Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

They Used To Last 50 Years

recraigslist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 877 posts

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#101

Post by autokad »

chrisseaton wrote: post #95
autokad wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

touch pads have high failure rates. if they don't go, the control board does. and if neither, the connection between them. as for easy to change, replacing the mother board on my refrigerator would cost 600$ without installation fees. guess who bought a new refrigerator? :(

I know it happens, but how does a mother board just die? I mean it's a piece of plastic with durable metal channels on it. The channels don't wear or burn out. Everything's just inert. I know some components like capacitors do die, but they can be tested and replaced. How can a mother board just stop working?

some kind of short? kitchens are damp places, the door is opened and closed many times a day, huge power fluctuations, etc. I dont know why for certain, its not my field. I do know that it happens a lot, as I started googling what could be wrong with my fridge when it went haywire.

as for touch pads, contacts fail all the time.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#102

Post by magneticnorth »

If you were willing to pay the modern-dollar equivalent of the cost of old appliances, you could maybe get appliances that would last decades.

If this website is accurate: http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/50selectrical.html

A washer and dryer set in 1950 would cost the equivalent of $5000, and a refrigerator from 1950 would cost $3400

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#103

Post by jasonkostempski »

emodendroket wrote: post #3

While planned obsolescence is probably a factor I'd also consider the desire for more complicated features, efficiency requirements, and high (upfront) price sensitivity on the part of consumers. To the last point in particular I think you will find that a refrigerator was way more expensive in real dollars in 1950.

OMG, the "features". My stove is relatively simple except for 1 part, the one that sets the oven temperature (and the time, but who the hell needs a third clock in their kitchen). That part is a 300 dollar, proprietary circuit board. Of course it's the first thing to go. I'm sure the board doesn't cost the maker anywhere near $300 but I'm sure it's a lot more than an industry standard knob. If they want to cut a few bucks off the price, there's a good place to start. Put a standard knob only stove on the showroom floor and it might not be the first appliance everyone purchases but it will the be second of anyone that realizes how stupid it is to have a computer where single function piece of hardware belongs.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#104

Post by rosege »

psadauskas wrote: post #40
prodmerc wrote: post #8

I've worked on hundreds of domestic appliances. Newer ones from any manufacturer are indeed failing more often, and are designed worse. The only explanation is that this is on purpose - just like cars or laptops or smartphones, they are designed to fail faster so you buy new ones. Planned obsolescence, plain and simple. The best appliances today, by the way, are made by Bosch/Siemens and Miele. None of the other manu…

"The only explanation..."? What about "never attribute to malice..." and Occam's Razor. I think a more likely explanation is that in the majority of cases when shopping for an appliance and your choices are a $1500 one and a $2000 one, you buy the cheaper one. This forces manufacturers to compete on price, and to cut costs wherever possible to remain profitable. Additionally, I just spent 30 seconds googling and a wa…

If I can buy $500 ones that last 10 years I will be better off than buying 1 for $4500 that lasts 50. Although the planet wont be

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#105

Post by snotrockets »

mrob wrote: post #82
snotrockets wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that modern washer would use less energy, water, and need less detergent, reducing the cost-per-load.

Modern washers use the same amount of water, except now you have to manually run the extra rinse program to remove all the detergent.

Try to use less soap. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/your-money/13shortcuts.htm...

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#106

Post by ygmelnikova »

This article's content is summed up in the title. It's nothing but a long copy ad for AppliancSwap, which links to AppliancSchool.com where you too can learn to fix and sell used appliances.

Did I mention Applianc*Swap? Buy now for $147.00

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#107

Post by jondubois »

It's just like every other company that shares an oligopoly over an industry; they keep diluting the quality of their product over time but they do it slowly enough that nobody notices.

There was a case where Cadbury (the UK chocolate company) changed the recipe for their 'Cadbury Creme Egg' (to make it more profitable) but they changed the recipe too much and there was some backlash from consumers.

There are other cases though where hardly anyone notices. I know someone who worked for McDonalds in Australia who told me a story that the size of the buns used to make 'Quarter Pounder' burgers decreased suddenly - It seems that almost nobody noticed (except for the employees).

Also, pizzas from big brands have been getting progressively smaller over time and the toppings have gotten increasingly thin.

Same with fruits, vegetables and grains. I'm sure that soil quality has gone down and vegetables are lower quality today than they were 20 years ago. I was travelling around Europe over the past year and I noticed that the quality of fruits, vegetables and grains seems to vary significantly between different countries.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#108

Post by jamesbowman »

chrisseaton wrote: post #77
autokad wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

part of the issue, and I'm surprised the author didnt mention it, is that in the last 10 years most devices have switched from mechanical to electronic. when i bought my speed queen washer and dryer, the person selling it said they only had mechanical, which some consider an advantage. I tend to agree.

Why's mechanical better? Mechanics stick, break, become worn out. A circuit generally doesn't, does it? I know capacitors burst but they're easy enough to change. Do components like ICs ever just stop working? I would have thought solid-state would be better for endurance.

Yes, ICs age. Fissures in the subtrate expand with each thermal cycle. Delamination is a similar effect. That's how manufacturers prematurely age their parts -- by endless cycles in the oven.

The biggest culprit is flash memory. It's in almost everything, and has a much shorter life than the 10 years most manufacturers claim.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#109

Post by Merad »

lacampbell wrote: post #91
MichaelBurge wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around 40%[1] of the population rents, which means 40% doesn't make the purchasing decision for many appliances. We can sanity-check your argument with this: That reasoning should predict no change in the quality of commercial appliances used in apartment complexes and laundromats, since these customers are used to making spreadsheets with a capital expenditures budget that they pay into for 30 years. [1] http://www.…

Around 40%[1] of the population rents, which means 40% doesn't make the purchasing decision for many appliances. Do all rental properties come with appliances in the US? Here in NZ that's the exception rather than the rule.

Kitchen appliances are usually included. If the house/apartment has washer/dryer hookups it's usually up to the renter to buy them.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#110

Post by oasisbob »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #39

If talking about motors, they used to use copper for the windings. Now they use aluminum wire, which works perfectly fine, until there is a power surge in which case the aluminum overheats and the motor is now dead.

Got a source for that?

As I understand it, aluminum wound transformers are more reliable than copper under surge conditions because aluminum has a much higher specific heat than copper - providing more of a thermal buffer prior to damage.

Motors aren't transformers, but I'm having a hard time seeing how this same effect wouldn't be in play.

Post reply on HN