‘No’ to the idea:
Many organisations would prefer to replace their devices as often as possible if financial constraints were not a concern. This financial constraint in any organisation can be provisionally seen as a positive factor in these terms. If all companies replaced their devices as often as even 3 years, this will only leave us with the hope of recycling and not a functioning, global recycling solution. There will be a torrent of compounds piled up in the form of devices in waste grounds and recycling organisations will be not be able to cope up with the load. Business needs will drive replacements and the problem will have a snowball effect.
If ‘Yes’, why?:
Replacing devices means upgrading the organisation’s efficiency. This will be a contributing factor when it comes to productivity eventually helping the business flourish. There will be fewer disgruntled employees trying to kick a CPU that is extremely slow. In today’s fast paced world, we can agree that no organisation can wait as long as 10 years to replace computers or similar devices. The company will have already filed for bankruptcy.
Conclusion : Even though 3 years will be affecting recycling in a significant manner, it is impossible for companies not to keep upgrading the systems every 3 years or lower. This can be seen practically in many organisations due to various needs. Networks are faster than ever before and the hardware needs to support it. When consumers want to view 4K video, the networks and devices will need to be upgraded to accommodate the needs. Like it sounds, this is not ethical but only practical.But can we avoid it or find a better solution?
Thoughts? please leave your comments below.