Hacker News Reader

Comment by M_Grey | Hacker News Reader

Well that, and a home appliance doesn't cost 1/7th of your annual budget anymore. Some things were built to last because to justify the expense, they had to last.

James May (unusually) made a very good point that the "good old days" is an illusion created by survivorship bias, nostalgia, and failure to understand economics. The survivorship bias especially should be obvious:

Lots of cheap crap was made throughout the years, but it didn't survive. We only have examples of the stuff that managed to survive, or was notable in some way. The $50 Smartphone equivalent of the 50's was no more notable than today's version, and no more long-lasting.

View on HN

Speaking of James May and manufactured items of yore vs today, he recently did a series where he puts together a bunch of old stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=james+may+reass...

That's actually the series in which he makes the observation I was paraphrasing. I found that show pretty entertaining actually, and oddly satisfying. Edit: I think it might have been the stand mixer episode.

I also strongly recommend the mini-motorcycle episode.

The clip you mention is at 21:50 in this episode, indeed the kitchen mixer episode:

https://youtu.be/XnYPOkzy-oI

"Therefore medieval England must have been full of cathedrals. It must have been amazing!"

In a similar vein, I hope you've seen the Primitive Technology channel on Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAL3JXZSzSm8AlZyD3nQdBA

Oh yes, I love that channel...it's like virtual meditation crossed with a really interesting lesson.

I'm really enjoying episode 1 so far. There's something almost therapeutic about it.

I agree... it's mildly amusing, mildly engaging, mildly informative... it's just mild in the best possible way. It actually feels a bit like looking over someone's shoulder in a workshop, in a pleasant way.

Well, there's buckling spring model-m style keyboards, or even other keyswitch keyboards vs typical gel membrane keyboards... but even then, the casing material and backplate on a newer unicomp doesn't match the older IBM keyboards... it's definitely cheaper plastic everywhere except the keys themselves. Unicomp are about the only kb mfg today whose keys don't show obvious wear within a year of purchase.

Even Lego is looking to cut mfg costs (or has, was an older article) by switching to cheaper plastic, and removing some of the supports.

What kind of world are we living in where we need cheaper plastic?

The keyboards are significantly cheaper as well. The Model M keyboard retailed for 150$, which would be almost 400$ in today's money. For 400$ I guarantee you you will find a keyboard with a thick casing and quality plastic today.

These product comparisons all fail because today, we can make so much cheaper products than we could back then. And we are now comparing the cheapest crap (even a 100$ keyboard is cheap in comparison to the Model M) with MUCH more expensive products from the past. (Lego might be an exception here, as that product is the same)

LEGO are, officially at least, looking to move to a more sustainable plastic rather than a cheaper one. They have spent a lot of time and money coming up with an analog that is more environmentally friendly without sacrificing quality (compression strength, deformity, discoloration, etc).

Being both non-American and non-public, LEGO are less susceptible to the MBA bean-counting that is at the root of most of the problems described in this thread.

I'm on board with half of this claim. The failure-due-to-defect rates actually are rising, according to systematic studies of home appliances. But the cost decline might actually compensate for that, at least in consumer terms. If you cut costs on the most over-engineered parts of your product, you can often create a less-reliable device that's still more cost-efficient. Of course, whether you pass those savings to consumers is a second question.

https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/25...

This is why if you are a thrift store, the older-looking item is often a better buy than the newer-looking item of the same kind. The newer one is often further along is wear cycle than the older one.

Occam's razor goes on a different path if you know a little bit about the guts of the product.

The difference between a top 1% appliance and an average appliance is probably less than $10 of materials and $5 in labor.

Very unlikely.

Once you work in manufacturing you realize that components are actually very expensive, not a $10 joke.

I know that weight makes a big difference when shipping parts or complete machines. So the cost of shipping magnifies when you use heavier materials.

Perhaps when we buy applicances we should just choose the heaviest one.

I remember when I disassembled a VCR I was suprised to find a lead weight in it.

Presumably to help dampen vibrations from all the spinning parts?

Definitely, you'd have bits rattling around otherwise, and maybe even some harmonic issues. Even if it wasn't a noise issue, it would probably wear out the tapes a lot faster, and lead to more jams.

Then of course, you have Beatz headphones, which really are the next best thing to a scam.

You're probably correct. At the time I thought it was done to make it feel higher quality.

If that becomes a popular rule then unfortunately it's fantastically easily gamed.

The spectacular failures in these products that I've seen in the last decade were all skimping.

In the case of a refrigerator, the manufacturer undersized the motor, probably to meet some efficiency standard. The previous years model had an adequate motor, which worked much better.

I've also seen cases (Whirlpool refrigerators) where they included a rubber nipple that was too narrow, and would either freeze up and clog with biofilm. End result was icing of the condenser and evaporator. (Here's a description of the problem: https://partsdr.com/blog/w10619951-updated-drain-tube-fix-ki... )

Compare the average <$1000 fridge/freezer combo, with a Sub Zero model. My mother has one she's kept running for over 25 years...

Meanwhile my cheap apartment-scale fridge was made with chewing gum and hope.

A deep freezer is a very different beast. It is a simpler appliance with very basic components. Far fewer things to break than your combo which has to precisely regulate the temperature and has auto de-icing. I grew up with fridges that needed to be de-iced every few months. Those didn't break much either.

Sub Zero is a brand, it's not a deep freezer.

That 25 year old refrigerator is almost certainly very expensive to operate. Look at the energy use over time: 1990 -> 2015 saw a halving of power usage (1000 kWh/y -> 500 kWh/y) -- over a ten year lifespan with CA electricity at $0.19/kWh, that's $950 in increased energy expenditure as compared to a new refrigerator. ie it would be close to free.

http://aceee.org/blog/2014/09/how-your-refrigerator-has-kept...

For refrigerators at least, it doesn't make sense to make them robust enough to last more than 10-15 years since it's worth it to replace them over that time period. My understanding is the vast majority of refrigerators are then recycled. All those metals are valuable.

When I moved in with my wife, we replaced her 10-year old bachelor-sized fridge with a new one that was over 3x bigger and the new one had nearly the exact same power draw...

That makes a lot of sense though, a bigger fridge can have better circuit and insulation and will have a significantly larger "cold inertia".

> All those metals are valuable.

And all those refrigerants need to be collected to prevent release to the atmosphere.

I believe Sub Zero still has sub-average lifespan.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18176916/ns/business-consumer_news...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com