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

The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

english.elpais.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 824 posts

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#411

Post by inglor_cz »

koliber wrote: post #340
inglor_cz wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that if we fully incorporate all the environmental costs of production into the end prices of customer goods, we will become poorer, at least in the short run. In the long run, that could actually spur some development re cheap and safe energy etc.

Poorer in terms of $ accounting. Perhaps richer in terms of health, happiness, and the environment. Given how much money people are spending on the latter things I think becoming $ poorer might be the cheapest way of getting healthier and happier.

Possibly. Human happiness is complicated and rarely conforms to what it theoretically ought to.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#412

Post by atoav »

microflash wrote: post #238
layer8 wrote: post #176

Many comments here are arguing that quality has actually gone up over the past decades. However, a common experience for me is that I own something of good quality from 5/10/15 years ago and now buy the successor model from the same brand, but the product has gotten worse, being cheaper made. And I have a hard time finding a replacement that matches the quality of the old version. It’s a regularly reoccurring frustra…

This has been especially pronounced in medical equipments where there’s this unnecessary race to introduce “digital experiences”. An example is hearing aids. A few years ago, it was relatively easy to get an analog model with dedicated volume buttons and off switch. Now, most of the models come without off switch and need Bluetooth pairing with an app installed on your phone. What used to be plug and play is now a cl…

I run a media-lab at a art university and both HDMI and USB-C is flaming garbage. What you want is a digital video standard that simply pushes an A/V stream over the wire and negotiates the acceptable resolution on the fly. What you get is something that does too much, doesn't work half the time and does things nobody cares about. Last time I plugged in an HDMI source and the darn "smart" television showed the image for 0.5 seconds before displaying a menu that asks me to press a button on the remote to show the image. And don't get me started on DRM/HDCP..

The number of broken HDMI cables (as fraction of cables rented out) is way bigger than for any other connector, suggesting it is completely unsuitable and a broken design.

Whenever I can I go for SDI video, I do. You plug it in and it works. Why "consumer" techology has to be so much more pain than pro stuff makes me wonder.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#413

Post by efitz »

I think one of the indicators of of declining quality is the unwillingness to support products (beyond initial installation support), and that the unwillingness to make products supportable.

Did it break after two years? Make it so inconvenient that they’ll just buy a new one.

Failure is seen as an upgrade opportunity, and repair is seen as a captive revenue stream rather than an opportunity for other businesses or DIYers.

If you can tolerate or enjoy the style, Louis Rossmann is a great watch on YouTube.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#414

Post by beepbooptheory »

bsenftner wrote: post #237

Do not discuss "content" of this article, discuss the reasoning behind and the effect of this article. The author many not even realize this is a propaganda article, using a well known mechanism of "spray to dismay and therefore cripple". This article is a coordinated series of arguments that sum to the statement "you are powerless."

The "power" of your consumer choice is a consolation within a life of servitude anyway though right?

Like even if the author is totally wrong, that "actually all our products are actually much better thank you, good thing we don't live 50 years ago!" Is that something we can truly be happy about? Is that winning? You too, im sure, feel that itchy emptiness when you have received all your products, when all the plastics has been peeled off and the software has been updated.

This is not a battle you even want to win! The power you are defending is already second-hand, is just a sedative. You can want more.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#415

Post by danaris »

layer8 wrote: post #176

Many comments here are arguing that quality has actually gone up over the past decades. However, a common experience for me is that I own something of good quality from 5/10/15 years ago and now buy the successor model from the same brand, but the product has gotten worse, being cheaper made. And I have a hard time finding a replacement that matches the quality of the old version. It’s a regularly reoccurring frustra…

Like with much in the political situation, I think it's sort of a polarization.

The quality of some things has gone up significantly. This is going to be the things where improvements in technologies have made improved quality easier and cheaper (and that's not just electronics—materials technology, better manufacturing, etc can do this). It's also in products where other technological improvements have made it viable for there to be independent and artisanal (or similarly small-batch high-quality) production of them.

The quality of other things has declined precipitously. These are more likely to be commodities where improving quality still costs more, and the "innovation" they've done is in finding ways to make it cheaper and worse without it just always failing immediately (clothing is a prime example here).

Overall, I think that if you look into any given case of a product's quality getting better or worse over the past couple of decades, you'll almost invariably find that either way it's because that's how the manufacturers can make more money.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#417

Post by ericmay »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #407
ericmay wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't tell consumers what they should want. Why does marketing and advertising exist then? > Government failure and cultural malaise are what "late stage capitalism" predicts. It then predicts a collapse of the whole thing under its own weight. If capitalism gives what the market demands, then you are suggesting that The People want government failure and malaise. Either your premise is wrong or Late Stage Capi…

>> Government failure and cultural malaise are what "late stage capitalism" predicts. It then predicts a collapse of the whole thing under its own weight. > If capitalism gives what the market demands, then you are suggesting that The People want government failure and malaise You are both correct here. Obviously people don't want malaise directly, but some directly seek government failure, and the rest vote for thin…

> Oh, I didn't realize till the end that you were treating this as a team thing, and capitalism is "your team", so you must attack "the other team". Do you think that attitude affected the rest of your response, too?

It’s just empirical. Both Communism and Socialism are failed ideologies. Millions dead. Millions more starved. It’s like when Libertarians want to bring about their ideology and people tell them to move to Sudan and experience it.

The term “Late Stage Capitalism” is a communist slogan. What’s insidious about it is that it tricks you into believing we can’t make things better or right wrongs, and that progress can’t be made. It has entered the American and Western social discourse as yet another instrument to sow distrust, fighting, and hatred. If/when I see the Right Wing Nazi equivalents of those slogans I call them out too.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#418

Post by carlosjobim »

ath3nd wrote: post #38
navane wrote: post #6

It's called inflation guys. Most innovation is selling an inferior product for a lower price. Most of us can only afford that. It's the same old inflation, but repackeged to keep the official inflation number down.

This is not inflation, it's divorced from all factors, these companies are raking in record profits, and they still squeeze out price increases, smaller seats, worse customer service, just because you have no alternative, you gotta take it. It's called "Enshittification": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification . It's just the free market and the corporations giving a big middle finger to its clients. It's the…

Just because it's got a Wikipedia entry doesn't mean that it's the correct term for anything. Outside of the most navel gazing hacker communities you won't find anybody taking you seriously with that language. You sound like some kind of pervert.

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#419

Post by palata »

Ekaros wrote: post #82
palata wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's called "lowest cost technically acceptable". I like this wording better than "programmed obsolescence". I don't really believe that "programmed obsolescence" is common. If anyone in a company leaked that the company actively designs the product to stop working after some time, it would make the news. I call it "premature obsolescence", which sounds more passive to me: the product doesn't last as long as it cou…

Lowest cost possible is often fun optimization problem engineers enjoy. Save a fraction of cent here and there and there too. And in some ways it is good for consumer getting cheaper products. On the other end you have something like Juicero. Massively and wastefully overengineered piece of crap. To do not that useful task. While being extremely expensive. And probably not actually last that long. Maybe one day if fa…

I don't think that engineers think "okay, so if I use this chip, the product will last 4 years, so I can use this other chip that will last only 2 years because it's a few cents cheaper".

If you want it to last longer, it's a lot of work: you have to somehow test the components you buy (or get those who produce them to do it) and then you have to test whatever you build with them. So you have to invest in it, it's not just a design decision.

Same for waterproofness: it's not that you actively drill holes in your device to make sure that it won't be waterproof. It's just that if you actually want it waterproof, you have to design for it, then you have to test, and iterate a few times. If your consumers still buy your device if it's not waterproof, then there is no need to invest in waterproofness. But it's not "planned un-waterproofness".

Re: The bewildering phenomenon of declining quality

#420

Post by l0b0 »

Rotundo wrote: post #77
esperent wrote: post #4

> clothes are unrecognizable after the second wash What clothes are these? I don't buy any kind of expensive brands. I don't take any care when washing. I don't own a lot of clothes so I wear each item weekly. And my clothes last me for several years at least. The dyes have gotten noticeably better than when I was a child - when was the last time you had colors run in the wash?

I've got a pack of seemingly nice quality t-shirts that got a lot shorter and wider after first wash. I tried stretching them back to their original form but that doesn't work. Used to be the cheap "three pairs for 10 euro" socks lasted a couple of years. Now I get, maybe, a year out of them before the holes get too obvious. And price is not a reliable indicator of quality. Buying expensive can be just as much as a g…

"May shrink on first washing" or something like it seems to be pretty common; you might've accidentally tried something on which had that labelling (or didn't, which would suck).
Post reply on HN