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

561–570 of 877 posts

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#561

Post by sokoloff »

emodendroket wrote: post #494
sokoloff wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but I replaced my ice maker for $36 and about 30 minutes of my time (10 minutes to figure out what to order; 20 minutes to put it in). https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002GZND6U

You can save a lot of money on almost anything if you're willing to get your hands dirty and do the work yourself. I don't think it invalidates the argument.

You're totally right. I was trying to weigh the convenience and time savings of automatic ice for 12 years vs the low cost in time and money to keep it working, but I only cited the latter in my response.

Your observation is spot-on.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#562

Post by Yizahi »

My anecdotal experience (and my parents and grandparents) tells me that:

a) devices back them broke about the same and had similar lifespans. Yes, some devices lasted for a long time but I suspect that it is just a survivor bias.

b) there were less devices overall (no dishwashers for example), they were harder to get and more valuable.

c) they didn't have any modern electronics. All failures were mechanical, while today they are electronic (and usually non-reparable, only replaceable).

d) some of the devices were built using post-war production lines, e.g. ex-military electric motors, heavy metal bodies etc.

e) those devices were not even closely comparable to today's. Vacuum cleaners that were a metal body and a motor basically. Washing machine for tl;dr Article paints old tech as better overall which is maybe applicable to top models in some countries and still not even close. But he is right of course and we do need to strive for more durable devices.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#563

Post by LeifCarrotson »

slim wrote: post #542
gommm wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a similar experience in a mechanical engineering class, our professor was discussing MTBF (mean time between failure) and how calculating this more accurately allowed companies to better engineer their product for obsolescence. For a company, a product that is too reliable is unprofitable in the long term and so they adjust by making sure that the product works beyond the terms of the warranty but not much more…

Mean Time Between Failures

That's an interesting contrast. I mean, you're correct, but why is the acronym "between" instead of "before"?

As the article describes, when replacing a part costs a comparable amount to the price of a brand-new appliance, people buy new appliances. With this mindset, the correct term is no longer "between" failures - when you might replace a part and average the described time until the next failure - but "before" failure - at which point you replace the device and buy a new one.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#564

Post by threepipeproblm »

skywhopper wrote: post #529

I seriously doubt a real study of appliance reliability over the past 70 years would show that the stuff sold in the 50s is actually more reliable or longer-lasting than the stuff sold today. Sure, you can find appliances that old that still work fine, but you don't see the ones that broke down after a year or two--they were junked decades ago and forgotten about. Since you can't grow the supply of working 50-year-ol…

Right, no one would ever make products intentionally worse as part of creeping modernism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel

No one would ever, for economic reasons, plan (or just allow) for the lifespan of their products to decrease. http://resource.co/article/lifetimes-household-appliances-be... Technology is always getting better!

The old timers who almost universally report this phenomenon just don't know enough arm chair statistics. Delusional, basically.

If a study were done, or a set of studies, say between changes in average appliance lifespan between 1993 and 2007, these could never show a dramatic decrease in the average lifespan of most appliance categories.

1993 NAHB results http://www.metrohome.us/information_kit_files/life.pdf

2007 NAHB results https://www.interstatebrick.com/sites/default/files/library/...

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#565

Post by three14 »

nkoren wrote: post #515
ptaipale wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is partially true, of course. Energy saving makes devices more complex, thus they have more things that can be broken. However, it is also clear that e.g. control electronics is simply not made to last. E.g. they use the cheapest of electrolytic capacitors, which will leak and break in 5-10 years. Using proper ones might cost 1-2 cents more per device. This also means that old dead TVs and stuff may often be rep…

Just wanted to send a note to icantdrive55 of the sibling comment: your comment is dead for some reason. Looking through your history, you seem to have a long track record of making on-topic, non-glib, non-ad-hominem posts, so there's no reason you should be getting downvoted. But almost all of your posts are dead from downvoting (I guess?). Either someone has a vendetta against you, or an algorithm has gone rogue. E…

Note that if you click on the time next to the comment to open the page for the comment, you can click "vouch" and at least help save the individual comment.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#566

Post by vitro »

therealmarv wrote: post #452
throwaway729 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this true? I bought a (new) washer I never understood front-load anyways. Topload fails safe. Front load fails in a giant puddle all over your floor.

In Europe you will find nowhere toploader. We know they are poor engineering: Bad water and electricity efficiency combined with more stress and wear out for the fabrics during washing. Only plus side I can see is that it is faster... but wasting so much resources does not justifies it IMHO.

We had a top loader that spins around horizontal axis, just as front loaders do, should have the same water consumption.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#567

Post by rm_dash_rf »

I had an LG fridge stop working and the reason was that a fuse blew on the circuit board. A cheap $2 fuse. It was not replaceable. I was lucky that I was able to un-solder it and replace it but otherwise you have to replace the entire board ($150). If you are not that handy you then have to pay something to do all this for you. Now you are talking $300+.

Unbelievable.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#568

Post by gommm »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #563
slim wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mean Time Between Failures

That's an interesting contrast. I mean, you're correct, but why is the acronym "between" instead of "before"? As the article describes, when replacing a part costs a comparable amount to the price of a brand-new appliance, people buy new appliances. With this mindset, the correct term is no longer "between" failures - when you might replace a part and average the described time until the next failure - but "before" f…

That's a good point. I'm not sure why I misremembered the term but in this case it might actually be more accurate.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#569

Post by wslh »

threepipeproblm wrote: post #564
skywhopper wrote: post #529

I seriously doubt a real study of appliance reliability over the past 70 years would show that the stuff sold in the 50s is actually more reliable or longer-lasting than the stuff sold today. Sure, you can find appliances that old that still work fine, but you don't see the ones that broke down after a year or two--they were junked decades ago and forgotten about. Since you can't grow the supply of working 50-year-ol…

Right, no one would ever make products intentionally worse as part of creeping modernism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel No one would ever, for economic reasons, plan (or just allow) for the lifespan of their products to decrease. http://resource.co/article/lifetimes-household-appliances-be... Technology is always getting better! The old timers who almost universally report this phenomenon just don't kn…

My experience, which is not anecdotical and is shared with friends, say the same. I just change a refrigerator bought less than 12 years ago and I am changing a washing machine with the same age. My family is using the same refrigerator for more than 30 years.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#570

Post by babygoat »

rm_dash_rf wrote: post #567

I had an LG fridge stop working and the reason was that a fuse blew on the circuit board. A cheap $2 fuse. It was not replaceable. I was lucky that I was able to un-solder it and replace it but otherwise you have to replace the entire board ($150). If you are not that handy you then have to pay something to do all this for you. Now you are talking $300+. Unbelievable.

My blood is boiling from thinking about soldering a fuse to a circuit board.
Post reply on HN