Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

[Michael A. Terrell]

Don K wrote:

"Michael Black" <et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:eods7n$3ie$1@theodyn.ncf.ca...
So a tv set forty years ago was handwired (I have no clue whether that
was a good or bad thing, but it was costly) on a heavy metal chassis, and
was a significant purchase for most households. But when something
broke, the cost of repair was low compare to the cost of replacement, to
that tv set would be taken to the local repair shop. But, pretty much
all the parts in that tv set were generic, so that repair shop did not
have to be in some relationship with the manufacturer, and the parts could
be had at the local electronics store (and since those stores were selling
to all kinds of people, the same general parts to repair that tv set were
also used by they hobbyist and even the professional, the stores could
survive with a relatively small stock that was bought by many), so the
repair shop often didn't need to keep a lot of stock, especially not
a lot of specialized stock.

Also because the failure rate was so high, most failures would be
simply a burnt-out vacuum tube. These repairs were relatively easy
to fix and a TV repairman could make a living charging for simple
quick house calls. Most corner drugstores had a tube-tester for the
DIY repairman and a stock of common tubes 12AU7, etc.

Eventually and after replacing a lot of tubes the TV would need
realignment.

Modern TV's hardly ever need to be realigned. This is not the
result of planned obselescence. It is the result of phasing-in
new improvements in technology as it develops. For instance,
it is just-as-easy to manufacture a chip with 100,000 transistors
as with one or two. This means circuitry can be made extra-stable,
and to some extent, self-healing, and self-aligning.

Don

That doesn't stop you from having bad SAW filters, though.

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[b]

Too_Many_Tools ha escrito:

In my opinon, it is a symptom of a larger problem....

Companies are setting up the situation that you are forced to buy new
versus repair the used applicance, car, electronics, computers, cell
phones....because they make a larger profit.
The MBAs that are crafting the company policy are behind this.
And the consumer is being left holding the bill...including paying for
the cost of disposal.

I dont think it is planned obsolescence per se,( as in a sort of
conspiracy to deliberately make things to expire at a given moment.)
it's more to do with capitalist economics. It saves companies money to
cut back on service and parts support, and with the constant search for
cheaper production we see a decline in build standards. This enables
the final retail price to be lowered, more volume of sales etc.
This has created a consumer culture of the 'throwaway product' .
Longevity is not high on the average consumer's list of priorities when
shopping. It's more to do with how cool a thing looks, and how it
complements their lifestyle. rather moronic in my opinion, but that
seems to be what many people believe, probably because they know no
better.
People pay less and value the product less. For all but the very high
end gear,( a minority niche in the market), the idea of repair for
things like TVs doesn't come into it for the majority of those sort of
products sold. All well and good, but it's ultimately the environment
which pays, and this unsustainable lifestyle of consumerism means we
have to start wars to get oil to keep on supporting this system (after
all where does all that plastic come from?) Not to mention
envirtonmental side effects from the millions of tons of waste
generated by this process which defy contemplation. And let's not
forget costly solutions to attempt to solve this problem. So I reckon
we should be asking about the *real* cost of these 'cheap' throwaway
items - consider the excessive use of raw materials, treatment of waste
etc etc. - and they're suddenly not so cheap after all!

Incidentally, there are some great pics of this phenomenon here:
http://www.chrisjordan.com/

regards, -B.

 

[JR North]

The Direct Drive vac power heads I have seen are cheap plasicky
lightweight air turbine design. Poor torque to the brushes and the loss
of suction due to energy absorbed by the turbine make these inefficient
and, of course, failure prone due to cheap plastic components. The
replacement belt for my power head was $2.35 retail at the local vac
shop. 10 for $12.00 including shipping on Ebay. Try and find replacement
air turbine parts for that new vac-anywhere. The original belt lasted 20
years and only failed because my GF sucked a sash cord up and stalled
the head.
JR
Dweller in te cellar

Rod Speed wrote:

JR North <jasonrnorth@bigfoot.com> wrote:

Unfortunately, you have to plan for Planned Obsolescence several years
behind.
For instance: my Kenmore washer/dryer set is 16 years old. Still going
strong. No repairs. Lots of posts in S.E.R (and here) on current W/D
models puking after 2 or so years.
My JC Penney (Eureka) canister vac is 22 years old. Only thing
replaced was power head belt a couple years ago. New vacs are garbage.
I could go on and on....


Lousy design is nothing like planned obsolescence.

Most obviously with the modern approach of beltless direct drive
systems which dont even have a belt that will ever need replacing.



Too_Many_Tools wrote:


In my opinon...no.

I intentionally try to have older appliances, vehicles, machines to
lower repair costs and keep overall ownership cost to a minimum.

Your thoughts?

TMT

Irreparable damageBy Bryce Baschuk
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 9, 2007
Bill Jones, after 42 years, is finally closing the Procter Appliance
Service shop in Silver Spring.
"You can't make a good salary to survive on the way you could
years ago," said the 61-year-old owner of the oven, refrigerator and
washer-dryer repair shop. "Everything has changed in the appliance
business."
Mr. Jones recently sold his home in Laurel and is in the process
of moving to Bluffton, S.C., with his wife, Jeannette.
Mr. Jones is one of the many Washington-area repairmen who have
struggled to stay afloat as residents replace, not repair, old
appliances.
"It's a dying trade," said Scott Brown, Webmaster of
www.fixitnow.com and self-proclaimed "Samurai Appliance Repairman."
The reason for this is twofold, Mr. Brown said: The cost of
appliances is coming down because of cheap overseas labor and
improved manufacturing techniques, and repairmen are literally dying
off. The average age of appliance technicians is 42, and there
are few young repairmen to take their place, said Mr. Brown, 47. He
has been repairing appliances in New Hampshire for the past 13 years.
In the next seven years, the number of veteran appliance
repairmen will decrease nationwide as current workers retire or
transfer to other occupations, the Department of Labor said in its
2007 Occupational Outlook Handbook.
The federal agency said many prospective repairmen prefer work
that is less strenuous and want more comfortable working conditions.
Local repairmen said it is simply a question of economics.
"Nowadays appliances are cheap, so people are just getting new
ones," said Paul Singh, a manager at the Appliance Service Depot, a
repair shop in Northwest. "As a result, business has slowed down a
lot."
"The average repair cost for a household appliance is $50 to
$350," said Shahid Rana, a service technician at Rana Refrigeration,
a repair shop in Capitol Heights. "If the repair is going to cost
more than that, we usually tell the customer to go out and buy a new
one." It's not uncommon for today's repairmen to condemn an
appliance instead of fixing it for the sake of their customers'
wallets. If they decide to repair an appliance that is likely to
break down again, repairmen are criticized by their customers and
often lose business because of a damaged reputation.
Mr. Jones said he based his repair decisions on the 50 percent
rule: "If the cost of service costs more than 50 percent of the price
of a new machine, I'll tell my customers to get a new one."
"A lot of customers want me to be honest with them, so I'll tell
them my opinion and leave the decision making up to them," he said.
In recent years, consumers have tended to buy new appliances when
existing warranties expire rather than repair old appliances, the
Department of Labor said.
Mr. Brown acknowledged this trend. "Lower-end appliances which
you can buy for $200 to $300 are basically throwaway appliances," he
said. "They are so inexpensive that you shouldn't pay to get them
repaired." "The quality of the materials that are being made
aren't lasting," Mr. Jones said. "Nowadays you're seeing more plastic and more circuit
boards, and they aren't holding up."
Many home appliances sold in the United States are made in
Taiwan, Singapore, China and Mexico.
"Nothing is made [in the United States] anymore," Mr. Jones said.
"But then again, American parts are only better to a point, a lot of
U.S. companies are all about the dollar."
Fortunately for the next generation of repairmen, some of today's
high-end appliances make service repairs the most cost-effective
option.
The Department of Labor concurred. "Over the next decade, as more
consumers purchase higher-priced appliances designed to have much
longer lives, they will be more likely to use repair services than to
purchase new appliances," said the 2007 Occupational Outlook
Handbook. Modern, energy-efficient refrigerators can cost as
much as $5,000 to $10,000, and with such a hefty price tag, throwing one away is not
an option.
In some cases, repairmen can help consumers reduce the amount of
aggravation that a broken appliance will cause.
Consider the time and effort it takes to shop for a new
appliance, wait for its delivery, remove the old one and get the new
one installed.
In addition, certain appliances such as ovens and washing
machines can be a bigger hassle to replace because they are
connected to gas and water lines.
"It takes your time, it takes your effort, and if you don't
install the new appliance, you'll have to hire a service technician
to install it anyways," Mr. Brown said.
Some consumers bond with their appliances like old pets, and for
loyalty or sentimental reasons, refuse to let them go.
Mr. Rana said some of his clients have appliances that are more
than 30 years old. It makes sense, he said. "A lot of old
refrigerators are worth fixing because they give people good
service. They just don't make things like they used to."

--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes
Doubt yourself, and the real world will eat you alive
The world doesn't revolve around you, it revolves around me
No skeletons in the closet; just decomposing corpses
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dependence is Vulnerability:
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Open the Pod Bay Doors please, Hal"
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.."

 

[Logan Shaw]

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

In my opinon...no.

I intentionally try to have older appliances, vehicles, machines to
lower repair costs and keep overall ownership cost to a minimum.

Your thoughts?

I don't think planned obsolescence is a good thing or a bad thing,
because in most cases it's fictional. Appliances and other items
you buy aren't designed to fail. They are designed to be cheap to
manufacture.

The article you mentioned quoted a repairman saying that lots of
new devices are made with circuit boards (rather than discrete
components). There's a reason for that. Circuits built with
circuit boards and integrated circuits cost much, much less to
produce than ones made of discrete components. Probably half
as much, maybe even less than that.

I'm not sure people understand how streamlined and optimized modern
manufacturing techniques are. The reason we get all these appliances
and electronics items for so cheap is the way they are made. To me,
it is truly remarkable that you can go to the store and buy a DVD
player for $30. It might only last 2 or 3 years, but 10 years ago,
it would have cost $10,000 to build an equivalent machine (just
because of the processing power).

So the question, to me, is this: do you want to buy a new item
for $100 and have it last 5 or 10 years, or do you want to spend
$200 for it and have it last 10 or 20? My answer would be that
I'd rather have the item that costs half as much and lasts half
as long. Why? Because I can take the $100 I saved and put it
in the bank. In 5 or 10 years when the item breaks, I can take
the $100 out of the bank, and it will have grown with interest
that has outpaced inflation, so it will be worth more than $100
in inflation-adjusted dollars, and at that time, the price of the
device may have gone down to less than $100 in inflation-adjusted
dollars, and it will certainly be more up to date (more energy
efficient, better support for new media formats, smaller, whatever).

To put it a slightly different way, for that $30 DVD player, it
costs something like $10 labor and $10 materials to put that thing
together in the first place (because there are packaging and shipping
costs and profit). So how efficient is it to spend $30 labor fixing
it? It isn't efficient. Repairing mass-produced items isn't
efficient because one person working on one item and doing everything
by hand simply doesn't have the same economies of scale that a
highly-optimized manufacturing environment has.

- Logan

 

[Anthony]

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in
news:50vgt3F1htg0jU1@mid.individual.net:


Dude,
I hate to be the one to break this news to you, but *everything*
manufactured has a pre-determined design life. Be it 30 nanoseconds or
300 years, it _does_ have a design life. This design life is set in the
initial concept phase of design work, it is one of the parameters that
_must_ be determined before any actual design work takes place. Without
that parameter, you cannot design. So, yes, appliances have a design
life, and that life is, due to economics, going to be the warranty period
plus some safety factor (to help ensure that the product doesn't cause
expensive warranty claims).
Appliances are a commodity product, just like about every other mass
produced product on the market. The population is not expanding enough
to for it to be economically feasable for a company to produce a product
that will last 30 years with minimal upkeep, except in special
circumstances. The product has to 'wear out' or fail within some time
period so as to generate repeat sales for the market.


--
Anthony

You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
better idiots.

Remove sp to reply via email

 

[Rod Speed]

Don Phillipson <d.phillipsonSPAMBLOCK@ncf.ca> wrote

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote

Just had the chain adjuster failed on a dirt cheap relatively
new electric chainsaw. I assumed that they wouldnt bother
to supply parts like that, but I was wrong, readily available
and in fact free. Clearly no planned obsolescence there.

Contrast my Sears Craftsman chainsaw (42 cc engine,
18" blade) regularly $C 250 discounted to $C 200. This
required repair during the warranted one year (unexplained
jingle, source not found when I took off various covers: Sears
replaced the ignition module free.) After total 20 months
intermittent use the saw would not start. Sears diagnosed
that it needed a new cylinder and piston i.e. parts costing $180

Sounds very implausible unless you abused it very
badly by not providing adequate lubrication etc.

plus $100 service time. This unit is marked
"assembled in the USA" i.e. from imported components.

This was my second, the first being a Husqvarna 325 in 1990.
That too required warranty repairs early, and was kept running
by a small family motor repair shop.

Thats the main reason I went electric. I dont need the
away from home capability for cutting firewood etc and
dont like very small gasoline engines reliability wise.

When it finally stopped I did not want to pay for further repairs
since the repairman had told me the Husqv 325 was a notoriously
dud design, not manufactured for more than a year or two.

Clearly was enough of an arsehole to not tell
you that when you first brought it in for repair.

I bought Sears since Consumer Reports flagged several models as a Best Buy.

Trouble with those is that they cant really get a handle
on reliability, let alone flagrant abuse by the owner.

I guess the CR test system could not include length of service.

Yep, they dont even do that well on that with cars, let alone appliances.
It just isnt feasible and even if it was, by the time they have decent stats,
that model is long gone. I usually find that its damned hard to actually
find the products that come out on top of the list even if you are buying
the product just after the test has come out. In spades down the track.

I just lucked out there recently when buying a satnav, they had just
done the test a month before I wanted to get one, all the products
were still current, and I could borrow the two candidates that did
well in the test from mates and could see how I liked them myself.
Went for the TomTom because its pure touch screen, did the
destination selection much better than the Navman, and the test
claimed that the TomTom does a lot better in tunnels and the
CBD than the alts. I havent had a chance to test that claim yet.

 

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 20:48:52 GMT, "Rick Brandt"
<rickbrandt2@hotmail.com> wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Yes, my mother used her first clothes dryer for over 30 years. We
replaced the belt three times. A new dryer might last five years,
total.

On what do you base this statement? To claim that (on average) a new dryer will
only last five years is absurd. What, you once knew "a guy" who replaced a five
year old dryer? The dryer has to be one of the simplest and most reliable
things in the home. There just isn't that much to go wrong.

Well, the local thrift shopa and Habitat for Humanity won't accept

major appliances over 3 years old. The reason? Too many are not
functional and not economically repairable and it costs them too much
to dispose of them.

The washer lasted 18 years before the hard water ruined it,
and it had a timer replaced when it was 12 years Old. You think that
the new designs are an improvement?

How can anyone make a claim either way based on personal experience? He would
have to have personal experience on *multiple* old appliances that lasted a long
time (a mathematical impossibilty) and *multiple* newer ones that did not.
Anything else boils down to "I once knew a guy... or Joe down at the appliance
store once told me...".

It is an absolute certainty that all of appliances that lasted a long time were
manufactured a long time ago. That does not equate to "All of the appliances
made a long time ago lasted a long time". Nobody knows how long the appliance
they bought last month is going to last so how can a valid comparison be made?

Well, I've seen the results of the "cheaepening of america" The
suspension springs on several washers I've recently worked on had worn
through.On our own, After replacing the springs, it was only a short
time till the metal "eye" the spring goes into wore through. The
"ballance spring" wore right through the metal of the chassis. I ended
up drilling new holes for the springs to try to get another couple
years out of my wife's 3 year old drier. The one it replaced was 27
years old and still had all the original springs. We replaced it when
the pump started to leak because the transmission was also leaking oil
and I figured it wasn't worth spending more money on - would likely
have been farther ahead rebuilding the old one, but the timer and
several other critical parts were obsolete.
The 36 year old dryer is still running. I replace drum rollers about
every 18 months or so now and it's on it's third belt. The original
rollers lasted about 20 years. The element let go last year and I
patched it up, so it's likely good for another 2 sets of rollers????


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Rod Speed]

JR North <jasonrnorth@bigfoot.com> wrote:

The Direct Drive vac power heads I have seen are cheap plasicky
lightweight air turbine design. Poor torque to the brushes and the
loss of suction due to energy absorbed by the turbine make these
inefficient and, of course, failure prone due to cheap plastic
components. The replacement belt for my power head was $2.35 retail
at the local vac shop. 10 for $12.00 including shipping on Ebay. Try
and find replacement air turbine parts for that new vac-anywhere. The
original belt lasted 20 years and only failed because my GF sucked a
sash cord up and stalled the head.

My 40 year old vac has no belts at all, and I never bother with power heads
etc. Its as good as it ever was except for the switch replacement. Even they
they had sealed the contacts at the back of the switch with silastic etc, it still
ended up sucking enough dust into the switch that it wasnt reliable anymore.
While the switch was trivially dismountable by pushing the axle out, a quick
clean didnt see it very reliable and a new one cost peanuts so I replaced it.

Pity about all the washing machines, driers, dishwashers, VCRs etc etc
etc that have binned belts now and are much better because they have.

The only belts I have anymore are in the car.

Rod Speed wrote:
JR North <jasonrnorth@bigfoot.com> wrote:

Unfortunately, you have to plan for Planned Obsolescence several
years behind.
For instance: my Kenmore washer/dryer set is 16 years old. Still
going strong. No repairs. Lots of posts in S.E.R (and here) on
current W/D models puking after 2 or so years.
My JC Penney (Eureka) canister vac is 22 years old. Only thing
replaced was power head belt a couple years ago. New vacs are
garbage. I could go on and on....


Lousy design is nothing like planned obsolescence.

Most obviously with the modern approach of beltless direct drive
systems which dont even have a belt that will ever need replacing.



Too_Many_Tools wrote:


In my opinon...no.

I intentionally try to have older appliances, vehicles, machines to
lower repair costs and keep overall ownership cost to a minimum.

Your thoughts?

TMT

Irreparable damageBy Bryce Baschuk
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 9, 2007
Bill Jones, after 42 years, is finally closing the Procter
Appliance Service shop in Silver Spring.
"You can't make a good salary to survive on the way you could
years ago," said the 61-year-old owner of the oven, refrigerator
and washer-dryer repair shop. "Everything has changed in the appliance
business."
Mr. Jones recently sold his home in Laurel and is in the process
of moving to Bluffton, S.C., with his wife, Jeannette.
Mr. Jones is one of the many Washington-area repairmen who have
struggled to stay afloat as residents replace, not repair, old
appliances.
"It's a dying trade," said Scott Brown, Webmaster of
www.fixitnow.com and self-proclaimed "Samurai Appliance Repairman."
The reason for this is twofold, Mr. Brown said: The cost of
appliances is coming down because of cheap overseas labor and
improved manufacturing techniques, and repairmen are literally
dying off. The average age of appliance technicians is 42, and
there are few young repairmen to take their place, said Mr. Brown, 47. He
has been repairing appliances in New Hampshire for the past 13
years. In the next seven years, the number of veteran appliance
repairmen will decrease nationwide as current workers retire or
transfer to other occupations, the Department of Labor said in its
2007 Occupational Outlook Handbook.
The federal agency said many prospective repairmen prefer work
that is less strenuous and want more comfortable working
conditions. Local repairmen said it is simply a question of
economics. "Nowadays appliances are cheap, so people are just
getting new ones," said Paul Singh, a manager at the Appliance Service Depot, a
repair shop in Northwest. "As a result, business has slowed down a
lot."
"The average repair cost for a household appliance is $50 to
$350," said Shahid Rana, a service technician at Rana
Refrigeration, a repair shop in Capitol Heights. "If the repair is going to cost
more than that, we usually tell the customer to go out and buy a
new one." It's not uncommon for today's repairmen to condemn an
appliance instead of fixing it for the sake of their customers'
wallets. If they decide to repair an appliance that is likely to
break down again, repairmen are criticized by their customers and
often lose business because of a damaged reputation.
Mr. Jones said he based his repair decisions on the 50 percent
rule: "If the cost of service costs more than 50 percent of the
price of a new machine, I'll tell my customers to get a new one."
"A lot of customers want me to be honest with them, so I'll tell
them my opinion and leave the decision making up to them," he said.
In recent years, consumers have tended to buy new appliances
when existing warranties expire rather than repair old appliances, the
Department of Labor said.
Mr. Brown acknowledged this trend. "Lower-end appliances which
you can buy for $200 to $300 are basically throwaway appliances,"
he said. "They are so inexpensive that you shouldn't pay to get them
repaired." "The quality of the materials that are being made
aren't lasting," Mr. Jones said. "Nowadays you're seeing more
plastic and more circuit boards, and they aren't holding up."
Many home appliances sold in the United States are made in
Taiwan, Singapore, China and Mexico.
"Nothing is made [in the United States] anymore," Mr. Jones
said. "But then again, American parts are only better to a point,
a lot of U.S. companies are all about the dollar."
Fortunately for the next generation of repairmen, some of
today's high-end appliances make service repairs the most cost-effective
option.
The Department of Labor concurred. "Over the next decade, as
more consumers purchase higher-priced appliances designed to have much
longer lives, they will be more likely to use repair services than
to purchase new appliances," said the 2007 Occupational Outlook
Handbook. Modern, energy-efficient refrigerators can cost as
much as $5,000 to $10,000, and with such a hefty price tag,
throwing one away is not an option.
In some cases, repairmen can help consumers reduce the amount of
aggravation that a broken appliance will cause.
Consider the time and effort it takes to shop for a new
appliance, wait for its delivery, remove the old one and get the
new one installed.
In addition, certain appliances such as ovens and washing
machines can be a bigger hassle to replace because they are
connected to gas and water lines.
"It takes your time, it takes your effort, and if you don't
install the new appliance, you'll have to hire a service technician
to install it anyways," Mr. Brown said.
Some consumers bond with their appliances like old pets, and for
loyalty or sentimental reasons, refuse to let them go.
Mr. Rana said some of his clients have appliances that are more
than 30 years old. It makes sense, he said. "A lot of old
refrigerators are worth fixing because they give people good
service. They just don't make things like they used to."

 

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 07:08:07 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

terry <tsanford@nf.sympatico.ca> wrote
Ecnerwal wrote:

The new ones are, for the most part, designed NOT to be repairable,
and/or parts prices/availability are manipulated to render them
effectively non-economic to repair. "This part will (by design) break
about 1 year after the warranty runs out - let's put in in a monolithic
module containing all the most expensive parts of the machine."

Maybe that's stating it rather strongly?

Although recent discussion/discovery that IPods will
exhaust their batteries in approximately one to two
years do clearly raise the question? "Designed to fail?".

Doesnt explain stuff like cordless phones that use standard batterys.

Except you can buy much better batteries than the crap that comes with
the chinese built phone from the factory. Likely cost as much as the
phone, but often worth it.

But it's the same reason that I continue to accept
and use old appliances that I can repair myself.

I repair all my own stuff too, but accept that sometimes I need to buy
parts.

That can mean that you have to do without
some of the most elegantly usable appliances tho.

For example I refuse to buy a stove that incorporates
a digital timer/clock; they are virtually unrepairable!

If a digital timer makes it through the first 90 days, and then
through warranty, it may very well outlive YOU. Infant mortality is
the biggest issue with electronis. Mechanical timers simply wear out
or burn out, and although SOMETIMES repairable, they ARE more likely
to fail after the first year or so than electronics. Particularly as
the mechanics were cheapened and electronics become more integrated
and solid.

Mindlessly silly. My microwave is still going fine 30 years later.

Eventually can see myself, however, ending up with one of those and
deliberately disconnecting the digital timer clock or modifying the stove to use
one my older (saved) clock/timers or just dong away with the timer altogether.

Or get a clue and only bother with that if it actually does fail.
And get the benefit of a decent modern design when it doesnt.

I've never actually had a single digital clock in any system
ever fail and I've got heaps of them, plenty 30+ years old.

My experience as well. Electromechanical timers have failed on just
about everything I've ever owned with them except for the old
Frigidaire range (50 years old and still working fine when the oven
element let go and "plasma cut" a big hole in the bottom of the oven)
Several wires had burned off 30 years ago - I repaired them 26 or 27
years ago - otherwise it worked fine. Not so the timer on the water
softener that pumped several hundred gallons of water and350 lbs of
salt all over the basement floor when the timer died--------.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[BobR]

Out tendancy now is to replace appliances now based on fashion and not
usability. The appliance of a few years ago was harvest gold and
avacado green but those are no longer in fashion so we replace with the
black or stainless steel that is today's fashion. They don't need to
build with planned obselescence any more, we do that for them. I
should know, my wife insisted that we replace all the appliances in the
home we just bought for just that reason. All of the old ones worked
just fine but....they were not the right color.

Rick Brandt wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
In my opinon...no.

I intentionally try to have older appliances, vehicles, machines to
lower repair costs and keep overall ownership cost to a minimum.

Your thoughts?

TMT

Irreparable damageBy Bryce Baschuk
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 9, 2007
Bill Jones, after 42 years, is finally closing the Procter Appliance
Service shop in Silver Spring.
"You can't make a good salary to survive on the way you could years
ago," said the 61-year-old owner of the oven, refrigerator and
washer-dryer repair shop. "Everything has changed in the appliance
business."

This raises an apparent contradiction. Most people believe that appliances were
built much better in the past than they are now and yet in the past a whole
industry survived on doing appliance repairs. Perhaps they only seemed to be
built better in the past because we kept them longer and the only reason we kept
them longer is because we repaired them instead of replacing them. The flipside
of that same coin is that perhaps today's appliances only seem to be inferior
because we replace them more often and the only reason we replace them more
often is because we don't repair them.

 

[Karl S]

On 14 Jan 2007 09:30:59 -0800, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

They just don't make things like they used to."

THANK GOD!!!!

 

[Karl S]

On 14 Jan 2007 11:40:18 -0800, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

In my opinon, it is a symptom of a larger problem....

Companies are setting up the situation that you are forced to buy new
versus repair the used applicance, car, electronics, computers, cell
phones....because they make a larger profit.

The MBAs that are crafting the company policy are behind this.

You must be the guy who draws the "Dilbert" comic strip.

 

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 07:02:25 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

Ecnerwal <LawrenceSMITH@SOuthernVERmont.NyET> wrote
Rick Brandt <rickbrandt2@hotmail.com> wrote

This raises an apparent contradiction.

Perhaps you've not been adequately involved with your appliances
to see that there is not a contradiction, even "apparently".

Or perhaps you havent.

The old ones were, for the most part, designed to be repairable.

Yes. And so are the current ones too with the exception of plug packs etc.

"This part always breaks eventually, we'll
isolate it and make it easy to replace".

That is just plain silly with domestic appliances. There is bugger
all except light bulbs that cant be designed to last indefinitely.

And even that has changed just recently too.

The new ones are, for the most part, designed NOT to be repairable,

Oh bullshit.

and/or parts prices/availability are manipulated
to render them effectively non-economic to repair.

More bullshit. I've done just that fine with a modern electric chainsaw.

"This part will (by design) break about 1 year after the warranty runs out -

Not even possible.

It is NOT a conspiracy - it is the result of accountants over-ruling
engineers. The demand is to lower costs, at any cost. The engineers
then have to decide where to cut costs. Sometimes they win, sometimes
you loose.
Cost to assemble dictates design more than sevicability. If they can
save a dollar in total per machine by making assembly easier (or by
cutting out a procedure, like de-burring drilled or stamped holes)
without increasing their warranty exposure, they do it.
This could all change OVERNIGHT if all the cheap B@$7@rds in North
America wouldn't insist on buying the cheapest whatever possible. If
there was a market for quality products at a price that companys could
afford to build them and sell them for, quality goods would still be
available. That market just does not exist any more. If it did,
Wallmarts would be closing all over North America, instead of
continuing to displace the established specialty shops that used to
sell the "good stuff".

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 17:46:09 GMT, "Rick Brandt"
<rickbrandt2@hotmail.com> wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
In my opinon...no.

I intentionally try to have older appliances, vehicles, machines to
lower repair costs and keep overall ownership cost to a minimum.

Your thoughts?

TMT

Irreparable damageBy Bryce Baschuk
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 9, 2007
Bill Jones, after 42 years, is finally closing the Procter Appliance
Service shop in Silver Spring.
"You can't make a good salary to survive on the way you could years
ago," said the 61-year-old owner of the oven, refrigerator and
washer-dryer repair shop. "Everything has changed in the appliance
business."

This raises an apparent contradiction. Most people believe that appliances were
built much better in the past than they are now and yet in the past a whole
industry survived on doing appliance repairs. Perhaps they only seemed to be
built better in the past because we kept them longer and the only reason we kept
them longer is because we repaired them instead of replacing them. The flipside
of that same coin is that perhaps today's appliances only seem to be inferior
because we replace them more often and the only reason we replace them more
often is because we don't repair them.



I think the main problem with today's appliances is that

they are NOT made so that they can be repaired.

Modules are stamped together, molded together, whatever and
the little part that wears out can't be replaced without
replacing the whole module, which probably isn't available,
anyway, so the appliance gets tossed.

I have an old toaster from the '40s or '50s. It is a
mechanical thing, not electronic, and is made of individual
parts that can be cleaned, oiled, and if you could get them,
replaced as needed. When something like this stops working,
less than an hour's work will set it up to run for another
25 years!



Alan

==

It's not that I think stupidity should be punishable by death.
I just think we should take the warning labels off of everything
and let the problem take care of itself.

--------------------------------------------------------

 

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 18:19:24 GMT, "Rick Brandt"
<rickbrandt2@hotmail.com> wrote:

Ecnerwal wrote:
In article <B%tqh.1176$O02.696@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>,
"Rick Brandt" <rickbrandt2@hotmail.com> wrote:

This raises an apparent contradiction.

Perhaps you've not been adequately involved with your appliances to
see that there is not a contradiction, even "apparently".

The old ones were, for the most part, designed to be repairable. "This
part always breaks eventually, we'll isolate it and make it easy to
replace".

The new ones are, for the most part, designed NOT to be repairable,
and/or parts prices/availability are manipulated to render them
effectively non-economic to repair. [snip]

What you say speaks to the issue of why did we repair in the past and why don't
we repair now, but it says nothing about the comparable reliability. If
appliances in the past were "built to be repaired" that can be interpretted to
mean that failures were expected. If failures were expected and people could
make a living performing those repairs then that suggests that the appliances
were not that reliable.

I don't think they were so much "built to be repaired" but

that they were built with a different mechanical mind-set,
and if something wore out, it COULD be repaired.

 

On 14 Jan 2007 11:17:21 -0800, "hallerb@aol.com" <hallerb@aol.com>
wrote:

did you know theres all qualitys of stainless, some will last literaLLY
FOREVER not so for kitchen stainless, try a magnet on stainless the
better quality is non magnetic

The better quality for what? For some applications a magnetic
stainless may well be the better choice, while for other applications
a non-magnetic. Depends what qualities the application requires.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

On 14 Jan 2007 18:19:35 GMT, et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA
(Michael Black) wrote:

snip

And I want to add something about "planned obsolescence" because it
is often misused. If people are choosing to buy cheap, it's hardly
that the manufacturers are making things so they will break. The
consumer often wants that cheaper tv set or VCR.

And there is the issue of just plain obsolescence. Forty years
ago, there'd hardly be any electronic items around the house. A
tv set or two, some radios, maybe a stereo. But look around now,
and everything is electronic. It's either been invented in the past forty
years (not even that long in many cases), or at the very least could not
have been a consumer item until recently. Once you have consumers buying
the latest thing, things are bound to go obsolete. Buy early, and things
still have to develop, which means the things really may become obsolete
in a few years. It's not the manufacturer doing this to "screw the
consumer", it's a combination of new developments and consumer demand.

If my computer from 1979 had been intended to last forever, it would
have been way out of range in terms of price. Because they'd have to
anticipate how much things would change, and build in enough so upgrading
would be doable. So you'd spend money on potential, rather than spending
money later on a new computer that would beat out what they could
imagine in 1979. And in recent years, it is the consumer who is deciding
to buy a new computer every few years (whether a deliberate decision or
they simply let the manufacturer lead, must vary from person to person.)

Michael

Planned obsolescence has been a tenet of the automobile
industry since the '30s. General Motors, in particular
used styling to make a 2 or 3 year-old-car look "old" and in
need of replacement with a newly styled model.

A bigger engine, prettier colors, new styles, all those
things are at the heart of 'planned obsolescence.'

"Improving" the features on your cell phone every year is
the result of planned obsolescence.

However, making a product cheap, because someone is more
likely to buy an $11 toaster than a $50 toaster is just
that: making an inexpensive product which will, naturally,
not hold up for 50 years.

Alan

==

It's not that I think stupidity should be punishable by death.
I just think we should take the warning labels off of everything
and let the problem take care of itself.

--------------------------------------------------------

 

[Don K]

"BobR" <reed1@r-a-reed-assoc.com> wrote in message
news:1168818342.741590.256280@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Out tendancy now is to replace appliances now based on fashion and not
usability. The appliance of a few years ago was harvest gold and
avacado green but those are no longer in fashion so we replace with the
black or stainless steel that is today's fashion. They don't need to
build with planned obselescence any more, we do that for them. I
should know, my wife insisted that we replace all the appliances in the
home we just bought for just that reason. All of the old ones worked
just fine but....they were not the right color.

When there are no qualitative differences between products,
marketers do tend to invent imaginary discriminators such as style
and fashion to convince people to replace perfectly good stuff
for no good reason.

Don

 

[Homer J Simpson]

"Too_Many_Tools" <too_many_tools@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1168795859.447722.255770@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

In my opinon...no.

I intentionally try to have older appliances, vehicles, machines to
lower repair costs and keep overall ownership cost to a minimum.

Your thoughts?

I used to charge 75c for a house call, when appliances were in the $100 -
$200 price range. Couldn't do it now.





--

 

[Tracey]

"Too_Many_Tools" <too_many_tools@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1168795859.447722.255770@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

In my opinon...no.

I intentionally try to have older appliances, vehicles, machines to
lower repair costs and keep overall ownership cost to a minimum.

Your thoughts?

One thing that you might not have considered is Energy Efficiency. Sure,
your refrigerator from 1950 might appear to be working fabulously. However,
it probably costs an awful lot more in electricity to operate it than a
newer model would cost. Likewise with your hot water heater, oven,
diswasher, washing machine, etc.

Its just something else to keep in mind...