So it is not just “so stupid design” that “we don’t even feel devices are 10x faster than 15 years ago”, but deliberate design to use the hardware capabilities for the sake of other people’s computers.

To my limited understanding, better use of hardware requires both some level of standardization of hardware and better optimized software, with lower level programming languages if possible. Vibe coded Electron apps are never going to be as well optimized as something made to run a particular chipset. But how do we accomplish that when most programming is being done on high level programming languages? It seems that the industry has prioritized human readable code and improved UX over hardware efficiency, which at a surface level isn’t the worst trade-off.

I ultimately agree with this vision, and it’s a serious problem I’ve contemplated as well. That said, what’s the right balance between more efficient, repairable hardware and accessible, more readable code?

The ATT post-3G sunset compatibility list linked above often includes only US ATT-locked versions of phones, even when other carrier variants exist. Look at all the older Samsungs that only take the GxxxA variant when GxxxU and U1 devices exist that are carrier unlocked and have all the same bands. In the case of the OnePlus 6T, only the T-Mobile version is ‘supported,’ when the unlocked version is the same in all other markets (including the US). I, too, have a lot of beef with this setup. For whatever reason, ROW Samsung Galaxy S10s (G973F) are supported. Go figure ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯