|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{StubNotice}} | | {{StubNotice}} |
| =Overview= | | =Overview= |
| '''Planned obsolescence''' is a form of malicious product design that intentionally shortens the lifespan of a product, often in such a way that it fails soon after the legally mandated warranty period. In recent years, software and firmware updates have increasingly been used to augment planned obsolescence, for example by requiring replacement components to be validated by a whitelist. | | '''Planned obsolescence''' is a business strategy where products are intentionally designed to become obsolete, undesirable, or to stop functioning within a predetermined time-frame, forcing consumers to replace them. |
|
| |
|
| In most cases of planned obsolescence, the producer of the product uses this malicious effect for one purpose: profit, and it makes quite a bit of sense if we look at it from the company's perspective. Imagine a company like [[wikipedia:Bic_(company)#Pens|Bic]], who makes the Cristal ball point pen (since 1950). Let's imagine this company figured out a way to make a ball point pen that lasts "forever", perhaps someone's lifetime. This consumer never has to buy another pen (unless they lose it or break it), so Bic would make far less profit, and they might even find it hard to keep their employees working, which would cause a large chain reaction of things that need to change.
| | The phrase "planned obsolescence" was coined in 1932 by Bernard London, who proposed mandatory product expiration to stimulate Depression-era economies. Brooks Stevens later popularized it in the 1950s, defining it as instilling a desire for newer products "sooner than necessary". |
|
| |
|
| However, the above example is for a physical product. The other case we often see, and which is becoming far more relevant in the current day, are electronic products like apps, games, and services. Back in the time of CDs, a game could be purchased once and used again and again. Now, products such as that are far less common, as most electronic companies have strayed to a subscription based service (or free services that implement ads or both). However, it isn't the re-usable copy or the subscription copy that's the problem, it's often how the company goes from point A to point B. They make the physical, one time purchase copy, obsolete, and move to the new form where they can continuously charge the consumer so they make more profit.
| | Types of Planned Obsolescence |
|
| |
|
| It is important to point out that not all cases of planned obsolescence are bad. Companies making a profit isn't bad either, since they tend to pay their employees, which is how many of us make a living. The largest thing is when they take something good and perfectly functional and alter it in some way to make it work worse to encourage or force the consumer to buy their new version. This is what this page focuses on most: malicious planned
| | Contrived Durability: Designing products with inferior materials or components or non repairable parts. |
| | |
| | Systemic Obsolescence: Technological incompatibility, such as software updates rendering older devices unusable. |
| | |
| | Perceived Obsolescence: Marketing-driven trends that make functional items seem outdated. |
| | |
| | Legal Obsolescence: Regulatory bans. |
| | |
| | A foundational 1984 Stanford study theorized that monopolists intentionally reduce product durability to maximize profits by forcing repeat purchases. Oligopolists may collude to shorten product lifespans, though outcomes depend on market dynamics.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bulow |first=Jeremy |date=1984 |title=An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence |url=https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers/economic-theory-planned-obsolescence |journal=Stanford Graduate School of Business}}</ref> |
|
| |
|
| =Famous Planned Obsolescence Cases= | | =Famous Planned Obsolescence Cases= |