[HN Gopher] Declining quality of consumer-grade products - 2009 ... ___________________________________________________________________ Declining quality of consumer-grade products - 2009 fridge compressor autopsy Author : userbinator Score : 142 points Date : 2022-08-14 21:09 UTC (1 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.automaticwasher.org) (TXT) w3m dump (www.automaticwasher.org) | f38zf5vdt wrote: | Hugged to death, go here. | | https://archive.ph/hOrqv | slowmovintarget wrote: | From the notes: "These marginal design choices are not the only | way to get an efficient unit, since the fridge compressors from | the 1940's and 1950's era were very efficient, while having | consistently longer lives. This failed unit is purely an example | of doing just enough to get by until it is someone else's | problem." | | I've been seeing this as a common issue throughout most of the | household appliances we've tried to buy in the last ten years. | They just don't last. | PontifexMinimus wrote: | > I've been seeing this as a common issue throughout most of | the household appliances we've tried to buy in the last ten | years. They just don't last. | | I've had the same experience. E.g. I bought a kettle 2 years | ago and it lasted for 6 months. Previous kettles have lasted | many years (as they should). | sydd wrote: | Yep, some are so shitty that the whole product category becomes | garbage. We went on an adventure with blenders: | | 1. We bought a Bosch hand blender (maxomixx) because it looked | sturdy and was priced near the top at the mall -- thought that | the brand and the price tag would guarantee that it would last. | It broke after 8 months, turns out that the coupling between | the mixer and the body is made of plastic that wore off. I | called the Bosch service hotline, they told me that the whole | body is one "part" that I can buy for ~80% of the original | price. | | 2. Went back to the mall looking for one with metal coupling, | turns out there is NONE. All of them are garbage with the same | fault point. But luckily there is a wide selection of standing | blenders, where some of them had much more massively looking, | metal gears. Bought one from Electrolux. It broke after 3 | months, this time the bearing on the bottom of the blender cup | started leaking the grease into our food... | | 3. Gave up trying to get a blender from the mall, bought a | Vitamix for 7x the price, which we're happy with for the last 3 | years. | | Yes, there is plenty of planned obsolence out there, and one of | the greenest things you can do is buy premium stuff that will | last you a lifetime (if you can afford it :/ ) | jibe wrote: | _planned obsolence out there_ | | I don't think it is planned obsolescence, it is just a race | to the bottom on price. At $30, an immersion blender can't | have metal gears. Most people value cheapness more than | quality, so we get cheap junky products. Nylon gears are a | travesty, but most people prefer replacing crap to paying 7x | for the Vitamix. | CoastalCoder wrote: | This isn't true of me. | | I value quality and price. Unfortunately, while price is | clearly stated, poor quality is often hidden. | ClumsyPilot wrote: | thats fine, but then why do I get the same problems when i | pay $200? | ygra wrote: | Interestingly, the Bosch food processor we have has a plastic | coupling between the motor and the meat grinder attachment on | purpose, so if anything gets stuck, it's a 5 EUR plastic part | that's broken, instead of a more expensive and less | accessible one. So a plastic coupling alone doesn't sound | _that_ alarming in general. | s0rce wrote: | I think Kitchenaid's have that too, I remember repairing | one years ago with my dad. | azza2110 wrote: | I'd happily pay 5x the price of the cheapest product | available, if I knew I was getting a higher quality product | with a longer lifetime. | | However, I can never tell if this 5x premium actually gets me | a better core product, or just gets me better branding, | advertising, aesthetics, and/or superfluous features. | | So I usually just buy the cheapest and hope for the best. | cudgy wrote: | Get a Vitamix. 5x the price and seems to last forever. In | fact, there are even very old (decades old) used Vitamix's | on eBay that are still running and usually just need a new | canister. | rlaabs wrote: | Modern Vitamix benders (roughly within the last 8 years) | have the same declining quality issues. | | Newer models are typically much lighter. This means they | now have far less internal material to reduce noise. I | can't use mine without ear protection since it's about | chainsaw level of noise. The reduced weight means I also | need to hold onto it during use otherwise it will vibrate | itself off the counter. | | The company seems to be most interested in selling | smoothie recipe subscriptions for their blender companion | phone app. Aside from subscription selling the app is | pretty much useless -- who wants a phone app to remotely | control a blender? | xahrepap wrote: | For Christmas we replaced my moms vitamix. She had her | last one for well over 20 years. | | We've had ours for 8 years and it works like new and | doesn't smell like the motor is burning out like so many | cheap blenders do. | hansvm wrote: | I can second this motion. I've used a lot of blender-like | products of various advertised levels of quality, and | Vitamix is the only thing I've seen that can take massive | levels of abuse for ages. | Ma8ee wrote: | But that only says anything about the units that were | sold decades ago. It's very common that quality brands | with very good reputation are bought by some investors, | and then they start selling the same crap as everyone | else, but to the premium price that their brand and | reputation allow them to. And it works surprisingly long | before the new crap they sell destroys their reputation. | (I know nothing about Vitamix, they may still be great.) | ygra wrote: | In Germany there's an independent organisation, Stiftung | Warentest [-4], that anonymously buys various products in | stores and tests them quite rigorously. Some may say | perhaps a bit too well (including things like the manual, | how easy it is to set up a large appliance, or whether | toxic chemicals are used in parts that are handled), but | overall they seem to do a very good job. Testing and | scoring methodology is published as well. I trust them a | lot more than Amazon or YouTube reviews or some random blog | that got the product sent by its manufacturer. | | [-4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiftung_Warentest - the | article also has a few pointers to international, similar | organisations near the bottom. | floydnoel wrote: | Thanks for sharing, this is great information. I | definitely think that independent testing organizations | are important for quality so it's always great to hear of | more of them | bombcar wrote: | For food-service you can often find commercial-grade stuff | which still has some durability to it - but it will NOT have | things like "be quiet" or "small portion size" or "cheap" | usually. | seb1204 wrote: | Commercial range of devices often are better as they need to | endure much more uses. | ClumsyPilot wrote: | Commercial grade devices are often not suitable for home | use - for example commercial dishwashers are a totally | different beast, their cycles are like 10 minutes and they | are meant for disinfection nore than cleaning. They need | frequent maintenance, dont come with a pump, dont tolerate | long periods of non use, etc. | 14 wrote: | Same issue with a Dremel. Stopped spinning so opened it up | and found it had a plastic coupler. Junk. Luckily I was able | to find a 3d file and print a new coupler with my printer. | kevin_thibedeau wrote: | I had a higher end Dremel that would intermittently die | because the brushes got stuck in their channels once the | motor warmed up. I was so happy when the speed controller | died and I replaced that garbage with a $20 Menard's unit | that's been bulletproof. | Gordonjcp wrote: | > I called the Bosch service hotline, they told me that the | whole body is one "part" that I can buy for ~80% of the | original price. | | It's eight months old. They *have* to replace it under | warranty. | KennyBlanken wrote: | To save everyone a lot of time: he finds that a sintered bronze | bearing has worn and allowed metal-on-metal contact elsewhere | in the unit. He theorizes it's the oil, which he demonstrates | is very thin at room temperature. Which is meaningless - film | strength doesn't have to be high if there isn't high pressure | between sliding surfaces. | | The claim that fridges from the 40s and 50s were very efficient | is nonsense. Even a 10-20 year old fridge is very inefficient | compared to a modern fridge. It's as easy as looking at energy | star ratings. | | > When it becomes a problem, it goes to the dump where all the | foamed-together plastic parts will not be feasible to separate | nor recycle. | | It's never been economical / feasible to manually take apart an | appliance for recycling. They're shredded and the plastic/metal | chunks separated mechanically for the raw materials. | userbinator wrote: | _Even a 10-20 year old fridge is very inefficient compared to | a modern fridge. It 's as easy as looking at energy star | ratings._ | | Do you think the manufacturers aren't gaming those ratings | either? | | The energy efficiency of fridges over time has definitely not | been monotonic either. The ones that use the most were the | late 60s-80s models that sacrificed insulation thickness for | more interior volume. | cudgy wrote: | Old refrigerators may not be as efficient, but they were | built better internally and last longer. The savings from an | efficient refrigerator that only lasts a few years is | meaningless. | inferiorhuman wrote: | You'd have to stick an ammeter on it, but I bet a 50s fridge | is pretty efficient because they are manual defrost only. | Most modern full-size fridges are auto defrost - essentially | they suck down electricity to heat up the cooling system. The | efficiency gains over a couple decades ago are due to moving | from fixed, mechanical timers to computer controlled adaptive | defrosters. | userbinator wrote: | They are designed to die just slightly past the warranty, so | they can sell you another. Of course, the statistics means that | quite a few units won't even last until then. | | Before manufacturing tolerances were as tight, they'd error on | the side of caution and overbuild, resulting in a wider MTBF | curve. There were both many early failures as well as ones | which far exceeded their expected life. Now, the standard | deviation is much smaller so the end-of-life has become more | well-defined both at the cost of nothing much lasting longer | nor shorter than expected. | markus_zhang wrote: | So I guess the best strategy is to use them as much as | possible and make sure they break in the first year... | [deleted] | bombcar wrote: | There's a small subset that avoid it - but the only one I know | of is the Speed Queen machines that are identical to their | commercial offerings - and have remained basically the same for | decades. | | One way to gauge it is see how available repair parts are (all | systems eventually wear out) and what the costs look like. | geoffeg wrote: | The quality and warranty are the primary reasons I bought a | Speed Queen washer and dryer a few years ago. Most reviews | say the washer isn't the best at actually cleaning clothes | but 99% of the time I don't need to remove stains or dirt, I | just need to wash clothes from daily use. In addition to the | reliability I really like the controls. Nothing fancy, very | easy and obvious with a 7-segment LED display that will | likely last forever. | jackmott wrote: | Could it be because the information age causes companies to | compete on price much more aggressively? You can't easily prove | that your fridge really will last longer, but easy to price the | price is low. | Skunkleton wrote: | Sounds right to me. When you look at markets where | reliability is important, you see appliances that are the | same. You can get good quality commercial washing machines. | moooo99 wrote: | > You can't easily prove that your fridge really will last | longer, but easy to price the price is low. | | I'm not so sure about that. In my experience people tend to | be less price sensitive with household appliances (big one | time purchases that are supposed to last long) than they are | with other more expensive items. Most people I know tend to | be lifelong customers if they have good experiences with a | specific brand and are very willing to share that brand as a | recommendation. | | The problem is, those good experiences don't seem to hold | true anymore. Price hasn't been a good indicator for product | quality and life expectancy for a while. I've seen this first | hand with my family. My parents were very willing to spend | significant amounts on stuff like dishwashers, fridges, or | washing machines. Despite sticking to the brands they had | good experiences with, the product lifetime decreased with | every new product purchase. It has come to the point that | they don't care for the brand they used to trust, they are | just buying the stuff thats cheap and checks all the boxes. | | These companies seem to have traded high customer loyalty | (and possibly a very efficient organic marketing channel) for | more frequent sales but higher price competition. I have no | insights into those companies, but I'm not sure if that was | an intelligent long term play. | bombcar wrote: | It's _worse_ now - the cheaper product often lasts longer | (as it 's simpler) - I have a fridge/freezer thing that has | basically no controls and no computers, and it chugs along. | | Newer refridgerators with fancy water faucets and computers | and locks have failed in the time I've had it. | | Had a washer blow out on a computer control board; $750 for | the board. | | A similar washer blew out on the dial, $35 for the dial. | cudgy wrote: | Similar story with old Honda's. Simple cars that just | worked with few problems, but they were simple cars with | few electrical motors and digital features. Automatic, | heated, air conditioned seats? No. Automatic climate | control? No. Speed adjusted suspension? No. Speed | adjusted stereo volume? No. Etc. | | However, some manufacturers like Saab actually delivered | all this with excellent reliability only to be rejected | by the US market and driven into the ground by General | Motors. What is a quality manufacturer to do? | oezi wrote: | The manufacturers are all gaming the system by releasing new | models so quickly (and in so many varieties) that any design | flaw of a model cannot be used to make a purchasing decision | because the comparable old devices are no longer available. | npteljes wrote: | 100%. Information asymmetry, and also the glut of options | make informed consumer decisions much harder than they need | to be. | bombcar wrote: | Or there is one or two manufacturers for all the various | brands. | | "Whirlpool brands include Whirlpool, Maytag, KitchenAid, | Jenn-Air, Amana, Magic Chef, Admiral, Norge, Roper, and | others. See all items in Dishwasher Dishrack. Whirlpool | also makes various appliance models for Sears / Kenmore." | | And once you start looking up part numbers you realize it | goes even further. | vidarh wrote: | Could be. | | E.g. the majority of consumer grade ice machines on Amazon | (at least in the UK) uses a mechanism that is near identical. | This extends to mostly copying a design flaw: Most of them a | compartment used to immerse cooled metal rods in water, which | then rotates out of the way to let the ice cubes fall into | the ice compartment when done. Most of these are made out of | plastic, with a motor rotating only one side. Problem is when | it's stopped mechanically by simply hitting the end of the | range of motion, which means the motor effectively ends up | trying to twist the compartment. This works fine for casual | use - the plastics holds for a while. But use it enough, and | you get cracks developing. It's trivial to fix - some of the | designs have an optical diode to stop rotation in one | direction, but weirdly not in the other, and doing that in | both directions would solve it | | But I'm thinking that apart from not just coming up in | testing (it takes _a lot_ of cycles before it breaks), a lot | of these problems spread because of cost cutting in the | _product development_ phase. It 's a pretty obvious flaw if | you observe the above mechanisms, and while you can cut a few | cents of the bill of materials, without extensive testing you | won't know for sure that it won't fail within the warranty | window (they _do_ if you use them as heavily as I use mine) | and it doesn 't take a very high failure rate to make an | extra optical diode and wiring worth it. If people did | product dev from scratch you'd expect at least some of them | to decide it'd be worth it, but almost all of these are | clearly just blindly copied designs (I'm sure multiple models | must also be manufactured on spec by the same manufacturer). | | As a result there's little real competition, and few | customers will be aware there are better alternatives, | especially because it takes quite a bit of wear and tear and | so most people don't shop for these types of products often | enough to realistically compare, and as you point out it's | hard to prove (and takes a _long_ time to develop a | reputation). | willis936 wrote: | I have the internet at my fingertips. I _know_ a | thermostatically controlled toaster is feasible to make into | a cheap product because it existed in the 1960s and we now | have transistors. Every single toaster is exactly the same | with cosmetic differences. They 're priced from $10 to $500 | with no distinguishing features in the first $200. | | The market is not working, we just have the tools to realize | how badly it's broken. | AmericanChopper wrote: | The market works fine. For any category of good you can | think of there will be producers that make a high quality | version of it. Consumers who care about that quality | (according to however you're measuring it) will make their | decisions accordingly. Consumers who reveal a preference | for caring less about that quality will make decisions | based on other criteria. | | If your complaint is that this requires effort from the | consumer, then that's not something any market could fix. | The consumer will always have to consider what their | preferences are and how the offerings in the market align | with them, if the want to end up purchasing goods/services | that align with their preferences. | npteljes wrote: | No it's doesn't work "fine". One of the failings is the | artificial information asymmetry imposed by the | companies' constant churn of products. By the time we get | some non-seo actual reviews of the model A1000, it's out | of stock and you can only buy A1000b and A2000, both made | from different components. The market _can 't_ work as | intended under these circumstances, because there's no | way for the consumer to make an informed decision. | | Consumers signal their preference for quality all the | time. By buying the pricier stuff. But sometimes, | somehow, there's no option anymore to buy X stuff - try | buying a desktop CPU without Intel ME or AMD PSP for | example. They just put it in every one of the CPUs at one | point and that was that. People are not going to not buy | newer CPUs. | jbay808 wrote: | > For any category of good you can think of there will be | producers that make a high quality version of it. | Consumers who care about that quality (according to | however you're measuring it) will make their decisions | accordingly. | | I've been a consumer my whole life, and I still struggle | to "make my decisions accordingly" because it's so | difficult to find trustworthy information about quality, | especially the qualities that matter to me. It can take | an exhaustingly long time to gather this information, | there are no shortcuts, and price and quality are often | only loosely correlated. | | Worse, after putting in the effort, I frequently find | that those high-quality products and their makers | disappear from the market, being outcompeted by junk. | tialaramex wrote: | Yeah, no. | | Nobody makes high quality cassette tape mechanisms. It | doesn't make sense to make ten of a custom cassette tape | mechanism, only at least tens of thousands, so, they | don't. But the market for thousands of these mechanisms | is for the _cheapest possible_ not good quality. So you | simply can 't buy good quality. | | It was possible in the 1980s, at great expense, for the | humble cassette tape to sound pretty good, the Nakamichi | Dragon is the most famous high end tape deck. | | But you can't do that today. There are a handful of | Chinese manufacturers, spitting out variations on the | same basic cheapest possible "eh, it's good enough" | mechanism and that's the entire market. | est31 wrote: | The complaint is that one could manufacture those more | expensive high quality products at a larger quantity and, | through scaling effects, one would achieve a lower price, | which would make them accessible to larger segments of | the market. I suppose that would be the market "working". | Instead you have manufacturers churning out tons of cheap | shit that breaks quickly. I guess most customers don't | know how quickly different household appliances break, so | they also can't compare that together with price. They | have to assume that the more expensive appliances are | also higher quality, but how can you judge that as a non- | expert? | | Household appliances are textbook examples of adoption | s-curves, and in different phases, different rules apply | for the market. Especially in the last phase of the | s-curve, those manufacturers are hurt the most which | build lasting products, because their own past customers, | usually the best source for new purchases from their | brand, don't buy from them any more because the need is | still met by the still working product. So they either go | bankrupt or get bought by one of the manufacturers that | put in planned obsolescence and got tons of money from | that, or they change their strategy before that happens. | AmericanChopper wrote: | > The complaint is that one could manufacture those more | expensive high quality products at a larger quantity and, | through scaling effects, one would achieve a lower price, | which would make them accessible to larger segments of | the market. | | That complaint is immature and entirely self-interested. | It's almost always beneficial (except when there's | production shortages) to have a preference that is shared | by large segments of the market. It's not the systems | fault if few people share your preferences. | yojo wrote: | FWIW I love this Panasonic toaster, which is some | substantially different toaster tech: | https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-NB-G110P-FlashXpress- | Infrar... | | No thermostatic control, but the defaults are fine for my | uses. | | Currently on year 10. The power button got a little finicky | so I have to wedge it with a piece of cardboard to make | contact, but otherwise as good as the day I bought it. | tuatoru wrote: | > I know a thermostatically controlled toaster is feasible | to make into a cheap product because it existed in the | 1960s | | Having bought a toaster and electric kettle recently, I | completely agree with your main point: buy the cheapest one | you can bear to look at, because they're all the same in | the essentials. | | But this anecdote about your aside might be diverting. One | of my earliest extended memories (in the 1960s) is watching | my dad repair our toaster. winding new resistance wire | around the mica central divider. (The toaster was a manual | model with flip-open sides, toasting one side of the bread | at a time.) | | I don't think automatic toasters were all that cheap in the | 1960s. Not everywhere, anyway, if repair of a manual | toaster was worthwhile to do. | jiggawatts wrote: | This video makes this point very well: | https://youtu.be/1OfxlSG6q5Y | nonrandomstring wrote: | > The market is not working, we just have the tools to | realize how badly it's broken. | | "The market" is not a single thing. It's an idea(ology) | from economics, and a cultural mythology, that vaguely | intersect at some point. | | We all think we know what "The Market" is, supply, demand, | competition and so on. It's existence and operation | underwrites many a political argument. | | Then there is the reality: | | Walk in to a supermarket and "choose" from 20 different | brands of tinned vegetable, grown in the same region, | processed in a handful of factories ultimately owned by the | same parent company. | | "Own" a movie, on a device that you don't actually control | in any way, that you were effectively forced to purchase, | with money you don't have. | | And so on.... | | So, in respectful mockery of Thatcher I say "There's no | such thing as The Market" - not because I don't believe in | the values of property, choice, competition, innovation.... | but because we don't have these, and haven't for some time. | The myth of "The Market" lives on the place of early (real) | capitalism as we head toward "consumer communism". | Gordonjcp wrote: | > respectful mockery of Thatcher | | There is no need to do anything "respectfully" of | Thatcher. She should have been hanged. | | I wouldn't piss on her grave for fear the warmth would | comfort her. | mbesto wrote: | > They just don't last. | | Two words: planned obsolescence. | nly wrote: | It's very similar phenomenon to shrinkflation. Instead of | getting more expensive, items are just getting lower quality | RichardCNormos wrote: | People value low prices more than they value longevity. | ClumsyPilot wrote: | this is just your opinion. | | People have no way to know longevity of the product they are | buying | cudgy wrote: | This is the root of the problem. Quality machinery costs more | and most people think they are getting a good deal when they | buy junk at cheap prices. | | However, sometimes you get lucky buying cheap stuff that | lasts and that is the experience we like to remember and try | to repeat. | randallsquared wrote: | It's the root of the general problem, but as noted | elsewhere by another commenter, paying a lot more doesn't | actually provide much signal that the product isn't junk. | goodpoint wrote: | Planned obsolescence went so far that often appliances has a | higher TCO than 10 years ago. | | The cheap ones by lasting very little. The reliable ones by | being very expensive. | swayvil wrote: | If the quality of things goes down. And your wealth remains | consistently such that you can just afford to pay your bills | (that is, keep yourself supplied with all the necessary things). | Then poverty is happening. And it is being masked. | | Food and shitty food are both called food but they are not the | same thing. Their sameness is a trick of language. | replygirl wrote: | pipe and representation of pipe are both called pipe but they | are not the same thing. their sameness is a trick of language | nimbius wrote: | sounds like a lack of proper QC and insufficient or the wrong | grade of oil was added...but, home compressors are this weird | sealed monstrosity that can never be properly serviced without a | byzantine amount of hacky gizmos anyhow so... | | -\\_ (tsu) _/- | jjcm wrote: | The server seems to be having some issues. Here's the video the | article discusses: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpnnLQNgUiQ | matwood wrote: | I recently replaced a basic washer and dryer that had lasted 20 | years. I went to buy new ones and asked the person for basic | models that would last 20 years again. He laughed and said | nothing he sold would last that long anymore. I'm glad he was | honest, but it made me sad. | inferiorhuman wrote: | As I'm in the middle of replacing a one-year-old LG fridge I've | been doing a bit of reading. Apparently rotary compressors like | this require exceptionally precise tolerances to achieve any | manner of reliability. | | Thirteen years doesn't strike me as particularly bad. Not great, | but not bad. That 80-year-old fridge the repair shop guy is | bragging about is almost certainly not an auto defrost unit. So, | sure, it's probably on close to a modern fridge in power | consumption but the tradeoff is you'll have to scrape ice out of | it periodically. | | https://hbr.org/1989/03/cold-competition-ge-wages-the-refrig... | bombcar wrote: | Auto-defrost is nice for the first X years, until it starts to | ... not defrost as much or as well. Sometimes the simpler ones | are nicer, even if they require a bit more thought/work to use. | inferiorhuman wrote: | Most full sized residential fridges are auto defrost these | days. I think it's been that way since the 80s or so. | | I've a 2003 build Whirlpool fridge that's been just fine. In | that era the defrost logic is usually mechanical and if/when | the defrost timer fails it's a $30 part that's fairly easy to | replace. | | The LG that I just junked uses electronics to control the | defrosting. That gets expensive to fix but that's also not | what failed in that piece of crap. | kube-system wrote: | It was a premium product at the time and it was priced | accordingly. Only 85% of Americans could afford one at that time. | Appliances today are dirt cheap for a reason. | | The reasons everyone has a fridge today isn't because everyone is | rich, it's because fridges are cheap. | TaylorAlexander wrote: | It would be pretty cool if we made decisions that led both to | better pay for most Americans and for higher quality projects. | We've destroyed the labor movement so most workers have no | bargaining power. Real wages have barely risen since 1980, | despite huge gains in productivity. Then in order to make | products cheap enough for impoverished workers to afford, we | cut every corner we can. | est31 wrote: | It's not a "too bad we can't make it more durable because that | would increase the parts cost" situation, at least not solely. | It's also a "how can we make this product break quickly and | make it badly repairable so that you have to buy a new one" | situation, aka planned obsolescence. | kube-system wrote: | In monopolistic industries, this happens. But in other | consumer markets, value manufacturing _still_ win, because of | significant information disparities and /or consumer | preferences. | | If your competition makes a shitty fridge for $1000 with | bearing that will fail at 15 years on average, and you make | the exact same thing with bearings that will last 30 years | for $1010, most people will look at the exterior, say "these | look the same", and buy the competitors model. | | And you can advertise that all you want, and next week your | competition will put $3 of extra steel in the door handle to | make it feel more solid than yours and write the word | "professional" on the door. Now your product looks like a bad | deal. | | Now you might say that people are making bad decisions. But | are they really? Most Americans don't keep their house for 30 | years, so why do they care if the fridge fails before then? | It's someone else's problem. | | This is why market positioning is a complicated discipline. | It isn't just "make a good thing for a good price" | kingTug wrote: | What if I'm rich and just want reliable appliances? It's a wild | goose chase. | canadaduane wrote: | I've been using looria.com lately, and it seems to be | tracking a pretty good "signal" using Reddit and other | sources of consumer feedback that are currently more reliable | than Amazon ratings. | kube-system wrote: | Premium/commercial brands exist. | hardolaf wrote: | Heck even without going "premium", you can pretty much just | buy LG or low-end Bosch models of most things and be fine. | But if you buy Samsung, you might as well budget for a | replacement ASAP. | kube-system wrote: | Agreed. Bought all new appliances 10 years ago, and the | only ones that have given me trouble have been Samsungs. | tekno45 wrote: | i wonder if samsung products in Korea are better? How did | they get so big outside of phones? | seb1204 wrote: | Continuing gp train of thought you would need to search for a | supplier that 85% of people can't afford anymore. | hollywood_court wrote: | We have completely remodeled both the exterior and interior of | our last 70's home. But we haven't replaced a single appliance. I | have made far too much money repairing newer appliances for | clients and friends. | nabakin wrote: | Looks like the website is down. Here. | | https://archive.ph/hOrqv | | https://youtube.com/watch?v=DpnnLQNgUiQ | | Maybe we can switch links? @dang | cwillu wrote: | cgi-bin: haven't seen you in a long time. | legitster wrote: | For newer appliances, I've weirdly found that spending _less_ | money is key to achieving longevity. | | Smaller, fewer features, less moving parts. Avoid gimmicky | features that your grandparents never needed. | | I'm a real cheapskate when it comes to appliances and have yet to | have one crap out on me. | yojo wrote: | PCBs, sensors, and switches seem to cover most failure modes of | modern appliances. I try to minimize the number of each in | every purchase. | | My favorite recent buy was a Victory range hood with mechanical | switches and no PCB. More like this please. | bombcar wrote: | It's triply annoying as the computers in these devices | absolutely pale in comparison to a Raspberry Pi - it would be | nice if all appliances used one general purpose board that | could be easily sourced; as it is nobody will pay $750 for a | control board to fix a washer when a brand new one is less. | CatWChainsaw wrote: | Recently read "The Waste Makers" (published in 1960, I believe). | Nothing too mind-blowing since the advertising tricks used in | that era are quaint compared to today's, but it definitely opened | my eyes to how long the decreased quality/planned obsolescence | phenomenon has been going on. | mc32 wrote: | One thing I've noticed compared to childhood appliances is | plastic mechanisms (gears, actuators, brackets, etc). These tend | to become brittle or soft with age or exposure to chemicals and | lead to early failure. Of course metal also suffered from fatigue | and there are quite strong and durable thermoplastics but today I | see cheap plastic used liberally. | [deleted] | MontyCarloHall wrote: | These studies never account for survivorship bias. There were | plenty of crappy appliances decades ago, but they've all long | since broken, so we only have the very best old appliances to | compare against today. | | Also, the inflation adjusted cost of a fridge in the 50s was | something like $10k. A $10k fridge today (e.g. Sub Zero) will | easily last for many decades. A $1k Wal-Mart special will not. | e40 wrote: | Sub Zero fridges are terrible. The people I've known that had | them rued the day they bought them. | | They are a status symbols, that's why they cost so much, not | because they are top quality. | verisimi wrote: | Why make a good product, when you can make a good advert or | public relations campaign instead and gain repeat customers in a | shorter timescale? (As your product will need replacing sooner.) | If all the corporations collude in this way, everyone is a | winner. | | But of course the customer is at fault for this environmental | misuse of resources.... right? We should shoulder the expense of | cleaning up the mess that corporations and governments create. | | ^ That is the corporate/governmental plan - spin the problem as | an environmental issue that the consumer pays for! (Again.) And | extract even more money from the customer in the process as they | get rid of servicable products in favour of echo-friendly ones. | Make laws to force them to do this too! It's a win win for the | corporations! | verisimi wrote: | Mass production is only profitable if its rhythm can be | maintained.. that is, if it can continue to sell its product in | steady or increasing quantity. The result is that while, under | the handicraft or small-unit system of production that was | typical a century ago, demand created the supply, today supply | must actively seek to create its corresponding demand. | | Edward Bernays, 1930 | | I believe that competition in the future will not be only an | advertising competition between individual products or between | big associations, but that it will in addition be a competition | of propaganda. | | Edward Bernays, 1930 | rglover wrote: | What you're attributing to "evil corporations" is really just | mimetic theory playing out. Most people want (in general, but | specifically here, those working in corporations) to play it | safe and in turn, end up copying "the other guy" in the form of | product focus, strategy, and culture. | | The sad truth is most people in most companies are just | lemmings which creates the illusion of collusion, when really, | it's just a whole lot of unoriginality. | tejohnso wrote: | > an example of doing just enough to get by until it is someone | else's problem | | Sounds like what I've been noticing in grade school education. | Perfect grades for everybody! Just please move on and don't check | for any actual knowledge acquisition. | ProfessorLayton wrote: | Without numbers it's really hard to say how good or bad these | engineering choices were in regards to the consumer to come out | on top or not. | | In my experience appliances are _a lot_ more efficient _and | cheaper_ than they used to be. My new stainless steel fridge has | much more capacity while using the same amount of power than the | 20yo one it replaced (Which didn 't actually fail, but the white | coating was rusting all over the place). | | My HE washer doesn't fill the entire tub compared to the old | upright ones, so my water heater is used less, and spins at | ~1,200rpm, greatly reducing dry times for my electric dryer. The | recessed lighting in my house went from 90 watts _per bulb_ to 12 | watts for LED, and saves me $$ on cooling when needed. My | tankless water heater heats up only the water being used, no | more, no less. | | I'm paying roughly 32C//KW all-in (after taxes, fees etc.) for | electricity in the Bay Area, so efficiency gains build up quickly | over time. | | Anecdotally, the only issues I've had so far have been with | poorly engineered Samsung refrigerators, where the fans would | seize due to ice buildup, not mechanical wear. | nabakin wrote: | > In my experience appliances are a lot more efficient and | cheaper than they used to be. | | turbokinetic agrees modern refrigerators are more energy | efficient but at the expense of longevity and not worth it | | > I am saying that this compressor, and its application, show | clear engineering choices made, which sacrificed its life span | in the name of some modicum of energy savings. | ProfessorLayton wrote: | >turbokinetic agrees modern refrigerators are more energy | efficient but at the expense of longevity and not worth it | | Without numbers to back up that claim, that's just their | opinion, as is mine. I _my_ experience the energy savings | have been significant enough for that to not be a big | concern. | | There may be an environmental argument here of course, but | that's a separate argument than what consumers feel in their | pocketbook. | andrewstuart wrote: | Yeah my stupid Hisense fridge that I bought only four years ago | is already flaking out. | | I has Whirlpool washing machine that lasted more than 20 years. | When it finally gave up the ghost I bought a Fisher and Paykel | that literally within 2 months of the 2 year warranty expiring. | To their credit, Fisher and Paykel replaced it but even so..... | mianos wrote: | A washing machine should last more than two years in home use. | We have some laws here in Australia that makes them repair | things even outside their warranty if their expected life is | longer. | | The guide for fridges here is in between 6 and 13 years. Under | 6 you should not have any issues arguing with them (they will), | over 6 it might take some more effort. | replygirl wrote: | re: fridge, hisense is a tv company | | re: laundry, did you ever consider getting a second whirlpool? | either way, what about the paykel outweighed 20 years of | reliability? | cwillu wrote: | https://www.hisense-usa.com/home-appliance/explore-home- | appl... | leashless wrote: | My company is working on changing the economic incentives for | manufacturers, so that they will make high quality durable goods. | | Here's how it works: | | 1) Each item has a unique serial number, and a database for | storing maintenance records about the item. | | 2) When the item is going to be resold, third parties _including | the original manufacturer_ sell warranties on the item to protect | the new owner. A manufacturer would inspect, refurb, and re- | warranty on each iteration. | | 3) The new buyer pays more for the item, and the warranties on | top of that, because they're getting goods closer to new goods in | performance. | | 4) The manufacturers are profiting every time the goods are | resold, possibly as much or more than selling a new one. | | We think this model of the circular economy is a lot more likely | to succeed than the current model which involves ripping things | down to their raw materials then reusing those materials to | manufacture new things. | | https://mattereum.com/circular-economy/ <--- more here | matrix_overload wrote: | Yeah, sure, buying "physical asset NFTs" from you will suddenly | convince major appliance manufacturers to change their ways and | part with millions of dollars in profit. | | Sorry, the problem you mentioned is 100% valid, but the NFT- | based solution you are offering is a pure grift. | tehwebguy wrote: | Anyone know if Allstate (seems to be the primary warranty | parter on eBay) or Asurion (Amazon) sell their add-on | warranty data to third parties? | | Someone could beat Consumer Reports by just purchasing & | publishing the raw data (warranties sold, claims made, claims | paid). | vermilingua wrote: | If I'm understanding correctly, you're asking the manufacturers | (and/or other warranty writers) to take on liability for | unknown damage that may have been accrued over the lifetime of | the item. The only way to make this damage known would be to | return the item to the factory to be inspected, which would be | considerably more expensive than "ripping things down to their | raw materials". | | How do you solve this problem in a way that consumers aren't | paying for all these externalities? | | EDIT: didn't even see the crypto connection, that answers that | question. | workingon wrote: | why dont you just try to do something good instead of grifting | schlipity wrote: | It has been my experience for a very long time that most | warranties aren't worth the paper they're printed on. They | either take too long to replace the item so that you end up | buying a new one, or simply do nothing at all. The warranty | service that Amazon tries to add on to every "device" purchase | is famous for this. | 1270018080 wrote: | Why can't a new competitor come in, make non-shitty products, and | make billions? Is there really a grand planned-obsolescence | conspiracy, or is this a mixture of survivorship bias, recency | bias, and a strong imagination? | bombcar wrote: | Because it's hard to make non-shitty products _and_ be known | for it. | | By the time you have a reputation for quality products, you're | often acquired or out of business. There are actually cases of | this in some specialty equipment. | booleandilemma wrote: | I expect nothing less from a culture of people who buy a new | cellphone every 2 years. Longevity in consumer products is not | something we optimize for anymore. | jollybean wrote: | They didn't necessarily think about lifetimes back then. | | LEGO bricks used to be made to withstand nuclear holocaust | because, well, the Engineers though they should be 'durable'. | | It was hard to convince them to scale back a bit. | | They are still 'durable' as anyone walking with bare feet near | children can attest, but just not quite as invulnerable as | before. | | They saved a lot without compromise. | | Fridges may not need to last 30 years, it costs a lot to do so, | so let consumers decide. | | What _should_ happen is something about 'lifetime and warranty'. | | Some people might want 'long lasting things' in which case we | should be able to clearly differentiate. | ricardobeat wrote: | "let consumers decide" is a dark joke. In practice, the market | will race to the bottom, and the only quality items left will | be at the other end of the spectrum, unaffordable for 99% of | consumers. | | You see this everyday, it has become very hard to find great | manufacturing quality on every kind of product, from appliances | to phones, cars, even mundane stuff like a lemon juicer or a | light fixture. Everything at market prices is not built to last | more than a handful of years. | newaccount2021 wrote: | There aren't even good options anymore. An appliance repair guy I | know says even venerable Bosch dishwashers are a shadow of their | past reputation. | | Expensive appliances share most guts with cheaper | models...spending more doesn't mean higher quality anymore ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-08-14 23:00 UTC)