Hacker News Reader

Comment by Swizec | Hacker News Reader

What good is cheaper tech if we just use that to add more features and keep the same price?

You could get a TV for less than $50 if it had the same features and processing power as it did in 2002. Same for computers.

Imagine how cheap we could make a car that only has the features we had in the 90’s? Even if you include the mandatory passive safety upgrades.

View on HN

> You could get a TV for less than $50 if it had the same features and processing power as it did in 2002. Same for computers.

Well have I ever got good news for you. Here's a random article about TV tech from 2002 that I just found on google [0] talking about the top of the line in display tech being a new 30 inch LCD TV that cost $8,000 (that would be $13,200 in today's dollars). Now twenty years later you can buy a 32 inch 720p LCD TV on Amazon for $99.

Same for computers, ever heard of a raspberry pi?

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/18/technology/state-of-the-a...

The cars would still be fairly expensive. The upgrades on a low-end car are topical and aren't the expensive part of a car. Basic cars

A basic car only costs ~20k brand new. Some cars are as low as 12k.

Are there still cars in the USA without "smart"/connected features?

> What good is cheaper tech if we just use that to add more features and keep the same price?

...having better technology, and therefore higher living standards?

I'd be first in line for a new car that only has the features of cars from the 1990s.

Ford Crown Victoria was sorta that until 2010.

Yeah but the gas mileage on that was only 16 city/24 highway (mpg)...

90s cars of that size aren't any better. But even today, that MPG is common in the US because the fuel efficiency gains in engines get negated by 2/3 of people driving SUVs.

Plenty of low-mileage 90s cars are on the market. If you’re being sincere, just filter by low mileage and single owner and you’ll find your dream car.

Older cars require more ongoing maintenance and repairs.

What I want is a car with '90s features that rolled off the factory yesterday so I don't have to worry about it dying in the middle of a road trip next week.

That's why your parent poster specified "low milage."

This isn't true in any part of the country that has a winter.

True. California or Arizona (no salt on the roads, low humidity) are the unicorn places for cars without holes.

But since they're not being made in 2022, getting parts for them in 2040 will be fraught.

pick a slightly more expensive car from that era that has an enthusiast fan-base; aftermarket parts will be available indefinitely.

no problem finding parts for my (very old) Honda or the (very much older) VW beetle that's in the family.

Gimme something with '20's safety and fuel economy, and '90's features otherwise. Or, even better, an electric car without the computer screen on the inside.

I remember 90's cars safety and gas mileage, and I emphatically don't want that.

Yeah that’s the expensive stuff. The touchscreens and other tech crap is cheap

> Yeah that’s the expensive stuff.

In today's world of subscription heated seats, $9k to unlock pre-installed range extensions, and $10k FSD capability (though without the actual FSD)... I feel reasonably justified in disagreeing with you.

safety has improved, but gas mileage for small cars was great. 90'2 and 00's had lots of compacts that got 40+ mpg highway.

I was going to say "and how light we could make a car", but then i actually looked up some stats, and this was news to me:

http://web.mit.edu/sloan-auto-lab/research/beforeh2/files/Ma...

Car weight declined sharply from 1976 to 1982, then started creeping up again, but cars in 2010 were only about as heavy as cars in ~1979.

I don't think this takes into account that something like 50% of vehicles sold are now light trucks (pickups and SUVs) rather than passenger cars.

You can get a 32" Fire TV for $99 on Amazon right now...I'm not sure it makes sense to make cheaper, especially when you have used items on Craigslist that covers the gap.

TVs became cheaper because now companies have recurring revenue by selling ads.

Same with other stuff, it got "cheaper" because the sellers found alternative monetization channels, which often are more anti-consumer.

TVs have been continuously better and cheaper in real terms since their invention - any cross-subsidy from smart TV ads is very much a "last five years" phenomenon I think.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com