PM_ME_Dog_PicsPls t1_iscwunb wrote on October 15, 2022 at 12:18 AM

Reply to comment by BoilerButtSlut in Dishwasher keeps going by Atlantic76

Yeah Jfc the amount of times I have to say planned obsolescence doesn't exist in the way people use it is nuts.

NWO_Eliminator t1_isd3rqt wrote on October 15, 2022 at 1:14 AM

Making a design as cheap, light, and flimsy as possible with a built in short lifespan IS planned obsolescence! My 50 year old Maytag washer/dryer are still going strong. I could still get every single part for it up until 8 years ago (Whirlpool bought out Maytag and discontinued some of their parts) and still get most of the running gear that's important. Dishwasher is the same age. Yes, they were very expensive during their time period but were designed with reliability and serviceability in mind. Also, Maytag still cranked out parts for everything they made going back 50 years. You could still get every single part for their very first automatic washer in 1999 that was made in 1949. Nobody does that anymore.

https://www.postlandfill.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/PlannedObMeme-960x675.jpg

PM_ME_Dog_PicsPls t1_isd5ghs wrote on October 15, 2022 at 1:28 AM

No it's not. That's the nature of making something inexpensive.

How much did your 50 year old Maytag cost then and what is that adjusted for inflation? A comparably priced unit today is likely well built too.

You can absolutely still get parts for stuff today too. Not sure where you're getting the idea that you can't get parts for any new items from.

And one guy saying a thing doesn't make it true. Like y'all downvote people who actually design products telling you planned obsolescence isn't a thing because you get your info from memes.

Decimator714 t1_isew9f4 wrote on October 15, 2022 at 1:23 PM

One engineer saying it doesn't exist doesn't make it true.

Planned obselecense isn't necessarily "planned"

If an engineering team is told to focus less on repairability/reliability and focus on cheapest cost, it has the same effect as planning your product to fail.

BoilerButtSlut t1_isdpwur wrote on October 15, 2022 at 4:31 AM

You're looking at this the wrong way. They aren't being designed purposefully to fail. I don't know of any engineer that has ever been told to make something fail prematurely. This is especially true because consumers don't typically buy the same brand appliance to replace the one that just died a few months after you got it.

I've been on the engineering side, and this is how it actually works:

A manufacturer or a big box store or whoever will have a lot of data showing that if an appliance is priced at $X, then they can expect to sell Y number of them. So from that you can plan out your margins and costs. Well, the most sales happen (surprise) when the appliance is at the cheap end. But that also means your margins are very thin, so you need to cut costs everywhere.

So the engineer will cut back on materials or durability as long as it still keeps it working within the warranty period. So a plastic tub instead of metal. Or thinner metal. Sometimes a new technology, manufacturing method, or outsourcing, will save money without reducing build quality, but most of the time it does.

The solution to this is pretty simple: if you want better quality then you will just need to pay more for it. You simply can't have an appliance that lasts decades without spending way more than you probably think is reasonable. Just take some of your examples from 50 years ago and plug their prices into an inflation calculator. If you want a long-lasting replacement, then that number is about what you should spend for about the same number of features.

Long-term parts support costs money. Keeping those parts in the supply chain and on a shelf somewhere for years costs money. Long term customer support for a product costs money. Making that part better built to last longer costs money. It all adds up. That's why when a smaller-scale manufacturer tries to scale larger (ie. go to the bigger market with smaller margins), long term parts support is usually one of the first things to go.

You can still absolutely buy very durable and long-lasting appliances. They just cost a lot more. And the higher cost you go, the more your market shrinks.

Decimator714 t1_isewvh9 wrote on October 15, 2022 at 1:28 PM

Yep you hit the mark on this one.

Planned obselecense also has an entirely different meaning in the tech world. A company could plan to only provide software updates for only a few years. This is planned obselecense, especially if the software communicates with other devices. Eventually the outdated software will become forcibly obselete, and cannot communicate with newer software.

This is pretty big as I heard about certain washing machines having specific features that are exclusively controlled by an app. I would be willing to bet that it won't work after a decade or two.

But of course, like you said, it costs a lot of money to keep that stuff running. You can't expect them to be forced to do so.

It's up to the consumer to be informed and not buy shit products like that.

BoilerButtSlut t1_isfi7uc wrote on October 15, 2022 at 4:12 PM

Legacy software support and falls under the same boat. Going back into old code to add functionality for a legacy product is basically uneconomical to do, unless it's something you specifically promises a customer.

It's especially true because after an initial software release and support period, the team might be broken up and everyone goes to different projects. Bringing them back to add functionality or fixing non-critical bugs costs money and could easily delay new releases.

People look at these decisions as sinister, and they aren't. This is simply a case of consumers getting what they pay for: you want decades long parts availability/support? Well you're going to pay for that. You want updates software for years/decades? That's also going to cost you.