RE: Capitalistic sales engineering
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
The profiteers of this world can take a long walk off a short pier with their planned obsolescence following right behind them
Fuckers...
Right-to-Repair laws are on the rise around the world, which is a positive thing
Have you seen the Framework Laptop by chance? It's built from the ground up to be modular and easily repaired and upgraded by the owner, like a computer can and should be
You could theoretically own one laptop your entire life and keep it up-to-date to the very end
Here the long-term business model is built on customer satisfaction and supplying spare parts
The rationale for planned obsolescence is shaky at best, in my opinion
One example is the good reputation that German-manufactured goods have around the world. Generally they're high-quality and exceptionally long-lasting
Do these companies lack customers? Not at all. A lot of people buy them, especially after being burnt spending money on something else that breaks down after a short time
I have a Stihl chainsaw that was manufacturered in the early 90s. My father bought it at that time and it still runs today. It's an incredible little machine actually. I took it to a Stihl shop near me 6 months ago and they serviced it without issue. It's nearly as old as I am!
Has Stihl lost any sales from this? Of course not. If it became unusable within a few years of purchase, we would have moved on to a different brand altogether
Instead, I tell anyone looking for a chainsaw or other garden-maintenance machine to go for Stihl, and I'm not the only one. There's a very good chance that making their product last has increased their sales!
Planned obsolescence is a manifestation of greed (obviously), laziness and a hollow contempt for your fellow human beings
If your business model depends on it, then your business is bad
As in unviable
As in shit
It shows that your company places more importance on fleecing your customers for their money then on providing a quality product
Any business that does this does not deserve to survive in a free market
I'll check it out. I'm not one for soldering, though, so I assume it's not for me.
It's a tried and true model. In fact, companies will go out of their way to bully scientists who don't agree with them. This French guy invented a bulb that won't ever burn, but he sold his rights to someone who isn't producing it.
You either pay a little for average products that break quickly, or you spend a large sum for something that lasts a lot longer. It's still going as planned.
You see, companies pay a ton of money to engineers who have to design something that breaks after a very specific amount of time. Producing products that break often is MORE EXPENSIVE than producing long-lasting ones.
So that cheap version of a saw actually cost a lot more to design. What does this mean? It means that if they threw the deprecation method out of the window, they'd have saws as good as Germany's!
Making inexpensive, perfect products is cheap and easy. But you're forced to either pay a lot for something that lasts a long time, like the German stuff you've mentioned, or you pay a smaller sum for something you need to replace often. Those options are two sides of the same coin.
I'd agree it's shit, but Apple would probably correct me.
No soldering required. It's designed so you don't have to
Image source Archived source
See the small silver squares with the plugs sticking out, in the top right of the image? They're replacement parts. Just plug and play
I don't own one, so my comments are not an endorsement of the product. However, once my current HP has had it, I'll be looking to get one of these to replace it
I've replaced parts in my laptops for many years, but it's often a hassle and it usually only extends the lifetime of the device by another year or so (planned obsolescence striking again!) This modular approach will be much better
Sorry! This is my fault. I should have been more clear. What I actually meant was:
We're probably in agreement here; but you tell me. You're 100% correct that the economic rationale for planned obsolescence has been proven time and again
Thanks for your reply!
I've mentioned Ford in my article. They would have closed their doors, because almost every single person who could purchase a car already had one. That's why they sold out. Unfortunately, the only kind of functioning business is unethical at some level.
Heck, I've been considering how to include this in my very own work - posts! If I give out important bits at a time, people come back looking for more. But if I teach them everything they want and need to know in one go, they'd be too busy putting everything in practice, so coming back to my articles wouldn't be as important to them.
You can see this in my Rising Star posts, but I'm going to start something of the likes regarding Splinterlands, crypto in general and maybe productivity tips. Ethically, it's just as acceptable as a product that breaks down to keep business functional. Which is, of course, why I feel bad about it. But I have bills to pay and people to take care of.
I love this Framework Laptop. When I can, I'll get one. Although this is a great initiative, it's the kind of thing only start-ups do. Major players prefer stable income, so only someone who needs a competitive edge is going to sell perfect products. Eventually, when it's competitive enough, that business sells out. Even if it didn't, after a few years, every person who can purchase one is going to have their own already. Just like Ford, it's great starting out, but they have to introduce "business as a service" elements (like things breaking down) or they'll close their doors at some point. It'll never last decades.