Planned Obsolescence
Discussion
This term is often used in context with products failing unexpectedly early. IMO, it is often confused with low quality. Most cases of p/o are the availability of a newer, better version. That said, one could argue if the newer version is owed to a product replacement strategy or new developments due to technical progress.
I replaced my last washing machine after 26 years, not because it failed, but because I could hear the golden age of all bearings has passed, and got an offer for a machine that amortises itself on energy saving within 23 months.
At the same time, my average smartphone lasts two years before I replace it due to a combination of the battery having less than 50% of its original capacity, the screen having at least two cracks, and a new model having more functions.
Yet, the innovation in smartphone release cycles seems to be minor if you compare two subsequent models. Is that rather due to keeping up with the competition, than luring consumers into a new model?
I replaced my last washing machine after 26 years, not because it failed, but because I could hear the golden age of all bearings has passed, and got an offer for a machine that amortises itself on energy saving within 23 months.
At the same time, my average smartphone lasts two years before I replace it due to a combination of the battery having less than 50% of its original capacity, the screen having at least two cracks, and a new model having more functions.
Yet, the innovation in smartphone release cycles seems to be minor if you compare two subsequent models. Is that rather due to keeping up with the competition, than luring consumers into a new model?
I expect software changes and chip changes mean in this day and age, where a chip is involved past some basic stuff, this will be the way.
TV is a good example. 50 years and the system was PAL in the UK. Analogue glass to glass (sort of but for the sake of argument). Flat panels and compression with regards transmission have driven the direction, 10 years for HD digital then 4k became viable inside fewer years (keeping it short and sweet). Inside a few years there are bigger formats on the cards with the technology already there to do it (will and expense). This seems to be design and manufacture led now as they push the boundaries. But the TV system (DVBwhatever) in use should still work with a TV, the apps will stop and support will stop from the manufacturer.
Phones I expect are just the chips following the development. Want to make the most of the chip the write the software for it and keep the device fast. You could bloat up the device with poor software to carry older stuff along or just cut the cord after x years.
(edit. I see part of that shift from PAL is in relation to the shift from a glass tube for a TV to a different display method with more complicated circuitry)
TV is a good example. 50 years and the system was PAL in the UK. Analogue glass to glass (sort of but for the sake of argument). Flat panels and compression with regards transmission have driven the direction, 10 years for HD digital then 4k became viable inside fewer years (keeping it short and sweet). Inside a few years there are bigger formats on the cards with the technology already there to do it (will and expense). This seems to be design and manufacture led now as they push the boundaries. But the TV system (DVBwhatever) in use should still work with a TV, the apps will stop and support will stop from the manufacturer.
Phones I expect are just the chips following the development. Want to make the most of the chip the write the software for it and keep the device fast. You could bloat up the device with poor software to carry older stuff along or just cut the cord after x years.
(edit. I see part of that shift from PAL is in relation to the shift from a glass tube for a TV to a different display method with more complicated circuitry)
Edited by Zirconia on Friday 24th April 10:54
I imagine most people replace their phone because they're on contract and they get a new one every couple of years anyway. And / or they have to be seen with the latest version and have more money than sense.
Smart TVs can at least still be used as just a TV, even if like me, you never use the built in functions. I find them slow and inflexible, so I prefer an external source for stuff like youTube, such as an Amazon Fire Stick.
Smart TVs can at least still be used as just a TV, even if like me, you never use the built in functions. I find them slow and inflexible, so I prefer an external source for stuff like youTube, such as an Amazon Fire Stick.
Its very much standard practice to design obsolescence into most product design, whether its by component design, software design or deliberate use of components with limited life span. It must be remembered that with most consumer goods that the next generation is already well into its development cycle by the time a unit is released. You are always trying to balance with what people expect, what you could offer, and not wanting to give away what is to come and hitting your own sales. You want to ensure that many users of your technology will wish to 'upgrade' to the newer item without feeling they were 'let down' by the previous system. Certain consumer product manufacturers are well known and have been 'heavily' penalised in courts for deliberate trashing of their own devices to ensure people upgrade. It must also be appreciated that other factors may come into play, that could include re-purposing to ensure maximum return. It is not unusual for a government to put a limited life on (for example) a frequency and then reselling access that for a much higher price next time round knowing a different technology will pay a lot more for it than the existing users even if they use it for a completely different function meaning workable products would work, but their 'infrastructure backbone' has been removed (or more likely repurposed and no-longer accessible). On hardware
standard things may include batteries and screens not being replaceable, use of bearings and materials that will have limited life cycles or even components that may flex and break over time and use, its more a case of whats is deemed as an acceptable lifespan, and how soon can you realistically get away with getting the purchaser to replace or want to replace (like the comment earlier about replacing a phone every 2 generations) without suffering their wanting to go elsewhere.
standard things may include batteries and screens not being replaceable, use of bearings and materials that will have limited life cycles or even components that may flex and break over time and use, its more a case of whats is deemed as an acceptable lifespan, and how soon can you realistically get away with getting the purchaser to replace or want to replace (like the comment earlier about replacing a phone every 2 generations) without suffering their wanting to go elsewhere.
ive had the same phone for over 4 years, a note4 and am a very heavy user. ive noticed recently the touchscreen becoming less responsive in areas and also not as smooth as the coating has worn off. id have another as its a great phone, but no longer supported for updates. sad really, as they are still a reasonably good spec.
imo there should be a minimum lifespan of support for complex devices like smartphones of at least 6 years where their specification still meets a mid level current device for power/storage/memory etc.
also wifi enabled lightbulbs, aka dumb devices running software should not be a thing. stupid waste of resources. much more efficient ways to smarten up dumb devices.
imo there should be a minimum lifespan of support for complex devices like smartphones of at least 6 years where their specification still meets a mid level current device for power/storage/memory etc.
also wifi enabled lightbulbs, aka dumb devices running software should not be a thing. stupid waste of resources. much more efficient ways to smarten up dumb devices.
bmwmike said:
ive had the same phone for over 4 years, a note4 and am a very heavy user. ive noticed recently the touchscreen becoming less responsive in areas and also not as smooth as the coating has worn off. id have another as its a great phone, but no longer supported for updates. sad really, as they are still a reasonably good spec.
imo there should be a minimum lifespan of support for complex devices like smartphones of at least 6 years where their specification still meets a mid level current device for power/storage/memory etc.
Vehicle manufacturers need to ensure by law to have spare parts supply for ten years after production finished. Maybe that's an idea for smartphones (if they're serviceable at all). imo there should be a minimum lifespan of support for complex devices like smartphones of at least 6 years where their specification still meets a mid level current device for power/storage/memory etc.
Couldn't the lack of software updates be compensated by open source software?
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff