[Sohcahtoa82]

> I don't think actual malicious planned obsolescence is as prevalent as many believe.

I've been saying this for a while.

Consumers are insanely price-sensitive while also short-sighted. They'll buy a $20 blender that will die in a year rather than the $100 blender that will last a lifetime.

Manufacturers know this and there's a race to the bottom on pricing. To get pricing as low as possible, quality and durability take a hit.

[wwtrv]

> They'll buy a $20 blender that will die in a year rather than the $100 blender that will last a lifetime.

One problem for consumers is that often it's very hard to tell which is which. There is no guarantee that a $60 item won't just be overpriced garbage which is as bad (or worse if they spent much of that money on unnecessarily complex features that reduce reliability) as the $20 one, so always picking the cheaper item that superficially might seem good enough is not necessarily irrational.

(of course this doesen't necessarily apply to all brands yet)

[lupusreal]

> Consumers are insanely price-sensitive while also short-sighted. They'll buy a $20 blender that will die in a year rather than the $100 blender that will last a lifetime.

It's so much worse than that... They'll buy a $500 blender that lasts 6 months if it comes with sufficient "smart" technology integration to make them feel like they're buying into a futuristic lifestyle that others can be jealous of.

Hence, home AC units controlled by fancy tablets (which are actually shit) instead of thermostats (analogue or even monochrome LCD digital units) on the wall. Because tracking down wherever your family members wandered off to with the control tablet is so much easier than simply turning a knob or pushing a button that never moves because it's screwed into place... It must be better, it's new and expensive....