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

Backpacks got worse on purpose

worseonpurpose.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 396 posts

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#171

Post by SoftTalker »

bluGill wrote: post #125
CWuestefeld wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a worthwhile observation. It's good that there are lower-quality alternatives available. It means that people who couldn't in the past afford something at all, are now more likely to have some path to getting it. And even if you could afford the higher quality, you may not need it anyway. I've got a number of tools in my workshop that I'll probably use less than 10 times ever. I have no need of a high-quality…

> I've got a number of tools in my workshop that I'll probably use less than 10 times ever. I have no need of a high-quality product in these cases. I'd rather pay a fraction of that price to have something that'll survive the light duty that I put it to because I won't demand anything greater. I've been burned too often with this thinking. All too often the cheap tool isn't just light duty so it breaks, it is not go…

Anecdotally my experience is the opposite. I bought an angle grinder from Harbor Freight for something like $10 on sale. It's not something a pro could use every day but it has absolutely been fine for what I do with it: cutting the occasional piece of metal stock, sharpening the lawn mower blade once a year, etc.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#172

Post by bob1029 »

I think this is more of a case of the product getting worse incidentally. Contrast with leaders who are actually making things worse on purpose. Apparently, for no other reason than to be ugly and mean about it. I've been on this earth long enough to discover that monsters are real.

Windows 11 comes to mind as an example of something actually being made worse on purpose. Making it impossible to associate the original notepad.exe with text files is certainly not linked with business outcomes in any direct way. This seems to be purely about antagonizing the user base as much as possible. The only theory I can arrive at is that there is a secret cortisol harvesting scheme that results in better financial outcomes for Microsoft.

It helps to differentiate these cases. I don't like capitalism taken to the extreme, but the other thing is significantly worse. Intent makes all the difference. Engineered to suck vs sucks because it wasn't engineered are two completely different levels of evil.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#173

Post by vdqtp3 »

drBonkers wrote: post #149
MostlyStable wrote: post #55

While I personally find this kind of thing extremely annoying, to me, the main problem is the _difficulty_ of determining quality. The Donut media guys did a (relatively unscientific) video comparing a whole bunch of products from the 50s to modern day across several price points. What they found was that the things that "looked" the same now were simultaneously worse and also much cheaper. They also found that, if i…

> They also found that, if inflation adjusted, you get could, in most categories, the same or better quality for the same price. I argue you must evaluate against median purchasing power; it accounts for inflation and (lack of) wage increases. Comments from your linked video: > The problem with the “adjusted for inflation” argument is that it does not factor in buying power. The increase in wages has risen at out hal…

I'm really frustrated by inflation numbers because there doesn't seem to be a metric that makes sense.

CPI ignores the reality people feel (and swaps in cheaper items that aren't necessarily on par with the original to keep the number lower), gold isn't really a 1:1 with purchasing power...there must be some sort of useful composite metric that merges multiple data points over time like rental/house prices, CPI market basket, dollar vs hard assets like gold to come up with a more accurate number.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#174

Post by nearbuy »

drBonkers wrote: post #149
MostlyStable wrote: post #55

While I personally find this kind of thing extremely annoying, to me, the main problem is the _difficulty_ of determining quality. The Donut media guys did a (relatively unscientific) video comparing a whole bunch of products from the 50s to modern day across several price points. What they found was that the things that "looked" the same now were simultaneously worse and also much cheaper. They also found that, if i…

> They also found that, if inflation adjusted, you get could, in most categories, the same or better quality for the same price. I argue you must evaluate against median purchasing power; it accounts for inflation and (lack of) wage increases. Comments from your linked video: > The problem with the “adjusted for inflation” argument is that it does not factor in buying power. The increase in wages has risen at out hal…

This isn't true for median purchasing power. You're looking at the federal minimum wage, not the median. Only about 1% of hourly workers earn $7.25 or less.

Median earnings were $48,070 in 1975, measured in 2024 dollars, and $51,370 in 2024.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#175

Post by lkramer »

There are so many examples of this. Processed food, sweets and so on. Cadbury, Toblerone, etc live on the brand recognition, but have come objectively worse over the years. Often they are owned by the same mega corp that have a strategy of milking the brands for as long as possible.

It's bait and switch on global, organised scale and it's almost impossible to fight except on an individual level.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#176

Post by drob518 »

moolcool wrote: post #164
MostlyStable wrote: post #55

While I personally find this kind of thing extremely annoying, to me, the main problem is the _difficulty_ of determining quality. The Donut media guys did a (relatively unscientific) video comparing a whole bunch of products from the 50s to modern day across several price points. What they found was that the things that "looked" the same now were simultaneously worse and also much cheaper. They also found that, if i…

> The Donut media guys Actually the speeeed guys, now. They left because Donut went to shit after getting purchased by Private Equity. Surprise, surprise.

There's some irony for you.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#177

Post by petepete »

consumer451 wrote: post #9

I spent way too much money on a Peak Design backpack. 4 years in, the zipper broke. They honored the lifetime warranty, and swapped me for a brand new one. That was my first time ever dealing with such a high-end product and a lifetime warranty. Just sharing because it was a good experience.

I love mine too, I have the messenger bag and the backpack. Both are in near perfect condition after years of use, commuting and travelling.

I love their camera straps and clips too, everything just works nicely together.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#178

Post by vjvjvjvjghv »

34679 wrote: post #170

If you're looking for a backpack, I can't recommend Osprey enough. They are still a independent US company with a lifetime warranty they actually stand by. I had to call their customer service just last week after I ordered the wrong size bag. I was connected to an actual human immediately, and he sent me a prepaid return label, even though it was my fault and I was fully expecting to pay for return shipping myself.…

I had a buckle that was broken on one of my backpacks. Sent a message to Osprey and they sent a replacement buckle. I was quite impressed.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#179

Post by vscode-rest »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #38
Swizec wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gonna echo that I love my Peak Design backpack. Only backpack I’ve ever owned that delighted me so much I told others and showed it off. The design is a little dorky, especially now that every techbro in SF has one, but my god that thing has pockets and little details in all the right places. Been using mine for years and looks almost new. One downside of high quality gear: Velomacchi (motorcycle bags/backpacks) seem…

Peak Design is the rare travel backpack I could find that has one massive storage compartment instead of 5+ small compartments. So you can really pack that thing efficiently. And the 45L variant is the biggest thing you can use as a carry-on. https://www.peakdesign.com/products/travel-backpack?Size=45L... I've never spent $300 on a backpack before. It kinda stung. It's well-thought-out though. I've had it five years…

Annoying that there’s no “Made In X” declaration of origin on that site. Isn’t that required by law?

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#180

Post by jeffrallen »

34679 wrote: post #170

If you're looking for a backpack, I can't recommend Osprey enough. They are still a independent US company with a lifetime warranty they actually stand by. I had to call their customer service just last week after I ordered the wrong size bag. I was connected to an actual human immediately, and he sent me a prepaid return label, even though it was my fault and I was fully expecting to pay for return shipping myself.…

If you live in Switzerland and vibe with their brand, Freitag bags totally rock and never die.
Post reply on HN