The economic idea of engineering a product in such a way that it fails after a short amount of time to support economic growth. There is the famous example with the Apple Ipod battery; if the battery died (which it, with-in a year, undoubtedly had,) Apple support would tell customers to purchases an entirely new Ipod instead of just replacing the shoddy battery. Now after a widely publicized court case, Apple has altered this design flaw, but instead to create and maintain the idea of a "newer" "better" " hip" in the minds of consumers they push a new Ipod, or Iphone, or Iwhatever every new year, and attempt to make the older versions of their products seem dysfunctional and outdated...
Here is a youtube clip that I watched recently that refuses to imbed in the blog post:
Planned Obsolescence video
What do readers think about this? Should we maintain this philosophy to continue economic growth? Or should we as a people work towards a different business model not centered around rampant wasteful consumerism?
Apathy:Lack of interest in anything, or the absence of any wish to do anything.
When it comes to new technology, I've pretty much taken the road of avoidance. Although I love my "old" iPod touch (2008), and my MacBook Air and all of its programs, I refuse, for my own sanity (and wallet) to buy into the complications that go with technology. It seems that as soon as one product comes out, there's already a newer version coming not far behind. I would love to own an iPhone, or iPad, or what have you, but I refuse to spend the money I work so hard for on something that will soon be outdated. Perhaps it works for Apple and other innovative companies in the short run, but to me it's just frustrating and pointless.
ReplyDelete