Planned obsolescence ( wikipedia article ) and comments
Planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence in industrial design is a
policy of deliberately planning or designing a product with a limited useful
life, so it will become obsolete or nonfunctional after a certain period of
time. Planned obsolescence has potential benefits for a producer because to
obtain continuing use of the product the consumer is under pressure to purchase
again, whether from the same manufacturer (a replacement part or a newer model),
or from a competitor which might also rely on planned obsolescence.
In some cases, deliberate deprecation of earlier versions of a technology is
used to reduce ongoing support costs, especially in the software industry.
Though this could be considered planned obselescence, it differs from the
classic form in that the consumer is typically made aware of the limited support
lifetime of the product as part of their licensing agreement.
For an industry, planned obsolescence stimulates demand by encouraging
purchasers to buy sooner if they still want a functioning product. Built-in
obsolescence is used in many different products. There is, however, the
potential backlash of consumers who learn that the manufacturer invested money
to make the product obsolete faster; such consumers might turn to a producer (if
any exists) that offers a more durable alternative.
Planned obsolescence was first developed in the 1920s and 1930s when mass
production had opened every minute aspect of the production process to exacting
analysis.[citation needed]
Estimates of planned obsolescence can influence a company's decisions about
product engineering. Therefore the company can use the least expensive
components that satisfy product lifetime projections. Such decisions are part of
a broader discipline known as value engineering.Contents
1 Origins of the term
2 Rationale behind the strategy
3 Types of obsolescence
3.1 Technical or functional obsolescence
3.2 Proprietary batteries
3.3 Systemic obsolescence
3.4 Style obsolescence
3.5 Notification obsolescence
3.6 Obsolescence by depletion
4 Economics of planned obsolescence
5 Obsolescence and durability
6 Planned obsolescence in software
7 Fair trade
8 See also
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Origins of the term
Origins of planned obsolescence go back at least as far as 1932 with Bernard
London's pamphlet Ending the Depression Through Planned Obsolescence.[2] However,
the phrase was first popularized in 1954 by Brooks Stevens, an American
industrial designer. Stevens was due to give a talk at an advertising conference
in Minneapolis in 1954. Without giving it much thought, he used the term as the
title of his talk.
From that point on, "planned obsolescence" became Stevens' catchphrase. By his
definition, planned obsolescence was "Instilling in the buyer the desire to own
something a little newer, a little better, a little sooner than is necessary."
The term was quickly taken up by others, but Stevens' definition was challenged.
By the late 1950s, planned obsolescence had become a commonly-used term for
products designed to break easily or to quickly go out of style. In fact, the
concept was so widely recognized that in 1959 Volkswagen mocked it in a
now-legendary advertising campaign. While acknowledging the widespread use of
planned obsolescence among automobile manufacturers, Volkswagen pitched itself
as an alternative. "We do not believe in planned obsolescence," the ads
suggested. "We don't change a car for the sake of change."
In 1960, cultural critic Vance Packard published The Waste Makers, promoted as
an exposé of "the systematic attempt of business to make us wasteful,
debt-ridden, permanently discontented individuals."
Packard divided planned obsolescence into two sub categories: obsolescence of
desirability and obsolescence of function. "Obsolescence of desirability", also
called "psychological obsolescence", referred to marketers' attempts to wear out
a product in the owner's mind. Packard quoted industrial designer George Nelson,
who wrote: "Design... is an attempt to make a contribution through change. When
no contribution is made or can be made, the only process available for giving
the illusion of change is 'styling!'"
The document Light Bulb Conspiracy[6] claimed that the Phoebus cartel
deliberately limited the expected lifetime of an incandescent light bulb to 1000
hours. However, 1000 hours was a reasonable optimum life expectancy for most
bulbs.A longer lifetime could be obtained only at the expense of efficiency:
more electricity is wasted as heat and less light is obtained.
Rationale behind the strategy
In Democracy in America (1840), Alexis de Tocqueville noted the rise of planned
obsolescence in the United States:"I accost an American sailor, and I inquire
why the ships of his country are built so as to last but for a short time; he
answers without hesitation that the art of navigation is every day making such
rapid progress, that the finest vessel would become almost useless if it lasted
beyond a certain number of years."
The rationale behind the strategy is to generate long-term sales volume by
reducing the time between repeat purchases, (referred to as shortening the
replacement cycle). Firms that pursue this strategy believe that the additional
sales revenue it creates more than offsets the additional costs of research and
development and opportunity costs of existing product line cannibalization. The
rewards are by no means certain: In a competitive industry, this can be a risky
strategy because consumers may decide to buy from competitors. Because of this,
gaining by this strategy requires fooling the consumers on the actual cost per
use of the item in comparison to the competition.[citation needed]
Shortening the replacement cycle has many critics as well as supporters. Critics
such as Vance Packard claim the process wastes resources and exploits customers.
Resources are used up making changes, often cosmetic changes, that are not of
great value to the customer. Supporters claim it drives technological advances
and contributes to material well-being. They claim that a market structure of
planned obsolescence and rapid innovation may be preferred to long-lasting
products and slow innovation. In a fast-paced competitive industry market
success requires that products are made obsolete by actively developing
replacements. Waiting for a competitor to make products obsolete is a sure
guarantee of future demise.
The main concern of the opponents of planned obsolescence is not the existence
of the process, but its possible postponement.[citation needed] They are
concerned that technological improvements are not introduced even though they
could be. They are worried that marketers will refrain from developing new
products, or postpone their introduction because of product cannibalization
issues. For example, if the payback period for a product is five years, a firm
might refrain from introducing a new product for at least five years even though
it may be possible for them to launch in three years. This postponement is only
feasible in monopolistic or oligopolistic markets. In more competitive markets
rival firms will take advantage of the postponement and launch their own
products.
Types of obsolescence
Technical or functional obsolescence
The design of most consumer products includes an expected average lifetime
permeating all stages of development. Thus, it must be decided early in the
design of a complex product how long it is designed to last so that each
component can be made to those specifications.
Planned obsolescence is made more likely by making the cost of repairs
comparable to the replacement cost, or by refusing to provide service or parts
any longer. A product might even never have been serviceable. Creating new lines
of products that do not interoperate with older products can also make an older
model quickly obsolete, forcing replacement. Examples include change of formats
and peripheral devices in computers, change of formats in home audio recordings
and movies (records to tapes to CDs and VHS Video to DVDs to Blu-ray).
Planned functional obsolescence is a type of technical obsolescence in which
companies introduce new technology which replaces the old. The old products do
not have the same capabilities or functionality as the new ones. For example a
company that sold video tape decks while they were developing DVDs was engaging
in planned obsolescence. They were actively planning to make their existing
product (video tape) obsolete by developing a substitute product (DVDs) with
greater functionality (better quality). Associated products that are complements
to the old products also become obsolete with the introduction of new products.
For example video tape holders saw the same fate as video tapes and video tape
decks.
Proprietary batteries
Many portable consumer electronics contain proprietary, often lithium-based
batteries. These batteries typically last only about 500 cycles before losing
large amounts of their capacity as well as slowly losing capacity when not in
use.
Rechargeable lithium battery packs usually contain integrated circuits (IC);
they are required because of the above average risk of fire or explosion the
batteries have when improperly charged. The IC keeps track of statistics of the
battery to determine the current full charge point for the battery. A
manufacturer can set the algorithms of the IC to be ultra conservative or time/cycle
based, rather than based around the physical properties of the battery cells;
this artificially limits the life of the battery. The IC will not permit the
device to charge the battery any more than the IC dictates.
Production of these batteries is usually stopped at around the same time the
product is discontinued,[citation needed] therefore rendering the product
worthless once the batteries start to wear out. Some people will reset the ICs
in the battery pack, and obtain almost their original runtime on the battery (minus
the natural decay the battery cells),[citation needed] only to have to do it
again in the future because the IC ran down the limit.
While battery packs can be rebuilt and fitted with new cells,[8] this is either
too costly or too time consuming for most consumers.
Systemic obsolescence
Planned systemic obsolescence is the deliberate attempt to make a product
obsolete by altering the system in which it is used in such a way as to make its
continued use difficult. New software is frequently introduced that is not
compatible with older software. This makes the older software largely obsolete.
Even though an older version of a word processing program is operating correctly,
it might not be able to read data saved by newer versions. The lack of
interoperability forces many users to purchase new programs prematurely. The
greater the network externalities in the market, the more effective this
strategy is. Oftentimes, developers of hardware will try to prevent a product
from being backwards compatible with older interchangeable cartridges and
proprietary connector plugs.
Another way of introducing systemic obsolescence is to eliminate service and
maintenance for a product. If a product fails, the user is forced to purchase a
new one. This strategy seldom works because there are typically third parties
that are prepared to perform the service if parts are still available. One place
it does work is in proprietary software, where copyright forbids third parties
from performing some kinds of service. One example of this type of obsolescence
is Microsoft's termination of support for earlier versions of Windows and older
service packs on more recent versions.[9] Another example would be that the
recently introduced Internet Explorer 9 web browser will not work on Windows XP
(which can only use up to the IE8 web browser). Apple Inc.'s Mac OS X (introduced
following the purchase of NeXT in 1997) is Unix-based and incompatible with
previous versions of the company's operating systems, although a compatibility
layer was provided for several years. This strategy can have an unintended
consequence; if a customer is not dependent on the specific proprietary system
they may switch to a different system in hopes of longer support.
Style obsolescence
Marketing may be driven primarily by aesthetic design. Product categories in
this case display a fashion cycle. By continually introducing new designs, and
retargeting or discontinuing others, a manufacturer can "ride the fashion cycle".
Such product categories include automobiles (style obsolescence), with a strict
yearly schedule of new models; the almost entirely style-driven clothing
industry (riding the fashion cycle); and the mobile phone industries with
constant minor feature enhancements and restyling.
Planned style obsolescence occurs when marketers change the styling of products
so customers will purchase products more frequently. The style changes are
designed to make owners of the old model feel "out of date". It is also designed
to differentiate the product from the competition, thereby reducing price
competition. One example of style obsolescence is the automobile industry, in
which manufacturers typically make style changes every year or two. As the
former CEO of General Motors, Alfred P. Sloan stated in 1941, "Today the
appearance of a motorcar is a most important factor in the selling end of the
business—perhaps the most important factor— because everyone knows the car will
run."
Some marketers go one step further: they attempt to initiate fashions or fads.
Successfully created fashions or fads include Beanie Babies, Ninja Turtles,
Cabbage Patch Kids, pet rocks, acid wash jeans, and tank tops. Obsolescence is
built into these products in the sense that marketers are aware of the shortness
of their product life cycles so they work within that constraint. When Beanie
Babies sales revenue started to decline, company president Ty Warner decided to
go for one last Christmas marketing push and then drop the product.
Another strategy is to take advantage of fashion changes, often called the
fashion cycle. The fashion cycle is the repeated introduction, rise, popular
culmination, and decline of a style as it progresses through various social
strata. Marketers can "ride the fashion cycle" by changing the mix of products
that they direct at various market segments. This is very common in the clothing
industry. A certain style of dress will initially be aimed at a very high income
segment, then gradually be re-targeted to lower income segments. The fashion
cycle can repeat itself, in which case a stylistically obsolete product may
regain popularity and cease to be obsolete.
Notification obsolescence
Some companies have developed a version of obsolescence in which the product
informs the user when it is time to buy a replacement. Examples of this include
water filters that display a replacement notice after a predefined time and
disposable razors that have a strip that changes color. Whether the user is
notified before the product has actually deteriorated or the product simply
deteriorates more quickly than is necessary, planned obsolescence is the result.
In this way planned obsolescence may be introduced without the company going to
the expense of developing a "more up to date" replacement model.
In some cases, notification may be combined with the deliberate disabling of a
product to prevent it from working, thus requiring the buyer to purchase a
replacement. Inkjet printer manufacturers who employ proprietary smart chips in
their ink cartridges to prevent them from being used after a certain threshold (number
of pages, time, etc.), even though the cartridge may still contain usable ink or
could be refilled. Some medical equipment also exploits this technique to ensure
a steady stream of revenue from sales of replacement consumables. This
constitutes programmed obsolescence, in that there is no random component to the
decline in function.
Obsolescence by depletion
When a product consumes a resource, as when a computer printer consumes ink and
paper, it is generally understood that this is unavoidable. But some products
also consume related resources that need not be consumed. For example, a
4-colour inkjet printer that is used mostly for printing in gray scale and
seldom in colour, may be pre-programmed to deplete colour inks while printing
black, so that the colour cartridge(s) must be replaced about the same time as
the black ink cartridge.
Economics of planned obsolescence
Planned obsolescence tends to work best when a producer has at least an
oligopoly. Before introducing a planned obsolescence, the producer has to know
that the consumer is at least somewhat likely to buy a replacement from them. In
these cases of planned obsolescence, there is an information asymmetry between
the producer–who knows how long the product was designed to last–and the
consumer, who does not. When a market becomes more competitive, product
lifespans tend to increase. When Japanese vehicles with longer lifespans entered
the American market in the 1960s and 1970s, American carmakers were forced to
respond by building more durable products.
There are some industries where there is significant competition and consumers
have chosen to go for products that will fail more quickly anyway.[citation
needed] All that is needed is that the probability of repeat purchasing from the
same producer exceeds that of initially choosing the producer.
Even in a situation where planned obsolescence is appealing to both producer and
consumer there can also be significant harm to society in the form of negative
externalities. Continuously replacing, rather than repairing, products creates
more waste, pollution, uses more natural resources, and results in more consumer
spending. One workaround for these setbacks can involve a consumer getting more
tech-savvy about them so they can jury-rig them to work with newer equipment
similar to a MacGyverism; and upcycling the resources can offset the budget for
home projects, whereas downcycling allows for more generalized purposes to live
on. And those consumer strategies can counter the setbacks.
Others have defended planned obsolescence as a necessary driving force behind
innovation and economic growth. Many products, such as DVDs, become both cheaper
and more useful the more people have them. Planned obsolescence will also tend
to benefit those companies with the most modern and up-to-date products, thus
encouraging extra investment in research and development that often has large
positive externalities.
Obsolescence and durability
If marketers expect a product to become obsolete, they can design it to last for
a specific lifetime. If a product will be technically or stylistically obsolete
in five years, many marketers will design the product so it will only last for
that time. This is done through a technical process called value engineering. An
example is home entertainment electronics which tend to be designed and built
with moving components like motors and gears that last until technical or
stylistic innovations make them obsolete.
These products could be built with higher-grade components, but they are not
because it is stated that this imposes an unnecessary cost on the purchaser –
see overengineering. Value engineering will reduce the cost of making the
product and lower the price to consumers. A company will typically use the least
expensive components that satisfy product’s lifetime projections.
The use of value engineering techniques have led to planned obsolescence being
associated with product deterioration and inferior quality. Vance Packard
claimed that this could give engineering a bad name, because it directed
creative engineering energies toward short-term market ends rather than more
lofty and ambitious engineering goals.
Planned obsolescence in software
Software companies are sometimes thought to deliberately drop support for older
technologies as a calculated attempt to force users to purchase new products to
replace those made obsolete. Most proprietary software will ultimately reach an
end-of-life point, at which the manufacturer will cease updates and support. As
open source software can always be updated and maintained by the end user, the
user is not at the sole mercy of a proprietary vendor.
It may sometimes be economically infeasible to offer perpetual support for
software. This especially applies to network-related software, where continued
development work may be necessary to close new entry points for malicious
attackers and malicious software. Covering these costs would either require a
continual maintenance fee or a much higher upfront cost. Thus network-related
software may reach an actual end-of-life, where support has been withdrawn from
the provider and continued use of the software would yield an unacceptable
security risk to the customer.
Unfortunately. when we read about these kind of topics, most of the time, informations are limited to what can be said, or journalists are allowed to write.
So, i shall add some infos about the way you can find out how your product has been egineered to break, or programmed to stop working abruptly.
If you own a pc, as you are reading these informations, you should:
1) use an antivurs on your pc, an antitojan, an antispyware, and a firewall, then look for rootkit viruses, and on line exploit attacks, limit the number of open ports and services working on your pc, and protect yourself against common attacks. Any outer exchange should be recorded, to understand what the machine is doing. Unfortunately against native spyware that is programmed within common operative systems, there is not much that can be done. If you shut the doors they are using, the system generates a critical error and within 30 seconds the pc shuts down. Avoid using any pc that contains personal data online. Upgrade requests are most of the time a manner to collect infos.
2 ) Do not use programs that attempt to steal all your infos: Picasa, a free program that allowes you to visualize pictures, contains a trojan that will absorb all your images and send them somewhere....anywhere...
3) Firewalls and antiviruses, usually become administrators, and are capable
of opening plenty of doors, stealing any information that is memorized inside
your computer.
I am not saying that they are doing so, but some one that knows how they work
and is able to exploit their holes, could do it.
4) Change antivirus every month, since hackers, that know exactly where holes are, into these programs, use them to enter into your machine and do what they like.
5) P2P servers are usually full of fake ones, so control them.
6) Do not use any pc that contains personal data online, and use a spare one, to answer to mails, and navigate. Cookies are dangerous, and traces of what you have been reading and doing are recorded continuously, in specific files called mru, and in a specific folders called winsx, that keep growing all the time. You should clean your personal data too, and use multiple clkeaning programs to find pests, and dlls, services or exes that should not be there.
7) Blogs, and social networks, like facebook, twitter and other personal information collectors, have been created to steal all personal mails, since they immediately ask for your mails and passwords, to connect you with friends. This means that they will be allowed to read all your mails, since you have created your account. Do no forget this. Understand, that your avatars should be made out of pure fiction, and if you are playing for real, then, bank numbers, should be kept safe. Create a fake email, and use this one to play.
If you own any apparatus that is programmable, find infos an the system that is running, and how people have solved major problems, and corrected mistakes and limitations that the programmers have introduced to limit it.
If you own a device that in not linked to the internet, then your problem will be written inside the EPROM, and probably, will appear as soon as the date of a specific failure has been fixed. Sometimes, the number of times you switch on a device, counts. Some other time, the number of hours counts. Some other, a quantity may influence a specific behaviour. The number of pages, of pictures, of songs, and any other value that can be counted to a specific limit.
Find where the eprom is and see if any Russian Hacker has decripted its content, and find a solution to your possible problem. Most printers, that stop working nowadays, can be reprogrammed to live again with a simple code, like cell phones, and cameras, videocams etc... these people just do not want you to know how it is easy to make money, and so, next time something breaks down, find the solutions that blogs are offering to everyone. Your device MAY BE SAFE AND SOUND.
Printers, cars, boilers, cell phones and plenty of machines that are run by sentient functions, are programmed to self destruct.
If your device has no memory circuit, it can still be destroyed by introducing materials that will rapidly become obsolete. I remember a "Penta..." camera that suddenly stopped working. I opend it, and found out that all the mechanisms but one where made of plastic, and the specific metal one, had destoryed the plastic parts with which it was in contact. My compliments. An engine part made by "Ope..." , that used to break down every 100.000 km, had specifically been engineered in two different metals, so that the soft part would become obsolete and break ( melt down ) as soon as the car reached 110.000 km.
All devices have been downgraded nowadays, in comparison to the possibilities that we have scientifically reached. The idea that THINGS CAN ONLY GET BETTER, IS A FALSE ONE. Less parts are used, the better the device will work. The greater is friction, and the higher is the number of moving parts, the better these will break. Wind farms are bullshit. You do not need any moving parts to generate energy, but vibrating ones. The whole thing is spinning around, you just need to channel energy and use it.
So, be wise.
Amonakur and Wiki