They Used To Last 50 Years • Hacker News Board

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#871

Post by Arizhel » Thu, Mar 23, 2017, 2:16 PM UTC

luca_ing wrote: post #870

Arizhel wrote: post #863

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What machine was that? I've had two front-loading washing machines now with counterweights, and neither one of them was remotely easy to remove the weights in.

Can't be bothered to got to the cellar to look at the type tag. But it was from the '80s I think. Some Miele domestic machine. And I didn't pay attention to how hard it would be to remove it -- it was already moot by that time. But it is removable.

Good enough, I was just wondering about the brand. It being a Miele makes sense that it would be built that way. The machines I had were a late 90s Maytag (their first front-loader, the Neptune) and a mid-00s Whirlpool Duet. Both were definitely not designed for the counterweights to be removed for transport. You can take them out but it involves a significant amount of disassembly.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#872

Post by threepipeproblm » Thu, Mar 23, 2017, 3:02 PM UTC

Obi_Juan_Kenobi wrote: post #782

threepipeproblm wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The thing about the lightbulb collusion is that it's exceptional for being one of the only examples of such collusion that's verified. I don't doubt it exists in some cases, but if it were as ubiquitous as many say, I'd suspect to find evidence of other conspiracies. Many other industries also lack a centralized organization (one ostensibly for standardization) to facilitate such a conspiracy. Overall I just find the…

This is incorrect... there are many examples, the light bulb is just the best documented, partly because of it's historical timing.

Another poster mentioned the DRAM case, this is one of a fairly good number of examples of collusion. When you are talking about a type of behavior that people will generally go to good lengths to keep under wraps, a better conclusion would be that the known cases are a fraction of the actual cases.

If we had something closer to perfect competition there would a lot less of this... but we don't. Many of the cases where antitrust action has been deemed necessary by governments were IMO caused by government interventions in the first place.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#873

Post by eatbitseveryday » Thu, Mar 23, 2017, 3:24 PM UTC

greglindahl wrote: post #864

eatbitseveryday wrote: post #844

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If engineers are taught this, I imagine orgs like NASA, SpaceX, Boeing etc. must surely hire individuals who do not subscribe to this idea. Reliability IS important in these areas. In my opinion, what this individual told you should belong to a business lecture, not engineering. If your systems fail in engineering, you aren't doing your job right.

Making engineering tradeoffs between cost and reliability or performance and reliability is very much a part of many engineering situations.

Engineering something so that it is reliable JUST ENOUGH so you can make more money from it failing sooner is not a trade off between cost of producing it and its performance.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#874

Post by icbm504 » Thu, Mar 23, 2017, 9:03 PM UTC

Bought a Maytag washer+dryer more than 20 years ago before it was bought out by Whirlpool. Occasional minor fixes, but both still work great. So happy we bought them.

I remember the store we bought them at had this display comparing "maytag parts" vs. "competitors parts" showing that maytags parts were clearly better. Stuff like springs, screws, etcs.

I think that "6. How can we change things..." is avoiding the elephant in the room. This looks systemic. This is exactly why laws were written against monopolies and trusts. I have no idea how DoJ decides to prosecute a trust/monopoly. How does that work?

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#875

Post by rosege » Thu, Mar 23, 2017, 11:49 PM UTC

jimmies wrote: post #359

rosege wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I can buy $500 ones that last 10 years I will be better off than buying 1 for $4500 that lasts 50. Although the planet wont be

Having to worry about safety (electric shocks, leaks, fires, short circuiting) when something breaks, hauling big heavy appliances in and out of the house, selecting new ones,... those are costs you have to factor in when choosing to go with the shit that doesn't last. I'd prefer having the stuff that lasts longer for a little bit more money if I had a choice.

I would too - but 10 years would be ok

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#876

Post by ljf » Tue, Mar 28, 2017, 8:53 AM UTC

hx87 wrote: post #858

ljf wrote: post #851

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mine is a citroen so uses a urea system - hopefully good then... It's a lovely family car and easy 53mpg - though as a cyclist and parent I'm now feeling guilty about particulates, but as I say I drive irregularly and mainly motorway miles.

The urea system allows the engine to run lean and hot without excess NOx emissions, which reduces particulate emissions. The particulate filter should take care of the rest.

Great to hear! Pleased that they haven't been drawn into the emissions scandal (so far?) - really hopeful that my next car can be a electric or hybrid - but just have to see how the used car market pans out.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#877

Post by liveoneggs » Fri, Mar 31, 2017, 1:34 PM UTC

ars wrote: post #245

liveoneggs wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

recycling in the US has to be profitable. Where I live we are no longer allowed to put glass into the recycling because it is no longer a profit center for the city. I should add that getting rid of big items can be especially difficult, but most appliance delivery includes taking away the old one to .. wherever they go.

> to put glass into the recycling because it is no longer a profit center And because recycling it is one of the most pointless things you can do. It's sand, we have unlimited quantities of it, the planet is made of it.

please read https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/magazine/sand-mining-indi...