Why is it hard to buy things that work well? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#471

Post by benlivengood » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 6:02 PM UTC

dijit wrote: post #298

bjoli wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have two things in my possession that are wonders of engineering. One hair trimmer and one restaurant kitchen blender/kitchen multifunction machine. Both made in 1987 in East Germany. The blender I bought second hand, and it came with a box of original replacement parts and specifications so detailed that I believe I could probably replace the motor if it ever fails (almost 6hp! Take that, Vitamix!). It makes nut b…

is this not the very definition of survivorship bias though? I have things from the 80s that, obviously, have lasted a long time. But I have owned things from that era that have failed and been forgotten about. Incidentally I bought some boots this year that are expected to last (at a minimum) 10 years, and I suspect they would, but I can't know that until 10 years from now. Heirloom quality is probably still a thing…

> is this not the very definition of survivorship bias though?

Not necessarily; it's also sufficient to consider the overall distribution of blenders and hair trimmers from the 80s that are still working compared to the distribution of items sold, which means it's also fairly easy to spot because people use their kitchen/bathroom appliances frequently and notice when exceptionally old ones still work.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#472

Post by dspillett » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 6:09 PM UTC

CapmCrackaWaka wrote: post #400

dspillett wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In this particular example idling 99% of the time is cheaper, but even if idling 99% of the time is slightly expensive, it might still be a good idea not to outsource due to resilience. Or in some cases it might make sense to become an outsourcing destination. Your otherwise idle equipment & skills become a revenue stream rather than a cost when your need it low, your local equipment and skills are tested & re-enfo…

If you go through all this trouble, you have essentially added another business line to your company. This may or may not be where a company wants to spend their resources. Rolling your own XYZ will always be cheaper than paying a 3rd party vendor, _if_ you have the time, experience, money, and competitive advantage to do it correctly, which are pretty big iffs.

Aye. It certainly seems like a commit to it or don't do it at all decision, half measures will be more trouble than they are worth.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#473

Post by darkarmani » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 6:34 PM UTC

derefr wrote: post #451

pclmulqdq wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of outsourcing decisions seem to be made on the premise of "what if it breaks?" It's a terrible fallacy. Your wafer saw (or server) that is utilized 1% of the time is going to need a lot less maintenance than a shared wafer saw that is used 16 hours a day. You will actually experience a lot less downtime by investing in your own wafer saw (or your own servers) rather than outsourcing (to a foundry or a cloud pr…

> You will actually experience a lot less downtime by investing in your own wafer saw (or your own servers) rather than outsourcing (to a foundry or a cloud provider). Analogy doesn't work; "in-sourcing" of previously-IaaS resources as a cost-cutting measure, is used almost exclusively for "base load" (vs. elastic load, which is the comparative advantage of IaaSes); and so your in-house servers are usually running pi…

What do you think about external core dependencies? For example, people are starting to use Okta/Auth0 for the authentication core of their apps.

Obviously, this puts them at the mercy of the okta if anything goes wrong with IdM. But then again, people are very bad at doing auth.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#474

Post by vel0city » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 6:40 PM UTC

PinguTS wrote: post #313

dotancohen wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I updated the post. I had no idea that oil changes are now once every two years. On the wife's Subaru I still change the oil every six months, and I remember when the standard was actually every three months. She puts about 10 km on the car during those six months, we live in a hilltop village half an hour drive from a city.

What? Oil change every three month? WTF is wrong with the US industry? The very same cars in Europe will have an oil change every 2 years or so. My Volvo S60 Model 2000 has an oil change every 3 years. There must be something that you get sold on by marketing that is so wrong. BTW. Also a Tesla has oil in their gearbox, even if it is just a single gear integrated into the single unit combined with motor and inverter.…

> For a Model S it is recommend to replace it every 12.5k miles

There was a recommendation to change the gear oil previously, but newer versions of the S removed those. Even then I seem to recall it was way longer than 12,500 miles.

https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/models/en_us/GUID-E95DAAD...

Your vehicle should generally be serviced on an as-needed basis. However, Tesla recommends the following maintenance items and intervals, as applicable to your vehicle, to ensure continued reliability and efficiency of your Model S.

Brake fluid health check every 2 years (replace if necessary). A/C desiccant bag replacement every 3 years. Cabin air filter replacement every 3 years. Clean and lubricate brake calipers every year or 12,500 miles (20,000 km) if in an area where roads are salted during winter Rotate tires every 6,250 miles (10,000 km) or if tread depth difference is 2/32 in (1.5 mm) or greater, whichever comes first

Seeing as how the recommended cleaning and lubrication of the brakes is 12,500mi, I'm wondering if you heard that and got confused about the lubrication needs. As mentioned in their manual, this is really only recommended for places where they salt the roads in the winter. Since the brakes don't get used as much its even worse than a regular car with the corrosion. If you're not in a high road salt area, its not a problem.

The recommended service interval on other EVs also have extremely extended oil change intervals. The service life of the Mach E's gear oil is 150,000mi and the coolant change is at 200,000mi.

https://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/Catalog/owne... (warning: PDF document)

If you're changing your EV's oil every 12,500 miles you're either doing it way too often, you bought a defective EV, or you should repair the leaks.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#475

Post by ncmncm » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

ebruchez wrote: post #453

WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I had spent 20 years in the US and we consistently bought the cheapest appliances ever. When I bought my house I finally said "screw it, let's see what decent appliances look like". Japanese rice cooker set me back $95 and I thought I would never hear the end of it, and after 4 years, it had already paid itself off (we were doing $14 rice cookers every 6 months). Air fryer was $70 but the previous $40 only…

> one of our friends suggested bosch because we wanted a quiet appliance We've been very happy with our Bosch. Don't ever buy a cheap dishwasher.

You can spend as much as you like on a dishwasher. $200, $300, $400, $500, $700, $900, $1200.

The only real difference above $400 is how loud it is. In a silent room you can't tell whether the $1200 dishwasher is running at all.

That does not matter to everybody.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#476

Post by ncmncm » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 7:18 PM UTC

Ekaros wrote: post #287

ncmncm wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even know how I would identify a good toaster to buy, nowadays. Electric kettles are a problem, too.

Last Yule I bought a toaster for my brother. All of them felt kinda like crap, flimsy cheap, scratchy action... I was not even looking at cheapest but something I imagine to be reasonably mid-range that is around 50€ mark. After all it is a moving platform, some heating elements and case. Not at all complicated.

At issue is whether spending more gets you a better toaster, or just the same toaster but for more money. It is hard to find out.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#477

Post by ncmncm » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 7:20 PM UTC

chronogram wrote: post #286

ncmncm wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even know how I would identify a good toaster to buy, nowadays. Electric kettles are a problem, too.

I bought a store brand 9A kettle and it's fine [1]. They're simple products and shouldn't break unless you have very hard water, in which case a round of vinegar should clean that. What are you running into? 1: https://www.blokker.nl/blokker-waterkoker-bl-10202---rvs---1...

In the US, kettles are carefully designed to last one year and no more. Same for a $20 or $100 unit.

I have not discovered a way to find one that is not so designed. Regular reviews are useless.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#478

Post by ncmncm » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 7:32 PM UTC

JohnBooty wrote: post #443

WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I had spent 20 years in the US and we consistently bought the cheapest appliances ever. When I bought my house I finally said "screw it, let's see what decent appliances look like". Japanese rice cooker set me back $95 and I thought I would never hear the end of it, and after 4 years, it had already paid itself off (we were doing $14 rice cookers every 6 months). Air fryer was $70 but the previous $40 only…

There's also just a... man, I don't know how to describe it. Kind of a mental benefit to using slightly nicer things. When I was young, almost everything I owned was the cheapest possible version of that thing. Everything just kind of sucked, brutally cost-optimized to the point of being somewhat nasty to use and barely functional. I was still very fortunate: I had food to eat, clothes, etc. A lot of kids in the worl…

In the US, the $95 cooker lasts no longer, and works no better, than the $25 unit. (There is no $14 one.) You might be able to do better with a Japanese brand, but it is vanishingly unlikely you will get the same one as they would have sold in Japan, unless you actually get it shipped from there.

I make rice in a saucepan on the range top. I have to come back and turn it off when it's done. Otherwise, it is the same. If you care about how good your rice is, you are starting with short-grain rice. Or red, or black, or arborio for risotto.

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#479

Post by kingcharles » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 7:35 PM UTC

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #460

kingcharles wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, interesting. I would second MtF transgender. I've worked at places that will interview so they can appear what you might now call "woke", but then not hire based on their dislike, not skills or personality. And there are so many MtFs in tech. I'd love to see statistics, but it feels skewed.

I don't have statistics at hand, but folks on the autism spectrum are more likely to be queer or otherwise gender non-conforming. So if there are more autistic people in tech this certainly makes sense.

That's interesting too. I can definitely see that from personal observances, but what is driving it?

Re: Why is it hard to buy things that work well?

#480

Post by kingcharles » Tue, Mar 15, 2022, 7:38 PM UTC

Mezzie wrote: post #454

kingcharles wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, interesting. I would second MtF transgender. I've worked at places that will interview so they can appear what you might now call "woke", but then not hire based on their dislike, not skills or personality. And there are so many MtFs in tech. I'd love to see statistics, but it feels skewed.

It is skewed. This is one of those things I Can't Say in most places, but (unless you transitioned in elementary school) the MtF experience in tech and the cis female experience are totally different, and they (the MtFs) know it, because so much of our work is done online where you can be whatever gender/sex you want. I know how people reacted to me when they thought I was male vs. female. Age plays into it, too. Eve…

I don't know what it's like now as I've not worked in an office for 15 years, but back in the day being a woman in a tech company must have been horrible. Most tech guys I knew had zero experience with interacting with women and therefore would unconsciously act in the most creepy manner towards any and all women. Also, the women would get no respect as they were automatically assumed to have inferior technical skills.