A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now • Hacker News Board

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#131

Post by js8 » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:21 PM UTC

DSMan195276 wrote: post #99

forgetfreeman wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but you'd buy once and that fridge problem was sorted for a few decades. Over the long term you paid significantly less because you weren't replacing a broken fridge every few years. If problems did crop up appliance repair was a cost effective long term fix. Ain't designed obsolescence a wonder?

I think the point is more that you can buy expensive fridges today that could last that long - people don't because they care more about spending less on a fridge.

> people don't because they care more about spending less on a fridge

I don't think so. First of all, there are lots of quality improvements that could make life longer, at almost zero additional cost per unit. Also, repairability could be improved.

Second, there is an ecconomic problem with information asymetry - while I know the pricetag, I have no idea what the life expectancy is. So you get https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons ; that's not the customer's preference.

The latter could be possible to fix if we mandated producers to publish "expected usage per lifetime" (MTBF) numbers and also show price/usage ratio to customers.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#132

Post by dragontamer » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:21 PM UTC

jrochkind1 wrote: post #101

starbugs wrote: post #3

> Thing is, producing crappy, cookie-cutter, uninspired, overpriced junk that falls apart within 5 years (generously speaking) pays more to the shareholders. That's how we got from there to here. This summarizes it quite well for me.

I mean, in general, things we buy today are a lot more "affordable" while being lower quality. Googling says the average cost of a refrigerator in 1950 was $250 to $400 (for 10 cubic feet -- a fridge today is 20 to 30 ft^3), which would be $3K to $5K in 2023 dollars. If you pay $3K to $5K for a fridge today (for a fridge 2-3x as big as the 1950 fridge), do you get a better longer-lasting one? I'm not sure.

Refrigerators might be a bad example because we got rid of highly effective refrigerants on purpose to patch a hole in the ozone layer.

Or perhaps more accurately, to stop poking a giant hole in the ozone layer.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#133

Post by gbraad » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:22 PM UTC

And the feature is: "still operational after decades"

Built like a tank. Imagine Indiana Jones getting onto a fridge from now and try to survive a nuclear blast.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#134

Post by masklinn » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:22 PM UTC

usefulcat wrote: post #119

bombcar wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is it - high quality stuff is often still made, but it's expensive and/or has other downsides that you really do need to be aware of. For example, commercial equipment is often bullet-proof and long-lived, but it can be louder than you'd want in a home kitchen. Commercial dish washers have no noise insulation, get hot, but can wash dishes so fast they can crack them from the temperature changes. Commercial ovens…

> Commercial ovens have no or minimal heat insulation This seems counter intuitive to me. Why would I not want more insulation in an oven that's going to be used a lot more? Seems like the cost of the insulation would be amortized more quickly than in a home kitchen, since a commercial oven is presumably being used a lot more?

Possibly because you want very responsive temperature control, if the oven has a lot of insulation it's more efficient but it responds much more slowly to temperature decreases.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#135

Post by bayindirh » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:23 PM UTC

CamperBob2 wrote: post #84

bayindirh wrote: post #14

The most enlightening comment is "capitalism breeds innovation" (told sarcastically), but it's incomplete. The complete version is "Capitalism breeds innovation for getting consumers' money out of their hands".

What system do you recommend instead?

The shortest answer is "a system with strong pro-consumer regulations where you can't buy people and laws legally and illegally".

This idea proved to be a nice one, but unfortunately it includes humans.

In a more broader sense, we needs checks and balances. A better version of this idea is a "bigger government", where government not only regulates, but builds the baseline products which pushes other companies to compete to build better goods.

But this generates tons of brouhaha. It's called "communism", "non-free markets", "government intervention", etc.

In reality, private companies hate and despise real competition, because a corporation is (or has become) an establishment for generating shareholder value, not make customers happy beyond the level required to keep the company afloat.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#136

Post by mbg721 » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:23 PM UTC

distances wrote: post #120

rwultsch wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am getting a Sub-zero in a few weeks which is damn near the most expensive fridge. It does not have nice pull out shelves or the veggie compartments. I expect the sealing and ethylene scrubbing will keep veggies fresh linger.

Why does everyone keep their veggies in the fridge, do you buy them in bulk? Basic veggies like onions, tomatoes, cucumber I eat fast enough to just keep on shelves and in regular rotation, and all more special plants are anyway bought for a certain meal in mind so they're used within a day or two. My fridge does have a veggie section but I use that for beer.

To keep the bugs off of them. I know in theory you're supposed to keep tomatoes out, but they attract fruit flies.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#137

Post by usefulcat » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:23 PM UTC

firesteelrain wrote: post #87

drcongo wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My Samsung fridge is the worst thing I've ever bought.

Agree. Mine lasted 6 years. Replaced with a Whirlpool. Lowe's sales rep told us at the time that the Samsung's were great. I went back 6 years later and told him that we bought a Samsung from him 6 years ago when he told us 6 years later not to buy a Samsung. Needless to say, he was apologetic. Now, my Bosch dishwasher has been solid. No issues.

> Now, my Bosch dishwasher has been solid. No issues.

Seconded, and also confirmed by an appliance repair tech when I asked him about his opinion of the reliability of our various kitchen appliances.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#138

Post by markus_zhang » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:24 PM UTC

jrochkind1 wrote: post #101

starbugs wrote: post #3

> Thing is, producing crappy, cookie-cutter, uninspired, overpriced junk that falls apart within 5 years (generously speaking) pays more to the shareholders. That's how we got from there to here. This summarizes it quite well for me.

I mean, in general, things we buy today are a lot more "affordable" while being lower quality. Googling says the average cost of a refrigerator in 1950 was $250 to $400 (for 10 cubic feet -- a fridge today is 20 to 30 ft^3), which would be $3K to $5K in 2023 dollars. If you pay $3K to $5K for a fridge today (for a fridge 2-3x as big as the 1950 fridge), do you get a better longer-lasting one? I'm not sure.

Nowadays it's difficult to just pay premium and trust things to last for decades. A more likely event is that you pay premium, get more features, and the appliance breaks down if one of which breaks.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#139

Post by treis » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:24 PM UTC

AlecSchueler wrote: post #65

passwordoops wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but I'd bet the one we see in the video is probably still working, while I'm on my third fridge in 20 years. I think that negates any energy efficiency gains

Why doesn't everyone have old fridges then? You only buy new when the old one breaks down right? But if the old ones were so sturdy why were they all replaced? I expect there's some survivorship bias at play here.

Energy efficiency is a big one. You'll make back the new fridge cost in 5ish years over a 20-30 year old fridge. Depends a lot on local energy prices and if it's a garage fridge.

Re: A fridge from 70 years ago has better features than the fridge I own now

#140

Post by rascul » Mon, Jul 31, 2023, 2:25 PM UTC

mholm wrote: post #108

AlecSchueler wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why doesn't everyone have old fridges then? You only buy new when the old one breaks down right? But if the old ones were so sturdy why were they all replaced? I expect there's some survivorship bias at play here.

> You only buy new when the old one breaks down right? In my experience it's half and half. Sometimes people have a nice old reliable fridge that just looks ugly and dated to their tastes, so they upgrade. Same with older energy inefficient fridges.

I used to deliver and install appliances. My experience is approximately the same as yours. About half the time the old fridge broke, the other half is for upgrades or something when the old fridge still works. Or because the easily replaceable and still working fan makes some noises sometimes. That fridge is now in my kitchen.