5 ms·

This is not just an issue with housing. Virtually EVERY product is built with less long-term quality. I collect antique espresso machines. Some of these are hi

by adevine 11y ago

This is not just an issue with housing. Virtually EVERY product is built with less long-term quality. I collect antique espresso machines. Some of these are highly sought after because they use big, heavy, high quality components: big brass boilers, copper piping, stainless steel enclosures and big brass groupheads. Compare that with many flimsy, plastic machines today (which rarely last more than a couple years), and it's no wonder there is a market for these older machines.

peteretep 11y ago
> Virtually EVERY product Well not just physical products. Flights are another good example. > Compare that with many flimsy, plastic machines today ... that are available at a cheap accessible price. It's still entirely possible to buy espresso machines that are built like tanks, or ones that have lots of expensive electronics, and so on. The high-end of the market has not disappeared... > it's no wonder there is a market for these older machines. Market being the operative word here. We've seen a spread in the market to where the cheap end is now affordable by everyone, and the expensive end is even better than (and more expensive than) the best of the best was 20 years ago. Hard to see how this isn't a good thing, except from an environmental perspective.
- _delirium 11y ago
  > the expensive end is even better than (and more expensive than) the best of the best was 20 years ago I'm not sure about this part, unless you are very careful in what you're shopping for, and knowledgeable about it. One Achilles heel of a lot of current appliances is that there are now circuit boards everywhere, which are a common point of premature failure. If the computerized part of your appliance fails (due to a power surge, capacitor aging, etc.), the device is effectively bricked in a difficult-to-repair way, even if all the mechanical parts are still fine. One option is to buy all-mechanical high-end models, which works with some appliances (espresso machines) but is basically impossible with others (washing machines).
  - peteretep 11y ago
    You couldn't buy a washing machine 20 years ago that was anywhere near as energy efficient, kind to your clothes, could figure out the right amount of detergent or softener to use, or had features like remote operation so your clothes don't sit damp all day. Durability is not the only mark of quality.
    - frik 11y ago
      I hope you know that energy efficients often means using motors with less Watt so that e.g. your washing machine will take longer to complete the washing cycle and with less hot water. The same with vacuum cleaners, eletronic kettles, etc. Eletro motors aren't a new invention, even brushless motors are there for some decades. Not every energy saving idea is a good idea. Often it's better to buy a few photovoltaic panels yourself and buy high quality brands that last decades (e.g. Miele washing machines). I would buy a 2000W vacuum cleaner that can clean my house in 30min than a 1000W vacuum cleaner that is less efficient in cleaning the floor so it takes at least twice as long to really clean the floor. In the end you often trade time for peak power usage. Sure, power grid operators like that.
      - xorcist 11y ago
        In published tests, cleaning ability is not correlated at all to power over a certain level. Most 2000W cleaners are older models, since research and development has focused on energy efficiency for the past decade, so they are even likely to be worse. I could easily construct a 10 kW model for you, and it's going to run very hot. (There was this EU introduced power cap for domestic vacuum cleaners the other year, accompanied with articles how you should hurry up and buy one of the powerful ones before they were forbidden. I was in the market for one, and scoured every independent test I could find where I understood the language, and the result were the same: the modern ones using less power picked up small particles better. As soon as you have a powerful enough engine other things start to matter. That's when I sighed deeply about journalistic integrity and bought one of the newer models.) You describe an important problem. Consumers keep buying older models, which are objectively worse, because they want a scalar value for "betterness". It's just like megapixels, where you stuff a 20 megapixel sensor behind a plastic lens and consumers buy it because big numbers are good.
- ido 11y ago
  We've seen a spread in the market to where the cheap end is now affordable by everyone, and the expensive end is even better than (and more expensive than) the best of the best was 20 years ago. I've worked for a household-name European electronics manufacturer about 10 years ago (as an embedded programmer). Afaik their high-end offering differed from the low-end ones mostly or entirely in cosmetic details.
babuskov 11y ago
It's called Planned Obsolescence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence
- madaxe_again 11y ago
  Came here to say exactly that. Not sure why folks wouldn't think that the same philosophy which overtook manufactured goods post-war wouldn't also apply to construction. I mean, I'm sat here in my living room, place was built 1798 (relatively modern), near as damnit everything is original. Stone floors. Stone fireplaces. Stone walls. Lath and plaster ceilings. Lime plaster. They knew what they were doing, this shit is built to last. These days, they also know what they're doing, but a house has a shelf life of 30 years, so you can tear it down later, not feel bad, and stimulate the construction industry. In theory. I. Practice people live in leaky shoeboxes made of twigs, paper and tar. Finally, the insurance industry drives this. Ever try insuring a 100 year old slate roof in America? Good luck with that. They'll insist you rip it off and replace it with tar shingles, because no roof more than 20 years old can be any good. My other property has a 13th century stone roof (limestone, stacked), and it's barely been maintained and is in perfect nick after 600+ years.
  - douche 11y ago
    I've never understood why people put asphalt shingles on new houses, instead of putting on steel roofing. It might be a hair cheaper, but the difference between shingle and the screw-on steel panels is not that much. A.) Snow doesn't come off of shingles worth a damn unless you have a wicked pitch on your roof. So you have to get up and shovel off the roof, or risk icedams, leaks, and potentially the whole roof collapsing if you have really heavy snowfall. B.) Shingles only last about 20-30 years. Steel roofing lasts a lifetime. You might have to repaint it once in a great while.
    - burger_moon 11y ago
      Steel roofs are a lot louder when it's raining and such, so it might have something to do with that. Also, they don't look as good (not so much for me personally, but in general) as a shingled roof. No question that they last a lot longer. I very often see large garages and barns built with steel roofs.

by adevine 11y ago

peteretep 11y ago

> Virtually EVERY product Well not just physical products. Flights are another good example. > Compare that with many flimsy, plastic machines today ... that are available at a cheap accessible price. It's still entirely possible to buy espresso machines that are built like tanks, or ones that have lots of expensive electronics, and so on. The high-end of the market has not disappeared... > it's no wonder there is a market for these older machines. Market being the operative word here. We've seen a spread in the market to where the cheap end is now affordable by everyone, and the expensive end is even better than (and more expensive than) the best of the best was 20 years ago. Hard to see how this isn't a good thing, except from an environmental perspective.

_delirium 11y ago
> the expensive end is even better than (and more expensive than) the best of the best was 20 years ago I'm not sure about this part, unless you are very careful in what you're shopping for, and knowledgeable about it. One Achilles heel of a lot of current appliances is that there are now circuit boards everywhere, which are a common point of premature failure. If the computerized part of your appliance fails (due to a power surge, capacitor aging, etc.), the device is effectively bricked in a difficult-to-repair way, even if all the mechanical parts are still fine. One option is to buy all-mechanical high-end models, which works with some appliances (espresso machines) but is basically impossible with others (washing machines).
- peteretep 11y ago
  You couldn't buy a washing machine 20 years ago that was anywhere near as energy efficient, kind to your clothes, could figure out the right amount of detergent or softener to use, or had features like remote operation so your clothes don't sit damp all day. Durability is not the only mark of quality.
  - frik 11y ago
    I hope you know that energy efficients often means using motors with less Watt so that e.g. your washing machine will take longer to complete the washing cycle and with less hot water. The same with vacuum cleaners, eletronic kettles, etc. Eletro motors aren't a new invention, even brushless motors are there for some decades. Not every energy saving idea is a good idea. Often it's better to buy a few photovoltaic panels yourself and buy high quality brands that last decades (e.g. Miele washing machines). I would buy a 2000W vacuum cleaner that can clean my house in 30min than a 1000W vacuum cleaner that is less efficient in cleaning the floor so it takes at least twice as long to really clean the floor. In the end you often trade time for peak power usage. Sure, power grid operators like that.
    - xorcist 11y ago
      In published tests, cleaning ability is not correlated at all to power over a certain level. Most 2000W cleaners are older models, since research and development has focused on energy efficiency for the past decade, so they are even likely to be worse. I could easily construct a 10 kW model for you, and it's going to run very hot. (There was this EU introduced power cap for domestic vacuum cleaners the other year, accompanied with articles how you should hurry up and buy one of the powerful ones before they were forbidden. I was in the market for one, and scoured every independent test I could find where I understood the language, and the result were the same: the modern ones using less power picked up small particles better. As soon as you have a powerful enough engine other things start to matter. That's when I sighed deeply about journalistic integrity and bought one of the newer models.) You describe an important problem. Consumers keep buying older models, which are objectively worse, because they want a scalar value for "betterness". It's just like megapixels, where you stuff a 20 megapixel sensor behind a plastic lens and consumers buy it because big numbers are good.
ido 11y ago
We've seen a spread in the market to where the cheap end is now affordable by everyone, and the expensive end is even better than (and more expensive than) the best of the best was 20 years ago. I've worked for a household-name European electronics manufacturer about 10 years ago (as an embedded programmer). Afaik their high-end offering differed from the low-end ones mostly or entirely in cosmetic details.

babuskov 11y ago

It's called Planned Obsolescence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

madaxe_again 11y ago
Came here to say exactly that. Not sure why folks wouldn't think that the same philosophy which overtook manufactured goods post-war wouldn't also apply to construction. I mean, I'm sat here in my living room, place was built 1798 (relatively modern), near as damnit everything is original. Stone floors. Stone fireplaces. Stone walls. Lath and plaster ceilings. Lime plaster. They knew what they were doing, this shit is built to last. These days, they also know what they're doing, but a house has a shelf life of 30 years, so you can tear it down later, not feel bad, and stimulate the construction industry. In theory. I. Practice people live in leaky shoeboxes made of twigs, paper and tar. Finally, the insurance industry drives this. Ever try insuring a 100 year old slate roof in America? Good luck with that. They'll insist you rip it off and replace it with tar shingles, because no roof more than 20 years old can be any good. My other property has a 13th century stone roof (limestone, stacked), and it's barely been maintained and is in perfect nick after 600+ years.
- douche 11y ago
  I've never understood why people put asphalt shingles on new houses, instead of putting on steel roofing. It might be a hair cheaper, but the difference between shingle and the screw-on steel panels is not that much. A.) Snow doesn't come off of shingles worth a damn unless you have a wicked pitch on your roof. So you have to get up and shovel off the roof, or risk icedams, leaks, and potentially the whole roof collapsing if you have really heavy snowfall. B.) Shingles only last about 20-30 years. Steel roofing lasts a lifetime. You might have to repaint it once in a great while.
  - burger_moon 11y ago
    Steel roofs are a lot louder when it's raining and such, so it might have something to do with that. Also, they don't look as good (not so much for me personally, but in general) as a shingled roof. No question that they last a lot longer. I very often see large garages and barns built with steel roofs.