The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality • Hacker News Board

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#141

Post by amluto » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:22 AM UTC

jstummbillig wrote: post #115

mayas_ wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite sure about the affordability part. Cars are becoming prohibitively expensive. Housing is becoming a luxury. Even consumer products are becoming increasingly expensive. Safety largely improved but not craftsmanship.

> Cars are becoming prohibitively expensive. Adjusted for inflation, car prices are actually lower now than decades ago, especially factoring in huge safety and tech improvements. Entry-level models remain affordable, while buyers voluntarily pay more for SUVs and tech-heavy EVs. > Housing is becoming a luxury. Rising housing prices are mostly driven by land scarcity and zoning. The actual cost per square meter of co…

> The actual cost per square meter of construction (build quality) has improved and remains stable.

Do you have a source? And are you considering expensive markets (cough, Los Angeles)?

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#142

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:23 AM UTC

forgotusername6 wrote: post #108

raspasov wrote: post #43

"Following his reasoning, it cannot be stated in absolute terms that an iPhone 15 is of “better quality” than a 2003 Nokia." This statement suffers from either viewing the past through rose-tinted glasses or from total cultural relativism in the most pejorative sense. I'm not sure about 2003, but around 2009, I owned a Nokia N900, which was arguably the flagship Nokia phone at the time. I can confidently state that c…

I owned a Nokia in 2003. The battery lasted a week and they were virtually indestructible. The phone never crashed or reset, the keys were so reliable and well placed that I could text without looking at the screen. The phone did not get slower with age. None of these things can be said about my current smart phone. Granted it does a lot more, but the quality of the things it does do is much worse.

[deleted]

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#143

Post by kalleboo » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:23 AM UTC

forgotusername6 wrote: post #108

raspasov wrote: post #43

"Following his reasoning, it cannot be stated in absolute terms that an iPhone 15 is of “better quality” than a 2003 Nokia." This statement suffers from either viewing the past through rose-tinted glasses or from total cultural relativism in the most pejorative sense. I'm not sure about 2003, but around 2009, I owned a Nokia N900, which was arguably the flagship Nokia phone at the time. I can confidently state that c…

I owned a Nokia in 2003. The battery lasted a week and they were virtually indestructible. The phone never crashed or reset, the keys were so reliable and well placed that I could text without looking at the screen. The phone did not get slower with age. None of these things can be said about my current smart phone. Granted it does a lot more, but the quality of the things it does do is much worse.

If you limit your smartphone usage to the capabilities of a 2003 Nokia (turn off data and wifi, only use calls and SMS) the battery will last 2 weeks and never crash or reset. Before I got a phone with dual SIM capability I used to bring an old spare phone to keep my home SIM in with data off only to be able to not miss calls/SMS. They’d typically last the whole trip without charging when they’re not keeping connections alive for email, push etc.

Before I got a smartphone I used a j2me IRC client to keep connected with my friends, and I had to carry 3 batteries to swap throughout the day for it to last, the battery life was horrible if you actually did anything on it.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#144

Post by baxtr » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:23 AM UTC

forgotusername6 wrote: post #108

raspasov wrote: post #43

"Following his reasoning, it cannot be stated in absolute terms that an iPhone 15 is of “better quality” than a 2003 Nokia." This statement suffers from either viewing the past through rose-tinted glasses or from total cultural relativism in the most pejorative sense. I'm not sure about 2003, but around 2009, I owned a Nokia N900, which was arguably the flagship Nokia phone at the time. I can confidently state that c…

I owned a Nokia in 2003. The battery lasted a week and they were virtually indestructible. The phone never crashed or reset, the keys were so reliable and well placed that I could text without looking at the screen. The phone did not get slower with age. None of these things can be said about my current smart phone. Granted it does a lot more, but the quality of the things it does do is much worse.

In 2003 I almost never touched my phone, because you couldn’t do much on that tiny display other than actually calling people.

Maybe that’s the reason the battery lasted a week.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#145

Post by AdrianB1 » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:23 AM UTC

Pingk wrote: post #111

Arn_Thor wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parable of boots seems apt here. In the extreme, expensive pair can last for a decade while people who can only afford the cheap pair will have to keep buying a new one every year. Yes, the fact that any family can afford a new shelving unit is great! But the fact that it’ll last them just a few years is not good; they’ll spend more in the long run

Except it's getting so difficult to find the companies producing the more durable alternative, so everyone is forced to buy the flimsy piece that falls apart

It is not that hard, if you do the minimum effort to educate yourself. For example 20 years ago I struggled to find motorcycle gear in Eastern Europe, it was very hard and stuff was extremely expensive for the salaries in this region. I bought initially cheap stuff that broke fast, then the next generation I knew what to buy and I have now equipment that is over 10 years old that I am using with great pleasure. It is similar in most cases I have to buy something, but it takes some effort to look for options.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#146

Post by dijit » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:24 AM UTC

TrackerFF wrote: post #125

At least when it comes to musical instruments, cheap instruments today are astronomically better than the cheap instruments I grew up with - and they are cheaper. The manufacturing process has become so good that what you get for $350 today, is about the same standard as what you'd pay $500-$800 for 30 years ago (which is probably closer to $1000-$1500 today). As far as clothes go - I the cheap junk back in the day d…

Counter-anecdote. I bought some Jeans from ASDA (owned by Walmart now, not sure about then) for 5GBP in 2005..

FIVE, POUNDS.

Crazy cheap by any measure; they were extremely thick, to the point where you could stand them up with no person inside them. They lasted me for over 10 years.

New jeans (at any price point) seem to wear out in the inner thigh inside of a year, and I am not as active as I was back then due to age. I also haven’t gained a significant amount of weight to account for this. I thought it could be caused by cycling, but I stopped cycling and the wear outs still happen. I thought it could be the quality of what I was buying so I bought more and more expensive jeans, alas, the same was true.

The best Jeans I ever owned are simultaneously the cheapest.

(side note; I also noticed that nearly all Jeans these days contain “elastane” which is basically plastic, which probably contributes to the degradation - Elastane didn’t exist for jeans in 2005, they were mostly still 100% cotton until the legging jeans fad and then it started making its way into normal jeans).

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#147

Post by amluto » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:25 AM UTC

drdec wrote: post #91

sgt101 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought some wrangler jeans, because I remembered that I had a pair years ago that fit me better than levis, the levis were quite expensive and the wranglers cheap. They were ok for the first wear - but not great to be honest. Then I washed them and they were unwearable. Didn't do anything fancy, just a cool wash, dried them on the line. They turned to cardboard.

That's kind of what happens to denim when you air dry it. They are fine. Wear them a bit and you won't notice. If it bothers you next time tumble dry them on low.

Having recently compared one tumble dryer to another, “low” covers an exceedingly wide range, from genuinely lukewarm to “damage my clothing please”. Oddly, both machines I compared were LG and were not especially old. “Low” is a relative term.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#148

Post by raincole » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:26 AM UTC

raspasov wrote: post #43

"Following his reasoning, it cannot be stated in absolute terms that an iPhone 15 is of “better quality” than a 2003 Nokia." This statement suffers from either viewing the past through rose-tinted glasses or from total cultural relativism in the most pejorative sense. I'm not sure about 2003, but around 2009, I owned a Nokia N900, which was arguably the flagship Nokia phone at the time. I can confidently state that c…

It feels like when people watch the video of a 70s car crashes into a modern car and leaves in one piece.

"Wow, old car was much more solid! The modern car got destroyed!"

Until you realize that the old car utilizes the driver seat as the crumple zone.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#149

Post by simianparrot » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:26 AM UTC

Airplane tickets used to cost a lot more for economy class, even adjusted for inflation and fees. To get the equivalent service and quality today you simply have to pay more, you just have the choice of paying very little for very low quality because there’s more flights and more planes.

https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/even-with-fees-the-miracle-of...

Same can be said for most electronics and even clothes. I’m not saying that a high price label guarantees high quality, just that the spectrum of cost vs quality has broadened, even within big name brands. There’s now cheap and expensive Nike ranges, for example, where there used to be only the quality expensive tier.

But if you look at the cost of, say, quality furniture today and adjust for inflation, it’s going to be around the same as quality furniture 50 years ago. We just have the choice to pay a lot less for much worse now.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#150

Post by smokel » Sun, Jul 20, 2025, 11:28 AM UTC

dijit wrote: post #132

kovac wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought my dad a Nokia phone in 2008. A dumb phone, with just texting and calling features. It continues to work to this day, so, 17 years (the markings on the buttons are fully erased now, other than that it works). It outlived him. I don't know how they managed to build stuff like that. I would expect some electronic part to fail sometime along the way.

Well, I can tell you how: rigorous testing. I worked for Nokia (briefly, just before Eloppification) and I remember being told that when the iPhone launched everyone laughed because there was no way that the battery could last more than a day, there was no app store back then, no flash, no high-speed data (2G) and it failed every single one of the internal tests that Nokia had. Yet, people didn’t care, obviously - an…

> People seem to care much more about...

One cannot conclude this from what the market does. Single individuals might want wildly different things than what the combined economy serves them.