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

151–160 of 877 posts

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#151

Post by nathantotten »

pcurve wrote: post #113
theamk wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a much simpler explanation: people want to buy cheap stuff. If given a choice between $1200 appliance which lasts 25 years, and $1000 appliance which last 15 years, and no infomation about the actual lifetimes, most people would choose the cheaper model. The people feel good, the sales rise, and who cares what happens in 15 years -- the company will have different execs by that time. And once people get used…

I think the problem is more complex. It's not that people 'want' to buy cheap stuff. That's the mistake PC laptop makers made for 20 years, collective racing to the bottom until they figured out ways to produce $300 laptop. But they eventually learned that a large consumer base had no problem paying $1200 for a MacBook. It turns out, people were willing to pay substantially more for a better product. Now, PC makers a…

Also, on average people move houses every 7 years in the US (give or take based on age) and it is typical for the appliances to stay with the house. This means the original owner/buyer is pretty unlikely to see the appliance fail before they sell the house. The next owner might, but will buy a new one and then move before it fails. Repeat...

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#152

Post by Spooky23 »

M_Grey wrote: post #111
psadauskas wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

Well that, and a home appliance doesn't cost 1/7th of your annual budget anymore. Some things were built to last because to justify the expense, they had to last. James May (unusually) made a very good point that the "good old days" is an illusion created by survivorship bias, nostalgia, and failure to understand economics. The survivorship bias especially should be obvious: Lots of cheap crap was made throughout the…

Occam's razor goes on a different path if you know a little bit about the guts of the product.

The difference between a top 1% appliance and an average appliance is probably less than $10 of materials and $5 in labor.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#153

Post by valuearb »

coldtea wrote: post #115
psadauskas wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

> "The only explanation..."? What about "never attribute to malice..." and Occam's Razor. Experience tells us that the simplest explanation for manufacturer's behavior is the kind of malice called "maximizing profit, all else be damned". That's Occam's Razor in use right there -- we would need to get out of our way to invent morally good businesses, incompetent engineers who can't get things to last, and modern conve…

Maximizing profits also involves making products at the price points customers want. If customers don't want to pay for 50 year appliances, why should they make one?

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#154

Post by valuearb »

lordnacho wrote: post #45

He mentions it in the article: It's a failure of feedback that makes this happen. If people can't get reliable information about quality, quality will not determine what they buy. Price will, and price is readily available. To get price down, you need costs down. To do that, you replace the parts with crappy parts. If feedback worked, people would know they were paying less for a less good appliance that will have mo…

When appliances are out of date in ten years because new electronics provide better features, why should customers or makers spend extra to get them to last longer?

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#155

Post by JustSomeNobody »

Good luck finding modern electronic parts that will be supported for 50 years.

Also, seriously, you see so many people scoffing at the idea of supporting anything for any length of time. It is just the engineering mentality now-a-days; nobody wants to work on anything "old". Can you imagine trying to hire someone to maintain the software/electronics for appliances in 5 years much less 50?

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#156

Post by beefman »

In a large class of models of global macroeconomic growth, instantaneous output grows over time relative to the integral of past output. This plausibly explains increasing "throwaway culture".[1]

You wouldn't have wanted a computer from 1995 in the year 2000. And you probably don't want a phone from 2012 today. Well, everything is getting more like that.

[1] https://twitter.com/clumma/status/593890418028253185

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#157

Post by tzs »

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.

For some functions, such as simple timers, one advantage mechanical might have is that it might be easier or cheaper to obtain repair parts.

A mechanical timer is likely to be a commodity part used by many different manufacturers in a variety of products.

An electronic timer is more likely to be a custom board designed by the manufacturer of the appliance you are trying to repair, possibly designed specifically for that model. There might be only one source for replacements, and they may be restricted to "authorized" service companies.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#158

Post by JustSomeNobody »

makecheck wrote: post #63

I just went through this with a refrigerator and I was amazed that I had to spend hours reading reviews of innumerable brands (most of which are really the same, as mentioned in the article) before coming up with even a handful that seemed reasonable. This should have been a simple task but virtually all of them have several got-completely-screwed-a-few-months-after-purchase comments. My own repair guy told me that o…

> My own repair guy told me that often the insides of different brands are IDENTICAL, changing only the brand name, door chrome and other superficial things to justify some kind of premium. This means you’ll break down just as often spending thousands more. The companies themselves are becoming lousier, it is not that they are taking your extra money to make a good product.

I have a family member who does appliance repair and he says the same thing.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#159

Post by intrasight »

coldsmoke wrote: post #100
psadauskas wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

Not only that, but people also _want_ to buy new appliances, since they actually become better. More silent, less power drain, more features, etc. So if everyone buys new stuff every ten years or so anyway, why bother building stuff that lasts fifty since that undoubtedly is more expensive.

I'd be happy if new stuff lasted 10 years.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#160

Post by user5994461 »

Spooky23 wrote: post #152
M_Grey wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that, and a home appliance doesn't cost 1/7th of your annual budget anymore. Some things were built to last because to justify the expense, they had to last. James May (unusually) made a very good point that the "good old days" is an illusion created by survivorship bias, nostalgia, and failure to understand economics. The survivorship bias especially should be obvious: Lots of cheap crap was made throughout the…

Occam's razor goes on a different path if you know a little bit about the guts of the product. The difference between a top 1% appliance and an average appliance is probably less than $10 of materials and $5 in labor.

Very unlikely.

Once you work in manufacturing you realize that components are actually very expensive, not a $10 joke.

Post reply on HN