I'm genuinely surprised it took this long for someone to finally make a repairable, low-tech tractor. Good for them! Hopefully bigger companies will follow suit when they see the demand in action....
I'm genuinely surprised it took this long for someone to finally make a repairable, low-tech tractor. Good for them! Hopefully bigger companies will follow suit when they see the demand in action.
Also, special shoutout to this line:
For years, people who don’t understand the repair monopoly issue—that John Deere controls the parts production and distribution for its tractors, the software that runs its tractors, the diagnostics for its tractors, and the repair guides for its tractors—have said that farmers should simply vote with their wallets and buy tractors from a different company. The problem has been that, until now, there hasn’t really been an alternative company that doesn’t have similar repair practices.
This is my biggest gripe with people saying "vote with your wallet" or "just don't buy it" whenever people complain about a product. Sometimes, there are literally no alternative options. It's either that product or nothing, or in some cases the options are worse. Just because something's more polished than the other pieces of shit on the market doesn't mean it's not a turd.
People stick with bad products and services out of necessity, not because they want to. Often when a better option arises, they'll immediately ditch it. Just wish more idiots would understand that rather than be condescending.
There is a difference between technology used antagonisticaly toward the user and technology that is there for a purpose other than that. But a lot of technology that would be genuinely useful is...
There is a difference between technology used antagonisticaly toward the user and technology that is there for a purpose other than that.
But a lot of technology that would be genuinely useful is better avoided due to the potential abuses it makes possible.
And unfortunately technology is routinely used antagonisticaly, in large part due to abysmal tech literacy rates.
Also what is a no tech tractor? Even a horse drawn plow is technology. I genuinely don't find these kinds of exagerations helpful.
I think that "no tech" isn't too much of an exaggeration here, since a big part of the problem is manufacturers adding unnecessary electronic technology to otherwise mechanical designs. And at...
I think that "no tech" isn't too much of an exaggeration here, since a big part of the problem is manufacturers adding unnecessary electronic technology to otherwise mechanical designs. And at this point, I usually see "[X] tech" as short hand for more advanced and electronic technology. I mean, we generally refer to the career field involving computers as "the tech industry". "Low tech" might be a better fit (and I think the article's actual text uses that more), but the title got the point across to me instantly: farmers want tractors that don't have freaking software.
Come to think of it, there's not really a proper word to describe more advanced, electronic-heavy technology. "Computerized" doesn't really feel that fitting since some products don't really have a computer inside them. Similar thing going on with "digital". We have plenty of "smart" products, but that's largely used for branding and doesn't necessarily mean electronic technology is involved.
Huh. Wonder if we'll ever develop a proper word for it. "Technology" is pretty broad by definition, but we rarely use "tech" to talk about the simpler forms these days. At least, not in common conversation.
It's like a chemical free food! There are some really good benefits of tractors with software that can map the field and ensure you don't accidentally run over crops because everything is planted...
It's like a chemical free food!
There are some really good benefits of tractors with software that can map the field and ensure you don't accidentally run over crops because everything is planted just so.
It just sucks it's locked down by for-profit companies like that, because they're far too expensive to make
But also as someone whose washer and dryer connect to an app for some unknown reason, I would indeed like dumber stuff
I'm genuinely surprised it took this long for someone to finally make a repairable, low-tech tractor. Good for them! Hopefully bigger companies will follow suit when they see the demand in action.
Also, special shoutout to this line:
This is my biggest gripe with people saying "vote with your wallet" or "just don't buy it" whenever people complain about a product. Sometimes, there are literally no alternative options. It's either that product or nothing, or in some cases the options are worse. Just because something's more polished than the other pieces of shit on the market doesn't mean it's not a turd.
People stick with bad products and services out of necessity, not because they want to. Often when a better option arises, they'll immediately ditch it. Just wish more idiots would understand that rather than be condescending.
Of course people are fine with new tech, so long as you don't make it cheap or, in the cast of tractors, maliciously lock them out of it.
There is a difference between technology used antagonisticaly toward the user and technology that is there for a purpose other than that.
But a lot of technology that would be genuinely useful is better avoided due to the potential abuses it makes possible.
And unfortunately technology is routinely used antagonisticaly, in large part due to abysmal tech literacy rates.
Also what is a no tech tractor? Even a horse drawn plow is technology. I genuinely don't find these kinds of exagerations helpful.
I think that "no tech" isn't too much of an exaggeration here, since a big part of the problem is manufacturers adding unnecessary electronic technology to otherwise mechanical designs. And at this point, I usually see "[X] tech" as short hand for more advanced and electronic technology. I mean, we generally refer to the career field involving computers as "the tech industry". "Low tech" might be a better fit (and I think the article's actual text uses that more), but the title got the point across to me instantly: farmers want tractors that don't have freaking software.
Come to think of it, there's not really a proper word to describe more advanced, electronic-heavy technology. "Computerized" doesn't really feel that fitting since some products don't really have a computer inside them. Similar thing going on with "digital". We have plenty of "smart" products, but that's largely used for branding and doesn't necessarily mean electronic technology is involved.
Huh. Wonder if we'll ever develop a proper word for it. "Technology" is pretty broad by definition, but we rarely use "tech" to talk about the simpler forms these days. At least, not in common conversation.
It's like a chemical free food!
There are some really good benefits of tractors with software that can map the field and ensure you don't accidentally run over crops because everything is planted just so.
It just sucks it's locked down by for-profit companies like that, because they're far too expensive to make
But also as someone whose washer and dryer connect to an app for some unknown reason, I would indeed like dumber stuff