Living Car Free - story of stuff - planned obsolescence

Sure, but it isn't PLANNED obsolescence. You don't HAVE to toss out the computers, you just WANT to. Lots of people still use computers made fifteen years ago and do fine, they are still supported in many ways, they're durable and made to last, and as long as you don't want to use flashy stuff that requires capabilities that were not physically possible and were ten times the "theoretical limit" of what a computer could do when the computer was built with the absolute newest technology of the time you're fine.
PLANNED obsolescence is when you make your products shoddy pieces of crap because when they break down, you'll be releasing a new flashy model with a stylish paint job and cool bells and whistles that otherwise functions pretty much the same and works at a similar standard to the existing old stuff.

Well, the video did go into perceived obsolescence as well.

If the perceived obsolescence is intentionally created by a manufacturer or industry isn't it the same thing?

Obsolescence was 'planned' by the automotive industry in the 1940's when hundreds of auto makers went out of business due to the fact that at that time anyone that owned an automobile already had one so why buy another..?

Same is true for the computer industry as well. Once you have an operating system and applications what's the point of getting another one? Unfortunatly our economy is dependent on 'consuming' and if we don't 'consume' we're screwed, which is starting to happen now with the 'mortgage meltdown' and 'debt crunch'. We need a new economic model that's not based on 17th century standards, economists have been struggling with this for the last hundred year, anyone got any ideas?

P.S. and to respond to bragi: "I'm old enough to remember $1.00/gal gas. The population of my home state has quadrupled since I was in high school, and the landscape has gone to **** before my eyes. And this is happening even more rapidly in other parts of the world. We have 6 billion people on Earth, and counting, most of whom would love to have a standard of living equal to that of the West, and who can blame them, but with these numbers it's never gonna happen."

I spent the 1970's in England and $1.00 gas would be cheap even back then.. You could fit the entire population of the Earth in the Grand Canyon, the Earth is a big place and we're not going to run out of space anytime soon despite what the doomsayer's would like you to believe. England cut down the last of it's natural trees in the 1600's for shipbuilding that's one of the reasons the North American colony's were so important. Want to see the future? Look at present day Europe..allot of it ain't pretty.

Thanks for the criticism, I mean it. I may not agree with your opinions but I respect your arguments and your beliefs. It's when someone says "we shouldn't question this" that we're in real trouble and this has happened twice in big ways in the last decade:

1. Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq
2. Global warming

Cheers! :)

Obsolescence was 'planned' by the automotive industry in the 1940's when hundreds of auto makers went out of business due to the fact that at that time anyone that owned an automobile already had one so why buy another..?

Older cars which are in good condition can still run on modern roads with no problems. From the second half of the 20th century, almost all cars have had the capacity and power to run on today's roads. One could purchase, for instance, a 1958 car and use it on any roads we have. But cars don't last all that many years. From what I've seen, after a decade of moderate use, a car starts to get expensive and after about two decades, there are often reliability issues. That part of the automotive industry is about shoddy workmanship more than about obsolescence.

At the same time, there is a degree of obsolescence in automobiles. Parts are eventually discontinued and become hard to find. If I'm running a 50-year-old car in more or less original condition, I may have to look long and hard before I can find a part to fit when something breaks down.

Sure, but it isn't PLANNED obsolescence. You don't HAVE to toss out the computers, you just WANT to. Lots of people still use computers made fifteen years ago and do fine, they are still supported in many ways, they're durable and made to last, and as long as you don't want to use flashy stuff that requires capabilities that were not physically possible and were ten times the "theoretical limit" of what a computer could do when the computer was built with the absolute newest technology of the time you're fine.

You're right when you say computers can last for many years although power supplies might burn out and hard drives eventually will die. I've got an old Mac Plus, built in 1989, which is functioning nicely after a minor repair. An older computer can and will work just fine for someone who is using it strictly for basic personal work. If you're writing a letter, balancing your budget and sending or receiving e-mails (without attachments) you can use an old computer for a long time.

However, the limitations will show if someone goes beyond this basic computer use. If you're browsing the Internet, especially if you're trying to access video clips, an older computer will run into trouble, even with high speed Internet access. Or try using an older browser on a site that uses flash. It doesn't work all that well. Even PDF documents can cause problems with some of the older browsers. Also, if you and those around you are exchanging documents, the limitations of an older computer will show once again. Something built using current software might not read properly on an older version of the same software. These are just basic day-to-day examples.

In a perfect world, software would be made backward-compatible for such a purpose. And Internet sites would be built to basic standards so they would display on any browser. But that's not happening and that's where obsolescence is showing itself in the world of computers.

It is planned obsolescence if:

the tool is designed to fail rapidly, requiring replacement
the tool uses consumables which cannot be efficiently replaced
the tool requires maintenance, and the company shifts technology laterally - last year they used square bracket whosits, but next year's lineups all use hexagonal bracket whotzits, which are not compatible with square bracket whosits. There is no real performance difference between square bracket whosits and hexagonal bracket whotzits.


Computers are an item which becomes obsolete IN SPITE OF the efforts of the manufacturers, not by design.

They do. I've been using Ubuntu exclusively for over a year. the native games are mostly garbage, but it runs great. Xubuntu (the low resources version) apparently runs on systems down to 64MB of memory, though 128MB is recommended. It's a free download and you can play with it on the CD. It seems confusing for a bit but it's not any more confusing than Windows; think of it as the difference between riding a USS bent and a DF roadie. If you learned the USS as a child, the DF is going to be a pain to figure out.

Not sure what you mean by 'native'... yes, the games that come preinstalled aren't great... but there are lots of games out there that run natively on Linux... and a lot of them can be installed straight from the software repository system.

From what I've seen, after a decade of moderate use, a car starts to get expensive and after about two decades, there are often reliability issues. That part of the automotive industry is about shoddy workmanship more than about obsolescence.I'm not sure exactly what you expect. I am amazed at how many original parts are still in my wife's '91 BMW and how well it works but things do age. Rubber and plastic parts in particular.

When I was a kid (I'm 37), 100k miles was unusual to see. My indifferently maintained daily beater '93 BMW is nearing 200k miles.

Not sure what you mean by 'native'... Native as in games written for Linux, as opposed to games writted for Windows and run with an emulator.
yes, the games that come preinstalled aren't great... but there are lots of games out there that run natively on Linux... and a lot of them can be installed straight from the software repository system.
Yes, and they are almost all garbage. Seriously, most of them have inferior graphics to the original 8-bit Legend of Zelda. Or they are a poorly executed "clone" of an old game from the 80's. If you're lucky, it's a glitchy 'clone' of a game from the early 90's. Some of the games you can download actually run. Some of those are even reasonably complete. On the whole, I saw much better games when I still had my Amiga 500. It's like living in a bad joke about a Soviet Russian X-box or something. I LIKE Linux, but they have utter c*p for games.

Native as in games written for Linux, as opposed to games writted for Windows and run with an emulator.

Yes, and they are almost all garbage. Seriously, most of them have inferior graphics to the original 8-bit Legend of Zelda. Or they are a poorly executed "clone" of an old game from the 80's. If you're lucky, it's a glitchy 'clone' of a game from the early 90's. Some of the games you can download actually run. Some of those are even reasonably complete. On the whole, I saw much better games when I still had my Amiga 500. It's like living in a bad joke about a Soviet Russian X-box or something. I LIKE Linux, but they have utter c*p for games.

*points and laughs*

I am amazed at how many original parts are still in my wife's '91 BMW and how well it works but things do age. Rubber and plastic parts in particular.

When I was a kid (I'm 37), 100k miles was unusual to see. My indifferently maintained daily beater '93 BMW is nearing 200k miles.

I got rid of my first car, a 1984 Mercury Topaz, when it was around 15 years old. It had 310,000 km on it and was no longer reliable. The engine, drivetrain and body were still okay, but there were too many minor mechanical issues at that point. I couldn't afford the work it would take to keep it running properly.

My second car, a Ford Tempo, lasted me until it was around 12 years old and had more than 200,000 kilometres. I'd had some significant repairs done on it. I sold it cheaply a few years ago. It's still on the road. I had bought it cheaply because I needed a car after the Topaz died and went to car heaven.

My present car, a 1992 Mercury Topaz has served me well. I might still be able to get a couple of years out of it. But, if my previous experience with these cars is any indication, it's reaching the age where it's about to get expensive to maintain. Once again, it will be the little things, one at a time, that will add up. My mechanic has been telling me to start looking around for another car.

(I don't collect Tempos and Topazes. I've just been able to find good deals on these cars and for the most part, they've worked for me.)

Newspaperguy,
Being a multi Ford products owner...you did well with both the Tempo and the Topaz...in fact I am amazed. I think those were some of the worst cars Ford made. I had a mid 80's Escort exceed 300k miles with nothing more than standard maintenance, but the slightly newer Tempo was falling apart at the half the distance.

Aaron:)

I noticed the other day that Aaron made reference to planned obsolescence in one of the threads, and it got me thinking about a link that was sent to me. The video is about 20 minutes long. It's very interesting and in my opinion, worth watching.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

As carfree individuals, does planned obsolescence really ____ you off? And I don't just mean with respect to bikes and parts. I mean everything. And as consumers, are we really aware of it? Or do most of us not really care?

I haven't read this thread, but thanks for sharing that link. The process of consumerism is something I've put a lot of thought into lately. I'm not sure how it started, but every time I'm in the store now I find myself looking at an item and considering where it came from, what it took to get to me, what the true cost is. What's it packaged in? Will it contribute to my life in any manner? I try to resist the urge to consume for consumption's sake as best I can, but I'm not always successful.

I chuckled at the speakers example of the CRT vs LCD monitor as I'm in a similar boat with televisions. Most of my friends own Plasma/LCD/DLP High Definition TV's. I, on the other hand, have a 27" CRT standard definition TV, with analog cable. I'm told by my dad that I'm cheap. My friends rag on my small TV and actually use it as a reason to go to another persons house to watch games. I realize now that this small, block shaped TV makes it obvious that I'm not hip. That's all there is to it.

From where I sit, I'm not being cheap, I'm being responsible. The television I have displays moving pictures at a resolution I'm happy with. Yes, the new TV's look better, but I realize the true cost of buying that new TV isn't just the $800-$1500 it's going to cost me, but also the disposal of my existing, perfectly good television.

In answer to your question, it isn't Planned Obsolescence that makes me mad. Consumers should be smart enough to avoid that trap, and if they were then companies would stop doing it. My problem is with perceived obsolescence. The pressure put on us by so-called friends to consume. I'm supposed to be embarrassed of my 27" television and my 1997 Toyota Corolla. Buy more. Buy newer. Spend spend spend.

I'm through.

...I...have a 27" CRT standard definition TV, with analog cable...
For all practical purposes, analog TV broadcasting in the U.S. ceases on February 17, 2009. Cable companies are allowed to offer analog signals after that date, but they are not required to do so.

http://www.dtv.gov/consumercorner.html

While they're not required to, I suspect that they will continue to do so. If they don't I'll deal with then (by renting a converter box).

From where I sit, I'm not being cheap, I'm being responsible. The television I have displays moving pictures at a resolution I'm happy with. Yes, the new TV's look better, but I realize the true cost of buying that new TV isn't just the $800-$1500 it's going to cost me, but also the disposal of my existing, perfectly good television.

In answer to your question, it isn't Planned Obsolescence that makes me mad. Consumers should be smart enough to avoid that trap, and if they were then companies would stop doing it. My problem is with perceived obsolescence. The pressure put on us by so-called friends to consume. I'm supposed to be embarrassed of my 27" television and my 1997 Toyota Corolla. Buy more. Buy newer. Spend spend spend.

I'm through.

Why don't you stop watching TV completely? It's a good start in cutting off the pressure cycle of consumption.

Because I enjoy it?

I've got a TiVo (a product that actually *did* change my life in a meaningful way), so I don't watch commercials anyway. Besides, saying that TV provides all the pressure to consume is giving advertisers far, far too much credit.

My biggest obstacle is avoiding tech gadgets (specifically those release by Apple).

I, on the other hand, have a 27" CRT standard definition TV, with analog cable. I'm told by my dad that I'm cheap. My friends rag on my small TV and actually use it as a reason to go to another persons house to watch games. I realize now that this small, block shaped TV makes it obvious that I'm not hip. That's all there is to it.


The ironic thing is that just a few years ago, a "27 inch CRT standard definition TV, with analog cable" was the height of luxury, the most expensive set you could buy. This just proves the continuing escalation of luxury. Every year the thrills come at a greater expense, but the enjoyment level remains the same. IOW, people don't enjoy watching the 54 inch plasma any more than people used to enjoy watching the 27 inch CRT, or even the older 12 inch black and white set.

The only thing that's changed over the years is that it now takes more stuff to attain the same level of satisfaction. Our ever growing economy is not only unsustainable--it isn't even making us any happier.

IOW, people don't enjoy watching the 54 inch plasma any more than people used to enjoy watching the 27 inch CRT, or even the older 12 inch black and white set.
Jeez, I dunno. I have a couple 27" TVs but I sure enjoy watching friends' big HD plasmas. :)

Jeez, I dunno. I have a couple 27" TVs but I sure enjoy watching friends' big HD plasmas. :)

Yes, because you have the comparison. I mean that 20 years ago, people raved about the 27" sets and had level 10 fun watching them. Today people watch the plasmas and also have level 10 fun. Huge gain in expense, zero gain in satisfaction. (Except for the TV manufacturers, who gain great satisfaction from the profits made by promising us more fun, then not really delivering.) When it comes to fun, our prosperity is not getting us anywhere.

What if their fun goes to 11 now? :D

What if their fun goes to 11 now? :D

Believe me. People do not have more fun today than they did 50 years ago. All they have more of is worries.

"So-called friends" is right! My husband and I have actually had people drop us as friends because we refuse to buy into the consumer mentality....after they saw that their constant ragging had no effect on us, they simply stopped calling, and we weren't invited to their place for Thanksgiving. That's on top of his co-workers, who constantly ask,"Why don't you have a TV?", "Why don't you have two cars like everyone else?", "When is you husband going to get his driver's license?", and so on. It's rather lonely these days, but it's interesting to see people's true colors when you dare to step outside of society's norms. There's a lot of bad people in the world, it seems. :-(

I don't have television envy:p...when and if I watch television it is on my 15" LCD that I WON at a company picnic:rolleyes: that was the first television I have owned in quite a few years. Still don't have cable, use an old rotator antenna that I dug out of the trash somewhere. Good news is that the LCD has a digital tuner so I am set...

Aaron:)

"So-called friends" is right! My husband and I have actually had people drop us as friends because we refuse to buy into the consumer mentality....after they saw that their constant ragging had no effect on us, they simply stopped calling, and we weren't invited to their place for Thanksgiving. That's on top of his co-workers, who constantly ask,"Why don't you have a TV?", "Why don't you have two cars like everyone else?", "When is you husband going to get his driver's license?", and so on. It's rather lonely these days, but it's interesting to see people's true colors when you dare to step outside of society's norms. There's a lot of bad people in the world, it seems. :-(

"When is you husband going to get his driver's license?"
"Why don't you have two cars like everyone else?"
"Why don't you have a TV?"

True friends stay with you no matter what, they live your ways when they figure out why you are living like this. Besides, you figure the money you saved can be used to spend on something more meaningful, such as vacations, hobbies you enjoy, and things you love to do.

When people ask you, "are you too poor to own a car or tv?"
The answer will be: no, it's called priority. (You can add the reasons why.)

Yes, because you have the comparison. I mean that 20 years ago, people raved about the 27" sets and had level 10 fun watching them. Today people watch the plasmas and also have level 10 fun. Huge gain in expense, zero gain in satisfaction. (Except for the TV manufacturers, who gain great satisfaction from the profits made by promising us more fun, then not really delivering.) When it comes to fun, our prosperity is not getting us anywhere.

I find the best entertainment anyone can create is to create it themselves. That is why activities pushing your limits such as cycling, rock climbing, hiking, running, etc. are very rewarding. Before you say rock climbing requires a lot of equipment, the mantra with rock climbing is also towards less equipment, just you and the mountain, once you gain more experience of course.

I don't have television envy:p...when and if I watch television it is on my 15" LCD that I WON at a company picnic:rolleyes: that was the first television I have owned in quite a few years. Still don't have cable, use an old rotator antenna that I dug out of the trash somewhere. Good news is that the LCD has a digital tuner so I am set...

Aaron:)

I am wondering if this happens to anyone else here. I have a 25 or 27 inch TV which I borrowed from my son. For the last few years, every time I sit down on my couch to watch television, I fall asleep.

Not sure whether it is because I am getting old or because the content is boring, but I see no difference between this TV and my old 19 inch from 1988. I manage to nod off pretty quickly with either one.:o

I am wondering if this happens to anyone else here. I have a 25 or 27 inch TV which I borrowed from my son. For the last few years, every time I sit down on my couch to watch television, I fall asleep.

Not sure whether it is because I am getting old or because the content is boring, but I see no difference between this TV and my old 19 inch from 1988. I manage to nod off pretty quickly with either one.:o

Ahhh...the Television was watching YOU!:eek::D

Aaron:)

Quality of life has nothing to do with the type of TV you have.
Quality of programming doesn't either.

That film is depressing.

though i don't know if someone commented on this yet since i haven't read the entire topic yet.

It is good that you feel depressed about this film it may have opened your eyes to what you were not aware of. Unfortunately, feeling depressed after watching the film and trying to change your ways( not you specifically) is the big step we all need to do, so when we watch that film we are actually excited about it. its all about our conscience and our guilt because we know that we are doing wrong.

In answer to your question, it isn't Planned Obsolescence that makes me mad. Consumers should be smart enough to avoid that trap, and if they were then companies would stop doing it. My problem is with perceived obsolescence. The pressure put on us by so-called friends to consume. I'm supposed to be embarrassed of my 27" television and my 1997 Toyota Corolla. Buy more. Buy newer. Spend spend spend.
My experience is completely different.

I'm one of the most visible people in town and people know about my simple lifestyle. It's hard to miss when I'm walking or cycling to get around and when I'll freely say I'm not interested in acquiring a lot of stuff. There's a degree of curiosity about this, but I've never felt pressure to change my lifestyle and consumption patterns. I've been asked why I walk, why I don't have cable and why I don't buy the latest gadget of the month. But those questions almost always come out of genuine interest rather than a ploy to make me change my ways.

Partly as a result of watching me, several people here have started walking to work or started to save money. A few are asking for advice about buying bikes for themselves.

Of course there are a few who simply don't understand why I don't want a larger television, a new car or other stuff, but even those people aren't hostile.

My experience is completely different.

I'm one of the most visible people in town and people know about my simple lifestyle. It's hard to miss when I'm walking or cycling to get around and when I'll freely say I'm not interested in acquiring a lot of stuff. There's a degree of curiosity about this, but I've never felt pressure to change my lifestyle and consumption patterns. I've been asked why I walk, why I don't have cable and why I don't buy the latest gadget of the month. But those questions almost always come out of genuine interest rather than a ploy to make me change my ways.


That's because you live in the best place on earth. Where I live, there's some of that, too: who you are is vastly more important than what you have. But things are changing. In some circles, particularly among those under the age of, say, 25, if you don't have an internet-capable phone and a Facebook account, you don't actually exist. It's like living among the Borg.

I always turn to Thoreau when I need a little inspiration to continue the simple life.

(Click here (http://www.kenkifer.com/Thoreau/) if you want to read a famous bicyclist's take on Walden.)