• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why are the stuffs we're building nowadays don't last?

SSSnail

SSSnail

Lifer
Compare to the stuffs that were built with archaic methods and primitive materials? On one side you got monuments and bridges and buildings and whatnots that lasted through millenniums or centuries that were built with stones and other unrefined materials, on the others we got bridges that can't even last a 100 years.

Aren't we supposed to be advancing? Granted that the materials nowadays have higher strength and tensile but why can't we design them to last as well?
 
We can easily design them to last as well, or much longer.

But people don't want to pay the premium that this would require.

Governments always go with the lowest bidder, even if the quality is terrible and it ends up costing them more in the long term. Individuals would rather buy 10 Made-In-China pieces of crap which break in a week than a single quality lifetime item. And people demand more and more "features", which leads to more complexity and lower reliability.

If you want things that DO last, check out simple items like skis...much more reliable, lighter, and harder to break today than the wooden skis of yesteryear.

Bikes, too, if you compensate for the multiple-speeds thing.
 
Originally posted by: SSSnail
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: SSSnail
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Probably for the same reason you cannot speak or write proper English.
Click to expand...

Oh hai there theplaguefadg, don't you have some road-rage to cause?
Click to expand...

No, I'm off to built a bridge. 😛
Click to expand...

😉, oh and I want 4 lanes.
Click to expand...

I've been doing that a lot recently...I blame ATIT. 😉
 
So, what percent of man made structures in existence 200 years ago are still in existence today without being constantly taken care of?
 
Our bridges endure much higher traffic and vibration than anything the Romans ever dished out.

I'm sure we could build a rock / mortar building or bridge that would last just as long or longer than anything from the ancient world.

 
Originally posted by: edro
Our bridges endure much higher traffic and vibration than anything the Romans ever dished out.

I'm sure we could build a rock / mortar building or bridge that would last just as long or longer than anything from the ancient world.
Click to expand...

So...I guess your point is that our civilization is much better than the one ours was largely modeled after...the one that failed centuries ago.

Maybe, a few centuries from now, kids will be playing 'Virtual Age of Americas' on their new age computers as we start this whole mess up again.
 
There was actually a book on this that involved the modern business model, you make it fragile to the point where it will break often enough for you to have enough frequent customers to make a nice profit.

In the olden timey days it was usually the fuse, commonly a glass fuse that was easily exchanged but most people wouldn't even bother opening it up so they just bought a new one.

The actual components will last many decades.
 
Mostly because all our stuff comes from China. What sucks is we're polluting WAY more then we have to, because of stuff breaking so easily. Take new cars for example they only last a few years under normal conditions, but then take an old car and some are actually still running today.

I've seen trucks less then 1 year already start to rust. Like, wow. Manufacturer's defence is "well it's because of the salt on the road" well, we've been putting salt/sand on roads since winter existed, why is it only affecting cars now?
 
Like fueling an airliner they know exactly how much fuel to meter in the plane including a surplus for safety margins.

Today CAD/CAM can design a structure to withstand exactly what needs to be done. In the old days trial and error resulted in a lot of things being overbuilt and efficiency was about as good as a tree stump.
 
Too expensive and too much of the population treats anything that's not treated like a cheap commodity as being pretentious. Look at any thread about watches to see that, though admittedly that's a bit of an extreme example.

 
Originally posted by: RedSquirrel
Mostly because all our stuff comes from China. What sucks is we're polluting WAY more then we have to, because of stuff breaking so easily. Take new cars for example they only last a few years under normal conditions, but then take an old car and some are actually still running today.

I've seen trucks less then 1 year already start to rust. Like, wow. Manufacturer's defence is "well it's because of the salt on the road" well, we've been putting salt/sand on roads since winter existed, why is it only affecting cars now?
Click to expand...

They always rusted. The difference was that the metal was much thicker back in the day, because of the lack of crash testing and EPA fuel economy requirements. So it would take much longer for them to rust through.

Go to California, where they don't salt the roads. You'll see cars of every generation, still in OK condition.

Originally posted by: Descartes
Too expensive and too much of the population treats anything that's not treated like a cheap commodity as being pretentious. Look at any thread about watches to see that, though admittedly that's a bit of an extreme example.
Click to expand...

Also a bad example. The "cheap commodity" watches are often more accurate, tougher, and longer-lasting than the expensive ones, simply because they don't have any moving parts.

...but yes, there's some truth to what you say. To be fair, companies hike the price of "quality" goods up well beyond the additional costs to manufacture them, simply because of the pretentiousness factor.
 
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: RedSquirrel
Mostly because all our stuff comes from China. What sucks is we're polluting WAY more then we have to, because of stuff breaking so easily. Take new cars for example they only last a few years under normal conditions, but then take an old car and some are actually still running today.

I've seen trucks less then 1 year already start to rust. Like, wow. Manufacturer's defence is "well it's because of the salt on the road" well, we've been putting salt/sand on roads since winter existed, why is it only affecting cars now?
Click to expand...

They always rusted. The difference was that the metal was much thicker back in the day, because of the lack of crash testing and EPA fuel economy requirements. So it would take much longer for them to rust through.

Go to California, where they don't salt the roads. You'll see cars of every generation, still in OK condition.

Originally posted by: Descartes
Too expensive and too much of the population treats anything that's not treated like a cheap commodity as being pretentious. Look at any thread about watches to see that, though admittedly that's a bit of an extreme example.
Click to expand...

Also a bad example. The "cheap commodity" watches are often more accurate, tougher, and longer-lasting than the expensive ones, simply because they don't have any moving parts.

...but yes, there's some truth to what you say. To be fair, companies hike the price of "quality" goods up well beyond the additional costs to manufacture them, simply because of the pretentiousness factor.
Click to expand...

Like I said, it's an extreme example. The point wasn't so much to argue the same old issue of whether or not a mechanical watch is as accurate; rather, to point out that the general preference tends to lean towards items that are mass-produced, treated like commodities and are not built with a purpose of long-lasting quality.

You can probably come up with some counter examples and that's fine. I have a watch that's about a century old, clocks that are older and there are still clocks in operation today that are many centuries old. I expect these to be around long after I'm gone.

So, the "romance" of an artisan's work aside, I agree that many manufacturers inflate price due to the perception of being a higher quality; however, I think that perception begets the pretentiousness and not the other way around.

Like I seem to argue ad nauseum about quality, it's generally less a question of whether the increase in price has additional value (which may translate into quality) and more a question of whether that value is worth the price to the consumer in question. My only point here is that, unfortunately, most seem to think it's not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top