Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KY_4_PREZ t1_iv7e24c wrote

šŸ˜­can we please just go back to designing stuff like this again, instead of all the modern tech with planned obsolescence. This belongs on r/designporn.

−11

YouJustDid t1_iv7m9ht wrote

itā€™s deceiving ā€” the electronics are as cheaply made as they get; this is just fake ā€œvintageā€ enclosure design (like Crosley)

4

KY_4_PREZ t1_iv7n8ht wrote

I somehow doubt that a radio from 1985 was designed with the same approach that a fake vintage 2022 JcPenny radio usedā€¦

−3

YouJustDid t1_iv7ne4i wrote

thatā€™s your prerogative, fake is fake

2

KY_4_PREZ t1_iv7nost wrote

Iā€™m not arguing with you, my only ā€œprerogativeā€ is simply that electronics were fundamentally designed better in the past.

−2

YouJustDid t1_iv7ootb wrote

The novelty radios they sold at Sharper Image used the cheapest sweatshop-manufactured crap they could get their hands on.

3

KY_4_PREZ t1_iv7poa1 wrote

Again, Iā€™m sure they do, but that has absolutely nothing to do with my point.

0

YouJustDid t1_iv7qntp wrote

has everything to do with your point ā€” the electronics are at best an afterthought

5

KY_4_PREZ t1_iv7r698 wrote

Ok engineering god, please forgive me for my transgression of questioning the legitimacy of cheap modern practices. šŸ™

0

YouJustDid t1_iv7tc35 wrote

> questioning the legitimacy of cheap modern practices.

thatā€™s a valid question, with which I agree completely!

ā€¦cheap disposability was already well under way by 1985, and the electronics inside the ā€œSpirit of St. Louisā€ radio are a perfect example

5