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

Why are most sofas so bad?

dwell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 762 posts

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#551

Post by unethical_ban »

angry_moose wrote: post #9

I've posted about our ~$2000 West Elm sofa that disintegrated within 2 years in a similar previous thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37393399 The whole thing is just stapled together OSB. I ripped the dust cover off and added 3 new frame stretchers made from 2x8 construction lumber (and tied other loose joints back together) and its done pretty well since then: https://imgur.com/a/bqlLgW3 (wish I'd gotten…

Eesh... I have a West Elm couch I got at an outlet for half off, so only $1200. It's fairly comfy and looks good, but I feel the back cushions will need to be restuffed sooner rather than later. I've had it less than a year.

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#552

Post by _ea1k »

nytesky wrote: post #106
baby wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some reason people hate IKEA in the US. Was trying to sell a standing desk I bought there for 750$ and nobody wanted it. Ended up selling it for 150$. I also had a Jarvis and it was gone in an instant, even though the IKEA one was much much better. I Often hear people saying that IKEA furnitures don’t travel well or don’t last long. It’s like we’re not going to the same IKEA.

$750 for an IKEA desk is crazy money. Does it have hydraulics to raise and lower the desk? But depreciation on IKEA is huge because while it can last a long time within a household, it moves very poorly so if it has been moved or reassembled once or twice, it’s likely near end of life. But hard to evaluate that, it’s not like it has an odometer — hence value for used it very low.

Yeah, ikea standing desk prices are crazy. There are plenty of comparable products on Amazon for a lot less money. I kept looking at them in the store thinking that there must be something that could warrant the price, but I just can't see it.

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#553

Post by closeparen »

jajko wrote: post #500
gruez wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The buying up of precious housing as investments by non-residents should mostly be banned, starting with institutional and overseas investors. What's the issue with them buying houses as investments, as long as they're being rented out? If that's the case, their net effect on the housing supply is zero. >maybe also imprisoned. I find it extremely disturbing that people are effectively demanding for bill of attainder…

This is quite common trope here among young generation, feeling left out of property ownership like its some basic human right guaranteed by UN charter. Like previous generations were not left out of same/other stuff as well. That the post you respond to is not flagged tells you quite something... Too often these folks have outright communist mindset to set the world as it suits their current needs, which to somebody…

Countries where middle class people rent have pretty "communist" tenant protection regimes. Being perpetually 30 days from a potential eviction is not a position most people can or should be okay with.

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#554

Post by vmladenov »

secretsatan wrote: post #411

The article goes on about the quality of manufacturing, which is very fair, but something that bugs me, and it seems to apply to cheap sofas as well as very expensive ones. Why are so many of them just plain uncomfortable? I'm looking for one I want right now, and I have to go around a furniture shop and try each out and I reckon, maybe 1/4 of them are suitable for a place you might enjoy sitting in. The high end fur…

Check out the Stressless line by Ekornes.

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#555

Post by mynameisvlad »

namaria wrote: post #542
mynameisvlad wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean… not really. Quality and style generally are pretty correlated, with higher quality pieces traditionally being more “old school”. And that was basically GP comment’s point. One can value form over function, especially if there’s a specific style that the rest of your house uses. If your entire house is decorated in a contemporary style, then a traditional sofa is just going to stand out like a sore thumb.

This whole thread is about overpriced crap that sells because people don't know better. And if one's partner prefer flashy crap to quality stuff by calling quality stuff "antiquated" because it doesn't conform to styles peddled in social media and are devoid of fundamental quality well... that's not a conflict of taste, that is a story about choosing flashy crap for the sake of flashiness. Which doesn't seem defensib…

Uh… what?

I already said “One can value form over function”. Each person has different needs and wants out of their furniture. Just because you don’t value form doesn’t mean it’s some unbelievable or “indefensible” concept.

I don’t want my house to look like it came out of the 1920s. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

If you think otherwise, then more power to you, but don’t hoist your beliefs and preconceptions on others.

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#556

Post by eightysixfour »

thfuran wrote: post #541
eightysixfour wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quality is not necessary for a good to be a luxury good. Only for demand to go up disproportionately with increases in income. Practically this means luxury goods are purchased to convey status. Consider Range Rover or Jaguar, which are known for being low quality but luxury brands. Premium is the word that means paying extra for an increase in quality. Consider a Toyota vs a Kia. These things are often correlated bu…

>Only for demand to go up disproportionately with increases in income Okay, if we want to limit ourselves to economics jargon rather than vernacular. >Practically this means luxury goods are purchased to convey status No, practically it means poor people aren't buying them much. Only some luxury good purchasing is related to status signaling. >Premium is the word that means paying extra for an increase in quality I'm…

I don’t know what to tell you for you to believe me but premium relating to quality and luxury relating to status are literally the way they’re defined in the retail goods and brand world.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/difference-between-premium-lu...

https://medium.com/swlh/dont-confuse-luxury-with-premium-8-k...

https://imgmodelsblog.com/luxury-and-premium-comparison

Or, if you want to listen to techies talk about it, listen to this episode of Acquired: https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/lvmh

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#557

Post by thfuran »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #534
zac23or wrote: post #530

Everything is bad these days, not just the sofas. 1. The new switches I bought broke before the old ones, which are over 20 years old. 2. LED bulbs last less than incandescent bulbs, even with a 20-year warranty. 3. The new cell phone's screen breaks very easily, it's not like the old Nokia's. And nowadays something expensive is no longer guaranteed to last. This is why I value old things so much: I have an old chair…

I think when they try to hedonically adjust for inflation - they do a terrible job. The quality of everything is trash. And if you want something that has the type of quality you used to get 30 years ago - you're going to pay close to 4-10x as much. Everyone is selling trash for cheap. We live in a mall of garbage.

They're also selling trash for expensive, as stated in the article.

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#558

Post by vmladenov »

baby wrote: post #46
rsynnott wrote: post #34

I hear this a lot, but my fairly inexpensive IKEA sofa is about eight years old with no problems at all so far. EDIT: Actually, in general I've found that my IKEA furniture has done pretty well (basically everything in the house is IKEA) with the sole exception of a "Lack" coffee table, whose surface is kinda disintegrating after 8 years (I think it's basically made of cardboard with a veneer...). The name should per…

For some reason people hate IKEA in the US. Was trying to sell a standing desk I bought there for 750$ and nobody wanted it. Ended up selling it for 150$. I also had a Jarvis and it was gone in an instant, even though the IKEA one was much much better. I Often hear people saying that IKEA furnitures don’t travel well or don’t last long. It’s like we’re not going to the same IKEA.

I dislike their engineered wood stuff. It’s decent for furnishing an apartment but for more permanent things real hardwood just feels nicer, and IKEA has relatively few options with that material.

I had an engineered wood bed frame from them split in half, whereas an older IKEA pine (not hardwood but whatever) bed frame still lives on.

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#559

Post by q7xvh97o2pDhNrh »

RajT88 wrote: post #489
m463 wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem I've noticed is - the furniture that is built to last very frequently fails the partner test - "that looks like old fart stuff". Same sort of issue with cool remote controls. For example, la-z-boy has pretty good controls - remotes have better designs, have lots of adjustments, and motors seem to move faster. And they too fail the partner test - "that looks like old fart stuff" I kind of like some…

I hate to tell you, I don't think you can buy a recliner that doesn't look like "old fart stuff". Recliners are kind of "old fart guy chairs".

The Eames lounge chair is a reasonable solution to this problem.

(It probably invokes other stereotypes. I don't really know, but either way, you'll be too comfortable to care.)

Re: Why are most sofas so bad?

#560

Post by Naracion »

didon wrote: post #543
Symbiote wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed: > Frame: Plywood, Polyurethane foam 30 kg/cu.m., Particleboard, Solid wood, Fibreboard An example of something that looks well-built is the Skogsta dining table [1]. > Table top: Solid acacia, Clear acrylic lacquer, Clear lacquer > Leg/ Rail: Solid acacia, Acrylic paint (Though the oak version, which costs more, is oak-veneered particleboard.) Many Ikea things aren't designed to last. That table has cross-bea…

I actually have the Mörbylånga table at home and I find it very sturdy. One thing which the pictures doesn't show is that there are two supporting beams under the table, which provides the necessary strength to not collapse on first touch. Obviously, I have not done the actual test, but I will try to remember and report back if the table ever breaks.

Tangential, but if your table doesn't break in the next few days then you won't be able to report back, since editing and replying to comments get disabled after some days. I don't know what the exact time frame is like though.
Post reply on HN