The Lightbulb Conspiracy - products designed to fail

[Bucic]

The Lightbulb Conspiracy documentary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y1xt4nEvipg

 

If you'd like to skip to some more real stuff, skipping historical parts, go directly to 20:53

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1xt4nEvipg&feature=player_detailpage#t=1253s

 

[...temporarilydeleted...]

 

 

Fortunately the rest of the documentary is more reasonable, showing the case of 'planned obsolescence' being applied to DuPont products.

 

 

On a personal note, what t EF is with this wannabe-mysterious woman narration in documentaries nowadays?!? I recall I was watching some documentary about perfectly legitimate subject and the narrator woman made it sound like it was about bananas planning to takeover the world!

Edited December 31, 2011 by Bucic

[asparagin]

Thanks for sharing. Made me feel more miserable. Share something with kittens next time! :D

 

Anyway something somehow on subject, which I watched couple of weeks ago:

 

VIDEO

[Bucic]

Thanks for sharing. Made me feel more miserable. Share something with kittens next time! :D

Kittens suck :P

There, this should relax you a bit :sly:

 

 

Anyway something somehow on subject, which I watched couple of weeks ago:

 

VIDEO

Yeah, I saw it this week. Interesting but I wouldn't give it too much attention, for the very reason you pointed out :) Maybe just the highlight - ease up on your expectations. Also this is what I liked about the documentary in subject - it doesn't leave you [more aware and more hopeless]. It shows that leeches can be effectively opposed.

[hassata]

Vw4KVoEVcr0

[asparagin]

^^ OMG OMG !!

 

It shows that leeches can be effectively opposed.

 

But time is also a factor. And the leeches count on that.

[Beagle One]

The problem is well known, but on the other hand, there are plenty of products that are made to last...but those come with a pricetag not much people are willing to pay.

[Bucic]

^^ OMG OMG !!

But time is also a factor. And the leeches count on that.

Well, you do what you can.

 

The problem is well known, but on the other hand, there are plenty of products that are made to last...but those come with a pricetag not much people are willing to pay.

That's a common and harmful misconception. Solid products do not have to be significantly more expensive. The printer's case depicted in the documentary is a very good example. It was made to fail by design and the failure was triggered by additional electronic chip.

 

Then you have products that wasn't made to fail but that are simply shitty. They are shitty because:

1. People [are not used to] / [are not educated to] / [are thought not to] demand quality. To put it differently: There's a huge acceptance towards shittiness of products.

2. The design of products is often a concert of idiocy - not conscious solutions to lower unit price.

 

It's noteworthy that point 1 cover for both points.

 

The "plenty of products that are made to last...but those come with a pricetag not much people are willing to pay" thing comes down to marketing which has succeeded with putting the following thought into people's heads: robustness is a LUXURY. After that it's easy as no one will oppose the fact that luxury comes with a higher price tag.

Edited January 2, 2012 by Bucic

[ALDEGA]

The printer's case depicted in the documentary is a very good example. It was made to fail by design and the failure was triggered by additional electronic chip.

Do you believe everything you see in such a biased video? (it's practically a documentary on bias ...)

 

First we see the guy driving the printer (which is apparently filled with heavy lead) on a cart to his "workshop" (completely pointless scene). Next he claims the printer is set to stop working a fixed number of prints, without showing any proof. Printers require maintenance because they contain parts that wear down. The document which is barely shown in the video indicates the expected performance, as per the design. Counters may be kept for certain parts to alert the user to a part needs to be replaced (CRU or FRU). On many printers this kind of alert (which sometimes prevents printing) can be reset, without actually replacing the part.

 

Printer vendors make their profit on the ink cartridges/toner, not the printer itself. In some cases, printers are cheaper than a single set of ink cartridges. No wonder they take (unlicensed) third party ink suppliers to court ... Anyhow, when your printer breaks down, you'll likely be slightly upset and may be reluctant to buy from the same vendor again (printer AND consumables). This is something they'd want to avoid, right?

Edited January 2, 2012 by ALDEGA

[Bucic]

ALDEGA,

 

First of all I've read about it before. Second - the printer is insignificant in this whole issue. Not to mention it's only an episode in the documentary.

 

Are you the kind of a viewer that finds a crack in such a documentary, gets preoccupied with it, fails to get anything else from it, contented with his 'superior skepticism'? The fact that, for example, Corporation is a leftie flick doesn't mean it doesn't bring many valuable thoughts and information.

 

Interestingly enough only the two last sentences of your post are potentially valid points***. The rest is... a confirmation that the practice is being put to life by manufacturers. So, make up your mind.

 

That said I wouldn't count on my further participation in discussion of 'but the printer...' or other barely significant details.

 

As for the ***

Sure. They may also be a lot into coding and the artificial resource limiters give them the opportunity to play with coding a little bit more. (sarcasm on your rationalization)

[ALDEGA]

Second - the printer is insignificant in this whole issue.

The printer's case depicted in the documentary is a very good example.

...

 

Are you the kind of a viewer that finds a crack in such a documentary, gets preoccupied with it, fails to get anything else from it, contented with his 'superior skepticism'?

Where did I claim that we are not living in a consumption society, which is what the documentary is about? I was merely responding to your reply.

[Bucic]

'very good' as 'simple'. Then - only one of examples. No contradiction there.

 

Where did I claim that we are not living in a consumption society, which is what the documentary is about?

So, a printer and a consumption society, eh? I guess you'd be better off skipping the whole documentary and watching just the part about Apple batteries.

[Bucic]

Apple bows out of green tech certification programme | News | TechRadar

[Peyoteros]

[Yurgon]

Apple bows out of green tech certification programme | News | TechRadar

 

I'm not usually one to defend Apple, but apparently it took less than a week to rethink that decision. A letter from Bob Mansfield:

 

We’ve recently heard from many loyal Apple customers who were disappointed to learn that we had removed our products from the EPEAT rating system. I recognize that this was a mistake. Starting today, all eligible Apple products are back on EPEAT.

 

(via)

[monotwix]

It takes the whole team to create it and 3 neurons to rethink it.

[Bucic]

I'm not usually one to defend Apple, but apparently it took less than a week to rethink that decision. A letter from Bob Mansfield:

 

 

 

(via)

Yup. I was too busy to post it. That said life shows companies will insist on making the regulations more and more tolerant so they can go back to higher profits keeping the certificates. It usually works with thrilling similarity. After all we have lots of cancerogenic chemicals approved for use by law. While we're at it - I wonder when people will stop settling for having one or more of their friends die of cancer at the age of thirty something. Do people need half of their friends dead before shaking off from the marasmus? Just wondering...

Edited July 18, 2012 by Bucic