Backpacks got worse on purpose • Hacker News Board

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#391

Post by Anamon » Thu, Apr 16, 2026, 9:43 PM UTC

I suspect there may also be a strong "it's what people want" aspect to this.

Why do smartphones barely outlive their warranty period? Check the statistics on how long most people keep their phone before voluntarily replacing it, and it makes a lot more sense. Why invest in the premium components and workmanship to make your phone last 5 years, if 95% of your customers will not use it for more than 18 months? (These numbers are made up, but from what I remember, the reality is not far off from that).

I could totally believe a similar thing being at play for backpacks, jackets, shoes, etc. where the people who keep their stuff long enough to even notice it falling apart are a maybe vocal, but small minority.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#392

Post by evolve2k » Fri, Apr 17, 2026, 12:06 AM UTC

hencq wrote: post #280

evolve2k wrote: post #223

Talk to any Aussie tech workers you know and chances are they or their friend has a Crumpler backpack. (No affiliation just a big fan). Originally created by a bike courier who sick of bags breaking sewed a bag out of the toughest material he could get, marine canvas. To this day they make somewhat indestructible, well designed, trendy well loved bags. Also they have a lifetime warranty and repair policy that is very…

I bought Crumpler messenger bag about 15 years ago (in San Francisco when they still had a store there). Can confirm it’s indestructible. I’m glad to hear they’ve kept up their standards to this day!

Just had a look and seems that you can get a pretty decent range of pre-owned crumpler bags on eBay and similar. Worth a look.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#393

Post by tasuki » Fri, Apr 17, 2026, 2:00 PM UTC

Anamon wrote: post #390

tasuki wrote: post #271

Did they also buy Deuter and Osprey? What about Decathlon?

According to people in the thread, Deuter and Osprey are still independent and high-quality. I don't know about backpacks specifically, but my general impression with Decathlon and their own brands has been that they somehow manage to be ridiculously cheap, while also being better made and lasting longer than many name brands that cost several times as much.

My impression of Decathlon is that they also have very helpful and usually knowledgable staff. People go work there because they're into the sports!

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#394

Post by Someone » Fri, Apr 17, 2026, 6:56 PM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #130

Someone wrote: post #101

> A $35 JanSport that dies in eighteen months: $23 per year. […] A $200 bag that lasts ten years: $20 per year. Already cheaper. If it is, it isn’t by much. The difference between $200 paid now versus 7 times $35 = $245 over a period of ten years is about 5 years of interest over $200. At 4% interest, that’s about $40.

Don't forget to account for your time buying each new one and writing your name in it. If you don't replace soon enough also account for the lost value of things that fall out the holes.

And for the fact that you may not need a backpack that lasts 10 years, or that you may want one that fits with whatever you prefer, e.g. matching what is in fashion over the years, or matching you growing older.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#395

Post by account42 » Wed, Apr 22, 2026, 4:08 PM UTC

kimos wrote: post #371

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…

A subreddit or forum like this is a good resource: https://old.reddit.com/r/BuyItForLife/ But it turns every decision into an exhausting research and optimization project.

It's only a good resource until unscrupulous marketers catch up. Which probably already happened.

Re: Backpacks got worse on purpose

#396

Post by account42 » Wed, Apr 22, 2026, 4:19 PM UTC

gaze wrote: post #258

CWuestefeld wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other side of that coin is that someone whose units of labor demand less value can still get into the market.

see terry pratchett's boots theory of economic fairness. They'll get into the market with something that costs more long term...

Exactly, and many who could have saved up for the original quality product are also lured into getting the crappier one that doesn't last as long - often without being aware of that deal.