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

791–800 of 877 posts

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#791

Post by r00fus »

cc439 wrote: post #762
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…

>I do know one company that has a reputation for not doing this. Miele in Europe but then their appliances are double to triple the price of typical companies. I think Miele serves as an excellent example for why the market has moved away from designing products with a 30+ year expected service life. If the average modern appliance lasts for 5-10 years as this article claims (and has proven true time and time again i…

There's another factor to this - the US homeownership has gone down over the years, and will likely go lower.

More renters = even less incentive for reliable products, as the cheapest install that works is sufficient to rent.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#792

Post by galdosdi »

M_Grey wrote: post #111
psadauskas wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The only explanation..."? What about "never attribute to malice..." and Occam's Razor. I think a more likely explanation is that in the majority of cases when shopping for an appliance and your choices are a $1500 one and a $2000 one, you buy the cheaper one. This forces manufacturers to compete on price, and to cut costs wherever possible to remain profitable. Additionally, I just spent 30 seconds googling and a wa…

Well that, and a home appliance doesn't cost 1/7th of your annual budget anymore. Some things were built to last because to justify the expense, they had to last. James May (unusually) made a very good point that the "good old days" is an illusion created by survivorship bias, nostalgia, and failure to understand economics. The survivorship bias especially should be obvious: Lots of cheap crap was made throughout the…

This is why if you are a thrift store, the older-looking item is often a better buy than the newer-looking item of the same kind. The newer one is often further along is wear cycle than the older one.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#793

Post by mindslight »

crazygringo wrote: post #760

But they're cheaper, by something like 75% (and even more when you take energy efficiency into account). [1] For people who move every few years, whose requirements change (from solo to 4-person family), and so on, the current situation is pretty ideal. Spend less money, change models more frequently to fit your changing needs, and often it's even cheaper to buy a new one than to get it fixed -- which for consumers i…

Less expensive can be desirable. And perhaps the market could even find an equilibrium where some people would pay a bit more for appliances to be capital goods with longevity and serviceability and others would prefer the cell phone model.

But instead, when a consumer good becomes less expensive, our federal reserve overlords increase inflation to make sure most everybody is still being "encouraged" to work full time. This is their explicit policy! So we end up with the downsides of cost optimization (cheapness), but not the benefit (actually saving money).

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#794

Post by dsfyu404ed »

ams6110 wrote: post #702
rbcgerard wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To your point, I saw or heard an interview with a Ford engineer a while back where he basically said look we know how to make parts that last forever, but they are heavy and expensive. He went on to say people want more affordable cars (cheaper parts) and we need to make cars lighter for fuel efficiency standards (lighter parts), so they set an internal goal of 10 years of longevity for a part, and then try and make…

I don't think cars are a good example. Cars last much longer and with far fewer significant problems than they used to. A car made in the 1970s would maybe last 100,000 miles, if it didn't rust out first. And it would likely have one or more significant problems in that time (transmission failure, major engine problems, etc). A new, mass-market quality (e.g. Honda) car made in the last decade will easily go several 1…

Eh, when you consider the drive-train of your average 70s American car there's nothing preventing it from going 300k. The same small-block v8s and 3spd autos were used through the 90s with very good reliability. It's the little crap going wrong everywhere else that makes people upgrade.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#795

Post by hx87 »

mml wrote: post #612
ryanbrunner wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally speaking, purchasing commercial appliances doesn't work for a few reasons: - The manufacturer of a commercial appliance usually won't provide a warranty for it if it's used in a residential setting. - Your homeowner's insurance probably won't cover anything related to using commercial appliances in your home. - In certain cases (probably not a washing machine, but certainly other cases like kitchen applianc…

This. Commercial stoves and ovens don't have any where near the fire safety constraints as consumer models. A typical commercial setting will include stainless steel jacketed walls, and a mandatory fire suppression system. Install them in your home at your peril.

Presumably if you're installing commercial stoves in your residence, you're also installing all the gear that goes along with it in a commercial setting.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#797

Post by lr4444lr »

platz wrote: post #783
sqeaky wrote: post #778

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the implication is that if consumers are well informed they will lookout for their own needs and try to buy goods of sufficient quality. If enough consumers do this the market for junk should fail. In some markets it has and in others it hasn't, apparently in appliances junk prevails.

> If enough consumers do this the market for junk should fail I think over the long run we've seen evidence for the opposite due to consolidation. Markets aren't perfect; so I am highly skeptical of such a claim. it almost seems like the more the market matters to society, the less choice consumers actually have. I am more interested in trends over time than point-evaluations of dynamics at a specific moments.

Not at all incompatible with the parent post. "Sufficient quality", "junk" are the counterparts to "upsell", and "over-engineered". It's in the eye of the beholder.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#798

Post by mzs »

ryanmarsh wrote: post #247
mrbill wrote: post #174

When we moved into this house 12 years ago, I got the cheapest, simplest, most "mechanical" washer and dryer set that Lowe's offered (I think it's branded GE). Haven't had a single problem other than the light inside the dryer eventually burned out when a housemate left the door open. I know that when one of them eventually fails, it will hopefully be a cheap and simple mechanical fix. I have no desire to own a "majo…

After repairing my appliances one by one, finding the schematics, diagnosing parts and then searching for replacements I discovered the cheapest model and the most expensive model of most appliances by the same manufacturer share all the same parts except the exterior and control panel. That dishwasher or washing machine with extra modes for $1,000 more? It's the same as the cheapest model, they just didn't put the e…

I did that with a dishwasher once. Bought the cheapest same one internally and then swapped over the door and sound insulation from the expensive older one.

Also did that with a garbage disposal, the housing was identical and the sound insulation mounted perfectly over the new cheap one from the old expensive one.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#799

Post by [deleted] »

crazygringo wrote: post #760

But they're cheaper, by something like 75% (and even more when you take energy efficiency into account). [1] For people who move every few years, whose requirements change (from solo to 4-person family), and so on, the current situation is pretty ideal. Spend less money, change models more frequently to fit your changing needs, and often it's even cheaper to buy a new one than to get it fixed -- which for consumers i…

[deleted]

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#800

Post by hx87 »

Keverw wrote: post #199
mrbill wrote: post #174

When we moved into this house 12 years ago, I got the cheapest, simplest, most "mechanical" washer and dryer set that Lowe's offered (I think it's branded GE). Haven't had a single problem other than the light inside the dryer eventually burned out when a housemate left the door open. I know that when one of them eventually fails, it will hopefully be a cheap and simple mechanical fix. I have no desire to own a "majo…

I remember seeing on HN a year or two ago? About Samsung smart fridges calendar app not being updated when Google phased out the API it was using. Also Blu-ray players don't get updates after a long while too I've heard as YouTube and Netflix changes their APIs - the devs of these devices don't keep them up to date. I would prefer a dumb TV, and just buy a replaceable box with the computer part. The only way I could…

I have similar preferences with kitchen appliances. I cook a lot, so I expect a lot out of my stove, but I hardly bake, so I don't care about having a fancy/enormous oven. In fact, I'd rather not have and oven, only a cooktop plus a portable convection oven, but in large parts of the USA a residence is not considered habitable without a built-in oven. Therefore instead of buying a range, I buy a $1500 gas cooktop with a 22,000 BTU/hr burner and the cheapest built-in wall oven I can find.
Post reply on HN