• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are new 'things' deliberatly made to last not too long?

Pin dÁr

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
112
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It seems so! Technology fro years back could be used much longer then it is now!

It the technology backward or is it done deliberatly?

I think the latter!

printers 'die' after so much years, cars don't last longer then 5 years, computers break down rather fast. lightbulbs 'die'
after so may hourse and the list goes on and on.

what do you think?
 
It seems so! Technology fro years back could be used much longer then it is now!

It the technology backward or is it done deliberatly?

I think the latter!

printers 'die' after so much years, cars don't last longer then 5 years, computers break down rather fast. lightbulbs 'die'
after so may hourse and the list goes on and on.

what do you think?

When you produce some thing, you find a trade-off between robustness and costs. You then think about the competition and produce on the efficiency frontier to optimize your goals. I have usually found that paying a lower price for a gimmicky product made me unhappy.
 
It seems so! Technology fro years back could be used much longer then it is now!

It the technology backward or is it done deliberatly?

I think the latter!

printers 'die' after so much years, cars don't last longer then 5 years, computers break down rather fast. lightbulbs 'die'
after so may hourse and the list goes on and on.

what do you think?

Yes and it is actually proven.

Take printer cartridges..the original kind. They are designed to last for X amount of prints, not on the level of ink in the cartridge. Printers are also designed for cheapness (well the cheap ones), so much that in the manual/guarantee it actually states that the company will not fix broken parts. Had a client where a bit of plastic had broken in his 80 dollar 7 year old printer. He wanted it fixed, but I told him that .. get real. My cost plus if I could find the bit of plastic.. would be way more than buying a new one.

Or even mobile phones. Apple and others design them to last 2-3 years.. battery wise and such. After that, performance of the hardware goes down by design, and of course with software upgrades that is only made worse. It is an actual policy statement with Apple (got released a year ago by mistake)

In some markets, companies have been busted for actually limiting the life span of their products. Apple did it in the 1990s with the iPod in Europe and got fined for it. Samsung has been accused of it in Denmark on TVs (although I have Samsung TVs that are 10 years old, so dunno about that one).
 
It seems so! Technology fro years back could be used much longer then it is now!

It the technology backward or is it done deliberatly?

I think the latter!

printers 'die' after so much years, cars don't last longer then 5 years, computers break down rather fast. lightbulbs 'die'
after so may hourse and the list goes on and on.

what do you think?

what world are you living in? I've never owned a car younger then 12 years. I've put multiple cars past 12 years and 200,000 miles. cars thirty years ago only had five didgets on the odometer. you are not correct here.
 
what world are you living in? I've never owned a car younger then 12 years. I've put multiple cars past 12 years and 200,000 miles. cars thirty years ago only had five didgets on the odometer. you are not correct here.

problem here is you just can't compare one thing of course. It is about statistics.

In reality things are really made, deliberately, for a short live span, it even has a name :

"PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE"
 
Last edited:
Yes and it is actually proven.

Take printer cartridges..the original kind. They are designed to last for X amount of prints, not on the level of ink in the cartridge. Printers are also designed for cheapness (well the cheap ones), so much that in the manual/guarantee it actually states that the company will not fix broken parts. Had a client where a bit of plastic had broken in his 80 dollar 7 year old printer. He wanted it fixed, but I told him that .. get real. My cost plus if I could find the bit of plastic.. would be way more than buying a new one.

Or even mobile phones. Apple and others design them to last 2-3 years.. battery wise and such. After that, performance of the hardware goes down by design, and of course with software upgrades that is only made worse. It is an actual policy statement with Apple (got released a year ago by mistake)

In some markets, companies have been busted for actually limiting the life span of their products. Apple did it in the 1990s with the iPod in Europe and got fined for it. Samsung has been accused of it in Denmark on TVs (although I have Samsung TVs that are 10 years old, so dunno about that one).

Yes, you are very right here.

About the printer, you can find that it in this documentery, it is even in the beginning.




As I always say we are being ****ed from all sides!
 
Last edited:
Just the opposite is true. Today's quality is far ahead of the past decades. The old days of "We do it right so we don't need no QA" are all but gone and forgotten. Better materials, better employee training, documented production methods and systems, better packaging, better quality plans and systems and testing equipment and better QA personnel training, better customer service, better warranties, better product return policies. I have spent 40+ years in quality assurance working in many countries and have seen a world of difference in today's industries. Of course there are still those that believe in cutting corners and those that still don't buy in to QA rigid QA program because they view it as simply money that could be spent on production concerns. I have done quality audits all over the country and have heard every excuse on not believing in QA because they "do it right" mentality and not one of those companies ever passes and audit. Japan paid a heavy price after WWII by making junk in every industry from radios to cars only to turn it around to be one of the world leaders in quality.
 
Just the opposite is true. Today's quality is far ahead of the past decades. The old days of "We do it right so we don't need no QA" are all but gone and forgotten. Better materials, better employee training, documented production methods and systems, better packaging, better quality plans and systems and testing equipment and better QA personnel training, better customer service, better warranties, better product return policies. I have spent 40+ years in quality assurance working in many countries and have seen a world of difference in today's industries. Of course there are still those that believe in cutting corners and those that still don't buy in to QA rigid QA program because they view it as simply money that could be spent on production concerns. I have done quality audits all over the country and have heard every excuse on not believing in QA because they "do it right" mentality and not one of those companies ever passes and audit. Japan paid a heavy price after WWII by making junk in every industry from radios to cars only to turn it around to be one of the world leaders in quality.

are you kidding?? Have you seen the movie??
 
I think it is relative, for cars some of the cosmetic features are clearly designed to not last long.
but other things like printers have become disposable items,
The price point is such that you just go buy a new one.
HP sold an laser jet series II printer, that was so robust they had to have a program
to buy them back from the customers. I understand they then sold them as refurbished,
in central and south America.
How long will LED bulbs actually last? The compact fluorescent were supposed to last a long time,
(and did if you left them on), but most only lasted a little longer than incandescent.
There is some planed obsolescence, but mostly just engineering trade offs driven by market forces.
 
There is some planed obsolescence, but mostly just .

I would say planned obsolescence = engineering trade offs driven by market forces
 
what world are you living in? I've never owned a car younger then 12 years. I've put multiple cars past 12 years and 200,000 miles. cars thirty years ago only had five didgets on the odometer. you are not correct here.

You are not alone either...

advance-05_large.png
 
I would say planned obsolescence = engineering trade offs driven by market forces
I would not equate them so readily.
Real planned obsolescence, is much more invasive.
I think it was Cadillac, who after a specified number of miles (after the warranty expired)
had the computer detune the engine, so it would run rough, with lower mileage.
 
Maybe we need a definition now, so we are all on the same page:

Planned obsolescence is a business strategy in which the obsolescence (the process of becoming obsolete—that is, unfashionable or no longer usable) of a product is planned and built into it from its conception. This is done so that in future the consumer feels a need to purchase new products and services that the manufacturer brings out as replacements for the old ones.
 
You are not alone either...

advance-05_large.png

well, I don't know:

As the life cycle of products has increased—largely because of their greater technical excellence—firms have found that they need to plan for those products' obsolescence more carefully. Take, for instance, the example of the automobile. Its greater durability has made consumers reluctant to change their models as frequently as they used to. As the useful life of the car has been extended, manufacturers have focused on shortening its fashionable life. By adding styling and cosmetic changes to their vehicles, they have subtly attempted to make their older models look outdated, thus persuading consumers to trade them in for new ones.

Planned obsolescence | The Economist
 
Very interesting!

Made to Break: Technology and Obsolescence in America

51j5ZDk54OL._SX329_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

If you've replaced a computer lately--or a cell phone, a camera, a television--chances are, the old one still worked. And chances are even greater that the latest model won't last as long as the one it replaced. Welcome to the world of planned obsolescence--a business model, a way of life, and a uniquely American invention that this eye-opening book explores from its beginnings to its perilous implications for the very near future.

Made to Break is a history of twentieth-century technology as seen through the prism of obsolescence. America invented everything that is now disposable, Giles Slade tells us, and he explains how disposability was in fact a necessary condition for America's rejection of tradition and our acceptance of change and impermanence. His book shows us the ideas behind obsolescence at work in such American milestones as the inventions of branding, packaging, and advertising; the contest for market dominance between GM and Ford; the struggle for a national communications network, the development of electronic technologies--and with it the avalanche of electronic consumer waste that will overwhelm America's landfills and poison its water within the coming decade.

History reserves a privileged place for those societies that built things to last--forever, if possible. What place will it hold for a society addicted to consumption--a whole culture made to break? This book gives us a detailed and harrowing picture of how, by choosing to support ever-shorter product lives we may well be shortening the future of our way of life as well.

Made to Break: Technology and Obsolescence in America: Giles Slade: 9780674022034: Amazon.com: Books
 
well, I don't know:

Whatever they may be trying to do it is not working as the chart shows. People are keeping their cars longer and longer. I also think foreign competion has improved American cars tremendously.
 
If one reads the work of Zbigniew Brzezinski, you will understand that "planned obsolescence" is not just a coincident, at all but a coldly calculated plan. To keep us consumers consuming. It is all by design.
 
Last edited:
Whatever they may be trying to do it is not working as the chart shows. People are keeping their cars longer and longer. I also think foreign competion has improved American cars tremendously.

I am aware of the chart, but I have reasons not to believe that blindly.
Maybe it is true, the chart, maybe not.I am still exploring.
But I have seen too much of planned obsolescence in my own surroundings.


Have you seen the film mentioned above?

I have had computers that never got stuck.never! No problems at all!
But later at companies where I worked they all did!
Niow that is backwards technology.
 
It seems so! Technology fro years back could be used much longer then it is now!

It the technology backward or is it done deliberatly?

I think the latter!

printers 'die' after so much years, cars don't last longer then 5 years, computers break down rather fast. lightbulbs 'die'
after so may hourse and the list goes on and on.

what do you think?

I wonder if online reviews counteract this somewhat. If a hundred people post that a product sucks, fewer people will buy it.
 
You are not alone either...

advance-05_large.png

That's a bit misleading though as the 90s ( where this chart starts were times of cheap (cheaply made) cars as was the mid to late 70s..
If we had a chart going back to say the 50s I bet you would see a very different picture.
 
That's a bit misleading though as the 90s ( where this chart starts were times of cheap (cheaply made) cars as was the mid to late 70s..
If we had a chart going back to say the 50s I bet you would see a very different picture.

Hmm good comment, haven't thought of that. Thanks.
 
That's a bit misleading though as the 90s ( where this chart starts were times of cheap (cheaply made) cars as was the mid to late 70s..
If we had a chart going back to say the 50s I bet you would see a very different picture.

No doubt. What I am wondering is how reliable electric cars will be. Except for the batteries I can see them lasting a lifetime. That will put a lot of car companies out of business I'm afraid. There has to be a little obsolescence or there will be no sales.
 
Hmm good comment, haven't thought of that. Thanks.

Yea I just recall my grandpa 64 dodge truck with almost 300k miles on it and my grandmothers 66 bel air with like 330k miles on it and my other grandmas 68 impala with around the same. I also remember when I was a a little kid and all the muscle cars of the early 70s made way for the cheapo cars during the gas crunch. I was only a little kid but I thought man what these new cars are wimpy. then in the 90s we tin can car stuff like the geo metro and the Yugo. we had the ford Taurus which was probably the car that had to be repaired the most for years.
 
Back
Top Bottom