There are few things quite as emblematic of late stage capitalism than the concept of “planned obsolescence”.

  • I would have agreed with that statement until I saw the most recent Technology Connections video about why the incandescent light bulb has planned obsolescence built in. Sometimes it’s not malicious but to actually provide a compromise leading to an overall better product.

    I don’t think software death dates count, tho.

    • Gnubyte@lemdit.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      TLDR: I’m still very suspicious of how that is quantified - “leading to an overall better product”.

      Who quantifies that and how, on a case by case basis, especially in the form of Chromebooks or phones for revenant, popular examples?

      Let’s say it was a laptop: I can see issues with lithium batteries perhaps reaching a cycle count that lead them to be dangerous. Wouldn’t that mean though you should produce a good that has replaceable batteries? Is the battery designed in such a manner on purpose?

      Businesses with shareholders that live quarter to quarterly profit are the issue. There is no authoritarian legislator that reallocates resources like China did the last few years, for example, whether you like it or not.

      The US relies on legislation to be passed to mandate the changes or prohibit a device from being built a certain way. That legislation can be lobbied for loopholes, have various people in power also own percentages of the companies, etc. Whether you agree with it or not, there are many checks and balances and simultaneously a lack thereof.

    • ConsciousCode@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That wasn’t planned obsolescence though, it was an industry-created standard for the tradeoff between efficiency, brightness, and lifespan. Planned obsolescence is specifically when a product is made to break sooner than it needs to.