[HN Gopher] Taking apart the 2010 Fisher Price re-released Music...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Taking apart the 2010 Fisher Price re-released Music Box Record
       Player
        
       Author : fortran77
       Score  : 379 points
       Date   : 2021-10-30 14:01 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | pengaru wrote:
       | One of the worse aspects of growing old is having to watch things
       | previously done well and delivering genuine thoughtful value
       | mutate into illusory branded trash done just well enough to
       | fleece consumers.
        
       | dejawu wrote:
       | A friend of mine from engineering school had pretty much this
       | exact idea for a joke record player: Require the user to provide
       | a record and place the needle on it, but then use image-
       | recognition to identify the label/cover art and stream the album
       | while the record spun uselessly.
       | 
       | Seeing someone do this, but unironically and for a real product
       | specifically meant for humans who are actively developing their
       | sense of how the world around the works, feels somewhere between
       | cynical and outright deceptive. It reminds me of the Mechanical
       | Turk (the original one, not the Amazon service):
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_Turk - a machine
       | deliberately designed to mislead.
        
       | taddevries wrote:
       | I have to think this is mostly due to modern toy factories and
       | their standard tooling. You'd probably have a hard time finding a
       | factory that could mass produce the old toy because that's just
       | not how toys are made today.
        
         | jldl805 wrote:
         | I feel like you're about half correct here. For instance, most
         | of these factories aren't "toy factories" they are "injection
         | molding" or "pcb" or "electronic assembly" factories.
         | 
         | I would invite you to submit any examples of how you think
         | modern toys are made of "mostly" standard tooling... that's not
         | how this works. China has more mold designers, mold makers, and
         | mold shops in many towns than other countries have within their
         | borders.
         | 
         | I do agree with you that the old clockwork motor would be too
         | expensive to manufacture now, but I think you should keep
         | thinking about the rest of your thesis.
        
       | MarkusWandel wrote:
       | There's also the modern version of the See 'n Say. The original
       | one is mechanically brilliant. The new one has much better sound
       | quality and a flip-over semicircle that gives it two full circles
       | of things to point to. Is it better? Hard to say.
       | 
       | On the other hand some modern electronic toys are brilliant. The
       | Leapfrog one with the 8x8 LED array and the light pen is
       | absolutely brilliant in how much play value it gets out of that
       | simple hardware and already feels like a classic.
        
       | Symbiote wrote:
       | I remember playing with the original, although it wasn't mine. A
       | friend must have had it.
       | 
       | It would be interesting to know the cost in 1980, and compare it
       | (with inflation) to the current cost.
        
         | mbreese wrote:
         | That's a good point. I wonder what kind of tolerances were
         | needed to make the original records? It probably wasn't
         | terribly tight, but still necessary to make a playable record.
         | Versus a simple microcontroller that can play any number of
         | songs and very limited physical tolerances.
         | 
         | The electric version might actually be cheaper to produce.
        
           | Jtsummers wrote:
           | "any number of songs" = 10, in this case, and up to 16 but
           | the extra 6 can't be delivered since there's no update
           | mechanism. Versus the original which could play a much larger
           | variety of songs based on the records themselves. Presumably
           | using a music box like mechanism, not a vinyl record style
           | mechanism, which greatly loosens the quality constraints on
           | the records (based on listening to a recording of the
           | original).
        
             | pronoiac wrote:
             | The original is very similar to a music box. It's likely
             | doable to make your own disc for the original using 3D
             | printing.
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | mdorazio wrote:
         | I, too, was very curious about this and was able to find out
         | that when it launched in 1971, the record player was $6.85 [1].
         | That's about $46 in today's money. So I guess the question is
         | how many parents today would pay that much for the "good"
         | version of this toy in comparison to how many will pay $10 less
         | for the fraud version. I'm guessing the business case points
         | strongly toward the latter being revenue maximizing.
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://christmas.musetechnical.com/ShowCatalogPage/1971-Sea...
         | 
         | Side note: like others here, I loved the hell out of this thing
         | as a kid and I'm pretty sure we got it as a hand-me-down from
         | my older cousin. It still worked like a champ after many years
         | of abuse.
        
       | dehrmann wrote:
       | I'm surprised they still make this. Usually kids toys are modeled
       | after what they see adults doing. Some people still have
       | turntables, but it's rare enough that I wasn't expecting there to
       | be much demand for this.
        
         | Jtsummers wrote:
         | Nostalgia. Parents and grandparents who remember it will buy
         | new toys based on their toys from childhood, regardless of the
         | modern sensibilities.
        
           | rootusrootus wrote:
           | Exactly. A good business always has to remember who the
           | actual customer is. For kids, in many cases the actual
           | customer is mom & dad, so make sure your product is aimed at
           | them. Same with selling software to a business, the customer
           | is management not the engineers who will actually use it.
        
           | lofatdairy wrote:
           | That's a good point. lmao what a weird hauntology. the past
           | generation bought the toy for their children because of its
           | resemblance to everyday items in their lives, and the next
           | generation buys a facsimile for their children for its
           | resemblance to the toy from their childhood. i wonder how
           | many iterations will the chain continue
        
           | AtlasBarfed wrote:
           | Yeah, the sad fact of baby toys is that they are
           | fundamentally selling to the adults, not to the tots.
           | 
           | The tot phase is pretty fast, so parents don't really seem to
           | get a feel for what is a "good" baby toy in time.
           | 
           | I really wish there would be more general study of this
           | rather than being at the mercy of a sales market that
           | fundamentally doesn't have the baby in mind, mostly just the
           | parents buying the stuff.
           | 
           | But then again, "learning acceleration" in babies is probably
           | bunk anyway.
        
             | t0mas88 wrote:
             | My mother is a developmental psychologist specialised in
             | babies / toddlers. According to her most research showed
             | that behavior of the parents was a far far bigger factor in
             | the speed of development. And on the toys side of things
             | that it's mostly about allowing for creativity in play,
             | meaning kids want to invent their own game with whatever
             | you give them.
             | 
             | Simple wooden building blocks or a stack of cups that fit
             | in each other already allow for that for early age, no need
             | for more advanced toys / battery driven things.
        
         | Freak_NL wrote:
         | We have a turntable, and our 21/2 year old listens to records
         | on it. He's not putting the records on himself just yet of
         | course, but it's nice to have some technology where the
         | physical aspect is so prominent -- records have two sides, you
         | have to manually place the needle and stop the turntable after
         | listening, and records hold a specific album.
         | 
         | He'd love a toy like that (the original that is).
         | 
         | On a related note: it's nice that some old records with
         | children's content are actually really good, and often much
         | nicer -- slower, more focussed, and with better articulation --
         | than modern content for his demographic. Although I admit that
         | the much-loved audio play about a field mouse visiting her
         | mousy friend who lives in the city to learn all about the
         | sounds in a family's house is a bit... anachronistic. The
         | shower, electrical razor, and hoover are fine, but the
         | typewriter and landline telephone may be a tad confusing, and
         | the baker who hawks his bread at the door hasn't shown up in
         | reality yet (but fast-food delivery is a close-ish thing). His
         | parents both use mechanical keyboards though, so the sound
         | isn't too far-fetched.
         | 
         | People will buy this toy mostly for the nostalgic feeling. I
         | just don't get why Fisherprice didn't just remake the battery-
         | less original though; it would have hit just the right note
         | nowadays. The remake just damages their brand.
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | Skeuomorphism at work ... :(
        
       | smashed wrote:
       | As an 80's kid I have fond memories of this toy. Being all
       | mechanical you could explore and marvel at it.
       | 
       | I remember trying to get the spin faster/slower, stopping the
       | spring, etc.
       | 
       | Since it required no batteries it was always working, even when
       | you found it at the bottom of toy bin after months/years.
       | 
       | This modern version is a complete scam, especially since the
       | outside look seems absolutely identical to the original. I'd be
       | very disappointed if I bought one for a toddler, only to realize
       | when unboxing it's crap.
       | 
       | By the way, we still have the original toy from my childhood.
       | It's been passed around to relatives, but last I heard, it still
       | works after what must be almost 40 years.
        
         | timr wrote:
         | I also spent many hours futzing with one of these. The music-
         | playing mechanism in the arm was particularly interesting, for
         | some reason. I remember spending time plucking out songs using
         | a screwdriver.
        
         | cptskippy wrote:
         | > This modern version is a complete scam
         | 
         | This. It preys upon the childhood memories of parents and
         | grandparents. Literally everything that made the original such
         | a fond memory is gone and what you're left with is a cheap
         | trick that had none of the lasting appeal of the original.
        
       | randomstring wrote:
       | This new version of the Fisher-Price Record Player is
       | heartbreaking. I learned so much from trying to understand how it
       | worked. Concepts like stored energy: experimenting with trying to
       | over-wind, under-wide, a few turns, many turns, slowly adding
       | pressure to the winding knob until it would start playing and try
       | to maintain just enough pressure to play. Physically slowing and
       | speeding up the turntable to change to the tempo. Trying to
       | intentionally misaligning the head to play out of tune. Turning
       | it on it's side, upside down, trying to peek at the teeth on the
       | head and manually play individual notes. All at an age before I
       | could read. That toy was indestructible, because if it weren't I
       | would have torn it down to individual components (just like my
       | very expensive 6 million dollar man action figure, to the great
       | chagrin of my parents). It wouldn't be until much later I'd have
       | to tools to dissemble one, and by then I was taking apart real
       | record plays.
       | 
       | This toy is a good analog for a real record player and with
       | grooves that move a needle and play sound encoded on the disk.
       | Leading to understanding of sound waves.
       | 
       | This new toy is a mix of new and old tech. How can a per-literate
       | child be expected to decipher binary encodings and how they map
       | to individual songs? What deeper understanding of how things work
       | are within the grasp of a child that cannot yet use a
       | screwdriver, wire cutters, and a volt meter?
       | 
       | This new toy is boring. Once you learn how to turn it on, it can
       | have no appeal to a child exposed to much better music players
       | all around them: cell phones, iPads, computers, tvs. This is just
       | a piece of plastic and e-waste destined for the landfill,
       | purchased by some sentimental old timer who has fond memories of
       | the original F-P record player.
        
         | TeMPOraL wrote:
         | Yup. I'm pissed by this. And I never even owned a toy like
         | that.
         | 
         | The new toy is just fucking up with kids' development. It
         | literally boils down to a 10-button panel for selecting which
         | song to play. All the things that make it look like a turntable
         | are nonfunctional lies. There's no direct relationship between
         | what disk you have in it, and whether it's turning, because the
         | music isn't even encoded on it in the first place. The disk is
         | just representing two possible states, and the turning is for
         | show.
         | 
         | How did they imagine a kid will process such a toy? How much
         | disappointment will a child feel when they realize, after
         | trying to physically play with the turning disks, that it's
         | just a dummy?
         | 
         | They could've made this toy with a single disk with a motor
         | under it, and 10 buttons to pick songs, and it would be better
         | because _it wouldn 't lie_. It would look like a record player,
         | not _pretend to be one_. Or perhaps I 'm just angry because the
         | old model _was an actual record player_ , so we have a clear
         | example of them having a superior design available (and most
         | likely cheaper to produce), and then _choosing to make it
         | worse_ for re-release.
         | 
         | Anyway, there's a software analogy in here, but I'm not in a
         | mood to be able to write a coherent and short summary of it.
         | Suffice it to say: the continuous dumbing down of software all
         | across the board is sometimes called "Fisher-Pricing the UI".
         | Never before have I felt this term is so apt as I feel now.
        
         | pen2l wrote:
         | As well, the beautiful vulnerability and realness, the
         | imperfections, the notes sometimes slightly flat or sharp
         | because of mechanical aberrations -- they were wonderful to
         | observe. The humming sounds of the windings, the realness of
         | it. The tactile dots, the understanding of how they related to
         | musical notes. What a thing it was to behold, an authenticity
         | that the child in us could always appreciate and be impressed
         | and moved by.
        
           | agumonkey wrote:
           | We're still in the wave of digital purity (and the VR/meta
           | chapter won't help). Come back in 50 years for a
           | reappreciation of analog, complex, fragile and non linear. By
           | this time digital computing will probably be chaotic too.
        
             | grishka wrote:
             | I mean some people are already getting nostalgic about CRTs
             | for being so analog. And it's been what, only ~15 years
             | since LCDs and other types of digital flat-panel displays
             | started becoming cheap and widespread?
        
               | agumonkey wrote:
               | I'm part of that group (I ever regretted breaking my
               | beloved mitsu diamondtron[0]) but still the mainstream is
               | massively about digital purity, beyond biological retina
               | sampling and displaying .. in that era good luck talking
               | about the "value" of imperfect media, it's like fighting
               | a tsunami to me.
               | 
               | [0] to cope, I scavenged a few portable TVs from the 90s
               | to toy with the small tubes.
        
         | nodejs_rulez_1 wrote:
         | On the other hand there are things like this:
         | 
         | https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/upperstory/spintronics-...
         | 
         | Now it will be up-to parents to decide whether they want to
         | bring up an iPhone consumer kid or more of a PC creative kid.
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | Side note. How is an iPhone not a "personal" computer?
        
             | TeMPOraL wrote:
             | It's not about being a _personal_ computer. An iPhone may
             | be personal, but it 's hardly a _computer_.
             | 
             | I mean, _technically_ it is, but then so is the microwave
             | timer controller.
             | 
             | In terms of user interaction, an iPhone does its best to be
             | an appliance, not a general-purpose computer. So do Android
             | smartphones - lest one thing it's an Apple problem, it's
             | not. It's a modern computing problem.
        
               | grishka wrote:
               | > So do Android smartphones
               | 
               | At least you get to run arbitrary software on them as a
               | standard feature. And on many, the bootloader is
               | unlockable, so you could root the thing and/or tinker
               | with the OS.
               | 
               | The modern computing problem isn't this particular thing,
               | it lies higher. It's presuming that the user is stupid
               | and can't possibly be trusted with figuring stuff out and
               | making their own informed decisions. Won't be surprised
               | if people who design software like this consider every
               | setting a liability.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | > _The modern computing problem isn 't this particular
               | thing, it lies higher. It's presuming that the user is
               | stupid and can't possibly be trusted with figuring stuff
               | out and making their own informed decisions._
               | 
               | I agree with that. It's pretty much an unquestioned axiom
               | in the industry. You can see it mentioned in almost every
               | article or book about writing software, doing UI design
               | or UX work. The user is stupid. They're incapable of
               | thinking for themselves, figuring things out, having
               | their own goals. They have to be carefully guided so they
               | follow the exact path the software prescribes for them,
               | and incentivized along the way with "engagement
               | patterns", lest they get bored mid way.
               | 
               | > _Won 't be surprised if people who design software like
               | this consider every setting a liability._
               | 
               | Which is funny, because the first thing every single
               | piece of software on this planet does, is disclaiming any
               | and all liability for anything.
               | 
               | So the kind of liability they feel, I believe, is just
               | that of getting bad press over some reviewers deciding
               | something is too confusing, leading to reduced sales.
        
               | matheusmoreira wrote:
               | > It's presuming that the user is stupid and can't
               | possibly be trusted with figuring stuff out and making
               | their own informed decisions.
               | 
               | It's even more malicious than that. The corporations and
               | governments are hostile towards users. They lock the
               | computer down so we can't do anything that harms business
               | and government interests. Can't copy or share files.
               | Can't use strong cryptography the government can't crack.
               | 
               | These people believe computers are too subversive to
               | allow the masses unrestricted access to them. They would
               | rather we have nothing but restricted appliances that
               | obey them instead of us. The computer doesn't serve us,
               | it serves them as a tool to control us.
        
             | dabeeeenster wrote:
             | Please stop
        
             | grishka wrote:
             | It's a general-purpose computer inside but it was
             | intentionally handicapped by Apple to be an appliance that
             | only does what Apple approves of.
        
             | matheusmoreira wrote:
             | The iPhone _is_ a personal device but it 's not a computer.
             | It merely has a computer inside it. What sets it apart from
             | a real computer is the fact it only does what manufacturer
             | designed it to do. They're the ones programming the
             | computer, not the users. So the iPhone is just a device
             | that does cool things. Like one of those nice electronic
             | watches with a ton of cool functions but you get to
             | download new features from Apple's store.
        
           | Philip-J-Fry wrote:
           | That is such an amazing idea. Wish I had kids so I could
           | learn with them!
        
           | mhb wrote:
           | Or "DIY Hand-cranked Music Box Wooden Box + Hole Puncher +
           | Paper Tapes": https://www.ebay.com/itm/182794446978
        
           | tarsinge wrote:
           | Tinkering with a computer is not the only real creativity,
           | you can also actually use it. GarageBand would have been a
           | dream when I was a child.
        
           | prideout wrote:
           | The Spintronics video mentions the simulation of resistors,
           | capacitors, batteries...but not logic gates. It doesn't seem
           | to teach the magic of boolean logic at all, which is a bit
           | disappointing. (but not as disappointing as the Fisher Price
           | music player!)
        
         | themdonuts wrote:
         | I got stuck on the 6 million dollar action figure part and
         | ignored all the rest afterwards. What's the story?
        
           | ZiiS wrote:
           | An action figure of the "six million dollar man" (from a tv
           | show). Though sadly I can't rule out a toy fetching that now
           | adays.
        
       | robbiet480 wrote:
       | Foone has noticed this submission and is not pleased
       | https://twitter.com/foone/status/1454524960488132614?s=21
        
         | JasonFruit wrote:
         | Foone does cool things but clearly has high expectations for
         | their own control of how crowds of people will discuss stuff
         | that is, after all, out in public. Foone should maybe try a
         | screened subscription-only paywall and see if that satisfies
         | them more.
        
           | scrollaway wrote:
           | I'm not sure what Foone is going on about. There isn't a
           | single comment about the twitter format here except for
           | someone linking to an unrolled version. It's just praise
           | about their tweets and content, and shitting on fisher price
           | for building a crappier product.
           | 
           | Actually makes for a nice change for once. On-topic
           | conversation!
        
       | fortran77 wrote:
       | Part of the value of the original was kids could see and feel how
       | it worked. That made it a fascinating toy. It's all been lost.
        
         | BadCookie wrote:
         | Exactly right. That's why I bought an "antique" one on eBay for
         | my young son a few years ago. I had zero desire for the new
         | garbage version. It was maybe twice as expensive, but 100%
         | worth it to me.
        
         | DaiPlusPlus wrote:
         | > kids could see and feel how it worked. That made it a
         | fascinating toy
         | 
         | I assume all of us here on HN are the type-of-person who as a
         | child would have been fascinated about how mechanical and
         | electromechanical toys and gizmos worked - and probably
         | disassembled the thing to our parents' chagrin and figured out
         | how it works (and hopefully put it back together correctly!)
         | and ended the day with a sense of satisfaction from learning
         | something new.
         | 
         | ...and then I'm remind myself that _we_ are not like everyone
         | else: I 'm still able to vividly remember the things I did with
         | my mechanical/electro toys to see and try to understand how
         | they worked, but that most of the other kids my age didn't:
         | their objective was simply to use the toy as entertainment or
         | make-believe-play or the like - not as an object of curiosity -
         | and they weren't particularly interested in any explanation I'd
         | have for them (it didn't help that I wouldn't have asked them
         | if they wanted to hear my explanation in the first place
         | though... heh)
         | 
         | So for us, this digital-fake of a classic toy is an insult to
         | our imagined younger-selves of the 21st century, but when I
         | think about this ultra-modern toy from the perspective of
         | someone just after something of solely nostalgia value - and a
         | modern-day kid uninterested now (and shall most-likely forever-
         | be uninterested) in how things work then indeed none of what
         | we're griping about here matters - in fact it's the opposite:
         | this 2010 remake is demonstrably tougher and more resilient to
         | damage and wear than the mechanical original despite being
         | superficially the same - given we're in the minority overall
         | (...I think?) then this new design is objectively better as far
         | as moral-utilitarianism is concerned.
         | 
         | ...and it's not like Fischer-Price is selling this remake as a
         | toy of interest to kids with a curiosity for things mechanical.
         | They're not being totally dishonest.
        
           | ummwhat wrote:
           | When I was a kid the "toy" to take apart was a disposable
           | camera. The sort you used to buy on vacation and then drop
           | off to have the film developed without getting the camera
           | back. I discovered after charging it that touching the
           | capicator gives a nice electrical shock. I spent a great deal
           | of effort teaching this painful lesson to anyone I could
           | trick into learning it.
           | 
           | The objects of curiosity don't need to be a toy, or even
           | meant for children. Anything that can be disassembled will be
           | disassembled by a curious child.
           | 
           | Too bad it's no longer possible for end users to disassemble
           | mobile phones.
        
           | Jtsummers wrote:
           | It's a tradeoff, though. The loss of explorability means that
           | kids no longer have (with these newer toys) the same
           | opportunity for exercising their curiosity that the older
           | toys permitted. My sister never took our toys apart and
           | reassembled them, that was all on me. With a toy like this
           | one I would have (and probably did, with whatever equivalent
           | I had) taken it apart and seen how the music box worked (the
           | metal tines, the bumps on the record corresponding to notes,
           | etc.). The new version removes that opportunity, taken or
           | not. That is a loss.
        
           | scrollaway wrote:
           | But play is supposed to be a learning tool. If a toy's only
           | value is "push a button for a predefined thing to happen",
           | there is no opportunity for exploration. Might as well give
           | the toddler an iphone.
           | 
           | I agree with you, "we" are probably not like most people. But
           | taking the opportunity to experiment away is such a huge
           | loss. Giving a kid the opportunity to learn on their own is
           | so important. It's not just the one toy, you need to give
           | them loads of different opportunities like these. They'll
           | pick up on some.
           | 
           | Maybe i never would have experimented with this particular
           | toy as a kid. For me, it was getting a screwdriver and taking
           | old electronics apart (and the challenge of putting them back
           | together and still having them work!) that sparked my
           | curiosity. Plenty of things did not, however... But the point
           | is, i was given opportunities.
        
           | johnchristopher wrote:
           | > I assume all of us here on HN are the type-of-person who as
           | a child would have been fascinated about how mechanical and
           | electromechanical toys and gizmos worked - and probably
           | disassembled the thing to our parents' chagrin and figured
           | out how it works (and hopefully put it back together
           | correctly!) and ended the day with a sense of satisfaction
           | from learning something new.
           | 
           | Yeah. But no, that's a stereotype.
           | 
           | I hated my mecano things, it was too hard to play with. I
           | enjoyed storytelling with my LEGOs much more, my creations
           | were just bare bones scaffoldings for the flesh my
           | imagination would put around it.
           | 
           | I still work in IT and tear stuff apart every day.
           | 
           | With that being said it still saddens me they are
           | digitalising full mechanical toys. It's surely rose-tinted
           | glasses but it looked so much cooler.
        
         | dangle1 wrote:
         | Yeah, this brought back an early memory of my sparkling new
         | brain examining the mechanism of the original version of this
         | toy with my eyes and fingers without any words to describe what
         | I was learning. Just some kind of sense of mastery that I
         | couldn't communicate, but made me feel more confident about my
         | understanding of the world.
         | 
         | It seems pretty cynical to market this in order to appeal to
         | people like me with memories like this, with a huge dimension
         | of the enrichment value stripped away.
        
         | handrous wrote:
         | Lots of great 70s and 80s toys that are still around are
         | terrible. Super soaker? A joke, premium prices and way worse
         | than squirt guns 1/4 the price, which are themselves not as
         | good as early Super Soakers. Tank's not even removable which
         | means it's basically not even the same sort of product at all--
         | I'm sure the gaskets added too much to the production cost.
         | Loopin' Louie? Motor's too weak, and it's lighter, so it
         | doesn't work as well. They even managed to make Hungry Hungry
         | Hippos suck. Rock 'em Sock 'em? Really bad compared to the
         | original (you can find the original at flea markets sometimes--
         | it's _so_ much better, this isn 't just nostalgia). The usual
         | approach seems to be to cut vital features, shrink everything
         | 10-30% (it's sometimes hard to tell if you don't have the
         | original to compare it to, but it's _really_ obvious when you
         | do), and make all the plastic paper thin.
         | 
         | I think it's part of most things that aren't computers getting
         | worse over the last few decades. Shit would be double the price
         | if they still "made it like they used to". Even fast-food pizza
         | --Pizza Hut's _in fact_ way worse than it was even in the mid
         | 90s (they 've had at least two major reformulations of the
         | sauce, for one thing, getting worse each time), but if you find
         | a different pizza place that makes pizza around 90s PH quality
         | it'll be 50+% more expensive.
         | 
         | But yeah, inflation's only low-single-digits percent a year.
         | LOL sure.
        
           | underwater wrote:
           | Our kids were gifted "Guess Who" (a game which is problematic
           | in a whole host of other ways). I was shocked that it was
           | thin plastic and cardboard. The while thing felt disposable.
           | 
           | I feel that this must be a strategy used on toys that were
           | previously popular. They're not going to return to being the
           | popular must-have item that people will pay a premium for,
           | but there is residual value in the marketing campaign from
           | the 80s. So the toy companies push the build quality as low
           | as they can and milk the last good will from the brand by
           | making it a cheap impulse purchase.
           | 
           | To your larger point, there are still high quality toys
           | around. You just avoid the big Toys R Us style stores and go
           | to an independent or smaller toy story. Plan Toys and Green
           | Toys stick out to me as two brands which felt consistently
           | high quality and were widely available.
        
           | mustacheemperor wrote:
           | From what I can tell pump to charge water guns like the
           | original super soaker simply don't exist anymore, only pump
           | to fire. I think you're right that the gaskets/hardware
           | necessary for the pressure tank add a lot of cost, and I
           | wonder if there's a liability factor as well. Nothing you can
           | buy today can fire with nearly the same power as a super
           | soaker since there's no charged pressure tank. I had kind of
           | assumed there'd be some small brand selling "classic" water
           | gun designs but a quick google looks like most people only
           | recommend vintage.
        
           | quesera wrote:
           | > But yeah, inflation's only low-single-digits percent a
           | year. LOL sure.
           | 
           | Compounded inflation/interest is pretty powerful.
           | 
           | 2% compounded over 25 years (to mark your "mid-90s"
           | reference) would be a 64% increase, which lines up with your
           | 50+% pretty directly.
           | 
           | Agreed that Pizza Hut sucks now. I sometimes wonder which has
           | changed -- the me, or the thing. Good to know that at least
           | with Pizza Hut, it's not all in my head.
           | 
           | My personal pet peeve is the plastic playing pieces of board
           | games. Formerly well-weighted and painted, now thin cheap and
           | with a bad sticker. How much can plastic playing pieces
           | actually cost?
           | 
           | I wonder if Monopoly still ships with cast metal pieces...
        
         | tyleo wrote:
         | I agree, I'd pay a little more for a mechanical version.
         | 
         | If this trend continues even wooden blocks will some day come
         | with batteries :p
        
           | johnsonap wrote:
           | and will also have bluetooth
        
           | handrous wrote:
           | I seem to recall looking into wooden blocks for my kids when
           | they were a little younger, and finding not that they need
           | batteries, but the new normal-tier wooden blocks are now
           | kinda shit--small, uneven finish and size consistency isn't
           | good, et c.--and you have to start looking into niche
           | "premium" toys to get good ones.
           | 
           | We got some of those cube ones with the letters and numbers
           | at one point, and they were noticeably smaller and worse-
           | finished than the ones I had as a kid in the 80s, which I'm
           | sure were just the _only_ blocks of that type that some cheap
           | local store had and were probably the same quality as _all_
           | such blocks on the market at the time, not something special.
           | The newer ones looked very similar in a photo, but were
           | missing lots of textures (kinda, you know, a big deal to
           | babies and early toddlers) and details that mine had, and the
           | paint chipped more easily (probably a thinner coat, I guess,
           | plus probably just lower-quality paint).
           | 
           | We bought our first kid a rolling walker/phone thing with
           | some other features--yeah, electronic crap, but at least this
           | one had a volume setting, unlike many modern ones that are
           | just fixed to "deafen your child" with no other options
           | unless you break out a soldering iron. By ~4 years later,
           | between seeing other people's version of the same thing--same
           | brand and all--they bought a couple years after ours, and
           | seeing newer version at the store when toy shopping, we'd
           | noticed that the "same" product, which looked nearly
           | identical, had had a couple revisions, each one making parts
           | that used to move or be interactive fixed & dormant, and
           | otherwise lowering the quality.
        
         | smegcicle wrote:
         | and nowadays you could 3dprint new records for it
        
           | Jtsummers wrote:
           | I have a music box that uses a paper tape, it was an extra as
           | I was making a gift for a family member and Thinkgeek (long
           | before the Gamestop acquisition) accidentally sent me two. It
           | was actually a lot of fun to make extra songs for it, the toy
           | becomes interactive for the player. Which is a much better
           | thing for kids than something that can only ever play 10
           | songs, and which they cannot alter in any meaningful sense.
        
       | ReactiveJelly wrote:
       | Re: vinyl records
       | 
       | Has anyone proven / disproven Benn Jordan's video about why vinyl
       | is basically poisonous?
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ2czFuIYmQ
       | 
       | I haven't watched it for a while but the summary is:
       | 
       | - Vinyl records outgas harmful things that you can detect with
       | air quality meters. (VOCs I think)
       | 
       | - You can't dispose of them because they can't be recycled and
       | aren't supposed to go in landfills. So buying new records from
       | new bands violates the "reduce, reuse, recycle" principle
       | 
       | "It's just that it's _so_ lame and uncool to shit on vinyl..."
       | 
       | "This is just my objective opinion based on a whole lotta
       | research... If you're an avid collector whose peepee hurts after
       | watching this video, understand that my peepee hurts a whole lot
       | more."
        
         | h2odragon wrote:
         | I will guess your average human emits more hazardous VOCs than
         | a vinyl record.
         | 
         | I'd put this down to "someone thinks something is cool and fun!
         | we have to show them how wrong they are!"
        
           | ReactiveJelly wrote:
           | > I will guess your average human emits more hazardous VOCs
           | than a vinyl record.
           | 
           | As I recall, when Benn did the test, putting the record back
           | in its sleeve caused the air quality to go back to normal.
           | 
           | So whatever VOCs he is emitting, I don't think his meter
           | picked them up.
           | 
           | > I'd put this down to "someone thinks something is cool and
           | fun! we have to show them how wrong they are!"
           | 
           | Re-check the part about "how much my peepee hurts". I really
           | want to like vinyls, but I'm never going to buy one if
           | they're basically Forever Chemicals that got grandfathered in
           | by being part of pop culture decades ago. And Benn says in
           | the video that he could stand to make a lot of money if he
           | sold out and had vinyls of his work manufactured.
        
             | crtasm wrote:
             | But was "normal" based on an earlier meter reading with him
             | in the room? Or a proven baseline that applies in general?
        
           | mStreamTeam wrote:
           | Have any evidence to back that claim up?
           | 
           | And even of its true, reducing VOCs still sounds like a
           | positive goal
        
           | nemo wrote:
           | I'd recommend you read up a more about vinyl - you really
           | aren't treating a very dangerous material seriously enough.
           | PVCs are highly toxic, and at this point there are many
           | regulations to ban their use in plumbing, consumer goods, and
           | especially toys because they are so poisonous. Vinyl records
           | are a hold-out. They leach high levels of phthalates into the
           | air quite quickly which are highly toxic, far, far more toxic
           | than the typical emissions of your average human.
           | 
           | http://www.safemarkets.org/toxic-chemicals-in-
           | products/pvc/v...
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | ashtonkem wrote:
             | Yes, but I'd be much more worried about vinyl flooring,
             | trim, windows, and shower curtains than records.
        
               | nemo wrote:
               | Wise to not have any of the stuff anywhere. The off-
               | gassing from records is nearly instantaneous and reaches
               | measurable levels where it's dangerous within minutes -
               | having the extra surface area for off-gassing from the
               | grooves makes it much worse. A vinyl collection is
               | certainly better than other vinyl things like you
               | mentioned since an album won't off-gas much in its
               | sleeve, but playing one will definitely do a bit of liver
               | damage if you're near it.
        
               | ashtonkem wrote:
               | I'm sure vinyl records off gas, but I'm extremely dubious
               | about the liver damage you propose. With all substances
               | the poison is in the dose; you'd need a huge vinyl
               | collection to match the amount of vinyl typical in a
               | typical home with a shower curtain and vinyl windows, let
               | alone one that uses vinyl flooring.
        
               | ricardobeat wrote:
               | > playing one will definitely do a bit of liver damage if
               | you're near it
               | 
               | That sounds a bit exaggerated. There is evidence that
               | _occupational exposure to PVC compounds_ causes liver
               | damage or cancer, and that's mostly regarding workers in
               | production lines. You'd have to be closely sniffing your
               | record collection for hours on end to get the same
               | effect.
               | 
               | If this was true you'd have entire generations from the
               | 19x0s suffering from liver failure, as vinyl was the only
               | media available, with billions of records sold.
        
         | vincentpants wrote:
         | Confirmed. Depending on pvc's point in it's lifecycle, it's
         | either offgassing hydrogen chloride which turns into
         | hydrochloric acid when inhaled, all the way to releasing dioxin
         | when incinerated, and dioxin is considered the most congeners.
         | You can get the same effect when burning your pcb. One of the
         | deadliest fires in US history was the MGM Grand fire in Las
         | Vegas and iirc all of the fatalities were due to the fumes from
         | the burning pvc carpet and none were heat related.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM_Grand_fire
        
         | actionoffice wrote:
         | Big ignore.
        
         | jolux wrote:
         | This guy was unable to replicate his result and casts some
         | aspersions on the accuracy of the metering technology, however
         | he did find lead residue on one record:
         | https://youtu.be/gx5B44YeRpY
        
         | code_duck wrote:
         | I'm not sure about records, but it is well established that
         | vinyl flooring emits various toxic compounds. Apparently it's
         | mostly other ingredients besides the PVC.
         | 
         | https://floortechie.com/is-vinyl-flooring-toxic/
         | 
         | Just search "vinyl off gassing".
         | 
         | Here's an EPA pdf purely about vinyl chloride:
         | https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files...
        
       | golemotron wrote:
       | That music box record player is a perfect metaphor for
       | distributed supply chains in global manufacturing. In fact, one
       | could say that it is a representation of them.
        
       | russellbeattie wrote:
       | why is this a twitter thread? why not a blog?
        
         | AndrewDucker wrote:
         | Because that's how the author chose to write it.
         | 
         | Because that's where the audience they write for is.
         | 
         | Because they prefer Twitter threads to blog posts.
         | 
         | Because they get more readers that way.
         | 
         | (And probably anyone here can come up with some more reasons
         | that might be true if they put their minds to it.)
         | 
         | But mostly, the format someone chooses to make this available
         | in is the least interesting thing about it.
        
       | jsrcout wrote:
       | > So yeah. The original one required you to crank it up to spin
       | the disc, because spinning the disc was vital to the operation of
       | the original music box.
       | 
       | > The modern "classic" one requires you to crank it up, because
       | it won't start playing until you've cranked it up.
       | 
       | Maybe I'm just cranky today. But this quote perfectly
       | encapsulates so much of what's wrong with a lot of modern
       | technology.
        
         | xyzal wrote:
         | cranking it up increases 'engagement', probably
        
         | FridayoLeary wrote:
         | the limits of a design should be when it actively makes an
         | object _less_ functional. Car designers in particular blithely
         | ignore this. This is another good example.
        
         | fragmede wrote:
         | Skeuomorphism is a time honored tradition, eg folders in a
         | filesystem. Users often find its use is annoying, but other
         | times it's a necessary analogy for users to make sense of the
         | UX.
        
           | bink wrote:
           | This isn't just an artistic decision though. The product
           | gives the impression that it's an actual functioning record
           | player, like the old one.
        
             | TeMPOraL wrote:
             | No. This toy "gives the impression that it's an actual
             | functioning record player", even though it isn't. The old
             | one _was an actual functioning record player_. Or at least
             | a cross between a record player and a music box. But the
             | point is: the old one was actually playing music off the
             | disks, the new one only pretends to do it.
        
           | cabalamat wrote:
           | This isn't skeumorphism, it's just fake.
        
             | rgarrett88 wrote:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeuomorph
             | 
             | >A skeuomorph (also spelled skiamorph, /'skju:@,mo:rf,
             | 'skju:oU-/)[1][2] is a derivative object that retains
             | ornamental design cues (attributes) from structures that
             | were necessary in the original. Examples include pottery
             | embellished with imitation rivets reminiscent of similar
             | pots made of metal and a software calendar that imitates
             | the appearance of binding on a paper desk calendar.
        
             | lostlogin wrote:
             | An adult fake design is the Linea Mini espresso machine by
             | La Marzocco. I'd like one, but having a fake brew paddle on
             | a machine in that price range makes me back away. The
             | paddle is just an on/off switch.
             | 
             | https://international.lamarzocco.com/en/machine/linea-mini/
        
             | kube-system wrote:
             | It is an intentionally skeuomorphic design, critical to its
             | entertainment value as a toy. A simple box with a play
             | button would not fulfill the same goals.
        
       | Bluecobra wrote:
       | The updated Fisher Price Tape Recorder got a similar treatment,
       | the original played real cassettes but the modern one does not.
       | 
       | https://www.walmart.com/ip/Fisher-Price-Classics-Play-Tape-R...
        
         | mcphage wrote:
         | With the original Fisher-Price cash register, the 3 different
         | denominations were of different sizes, so each only fit into
         | its own slot. With their modern remake, the 3 different
         | denominations are all the same size.
         | 
         | That's the thing about their remakes, all across the board--
         | they look similar to the originals, but lost their a lot of the
         | details and functionality that made them charming. As a
         | Buffalonian I still have a soft spot for Fisher-Price, but
         | these are just disappointing.
        
         | kps wrote:
         | Fisher-Price once made a toy camcorder that used audio
         | cassettes. A 90 minute tape held 11 minutes of video,
         | monochrome 120x90 at 15fps.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PXL2000
        
       | neom wrote:
       | Am I the only one who loves the meme that Foone hates being on
       | the front page and always ends up on the front page? :D
        
       | jaynetics wrote:
       | I'm not sure how common this is in other countries, but here in
       | Germany we have quite a few "water playgrounds". There are some
       | pumps in the sand, sometimes small aqueducts and the likes, so
       | during summer, the kids can play with water. The pumps used to be
       | real pumps. Now they are electronic. They have a sensor to detect
       | how fast the handle is moving and at a certain speed you'll hear
       | a clicking sound, a valve opens and the water starts flowing.
       | 
       | I think some children will realize how these things work. They
       | might start to find them dumb if they find out that the strenuous
       | repetitive movement is in fact unnecessary. At least to me it
       | feels like a dishonest contraption and I'd prefer if they simply
       | put a button on it.
        
       | drtz wrote:
       | I got one of these for my kids around 2014 and was also hugely
       | disappointed. I realized very quickly that it was just a gimmick
       | to lure the Gen-Xers and Millenials who remember these from their
       | childhood.
       | 
       | I, too, was disgusted that it took batteries but you still had to
       | wind the knob, but I was even more offended by the awful staticky
       | sound from the tiny speaker.
       | 
       | Like foone, I also got a kick out of playing with the switches
       | and seeing what happened when you held the disc stil, but I was
       | never curious enough to open it up. I'm glad I didn't, though --
       | I think the sight of an actual music box would have broken my
       | heart.
        
       | thunderbong wrote:
       | Better readability -
       | 
       | https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1454230585933631488.html
        
       | johnsonap wrote:
       | God I love foone
        
         | junon wrote:
         | And foone hates HN and wishes his tweets would stop being
         | posted here lol.
        
           | blamazon wrote:
           | Summary of stated justifications: [1]
           | 
           | * Foone likes to do tweet storms and not blogs and some
           | people on HN have a "Why isn't this a blog?" sentiment which
           | is bothersome to foone.
           | 
           | * HN scraping bots on twitter mention foone which is
           | bothersome to foone.
           | 
           | * HN community frequently assumes he/him for foone. Foone
           | goes by they/them. This does not seem to bother foone on its
           | own, but HN commenters correcting HN commenters about how
           | foone goes by they/them sometimes leads to grammatical
           | argument about using they as a singular pronoun which is
           | bothersome to foone.
           | 
           | * Generally, discourse beyond "whoops sorry!" about
           | he/him/they/them is bothersome to foone.
           | 
           | * Elements of HN discourse represent larger problems of male-
           | dominant sexism that are trenchant in technology, which are
           | bothersome to foone.
           | 
           | [1]
           | https://twitter.com/foone/status/1440375176604966924?lang=en
        
             | kelnos wrote:
             | On the plus side, at least right now as I write this (the
             | post has been up for 5 hours, with 96 comments), there is,
             | in this HN post:
             | 
             | * No mention of the Twitter thread being better as a blog
             | post, and someone has already posted a Thread Reader App
             | link with the thread unrolled.
             | 
             | * A single instance of someone getting corrected for
             | misgendering, but with no follow-ups or toxic discussion
             | around it.
             | 
             | So maybe things are getting better?
             | 
             | But really, though, I just kinda find foone's annoyance
             | about being posted on HN to be annoying in and of itself.
             | The bot @-mentions I agree are annoying (and I don't know
             | of a good solution; playing ban whack-a-mole every time a
             | new one pops up is lame to have to do), but the other bits
             | have a simple solution: don't read the HN comments. I know
             | sometimes it's hard to resist the temptation, but I
             | personally appreciate these foone threads getting posted
             | here (as I don't really use Twitter much, so I wouldn't
             | otherwise see them). And it's just a little weird to
             | criticize people for linking to something you posted on the
             | web, since linking is what the web is for.
        
         | polytely wrote:
         | Yes honestly one of the most entertaining follows on twitter
        
         | DaiPlusPlus wrote:
         | How does Foone spend so much time on all these "here's
         | something interesting I found, now it's a 12-hour-long deep-
         | dive into something I never thought I could care passionately
         | about" things and still have a job?
         | 
         | Turing's living the dream... (the family name has to be a
         | coincidence, right?)
        
           | post-it wrote:
           | Do they have a day job? I thought they lived off their
           | Patreon. They definitely changed their first and last name at
           | some point, I remember a Twitter thread mentioning it.
        
             | frosted-flakes wrote:
             | Is it multiple people writing the Twitter posts?
        
             | shdon wrote:
             | They're a Continuous Integrator at Backblaze, according to
             | their LinkedIn.
        
           | johnsonap wrote:
           | they use they, not he, but they have a lot of followers on
           | ko-fi! https://ko-fi.com/fooneturing
        
           | umvi wrote:
           | Does foone have a job? I know he has a Patreon.
        
             | ryan-c wrote:
             | If you know foone has a Patreon, I'm not sure how you're
             | aware they're not a "he"...
        
               | umvi wrote:
               | I know they have a Patreon because I saw it on their
               | wiki[0] which I read through after seeing their death
               | generator a few months ago. Their wiki didn't mention
               | their gender identity preferences, and I don't follow
               | their blog or twitter or anything, so I wasn't aware,
               | sorry...
               | 
               | [0] http://floppy.foone.org/w/Main_Page
        
       | varjag wrote:
       | If space aliens ever get this as an artefact they'll never make
       | sense out of it.
        
       | mhb wrote:
       | Not the same, but this "DIY Hand-cranked Music Box Wooden Box +
       | Hole Puncher + Paper Tapes" might appeal in a similar way:
       | https://www.ebay.com/itm/182794446978
        
       | teddyh wrote:
       | "This is a toy zombie."
       | 
       | -- https://twitter.com/wangtian/status/1454329529569218566
        
       | memeboop wrote:
       | I love the irony of the new toy containing an actual music box
       | inside that isnt used to play the music.
        
         | neilv wrote:
         | Perhaps whatever hapless engineer was tasked with desecrating
         | the Fisher Price toy that might have nudged their own early
         | cognitive development... retreated into a dark sense of humor
         | about it.
        
       | pmorici wrote:
       | The original Fisher-Price "Record Player" is really a kids
       | version of a Polyphon [0] a type of record like music player that
       | was popular in the late 1800's to early 1900's. You can see some
       | playing on YouTube [1]
       | 
       | I thought it would be interesting to 3D print additional records
       | for the thing. Was super disappointed when I bought one for our
       | daughter last year and found that they had changed it to a
       | digital music player that only uses the records for song
       | selection.
       | 
       | A lot of the modern day versions of the original Fisher-Price
       | toys don't hold up to the originals. For example on the xylophone
       | they replaced the Wood base with plastic and the thing sounds
       | like crap.
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphon
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk4zjQshq14
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soQLAvqnTOQ
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | These large polyphons sounds superbly full to me. full metal
         | not so compact disc :)
         | 
         | I mean really.. ave maria is a little magical
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu4FWixsUM8
         | 
         | gosh
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | If you want music toys for kids look to hohner
         | http://hohnerkids.com/. They make a line that are real musical
         | instruments. They tune their xylophone for example.
         | 
         | They are still cheap plastic, but the quality is good enough
         | for real music.
        
         | bink wrote:
         | It sucks how cheaply kid's toys are made these days, but there
         | are companies that stand out by making things that last. When
         | my kid was little we bought a lot of Melissa & Doug toys
         | because they were actually made of wood and would survive
         | multiple children.
        
       | Waterluvian wrote:
       | Mechanical toys can be "screwed with" a lot. Like experimenting
       | with a ton of "what if..."
       | 
       | Electronic toys generally don't give you much of this.
       | 
       | And I think this really represents a fundamental change in a lot
       | of aspects of life: there's a specific way to interact with
       | things, prescribed by the maker.
       | 
       | I absolutely loved the quiet weekends as a kid where I could
       | spend hours and hours making ridiculous contraptions by mixing
       | toys and a bit of tape and such.
        
       | kcplate wrote:
       | Someone out there thinks this is better.
        
         | diogenescynic wrote:
         | Probably just cheaper.
        
           | ginko wrote:
           | I wonder if this was originally planned to be more like the
           | original with songs mechanically encoded in the disks but
           | they either found the cheap microswitches in the tone arm to
           | not have the right reaction speed or they realized developing
           | the sound generation for the IC took too long/needed a more
           | powerful+expensive micro controller so they went with this
           | instead.
        
           | Someone1234 wrote:
           | More reliable too. The old music player was far more
           | resilient compared to a non-toy, but still suffered from
           | gunk/grime on both the records and pin.
        
             | sulam wrote:
             | Right, a fully mechanical version would have far higher
             | DPPM, and as a result likely not be profitable.
        
               | rrss wrote:
               | I don't understand how it could be made profitably 50
               | years ago but not today.
        
               | zokier wrote:
               | It's not a question of being profitable or not
               | profitable, but of being profitable or _more_ profitable.
               | Also the market situation probably is very different,
               | nowdays there is most likely more demand for cheaper toys
               | and more competitive pressure to keep prices down.
        
       | Yuioup wrote:
       | That's just sickening. I'm disgusted to my core.
        
       | ineedasername wrote:
       | It's not that I'm nostalgic for analog, I just don't like the new
       | version because it's basically a fraud. Presenting itself as
       | analog when really it's just a skeuomorphic presentation of a
       | cheap digital music player.
        
       | allenrb wrote:
       | Man, this makes my day. I was born during the original production
       | run and, of course, had one of these. Lovely, fun little toy. So
       | when our first child was born and some kind family member bought
       | her one, it put a big smile on my face...
       | 
       | ...until I looked closer! Fraud! Deception! And saddest of all, I
       | tried the same thing foone did, knowing that the unused binary
       | codes (maybe not 0000 but _surely_ the other five) were surely
       | hiding a few extra songs. But no, complete and total
       | disappointment. Par for the course.
       | 
       | This thing has survived two young daughters now, but it is
       | utterly devoid of soul.
        
         | t0mas88 wrote:
         | They probably skip 0000, 1111 and all single bit ones because
         | those are the most likely codes you get if you press the
         | buttons with a finger?
        
       | gjsman-1000 wrote:
       | My family has had one of these for a few years. I remember
       | studying it and immediately realizing there was no way the discs
       | had any data, and sure enough I felt the pins under the head and
       | could make it play different songs by pushing them in
       | differently.
       | 
       | As for the dial, I remember thinking it felt so music-box-like,
       | but I had no idea it was an actual music box!!
       | 
       | Alas, I never experienced the mechanical version. Such a shame.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | Which is amusing because the music box is silenced and only
         | sued for regulating the spin.
         | 
         | I wonder if the original revamp had planned to have it just be
         | a wind up music box and only play one song.
        
           | Jtsummers wrote:
           | My guess is that the toy in the Twitter thread was the result
           | of a kind of refactor. If you find a recording of the
           | original it has a traditional music box inside which actually
           | plays the songs (you can hear the tinny sound of the metal
           | tines). So they probably took the original, figured out how
           | it worked, replaced the audio generation with speakers and
           | the microcontroller and changed the read head. Since the
           | newer ones apparently use a switch and no spring, that was an
           | intermediate step to the current incarnation.
           | 
           | The first version was an electronic imitation (complete with
           | winding) of the original. Once the winding was rendered
           | unnecessary, you get the current version without that
           | imitation and it loses the tactile component.
        
             | wolfgang42 wrote:
             | The original didn't have a music box in the base; there was
             | a spring motor to turn the record, but the actual music-box
             | part was in the head (running along the record, which had
             | detents in the plastic to pull the tines for the
             | notes)--this is why you could get different songs by
             | changing the disc.
             | 
             | This music box in the base of the new model is probably
             | simply the cheapest way to get a spring motor for the
             | turntable these days, rather than custom-manufacturing one
             | that matches the original.
        
       | euroderf wrote:
       | Back in the 60s we had an actual cheap-ass record player for 78s,
       | and the 78s were thick - very thick - like more than an eighth of
       | an inch thick. But these kids' "record players" nowadays? Naaah.
       | A mere shadow. No actual appreciation of retro technology
       | required - or wanted.
        
         | mulmen wrote:
         | Are you talking about the toy in the thread or actual
         | turntables?
        
       | krallja wrote:
       | On sight, I recognize Fur Elise on the cylinder.
        
       | codesuki wrote:
       | This seems to be a theme. Toy quality going down. There was a
       | tape recorder with mic from fisher price. You could use the mic
       | to record on the tape and keep it around. I thought to buy it for
       | my kids because I had good memories of it, but guess what. They
       | replaced the tape with tiny memory that you have to overwrite all
       | the time. If they at least would have supported some removable
       | memory.
        
         | TeMPOraL wrote:
         | > _They replaced the tape with tiny memory that you have to
         | overwrite all the time._
         | 
         | Until that point I fully expected you to say that they replaced
         | the tape with _storage on a cloud account_. I bet this will
         | happen one day. So many toys are already trying to suck on kids
         | ' data and hook up the parents to cloud services (see e.g. toys
         | that feature "extra experiences" that you access by pointing
         | your smartphone camera at them, and looking through the toy
         | maker's app).
        
       | rrss wrote:
       | in case others are interested, I was curious about the original
       | and found a good description the mechanism of the original in the
       | patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US3710668A/en.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-10-30 23:00 UTC)