I don't know anyone who uses 100 percent of the software on their computer. The same is said for "smart phones".

That's why I have a, "stupid" phone. All it does is send/receive phone calls and store phone numbers that I enter in its memory.

I don't feel burned by all the useless programs installed on personal computers because I have never bought a computer. I just use that "worthless" hobby time to fix them after the customer decided to buy a new one instead of paying for a repair.

Small victory, but it's MY small victory.

 

3. Your logic is a non-sequitur and in error anyway. The fact that YOUR ONE product did not fail does not follow that ALL similar products will also not fail. The same non-sequitur logic error that you keep promoting where just because YOU did not see designed failure it cannot exist.

Actually, your (lack of) logic is a non sequitur. You keep saying that electronics devices are designed to fail. So, when I point out the myriad of devices that our household owns from multiple cordless phones, Ipad, Ipod, TVs, PCs, laptops, DVR's, VHS recorders, receivers, cassette decks, DTV converter boxes, TIVO, and enough stereo equipment to open a retail store, you try to get off the hook by claiming that these "single" incidents don't disprove the "built in destruct" claim?

Yes.... they do disprove your claim, or else you are changing the story so that what you are now claiming is they design the devices to fail early but do not accomplish it since in the many dozens of devices listed, they failed to design in a rapid death in any of them. Not most, EVERY ONE.

So yes, that data does disprove your claim unless you are now amending that claim to "they design them to fail early" but in most cases do not succeed to achieve their result.

This topic is a complete waste of time. It's like arguing whether the earth is flat.

 

In short, someone who has NOT seen something happening should not try to sound like an expert saying it "never happens" in front of someone who has seen it actually happening (and getting worse) year after year.

And yet if what you were saying had any credibility, you would be able to post so many examples..... and yet all we hear of is some PC UPS that had a timer in it? Well... to quote somebody who just posted, ONE EXAMPLE doesn't prove anything. At least, that's what you just said. You found a timer in something and I have probably a hundred electronic devices in my house which have never exhibited any trace of what you claim.

Whose "proof" is anecdotal?

 

Almost every piece of electronics today has an embedded microcontroller. It is conceivable that a programmer can easily make the system fail at any time or under any conditions, precisely or randomly as the designer may choose.

I find it totally reprehensible that any CEO would knowingly instruct the company's designers and engineers to implement such policy for the sake of increased revenue.

No CEO ever would because he is not brain dead. The practice would instantly get out and their product line would be castigated on the internet and would then go out of business and that CEO would be working at McDonalds.

People reverse engineer IPhones to get their operating code. Does anybody seriously believe if a "kill app" was implanted into a processor and phones or devices dropped dead after a given lifetime that the practice would not be discovered?

This whole subject would best be left to the tinfoil hat wearers who think the missing airplane was beamed aboard a spacecraft. It has about as much sense and credibility.

 

As for the first paragraph, it sure seems odd the number of times I have mumbled under my breath, "warranty timer" while fixing something that was 14 months old. That's probably where the myth comes from.

As for the last paragraph, it was I that the General Motors engineer told and I believed him because, A) he employed me to build oscilloscope kits for him and, B) he was sleeping with my mother. I don't think you will ever read about that because, A) both of them have been dead for at least 15 years and, B) I don't think he ever slept with a technical writer.

The "car obsolescence" myth has been around for a long time and it's baloney. In reality, they have long been trying to improve life because many didn't live long enough. The need to create multi weight oils was specifically to reduce engine wear, most of which occurs in the first five minutes after an engine is cold started because the oil is too thick to flow well through the bearings. The development of ZDDP was specifically to reduce start up wear. Modern (post 60s) engines do last a long time, some 200k miles or more with superb care.

One joke was back in the 80's, Lee Iacoca complained that the problem Chrysler had was not enough "repeat sales" because they new cars they built were so good they lasted too long. It was baloney. Their new line was built around their 2.2L four engine which was the worst engine MoPar ever made..... I owned one. Blew the head gasket about one year out of warranty. I guess they timed that one just right? Point is, they were just terrible engines and everybody knew it or found out if they bought one.

Bottom line: I don't try to build a conspiracy around incompetence and greed.

 

Electronics is more-or-less a non-issue except in under-hood applications where long-term thermal damage becomes an issue - last time I was involved in automotive projects, the target was 200 C components. I think the component manufactures told the automotive industry to pound salt on that proposal - I never heard the end of the story since I moved on to other, easier-to-work-with industries.

The 200C thing is also found in electronics that go in "well heads" used for oil drilling. As far back as the 70's, they would offer ridiculous sums of money for devices that could live at 200C. Some salesman working in the semi company would freak out and stampede to get the thing and we would have to explain the laws of semiconductor physics would not allow it..... and it would re appear every couple of years.

 

bountyhunter, you have made it clear that you don't believe that several corporations implement what is essentially hardware/software viruses which are triggered by product lifetime.
But is it worth going on a crusade to make everyone else come to your side otherwise draw a tin-foil hat on their heads?
Don't be so fanatic about your opinions. State them, defend them, but always allow other people have their own.

The same could be said for both sides of the argument, but you where the most adamant about it.

To state my personal experiences, I have heard, but not verified the following:
In the topic of planned product lifetime:
1. I have also come across the rumor that inkject cartridges have page counter chips, that render the cartridge useless based on page count rather than ink consumption.

In the topic of planned obsolescence:
1. Last week I heard that Apple announced that the AppStore would only install new apps and update old ones only on devices that ran a certain version of iOS and forward. However, the fairly recent iPhone 4S model does not support that version. I have not verified this.
2. In the sector of smartphones and computers, the recent trend of free online patches and updates is a source of trouble, besides its benefits. Machines which ran fine with a few-years-old hardware now struggle to cope with the extended capabilities and demands of the software, which is expanded in retrospect. This may be attributed to programers' lack of time to optimize their code, or branded as a trade-off in favour of software upkeep and security, but in my opinion, the end result is a user whose device does not perform up to par with its original state, hardware-wise; hence a reason to buy a new one is established.

 

I could do it easily, after decades of seeing what failed, how and why it failed and how long it took to fail. Caps that will shut down the unit if ESR is high, placed next to heatsinks that dry out the cap and cause increase in ESR per month. Depending on range of ambient temperature you can get it down to X months for Y percent of product fails. And things like insufficient heatsinking and airflow casuing semi failures, weakened linkages and mechanisms, etc.

That can't make all products fail in exactly X months (apart from the examples like printer cartridges and UPS fail timers) but for general appliances they can engineer with confidence to get 20% fail in X months, another 30% in Y more months, and then they don't care after that because the new year's products are out picking up all the repeat sales.

Designed-in failure causes repeat sales, which is very important. Do you really think they are totally blind to something that can bump sales figures by 20 to 30% easily? A CEO that stupid would need to be sacked.

Your whole argument collapses in on itself: considering that the entire world is plugged into social media, you assert that companies intentionally design short lives into products using techniques that are easily discovered and (as you claim) clearly pre meditated......

yet in your scenario, no one would ever find out and make the information generally known since doing so would instantly put the company out of business.

Somehow, all of the consumer electronics companies are choosing to bump sales 20% by using a technique that will cause them to lose all their customers when revealed.

Common sense can be your friend.

 

Hello,

I have had an HP2000 colorjet printer.
That has inkcartridges that would not work after the expiring date.
The printer is blocked until you have installed a new cartridge.
I phoned HP and asked why this was done.
They told me that it was to protect the printing heads from old ink.

Bertus

 

They told me that it was to protect the printing heads from old ink.

Actually I understand there is also an on-chip complaint detector.
So , Bertus, it's to prevent you printing out your letter of complaint.

 

bountyhunter, you have made it clear that you don't believe that several corporations implement what is essentially hardware/software viruses which are triggered by product lifetime.
But is it worth going on a crusade to make everyone else come to your side otherwise draw a tin-foil hat on their heads?
Don't be so fanatic about your opinions. State them, defend them, but always allow other people have their own.

The same could be said for both sides of the argument, but you where the most adamant about it.

To state my personal experiences, I have heard, but not verified the following:
In the topic of planned product lifetime:
1. I have also come across the rumor that inkject cartridges have page counter chips, that render the cartridge useless based on page count rather than ink consumption.

In the topic of planned obsolescence:
1. Last week I heard that Apple announced that the AppStore would only install new apps and update old ones only on devices that ran a certain version of iOS and forward. However, the fairly recent iPhone 4S model does not support that version. I have not verified this.
2. In the sector of smartphones and computers, the recent trend of free online patches and updates is a source of trouble, besides its benefits. Machines which ran fine with a few-years-old hardware now struggle to cope with the extended capabilities and demands of the software, which is expanded in retrospect. This may be attributed to programers' lack of time to optimize their code, or branded as a trade-off in favour of software upkeep and security, but in my opinion, the end result is a user whose device does not perform up to par with its original state, hardware-wise; hence a reason to buy a new one is established.

I think we've had a long, cold winter in North America and cabin fever is going around. Everyone is getting grumpy and irritable. Look how many threads have long-time members in pi$$ing contests with each other.

I can't wait for warm weather.

 

bountyhunter, you have made it clear that you don't believe that several corporations implement what is essentially hardware/software viruses which are triggered by product lifetime.
But is it worth going on a crusade to make everyone else come to your side otherwise draw a tin-foil hat on their heads?
Don't be so fanatic about your opinions. State them, defend them, but always allow other people have their own.

Got it.

When I reply to a poster who claims my statements are "non sequiturs" , I am crusading.

Understood.

If you look at my posts, they are clearly directed replies at posts which addressed me. Nothing more. IMHO, your evaluation is not correct. No offense, but:

The same could be said for both sides of the argument, but you where the most adamant about it.

The only thing I observed is that my points were the ones most based in common sense.

However, I won't post in this thread again.

 

Remember the poor Maytag service technician who hardly ever gets any service calls?

Well I have Maytag washer and drier that are going on 25 years old and running strong.

What does that do for Maytag repeat sales?

 

Remember the poor Maytag service technician who hardly ever gets any service calls?

Well I have Maytag washer and drier that are going on 25 years old and running strong.

What does that do for Maytag repeat sales?

I don't know. I can't remember ever fixing a Maytag.

Well...maybe one. Are they the washers that have a fuse that blows when the lid switch goes bad?

 

Never had a blow fuse on the Maytag washer.
Replaced a solenoid valve and drive belt so far.
Recently had to retrieve a sock that got stuck between the basket and the tub.

Never had a problem with the drier.

 

What's that component exactly? Thanks, guys we need more pictures of planned design failures.

That little component had me fooled for awhile as it looked like a resistor or inductor. Its actualy a 63Ma fuse & when checking it was open circuit. Bridged it with a 63Ma quick blow fuse, which blew on turn on of the copier, & the copier was quite happy to work again. This is definitely planed failure at a certain amount of copys.

 

As a repair technician, do you recommend to people not to repair an item because it becomes cost prohibitive or do you just repair it and demand your fee?
...

I left the electronics service industry about 12 years back (after owning a chain of repair shops) when things started to get bad (ie when manufacturers really started deliberately reducing product quality and longevity). Since then I make my living as a product design engineer and now I only repair a few things for family and friends.

Re your question, I used to give free quotes and very often recommended the appliance was not worth repairing (making no profit from it). As the manufacturers worsened their product longevity it became increasingly common for things to be "not worth repairing" and unprofitable to operate like that.

That was a big part of my reason to leave the industry. If I had charged for quotes I would have got paid to say; "The manufacturer deliberately made this piece of crap to break down and not be worth repairing... Now pay me $40 for looking at it".

...
True, except in the cases where the consumer becomes disenchanted with the manufacturer or service provider. There is a finite number of people who buy or repair things. If you can't increase market share, your former clients must become repeat clients for you to maintain your cash flow. ...

True. But the "clients" have now been trained that nothing lasts anymore. I go to repair something for a friend that blew up after 4 months and it's going to be an annoying SMD repair etc, and they say; "Don't bother, I'll just buy another one, nothing lasts these days anyway".

Whether they buy that brand or a different brand deosn't matter, the industry gets repeat sales as a whole and consumers are stupid and buy based on colour or how pretty the display is or what the salesman pushed that month. They are not very brand focused especially these days where there is a lot of Asian rebadging going on and consumers don't really know who made something anyway.

I am a technician.
...

Excellent. I'm very interested in your opinions on modern consumer electronics. Have you seen design choices in the products that resulted in greatly reduced product life? Have you seen a degradation in product longevity over new generations of a product?

...
Well I have Maytag washer and drier that are going on 25 years old and running strong.
...

Well, 25 years ago they made good stuff! If you want something more relevant, buy a washing machine today and count the years.

I recently had to buy a new washing machine, and after talking with family and friends many have had machines fail in three or four years. The washing machine salesman said "budget for a new machine in five years".

My last machine, a Fisher and Paykel, was 13 years old and I had repaired it 4 times over 13 years; two motor repairs, and two board level electronic repairs, one caused by a water leak that also had to be repaired.

 

I ran a Kenmore washer from 1989 to a year ago. No repairs until the center shaft started leaking. When I looked into it, the shaft seals and the bearings in the transmission were shot and no parts were available. 24 years, not bad.
I bought another Kenmore

In a week, the control board and lid switch died (under warranty). Sears fixed them and then I replaced the lid switch with a toggle switch so the $80 switch wouldn't carry all the current for the motor.

The water levels are just right, but the 4 wash temperatures were: 74 F, 74 F, 85 F, and 122F. All rinse temperatures were "cold" (74 F). The control board failed a month later and set all the water temperatures to, "cold".

I removed the thermistor from the water stream, set the original control to permanent, "cold, and replaced it with my switches to set the temperatures for wash and/or rinse as: 73 F, 90 F, 108 F, and 125F. All these changes and the control board still thinks it is connected to the original parts.

No transmission. All the motor functions are microprocessor controlled through triacs. Very difficult to hack, so the control board still does motor functions and water levels. I could hack the water level switch if I needed to. If I could hack the motor drive, I would replace all the controls with parts that don't cost over $100 each.

I couldn't say that this machine was designed to fail, but it failed twice in the first month. The lid switch has a dry contact in it to see if the lid is closed, but it also has a contact in it that carries all the motor current. The microprocessor already detects the dry contact and will not run the motor if that isn't closed. Why add another contact to carry all the motor current? If they did that, the machine would have one less, high current, eighty dollar part in it.

 

Most of the discourse in this thread is based on ancient history; in the present, we live in a disposable society with a debt-based economy. Manufacturers build whatever is necessary to meet the price demands of the mega-retailers, and most consumers under 50 have no idea of quality, so they buy whatever looks slick and will fit on their credit card.

 

Are you talking to me? Are you talking to me?
Taxi Driver was on TV last night.

No, I don't think you are addressing post #138.
Happy Sunday, tracecom...and everybody else.