Planned obsolescence: Difference between revisions

Line 1:

=Overview=

'''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.

'''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. This practice maximizes profits for corporations, but leads to unnecessary waste and consumer frustration.

~~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"~~.

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>

~~<u>Types of Planned Obsolescence:</u>~~

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".

* Contrived Durability: Designing products with inferior materials or components or non repairable parts.

Vance Packard’s 1960, The Waste Makers, critiqued corporations for manipulating desires through style changes and a perception of being out of date. Modern fast fashion and tech industries continue this trend, fostering "throwaway" cultures.

* 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* Perceived Obsolescence: Marketing-driven trends that make functional items seem outdated.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.

<u>Types of Planned Obsolescence:</u>

Vance Packard’s 1960 The Waste Makers critiqued corporations for manipulating desires through style changes and a perception of being out of date. Modern fast fashion and tech industries continue this trend, fostering "throwaway" cultures. Fast fashion brands produce low-quality garments designed to wear out quickly. ~~Smartphones exemplify systemic obsolescence~~, ~~with batteries sealed to prevent replacement and~~ software updates ~~slowing~~ older ~~models~~.

* Contrived or Artificial Durability: Designing products with inferior materials that wear out quickly or using non removable/repairable components.

* Systemic Obsolescence: Technological incompatibility, such as software updates rendering older devices unusable.

* Perceived or Aesthetic 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>

Modern devices are often sealed with adhesives, welded components, or proprietary screws, making disassembly difficult or destructive. Smartphones exemplify systemic and contrived obsolescence, glued in batteries and soldered components needing specialized tools in some cases and software updates that render the device useless<ref>{{Cite web |last=Cordella1, Alfieri2, Clemm3, Berwald4 |first=Mauro1, Felice2 , Christian3, Anton4 |date=2020-12-01 |title=Durability of smartphones: A technical analysis of reliability and repairability aspects |url=https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7871336/}}</ref> <ref>{{Cite web |title=Smartphone Repairability Scores |url=https://www.ifixit.com/repairability/smartphone-repairability-scores}}</ref> These design practices force consumers to rely on manufacturer-authorized repairs or buy replacements, aligning with planned obsolescence strategies.

=Famous Planned Obsolescence Cases=

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{StubNotice}}
 =Overview=
-'''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.
+'''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. This practice maximizes profits for corporations, but leads to unnecessary waste and consumer frustration.
-   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".
+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>
-<u>Types of Planned Obsolescence:</u>
+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".
-*    Contrived Durability: Designing products with inferior materials or components or non repairable parts.
+Vance Packard’s 1960, The Waste Makers, critiqued corporations for manipulating desires through style changes and a perception of being out of date. Modern fast fashion and tech industries continue this trend, fostering "throwaway" cultures.
-*    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.
+<u>Types of Planned Obsolescence:</u>
-Vance Packard’s 1960 The Waste Makers critiqued corporations for manipulating desires through style changes and a perception of being out of date. Modern fast fashion and tech industries continue this trend, fostering "throwaway" cultures. Fast fashion brands produce low-quality garments designed to wear out quickly. Smartphones exemplify systemic obsolescence, with batteries sealed to prevent replacement and software updates slowing older models.
+*   Contrived or Artificial Durability: Designing products with inferior materials that wear out quickly or using non removable/repairable components.
+*   Systemic Obsolescence: Technological incompatibility, such as software updates rendering older devices unusable.
+*   Perceived or Aesthetic  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>
+Modern devices are often sealed with adhesives, welded components, or proprietary screws, making disassembly difficult or destructive. Smartphones exemplify systemic and contrived obsolescence, glued in batteries and soldered components needing specialized tools in some cases and software updates that render the device useless<ref>{{Cite web |last=Cordella1, Alfieri2, Clemm3, Berwald4 |first=Mauro1,  Felice2 , Christian3,  Anton4 |date=2020-12-01 |title=Durability of smartphones: A technical analysis of reliability and repairability aspects |url=https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7871336/}}</ref> <ref>{{Cite web |title=Smartphone Repairability Scores |url=https://www.ifixit.com/repairability/smartphone-repairability-scores}}</ref> These design practices force consumers to rely on manufacturer-authorized repairs or buy replacements, aligning with planned obsolescence strategies.
 =Famous Planned Obsolescence Cases=