Logitech's Controversial 'Forever Mouse' Doesn’t Need Subscriptions. It Needs to Be Repairable

Many companies have embraced the idea of offering products as subscriptions. (Almost) everything requires a subscription now.

One striking example is Logitech. In a recent The Verge podcast, CEO Hanneke Faber discussed the concept of creating a "forever mouse" as a subscription-based product.

She used the analogy of high-quality, long-lasting watches to illustrate the idea. “I’m not planning to throw that watch away ever. So why would I be throwing my mouse or my keyboard away if it’s a fantastic-quality, well-designed, software mouse?” Farber said.

The CEO’s question is valid and can be answered in a three-act story.

Act 1: The Story of an Almost Forever Mouse

Faber’s question is valid, sure, but we should be having high-quality, long-lasting mice anyway.

I use Logitech peripherals every day. The keyboard on my computer is a Logitech K800, a few years old, while my mouse is a first-generation MX Master. I purchased the mouse in May 2015 for around €100 ($110) and was so impressed with it that I bought another one two years later for €46 ($50) just in case, even though I didn’t really need it.

And the “just in case” finally became a reality.

In 2021, the mouse wheel, which can be used in two modes, was failing. After watching a tutorial on YouTube, I found that the glitch was quite popular and had a solution. So, armed with a screwdriver and an erratic pulse, I managed to fix the problem and felt like Elon Musk (before he bought Twitter).

But a couple of years later, the mouse fell on the floor and a small part of its casing broke. It wasn’t a big deal because the mouse still worked, but it was a bit uncomfortable to handle. So, I decided to take advantage and use the one I had as a spare. The old one is still there for any emergency, and it’s reassuring that this is the case.

Act II: HP Shows Us the Potential Problem With Hardware Subscriptions

The story above is the best example of why Faber’s idea is highly debatable. It seems that Logitech engineers are considering making a heavier model of the mouse, which doesn’t necessarily mean it’ll be better, especially for gamers. Additionally, it’s said that the mouse will have a special feature: constant software and service updates.

Faber didn’t provide further details about this feature, but it’s expected that devices like a mouse should receive automatic updates from the manufacturer to improve performance or fix issues. This theoretically guarantees a certain level of quality and performance.

Graphics cards, sound cards, phones, tablets, and even printers do that. Companies like HP and others have introduced subscriptions for consumables, like ink, rather than for software upgrades. If HP were to charge a subscription for upgrades, many users would likely not sign up, considering they often seem to harm users rather than benefit them.

So, what Faber is proposing is to restrict mouse options at the beginning and then release them through updates that we have to pay for? This seems like a bad plan. Devices shouldn’t become more complex with additional services but should remain user-friendly.

The proposal would likely require users to consent to installing software that continuously monitors the mouse’s status to analyze and assess its behavior and suggest improvements.

This is similar to what HP does with Instant Ink: It notifies users if it detects that the printer isn’t connected to the Internet. It’s important to note that this monitoring is somewhat logical: If HP doesn’t know how much ink is left in the cartridges, it can’t send new ones before they run out.

However, suspicions are natural, especially when it comes to a company that, like its competitors, has disappointed us in this area several times.

Act III: Yes to Repairable Devices, No to Unnecessary Subscriptions

In contrast to Faber’s idea, I’d like to propose a somewhat different one. A forever mouse shouldn’t be a subscription-based mouse, but a repairable mouse.

This is exactly the idea put forward by Framework, the company that has revolutionized the hardware world in recent years by offering modular and repairable laptops unlike we've ever seen before.

“Please don’t do this. There are better ways to build a product that lasts,” Framework shared on an X post. I agree. “We’re giving them the benefit of the doubt and making a genuine ask for them not to follow the HP printers path.”

Definitely, there must be a better way, especially when it comes to mice. Perhaps making them modular and repairable, similar to Framework’s laptops, could be a good solution. As Ars Technica notes, Logitech already offers components for repairing some of its mice and devices through iFixit, which could be a positive first step in pursuing this alternative approach.

Creating a repairable, modular mouse doesn’t seem like a difficult task, as many already exist. Focusing on this approach could potentially lead to the development of a forever mouse. However, the big question is what Logitech and its competitors will do if everyone ends up with forever mice, given that this would eliminate the need for new mice altogether.

Or would it?

This article was written by Javier Pastor and originally published in Spanish on Xataka.

Related | The Game Pass Price Hike Hides Another Reality: The Inevitable Decline of Subscription Services