Right to repair

[SocketRocket]

I'm certain you know, from your own career, it's all about balancing several variables...Cost (initial and long-term), Quality, Performance being the main ones! Servicing/Replacement schedules can be (and at least in the case of the Aero industry ARE) organised to optimise/balance those criteria according to the customer's requirements - even/especially with the likes of aero engines.
FWIW...How often do you change your vehicle's engine oil - and with what grade/price oil?
Edit...And a BTW...There's an implication in this thread (that I'm not sure is correct) that certain components are used BECAUSE they are likely to 'end the serviceable life' of a product'! I'm pretty certain that would not happen in the Aeronautics industry!

Exactly, that's the point I'm making. Aero engine components are designed for reliability, it's absolutely vital they are, the components will have a life cycle but it would never be subject to built in obsolescence. If you design a component like a washing machine pump impeller such that it will fail long before major components like the Motor or Drum then you are purposely building a reduced potential life cycle for the machine. This is based on the precept that many users will replace the total rather than a component. I pointed out previously that for a fairly small cost the component could be manufactured such that it's expected lifecycle was longer. Built in obsolescence is designed to rip off the customer and IMO wrong.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Exactly, that's the point I'm making. Aero engine components are designed for reliability, it's absolutely vital they are, the components will have a life cycle but it would never be subject to built in obsolescence. If you design a component like a washing machine pump impeller such that it will fail long before major components like the Motor or Drum then you are purposely building a reduced potential life cycle for the machine. This is based on the precept that many users will replace the total rather than a component. I pointed out previously that for a fairly small cost the component could be manufactured such that it's expected lifecycle was longer. Built in obsolescence is designed to rip off the customer and IMO wrong.

There is no built in obsolescence as you maintain. Domestic appliances are built to a price point the consumer will pay, and as a result will use lesser materials to get there. How many on here have spent more on their TV than on their washing machine? Only one of those just shows you what signal it is being fed, whereas the other is integral in how long your garments look and stay in good condtion.
If the consumer wanted better white goods, Miele would be the minimum anyone would buy and we wouldnt want to change them every 3 years or so "because the colour isn't right".
I'm not saying the manufacturers are perfect, but they have played to a tune we the consumer have been humming for years and we can't ignore that.

 

[SocketRocket]

There is no built in obsolescence as you maintain. Domestic appliances are built to a price point the consumer will pay, and as a result will use lesser materials to get there. How many on here have spent more on their TV than on their washing machine? Only one of those just shows you what signal it is being fed, whereas the other is integral in how long your garments look and stay in good condtion.
If the consumer wanted better white goods, Miele would be the minimum anyone would buy and we wouldnt want to change them every 3 years or so "because the colour isn't right".
I'm not saying the manufacturers are perfect, but they have played to a tune we the consumer have been humming for years and we can't ignore that.

You seem to have ignored the point I was making. My point is that IF a machine fails due to a cheap vital component then that is built in obsolescence. Unless there is an easily sourced replacement that is simple to install then the consumer is being ripped off. Televisions are extremely reliable, I can't recall having to replace one due to component failure, that's why the previous TV repair industry is no more.

I also disagree with you that the reliability of white goods is consumer driven, it's driven by the manufacturers who have created a culture through their marketing that encourages the end user to accept obsolescence and desire new models. It's much like golf clubs.

 

[RichA]

The mobile phone and computer industry is bad for this. No moving parts to wear out, but perfectly good devices notify you after a few years that they no longer support "vital" security updates. It's a shame that Apple and Google/Android don't offer customers an opportunity to pay for optional OS updates to lengthen lifespan of devices, rather than convincing us that our old devices are a security liability and must be replaced.
I look after my stuff, so have a drawer full of perfectly good mobile phones and a 12 year old Macbook Pro that can never be used again.

 

[jim8flog]

, that's why the previous TV repair industry is no more.

.

It is like anything the cost or repair is not worth it.

My Panasonic TV broke down last year at a little over 2 years old. My local Panasonic (and other) dealer does repairs but the part needed (back light panel) was £180.

 

[SocketRocket]

It is like anything the cost or repair is not worth it.

My Panasonic TV broke down last year at a little over 2 years old. My local Panasonic (and other) dealer does repairs but the part needed (back light panel) was £180.

I've not had a fault with a TV for over 25 years, they tend to be extremely reliable.

 

[williamalex1]

I've not had a fault with a TV for over 25 years, they tend to be extremely reliable.

Seemingly back lights fail quite often on TVs. My TV engineer mate makes a good living out of importing them from China and selling them on.

 

[jim8flog]

I've not had a fault with a TV for over 25 years, they tend to be extremely reliable.

A 25 year old TV would not have the same method of construction and components as used in modern TVs.

My 20 year old TV got taken to the dump in perfect working order. A 25 year old TV is not gong to be a HD TV.

 

[Foxholer]

I've not had a fault with a TV for over 25 years, they tend to be extremely reliable.

Is your TV actually 25 years old though?
New and advanced features - larger screen, HD etc - as opposed to simply reliability, tend to be the determining factor for the likes of TVs computers and many electrical component/technology dominated appliances. Whereas the likes of Washing machines, Driers, Dishwashers etc are more 'practicality' oriented ones.
And 'the market' certainly has a major effect on the sorts of things companies might consider to boost sales. Remember the Hoover 'free flights' scandal?

 

[SocketRocket]

A 25 year old TV would not have the same method of construction and components as used in modern TVs.

My 20 year old TV got taken to the dump in perfect working order. A 25 year old TV is not gong to be a HD TV.

I'm not talking about a 25 year old TV. I'm suggesting that over the last 25 years I've not had a fault with any of my TVs. I've had about three but they've only been changed due to them becoming out of date. The main point being they are extremely reliable and that's good news.