They Literally Don't Make Things Like They Used To – EARLY ACCESS, AD-FREE, AND UNCENSORED

Here’s the thing about the lightbulbs that all the people don’t seem to be getting: The independent testing of bulbs to meet the standards didn’t just fine companies for getting less than 1000 hours—it fined them for getting *more than* 1000 hours. That’s the part that made it a grift.

Chris Hanson

I'm waiting for the cult-tier membership plan.

Steven Smith

So I love grindcore music and I looked it up on the metal archives. Creative Waste was in fact a real grindcore band. Awesome.

A few years ago, I bought a MAC mini, an iphone, and airpods. The computer began malfunctioning on day 2...freezing, rebooting, etc. It would lose the signal to the wireless mouse. When that happened, the cursor would disappear and you couldn't do anything until it reconnected which would sometimes take an hour. Then, the audio jack just stopped working and I had no sound. The iphone constantly gave me problems. Apps would spontaneously uninstall themselves. Music would disappear from my downloaded library. Music would play at double speed, stop in the middle of a song, and skip to some other random song. The volume would go up and down on its own. The phone would lock me out and say I was entering the wrong pass code. The aipods would only connect on one side. I'll never buy another apple product again. Overpriced garbage.

Mothman cult?! Where do I sign up????

YithianHistorian

Sorry guys, but this episode just didn't hit for me; not as much as it could have and usually does. The biggest issue is conflating "hyperconsumerism" and "planned obsolescence". Yes, corporations are bad for training consumers to want to buy the latest gadgets and throw the old ones away. But if those old gadgets still work — if there isn't something being done (like Batterygate) to force the tech to stop working — then it should squarely be classified as the former. That seems to be the case with the 1940s automaker example you gave — yes, they wanted people to buy a new car every year, but you admitted in the script that those cars were still fully functional and fully identical to the previous year models! I would have made this episode one on the hyperconsumerist "just buy another one" mentality, which *includes* planned obsolescence, but isn't *equivalent* to it, and opens the door to a far broader discussion when it comes to things like toys and fashion and waste. Gonna highlight the Technology Connections thing like everyone else, but add my own take on the matter: this is one of the most clear-cut examples **outside of modern tech** of something that *looks* like planned obsolescence, so the idea that it *is* that is very easy to latch on to, especially if you (very easily) believe that the Centennial Lightbulb burns brightly. That's really the issue — older lightbulbs were NOT efficient at all (this episode explicitly states they were), and those lights do NOT burn brightly at all. But neither of those things are how we experience lightbulbs on a daily basis, so we instead make the faulty assumptions that lead to the cargo-culting of "it was planned obsolescence!!!". Yes, Apple is bad at this. But as the video dragged on, it seemed less and less like a good-faith criticism of Apple's (yes, often bad-faith) practices and more like a 2007-Internet-edgelord bash-a-thon, but forced to stay on topic so it doesn't seem like that when processing the words. If you just hate Apple and want to relentlessly mock them, go ahead — just not under the guise of highlighting problems with planned obsolescence in tech in a journalistic fashion. No, a $700 gaming rig is not a 1:1 alternative to a Mac, especially if the person is tied to the software for work reasons — and no, as someone from the FOSS world I can say with confidence we have tried this over and over and over again, you can't just *tell* a professional to switch away from their tooling (if we could, no one would be using Adobe software anymore!). And calling them out as the only example of a bad tech company reeks of agenda. You correctly say they are the poster child for this behavior, but that doesn't get you off the hook for the other examples, or for demonstrating in a not-vaguely-handwave-y way that this isn't exclusive to them. Also going to highlight the other commenters here pointing out the Final Cut Pro example is straight up misrepresentation. SMN is usually very good at building a *broad* case for something, pulling lots of examples that highlight things from many disparate places (when the subject isn't inherently a specific one, anyway). This episode not only fails to do that, it also makes mistakes when it does seem to try. I also find it incredibly incredulous that this is something "the left" doesn't care about. We absolutely *do* care about it; we're ALSO pulling for right to repair, especially in things that aren't farm equipment. The problem is having to deal with lawmakers, who are NOT "the left" and who, between the US Congress focusing on impeaching Joe Biden and the NY Governor completely and unilaterally gutting our own Right to Repair bill, seem to either not be bothered or actively hindering our efforts (possibly due to lobbyists; can't forget lobbyists!) under the guise of satisfying them. (And that's before you get to the part that there's just way too much to fight for lately...) This is not so much a criticism of the episode as much as it is something I wanted to get off my chest in general and you provided an opportunity: I personally hate the idea that because a product is well-made enough that "everyone" (quotes mine) gets it, then that's it, no one will ever have a need to buy one again. It's an argument that is defeated by the simple fact that humans have, you know, kids, who often move out and have living spaces and appliances of their own. Like, if a family of three becomes four families, are they all expected to just share the same Instant Pot around? No, they will buy three Instant Pots! And it's not like human generations are staggered so that we have to wait 10 years for the next batch of new households to appear; it's a process that's *constantly happening*, is it not? Also even in the 1950s companies didn't exist to make An product and then expect to live off of that product forever; they instead made additional products to build a venerable product line to provide multiple sources of revenue. Yes, Line Goes Up Economics is bad, but I don't like the implication of calling this an example of that.

Pietro Gagliardi

Choosing Final Cut Pro as an example was quite a miss, IMO. First, its divisive new version wasn't forced on its users; the previous version didn't suddenly stop working. Also, the new version has had 12 years (so far) of free updates since. The iPad version sure, it's a subscription, but the difference between Adobe and Apple in this regard is gigantic nonetheless. In terms of software, Apple is on average… decent? How many companies provide OS updates for as long as Apple does? What's the average period an Android user can expect security updates? On hardware, though, Apple deserves all the thrashing on device repairability. It's shown signs of improvement, but that's not hard when the starting point is zero.

jp

Hi - Just wanted to make a quick note about Final Cut Pro. Part of my job is to edit video, and I have used Final Cut for a long time. While yes, the iPad version of Final Cut is basically slightly better iMovie, the Mac version is completely functional and has all the tools one might need for editing film, collateral, or other content. Many professionals do use the most recent version of Final Cut Pro for Mac, and while yes there is a fierce debate between which video editing software is the best one, many do still choose Final Cut. Also, it should be noted that while yes, the iPad version is a subscription and generally sucks, on Mac the software is a one time purchase forever, with full support for future updates. I bought my copy long ago and have never had an issue I couldn't resolve easily. Updates are frequent and regularly include new features that are actually useful. Generally, tablet version bad desktop version very good

Alex V

When I first moved to the Czech Republic from the US almost 10 years ago, the consumer culture surrounding technology was so different. Because an iphone cost a month and a half's salary, few people were willing to justify upgrading their phone because Apple released a new version that year. Also, lots of people just bought Androids. And to me, that seems sane. Only in 2022 did I finally upgrade my iphone from a 5s to a 14 pro max (what the hell are these stupid ass naming systems with the later models, man?) but only after it legitimately stopped working for good. My dad on the other hand back in the US will be like "Oh I went into the Sprint/Verizon/whatever store and they offered me a free/cheap iphone upgrade to the latest model. WTF?! It's so insane to me. Our raging consumerism is like a race to the bottom to see who can contribute the most e-waste to our planet. It makes me so sick and angry.

Linda

As a Genius Bar team member…no comment

AVTW

I teach Technology to 10th graders, and this is one of the topics I always cover. My students have surprisingly rarely thought about it before our discussions. Thanks for spreading awareness of these malicious design strategies.

AEPSchmitt

Not for anything in particular. We just do.

New Zealand here - we deserve a point

I just recently watched a video from Technology Connections about planned obsolescence, specifically regarding light bulbs; video here: https://youtu.be/zb7Bs98KmnY . That video kind of trips up the opening argument regarding the "great lightbulb conspiracy" and how we were all grifted. Basically, there's a trade-off with light bulbs -- if you want a light bulb that lasts forever, you'll end up with a very dim bulb that uses more energy. He also mentions the "Centennial Light", which was highlighted in the Some More News video. And if you take a look at the photos used in either video, you can see for yourself: the bulb is barely glowing. The shot is during the day, but even then I'd say that a bulb where you can easily see the filament in a photo and it's not over-exposed is not exactly a bright bulb. A better example for planned obsolescence with light bulbs might be the newer trend with LED light fixtures -- which TC also helpfully has a video about: https://youtu.be/fsIFxyOLJXM . Basically, instead of continuing to make light bulbs, manufacturers are taking advantage of LEDs to make custom light fixtures. Only problem is that when the light dies, you have to replace the entire fixture -- not just a bulb. Creates more waste than a single bulb, and also requires people to be okay dealing with mains voltage ( or hiring someone replace the fixture for you -- haha, capitalism ). And not just small fixtures like what you'd have in a closet -- think all the way up to gaudy chandeliers. So while there was definitely a cartel that set the maximum hours for a light bulb, it was only *partially* for money reasons. The other reason was that building light bulbs so they only had a lifetime of 1000 hours meant that the bulbs were cheaper to operate ( in terms of electricity cost, which is good for the consumer ) and brighter.

Funny thing, Unlearning Economics is about to drop a video about Planned Obsolescence as well. Should be fun💀