(this was inspired by an issue brought up in my Design Culture class)
First, a definition. Planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence in industrial design is a policy of planning or designing a product with a limited useful life, so it will become obsolete, unfashionable or no longer functional after a certain period of time (Wikipedia).
Now, read this article regarding Apple designs. It's good I swear!
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/disruptions-you-know-you-cant-live-without-apples-latest-glass-rectangle/
And finally, a word of my own...
Built-in obsolescence is nothing but an
annoyance from the consumer’s point of view. Most people aren’t made of
money, so the notion of investing your funds in an item with a “limited
useful life” seems absurd. Design should facilitate our
lives, not cause problems. How annoying is it to have to replace the
batteries in your calculator in the middle of a homework assignment, or better yet, how annoying is it that you
can't replace the battery in your iPod when it dies? Very. But did you ever stop to think that those items were
designed to manipulate you? Built in
obsolescence is not a new phenomenon, so we’ve sort of become accustomed
to things like changing batteries, or replacing an item completely because you are unable to change its battery. In modern times it's even more annoying when we know the technology exists to avoid
such problems, and yet it isn’t always implemented. Why? Economics.
From a commercial point of view, I can understand why built-in
obsolescence exists. It’s a cushion, or a near guarantee that businesses
will continue to prosper despite the fast-paced changes occurring in the world.
Apple is the
prime example. They seem to put out new products in the blink
of an eye, but with only very slight adjustments to either the software or physical
design. Lots of people find this wrong, but I think the fault is in the
consumers just as much as the producers. Sure, it could be said that
Apple is taking advantage of its audience by constantly tempting them
with new products, but the bigger issue in my opinion is that PEOPLE
ACTUALLY FALL FOR IT! Why on Earth would you buy the new iPod nano, when
your “old” version from 6-months ago still functions absolutely fine?
What companies like Apple are really doing is altering our very culture,
making people far more materialistically conscious than they need to
be. It’s creating a social hierarchy based on who has the most
up-to-date technology. That is not to say that everyone falls into the
Apple trap. Actually, I know many people, including myself, who avoid it
quite actively. In my life, I have owned a single iPod. I’ve had it for five
years, and I have no desire to upgrade it. I am well aware, however,
that the irreplaceable battery will soon die, and I will be left with a
decision: do I invest in a new iPod, do I buy another brand of mp3
player, or do I live without? Whatever I chose, I find myself engaged in the
unavoidable battle of built-in obsolescence.
And then there's the issue of increasing commonality. As built-in obsolescence becomes more
uniformly immersed in our society, technology all starts to look the
same. Why the obsession with electronic “rectangles”??? Why not circles or pyramids? I'm kidding of course. But it seems to me that the manufacturers are dictating society and I can’t help but
wonder, when will we draw the line? Will people ever crave variation in design
again, or has the function of an electronic object completely overridden its physical essence? That's not to say that people don't care about the looks of a product, because THEY DO. But has technology cut back on the carbs or what, because it's withering away to nothing! What will happen when we reach the limit for how thin a Macbook Air can physically be? Will things start getting bigger again? Will we find a way to eradicate the physical design completely and download the software directly into our brains? Sounds like a science fiction novel, but maybe it's not so far off. At this point in time, it's hard to reckon where electronic design is headed in the future.
First, a definition. Planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence in industrial design is a policy of planning or designing a product with a limited useful life, so it will become obsolete, unfashionable or no longer functional after a certain period of time (Wikipedia).
Now, read this article regarding Apple designs. It's good I swear! http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/disruptions-you-know-you-cant-live-without-apples-latest-glass-rectangle/
And finally, a word of my own...
Built-in obsolescence is nothing but an annoyance from the consumer’s point of view. Most people aren’t made of money, so the notion of investing your funds in an item with a “limited useful life” seems absurd. Design should facilitate our lives, not cause problems. How annoying is it to have to replace the batteries in your calculator in the middle of a homework assignment, or better yet, how annoying is it that you can't replace the battery in your iPod when it dies? Very. But did you ever stop to think that those items were designed to manipulate you? Built in obsolescence is not a new phenomenon, so we’ve sort of become accustomed to things like changing batteries, or replacing an item completely because you are unable to change its battery. In modern times it's even more annoying when we know the technology exists to avoid such problems, and yet it isn’t always implemented. Why? Economics.
From a commercial point of view, I can understand why built-in obsolescence exists. It’s a cushion, or a near guarantee that businesses will continue to prosper despite the fast-paced changes occurring in the world. Apple is the prime example. They seem to put out new products in the blink of an eye, but with only very slight adjustments to either the software or physical design. Lots of people find this wrong, but I think the fault is in the consumers just as much as the producers. Sure, it could be said that Apple is taking advantage of its audience by constantly tempting them with new products, but the bigger issue in my opinion is that PEOPLE ACTUALLY FALL FOR IT! Why on Earth would you buy the new iPod nano, when your “old” version from 6-months ago still functions absolutely fine? What companies like Apple are really doing is altering our very culture, making people far more materialistically conscious than they need to be. It’s creating a social hierarchy based on who has the most up-to-date technology. That is not to say that everyone falls into the Apple trap. Actually, I know many people, including myself, who avoid it quite actively. In my life, I have owned a single iPod. I’ve had it for five years, and I have no desire to upgrade it. I am well aware, however, that the irreplaceable battery will soon die, and I will be left with a decision: do I invest in a new iPod, do I buy another brand of mp3 player, or do I live without? Whatever I chose, I find myself engaged in the unavoidable battle of built-in obsolescence.