• 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!

Planned obsolescence

What do you think about "planned obsolescence"?

  • It's real

    Votes: 14 70.0%

  • It's a myth

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • It's real but as an exception

    Votes: 1 5.0%

  • Dunno

    Votes: 2 10.0%

  • I don't care

    Votes: 3 15.0%
  • Total voters
    20
Canell

Canell

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
1,170
Location
EUSSR
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Planned obsolescence, is it real or a myth? :confused:


P.S. Before somebody tries to move this thread somewhere else, please keep in mind that planned obsolescence, if proved, is deeply troubling political issue. :peace
 
Canell said:
Planned obsolescence, is it real or a myth? :confused:


P.S. Before somebody tries to move this thread somewhere else, please keep in mind that planned obsolescence, if proved, is deeply troubling political issue. :peace
Click to expand...

An example (or two) would make this post at least make some sense. ;-)
 
I'm not sure if it's real or not, but it certainly seems like it could be. I notice it with my cell phones. It seems like they start running a lot slower and having more problems when I get within a couple months of being able to get a new phone. But it could just be a matter of perception as well.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
An example (or two) would make this post at least make some sense. ;-)
Click to expand...

Well, there are even films on the topic, like "Surplus. Therorozed into being consumers".

Besides, I had to change my car's ignition cables today (there were sparks) and never stopped wondering: how in the world is it possible that something so basic has to be changed? I mean, it's a cable, come on! There is no electronics, no moving parts. Why didn't they make the insulation thicker so it endures? And then, why do I have to change all cables when there is only one sparking? Things like that. I'm quire unhappy with this story.
 
Last edited:
molten_dragon said:
I'm not sure if it's real or not, but it certainly seems like it could be. I notice it with my cell phones. It seems like they start running a lot slower and having more problems when I get within a couple months of being able to get a new phone. But it could just be a matter of perception as well.
Click to expand...

That's a perfect example. Cellphones. Goes for computers, as well. Before new technology is released to the consumer, there's already "a better one" in the pipeline. Big screens the same thing. In fact, most technology products are designed and released for planned obsolescence. For that matter, so is clothing. I think I could go on and on . . .
 
Canell said:
Well, there are even films on the topic, like "Surplus. Therorozed into being consumers".

Besides, I had to change my car's ignition cables today (there were sparks) and never stopped wondering: how in the world is it possible that something so basic has to be changed? I mean, it's a cable, come on! There is no electronics, no moving parts. Why didn't they make the insulation thicker so it endures? And then, why do I have to change all cables when there is only one sparking? Thing like that. I'm quire unhappy with this story.
Click to expand...

Ah, now we are getting somewhere. That is a good example, indeed. What you are seeing is "minimalism" or using the cheapest solution to the problem possible. Cars are made "cheaply" for a few valid reasons, one is to simply save weight, causing better fuel economy, another is to reduce production costs to help increase profit. As long as the auto part will survive the warranty period and pass minimal gov't safety standards it is likely to be used. The advantage of making cars that wear out soon after warranty is obvious, they will need replacement sooner. If you make a product that costs WAY more yet lasts longer, you make less profit per unit sold, sell fewer units and must wait a long, long time to sell your old customers a new one. ;-)
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
Cars are made "cheaply" for a few valid reasons, one is to simply save weight, causing better fuel economy, another is to save production cost to help increase profit.
Click to expand...

I don't think that adding 1 mm more insulation (worth $1-2) on the ignition cables would save that much energy or rubber. ;)But it may have saved me the tens of dollars and the pollution of throwing the old cables out.

ttwtt78640 said:
The advantage of making cars that wear out soon after warranty is obvious, they will need replacement sooner.
Click to expand...

Advantage for who? Certainly not me. :roll:
 
MaggieD said:
That's a perfect example. Cellphones. Goes for computers, as well. Before new technology is released to the consumer, there's already "a better one" in the pipeline. Big screens the same thing. In fact, most technology products are designed and released for planned obsolescence. For that matter, so is clothing. I think I could go on and on . . .
Click to expand...

Yep. Those that buy the latest electronic gizmo, also get soaked for all of the R&D costs, get to find the bugs first and have to wait for many apllications to "catch up". I find that my real needs are satisfied by using technology that has passed its prime a bit, yet still works just fine, so its costs are reduced to basically the production costs alone. That 46" 1080dpi HD TV that sold for $2K when it was "the new thing" only a few years ago now sells for $300, its true production cost, and is still compatable with MOST broadcast, cable, computer, CD and DVD/Blueray players. Just as you get a much better deal buying a 5 to 7 year old car, you get a better deal on "old tech" too, let the other guy pay the R&D costs, discover the "bugs", suffer the masive depreciation and get what you NEED later for about 1/3 (or less) of the cost. ;-)
 
Last edited:
Canell said:
I don't think that adding 1 mm more insulation (worth $1-2) on the ignition cables would save that much energy or rubber. ;)But it may have saved me the tens of dollars and the pollution of throwing the old cables out.



Advantage for who? Certainly not me. :roll:
Click to expand...

The advantage is for the manufacturers and their retail outlets. If you intend to keep that vehicle going you will find and replace many, many parts - eventually you will have a good vehicle, but for 2x what a new one would have cost. That keeps the parts guys happy and profitable too. As you can see, it is not the comsumer that they care about. Making that ONE part last longer, at $2 per unit produced, is a lot of money, for very little gain (on their end); multiply that "tiny" cost increase by 1000 parts, on 100,000 units produced and you can then see the "problem" from their point of view. ;-)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The advantage is for the manufacturers and their retail outlets. If you intend to keep that vehicle going you will find and replace many, many parts - eventually you will have a good vehicle, but for 2x what a new one would have cost. That keeps the parts guys happy and profitable too. As you can see, it is not the comsumer that they care about. Making that ONE part last longer, at $2 per unit produced, is a lot of money, for very little gain (on their end); multiply that "tiny" cost increase by 1000 parts, on 100,000 units produced and you can then see the "problem" from their point of view. ;-)
Click to expand...

Yeah, the broken window fallacy. :roll: I don't like screwing up Nature for a fallacy.
 
MaggieD said:
That's a perfect example. Cellphones. Goes for computers, as well. Before new technology is released to the consumer, there's already "a better one" in the pipeline. Big screens the same thing. In fact, most technology products are designed and released for planned obsolescence. For that matter, so is clothing. I think I could go on and on . . .
Click to expand...
I think "planned obsolescence" exists to some degree, but to be fair sometimes it's just technology naturally advancing in leaps and bounds compared to what it used to. Then, we collectively as consumers, lack restraint and just have to have the latest and greatest.

Honestly, I wish we could all agree to simply ignore whatever comes out after Blu-Ray.

Anyway, another aspect has to do with manufacturing efficiency. For example, when your toaster goes out (and in my experience toasters usually last a pretty damn long time), do you fix it, or do you replace it? Toasters are so cheap that it almost never makes sense to fix it.
 
This topic here was made before mine? Shows it was made 2 hours or so before mine. Weird.

I didn't know this one existed. I hate it when people create the same topic with slightly different spin.
 
Last edited:
Canell said:
I don't think that adding 1 mm more insulation (worth $1-2) on the ignition cables would save that much energy or rubber. ;)But it may have saved me the tens of dollars and the pollution of throwing the old cables out.
Click to expand...
For one cable, yeah. Not so much when you need to buy tens of thousands of cables.
 
Canell said:
Well, there are even films on the topic, like "Surplus. Therorozed into being consumers".

Besides, I had to change my car's ignition cables today (there were sparks) and never stopped wondering: how in the world is it possible that something so basic has to be changed? I mean, it's a cable, come on! There is no electronics, no moving parts. Why didn't they make the insulation thicker so it endures? And then, why do I have to change all cables when there is only one sparking? Things like that. I'm quire unhappy with this story.
Click to expand...
Unless people are violating antitrust laws, someone could make a better cable if it's really that simple.
 
Canell said:
Besides, I had to change my car's ignition cables today (there were sparks) and never stopped wondering: how in the world is it possible that something so basic has to be changed? I mean, it's a cable, come on! There is no electronics, no moving parts. Why didn't they make the insulation thicker so it endures? And then, why do I have to change all cables when there is only one sparking? Things like that. I'm quire unhappy with this story.
Click to expand...

This sounds more like an auto shop fleecing you. Cables simply don't "go bad". Battery cables are notorious for corroding which simply means that you need to clean the connections. (I erroneously replaced a starter once because of a bad ground connection.) If the insulation is rubbing off you can simply apply special insulation tape to the wire and the problem is solved.

MaggieD said:
Before new technology is released to the consumer, there's already "a better one" in the pipeline.
Click to expand...

Advancing technology is not the same thing as planned obsolescence. If manufacturers were to wait until the "better" technology was finished with development and ready for release there would always be another one following it which would prevent the release of new technologies ever! Big screens are actually a great example. When they were first released, they cost several thousands of dollars and were enormous (not to mention had many bugs). As the very few high-end consumers purchased these and technology progressed the kinks got worked out and prices began to decline from increased efficiencies. These are not examples of planned obsolescence.

radcen said:
Honestly, I wish we could all agree to simply ignore whatever comes out after Blu-Ray.
Click to expand...

I don't think Blu-Ray will get that big - not nearly as big as VHS and DVD anyway - and there will most certainly be no replacement. The next advancement will be completely 1's and 0's. Digital media will replace all of the physical media in a short time.
 
TNAR said:
This sounds more like an auto shop fleecing you. Cables simply don't "go bad". Battery cables are notorious for corroding which simply means that you need to clean the connections. (I erroneously replaced a starter once because of a bad ground connection.) If the insulation is rubbing off you can simply apply special insulation tape to the wire and the problem is solved.
Click to expand...

I have had OEM plug wire cables go bad before. It turned out to be a crappy weld on the connector that connected to the spark plug.

TNAR said:
Advancing technology is not the same thing as planned obsolescence. If manufacturers were to wait until the "better" technology was finished with development and ready for release there would always be another one following it which would prevent the release of new technologies ever! Big screens are actually a great example. When they were first released, they cost several thousands of dollars and were enormous (not to mention had many bugs). As the very few high-end consumers purchased these and technology progressed the kinks got worked out and prices began to decline from increased efficiencies. These are not examples of planned obsolescence.

I don't think Blu-Ray will get that big - not nearly as big as VHS and DVD anyway - and there will most certainly be no replacement. The next advancement will be completely 1's and 0's. Digital media will replace all of the physical media in a short time.
Click to expand...

spot on!
 
megaprogman said:
I have had OEM plug wire cables go bad before. It turned out to be a crappy weld on the connector that connected to the spark plug.
Click to expand...

Oh, didn't realize they were plug wires. Yeah, they need to be replaced relatively often. Bit of a different scenario there though, they don't just transmit electricity, they transmit clean electricity. If that makes sense. Stupid plug wires. That's why I like diesels.

Totally off topic, but why don't Americans like diesels?!?
 
It's real. The auto makers use it to push new models every year. Without it, the auto industry wouldn't make nearly the money it did.
 
RadicalModerate said:
It's real. The auto makers use it to push new models every year. Without it, the auto industry wouldn't make nearly the money it did.
Click to expand...
Just last week I saw a blub on ABC news that the average age of car on American roads is now over 11 years, and that that is the highest it has ever been in history. A big part of the credit for this was given to increased reliability over past years.

I do not have a link.
 
RadicalModerate said:
Noisy and expensive. Americans only like diesels in trucks, because of the higher torque for work trucks and the loud noises for the immature males with big toys.
Click to expand...

Noisy? Expensive? So Americans aren't familiar with diesel cars. Gotcha. I can assure you that the VW Jetta is not noisy. And at 75 mpg it is not expensive.
 
More than 80 years ago, GM boss Alfred Sloan figured out the way to keep his factories humming was to convince car buyers this year’s model is better than last year’s. By 1927, every American who could afford a new car already owned one, and as the average life of a new car was seven years, relying on more people being able to afford a new car for the first time, as well as existing customers replacing their old, worn-out cars, clearly was not a viable business strategy. Sloan’s insight became known as “planned obsolescence,” and it helped make GM the world’s largest and most profitable automaker.
Click to expand...

All I'm really saying is that planned obsolescence is clearly a real thing.
 
TNAR said:
Noisy? Expensive? So Americans aren't familiar with diesel cars. Gotcha. I can assure you that the VW Jetta is not noisy. And at 75 mpg it is not expensive.
Click to expand...

Hey, I don't have a problem with diesels. But the Jetta is mostly for trendy young women, and they frankly don't like the knocking sound of the engine or the extra buck or two a gallon to fill up.

No one ever said Americans had good car sense; we have pretty good taste, but no sense. We have the biggest physical size of cars in any market. We happily sacrifice MPG's for unessecary performance or luxury amenities. We ravenously devour SUVs so we can drive on our paved suburban streets.

Don't try to apply logic to the US car market. You'll start bleeding from the eyes.
 
radcen said:
Just last week I saw a blub on ABC news that the average age of car on American roads is now over 11 years, and that that is the highest it has ever been in history. A big part of the credit for this was given to increased reliability over past years.

I do not have a link.
Click to expand...

yes, cars are more reliable....they have to be or we won't buy them. The more something costs, the longer it should last.
Personal electronics are relatively cheap to make, hard to repair, going obsolete by the day, so we don't mind getting the latest model every year or so, but a car is not cheap and there really isn't much improvement to be made in cars relevant to its intended purpose, that of transportaton.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom