Uh oh, a tech exec went and said the quiet part out loud.
On a podcast with The Verge, Logitech’s CEO — Hanneke Faber — said the company was playing around with the idea of a ‘forever mouse.’ Effectively, this is a piece of hardware you’d subscribe to and, in return, get access to a series of constantly updating software features.
Think of it like buying a chair, but rather than just owning that chair, you have to pay extra cash each month so the chair’s comfortable to sit on.
It’s a truly mesmerising idea in the worst possible way, and it says far more about the modern world than I believe Faber was planning to.
Before we begin, have a little glimpse at the quote itself:
Unsurprisingly, the backlash was intense. People hate the idea of a subscription mouse so much that Logitech’s head of comms had to release a statement saying, “There are no plans for a subscription mouse.”
But even if Logitech won’t do it right now, other companies won’t be far behind.
Hardware subscriptions are something that I’ve discussed on The Rectangle before. Whether we like it not, they’re coming. Apple was rumoured to be planning something similar — and it’s easy to see why. Subscriptions make money. Lots and lots of it. They’ve been huge for companies like Adobe. I mean, just look at this graph:
It’s not particularly challenging to work out why subscriptions are successful and the reason companies like them. After all, getting a bit of cash regularly is better than a single lump sum. That, friends, eventually adds up to More Money™.
To this point, subscription models are broadly limited to software or services, things like Netflix or Microsoft Office, yet change is afoot. You only need to look at, for example, BMW charging a regular fee so car owners can use seat heaters that are already in the vehicles.
It’s a racket, and one you can be certain Big Tech is praying it can get involved in.
Although bringing up the idea of subscription hardware was probably a public gaff by Faber, it’s also a pretty clever strategy by itself. Yes, it was shot down, but the concept is now in the ether.
This time, the public was outraged, declaring, “HOW DARE THEY?!?” But next time subscription hardware is floated? The general reaction will be one closer to acceptance, of not being surprised that companies are trying this again. We’re already on the path to paying constantly for stuff that we should just own.
Yet it’s not this that I think Faber shone a light on. No, the quiet part she said out loud was the very idea of a ‘forever mouse’ itself.
We’ve all been conditioned against the idea that products can last for decades and decades. Hardware should be created to last a lifetime, not a few seasonal cycles. The thing is, it’s not in companies’ best interests to do so. Meaning they don’t make reliable, long-lasting things.
On one hand, I can’t blame businesses directly. They’re beholden to a market that demands they keep on growing. They must deliver returns to stockholders, and that means looking for perpetual growth.
Can you guess what that means? Yep, you got it: making us buy more stuff. But it doesn’t have to be this way.
Of course, phones and screens and computers will need updating at some point, but there’s no reason less complex items like keyboards or mice or headphones shouldn’t last for decades with only minor repairs. Well, apart from the fact tech companies don’t want that. It’s not good for their bottom line.
Logitech could make a forever mouse, it simply has no incentive to do so. Faber said the quiet part out loud. The only way they really profit from a forever mouse is by charging us constantly for it.
The only way to change this? Oh, it’s simple. Just abandon the entire stock market model, make it so companies can only be private, and regulate them to ensure they actually serve the public.
But while politicians can hold stocks? And can link their wealth to the markets? I’m sorry to say that we’ll be waiting for our forever tech, forever.