition of non members that were making bulbs, but they were all small operations, as well as patent expirations that GE had) and the start of world War two pretty much broke it up, as the Cartel couldn’t keep everything regulated and tested due to all the travel restrictions and such. But it still remains as the first global wide creation of planned obsolescence.
Extra fun fact: the common light socket screw design/size has remained the same since 1880.
That is mostly a myth. They did agree of the lifetime, but it wasn’t planned obsolescence like people act. The lifetime of a bulb is directly related to how bright it is. If you make a really dim bulb it lasts a long time, which is how that one in the firehouse is still alive. It’s so dim it’s effectively useless. The group met to decide on a luminosity target, which also is a lifespan target effectively.
Yes, A dim bulb is extremely inefficient, it will use a lot of electricity for a very small amount of light.
On the other hand you can make very efficient lightbulb that will be very bright for a small amount of electricity but last only for a few minutes.
The 1000 hours limits is a nice middle ground.
And what of the noble gas filled bulbs that were both brighter and longer lasting?
i mean, all incandecant bulbs are filled with a noble gas, Argon. If they didnt any bulb would have a lifespan measured in seconds.
Back in the 1920’s and earlier they were commonly just in a vacuum.
I hate this approach to business.
Coupling subscriptions with forced obscolecence is a nightmare. If HP made the best printer money could buy, using it with a subscription model would be a hard sell. But they make shit printers that die at the drop of a hat, so coupling them with a subscription is asinine.
Logitech makes a decent mouse, passable webcams, and shit keyboards.
Just in case anyone from Logitech ever reads this, I own 2 MX Verticals, an MX Ergo, and an MX Master 2S. I love them all, but I’d rather use an OEM bog standard Dell mouse than pay for a subscription.
Buy a ploopy mouse and have your mouse forever. It is fully open sourced with QMK software.
I will continue buying cheaper (and wired) mouses from no-name Chinese brands.
I’ll never buy a wired mouse again 🤷♂️
I never want to have to worry about charging my mouse 🤷♂️
Takes an hour to charge my mouse, and the charge lasts for ~2months. My mouse becomes a wired mouse for that hour.
There’s one way subscription-based hardware might be a good idea: it would motivate the companies to focus on quality and repairability, because they would be the ones who have to deal with that stuff. Unless of course if the EULA of such hardware is complete shit. Which of course it will be.
It will be much cheaper for the company to replace rather than repair, then they don’t have to pay technicians
Oh I have a Forever Mouse. Bought a Microsoft Intellimouse Optical in 2001 or so. Still works. Use it with my Raspberry Pi sometimes. Also bought another Microsoft wireless laptop mouse like a decade ago. Still works just fine.
…The Logitech mouse that I bought against my better judgement in 2020 is starting to show signs of fatigue.
Also how the everliving hell do you add AI to input devices? Are they just going to guess what I’m pointing at?
Also how the everliving hell do you add AI to input devices?
They won’t, but they figure there are probably still some investors floating around who will buy that stupid line.
Weird, because I’m pretty sure all other mice can be used forever, as long as they don’t break.
I’m pretty sure the ‘forever’ part refers to the payment model.
I think it’s time to stop with subscription bullshit.
I understand that they prefer that, but it quickly becomes the only purpose fulfilled by these devices which is not fulfilled by more normal ones, while the main purposes suffer, looking closer to an excuse.
Also the argument of businesses going bankrupt when something is done too well - that’s by design. Progress works via removing bottlenecks one after another. Businesses which were located at those bottlenecks die. It’s fine, the society doesn’t need them anymore. Management and employees have mostly transferable skills and experience. If they earn less, then maybe their work is worth less, since the business failed. Investors lose money, and that’s fine, it’s the purpose of investment - judge wisely and win, judge poorly and lose.
It still irritates me how sometimes socialist-minded people say that it’s bad that in capitalism businesses (and whole industries) fail, and this should be fixed, but then blame capitalism for the results of preventing businesses (or whole industries) from failing.
I have internalized all the leftist arguments heard here, some are fundamentally and practically very true, but sometimes fixing the thing you have would yield results just as good or better as looking for that better thing you don’t know where.
OK, I’ve diverted from the point.
Somehow businesses making nails and screwdrivers don’t complain about making too good a screwdriver. Because, well, the good screwdriver still dies after sometime, and the amount of people who need tools grows, yadda-yadda.
This should work the same way in computing, but hype-scamming customers is such a norm there, that doing business the normal way seems the way to bankruptcy to them. They should all fail. We are doing - for the real-life useful output, not for FLOPS and IOPS, - just a bit more than in 90s, but for orders of magnitude bigger cost.
