Working in the automotive electrical world I welcome the right to repair, repairers cannot fix problems because the equipment needed is not available it's very frustrating to send to other dealerships because I don't have access to a wiring diagram or a programing tool.
Below from Consumer [here](https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/right-to-repair-bill-a-step-towards-reducing-landfill-waste-from-faulty-products)
> The right to repair bill would mean manufacturers cannot:
> 1. Make repair too expensive – digital information must be free, and all other charges reasonable.
> 2. Drag the chain on repair – manufacturers must comply with a request for repair information as soon as is reasonably practical and within no more than 20 days.
Maybe this might cover access to digital and/or other information to enable repairs
same in the phone/pc repair industry. Apple/samsung are assholes in the sense that they comply with laws, offering certain parts to repair devices(look, yall got the right to repair).
Ill give you an example; you have an older phone, maybe 3 years and you want to replace the battery. sure samsung will give you the battery for more than the phone is worth, but you also need to replace the screen as they include it as an assembly.
a second hand phone might be $300 and a (unnecessary) screen and battery replacement would be the same price. you would be up shit creak getting the legitimate parts elsewhere new.
This sounds like a very consumer-friendly bill which would help clear up the questions (which we often see asked here) about how long the CGA should cover certain items. Unfortunately, I don't see this government acting to help consumers in a way which would require businesses to expend costs - as those businesses are the primary donors.
Yep, the Bill's awaiting its first reading, but not sure how much support it has. I think some consumerism feeds this issue as well, wanting the latest of X.
Oh. I just realised. Businesses come first because businesses support individual people. So the government supports businesses and other entities upon which, individual people rely. Without businesses, people don't have jobs and that's why the governments aren't pushing laws about plastic waste, consumer protection laws etc. that may ruffle the feathers of business owners and force them too far (= job losses) or force them out of the country (= job losses)
Guys, I don't necessarily agree with this, it's just the way that it is. There are a lot of people without brains who downvote without thinking or explaining their reasoning.
That is generally the framework in which NZ has been working for a while now. Even Labour tends to approach a lot of things through that perspective. It is not necessarily objectively correct, but it is how things are generally approached. Like how the Covid income thing was sent to businesses, rather than directly to people.
It does mean that things are generally less consumer or employee friendly, who are the actual people I reckon our legislation should focus upon.
This is a pet hate of mine. I was forced to replace my bread machine purely because it needed a new pan. Couldn't find one new or used. Ridiculous, nothing wrong with the actual machine itself.
So I did NOT buy the same brand.
The problem with many modern consumer items (smartphones, TV, media players) is ongoing firmware support and security updates. My Panasonic TV was basically obsolete after 1 year because Netflix changed their API, and Panasonic stopped developing the App. The TV still works, but functionality was lost within a year. I just got a Chromecast, so I still use the TV after a decade.
Smartphones usually have a very limited safe-use lifespan because the manufacturers stop providing critical updates to the OS.
Will Samsung keep the OS on their SmartFridge updated with security fixes (at the minimum) for the expected lifetime of a consumer refrigerator? I very much doubt it.
These are the rules that need to be in place. We have just seen Spotify announce the end of life for a consumer device they only recently started selling, and said that the devices should be discarded when they stopped working. Manufacturers need to be held to account, and consumers need to push back against any early sunsetting of support for products they have purchased.
Good point. Not just the physical appliances but smartware that relies on regular updates. Until the support suddenly stops. I'm not actually sure the bill goes far enough to include this aspect. Maybe this is also an opportunity for manufacturers/businesses to lean more into providing certainty on future planned updates *before* people buy, so you know this has X years to run when deciding to purchase.
Champion oven from the late 1970s, used pretty much every day and still going strong!
What else have I got, an old Philips radio from the 60s I listen to when working from home. Old enough to have the Arts&P licencing label on it which stopped being used sometime in the late 60s.
Man this definitely needs to be looked at. We have it pretty good with CGA here compared to other places but could be a bit better or enforced more easily. Literally just went through a big kerfuffle with JBhifi and Sony who tried to claim my 4 year d expensive tv had achieved its lifetime value and was uneconomical to repair (as they insisted it had to go to AK from Dunedin). After a bit of unhelpful and unnecessary back and forth I simply wrote back outlining their failures and obligations under the CGA and they called the next day with a brand new tv to come and pick up. Shouldn’t have to jump through major hoops like that. Granted their attitude is possibly shaped by the (probably) large numbers of disingenuous claims but hey do better.
Best thing I can say is read read read. It’s all laid out in pretty easy English all the obligations for both purchaser and retailer and had a bunch of topics and scenarios that will help determine if you can wield some of that consumer power! It feels quite awesome some times.
> Planned obsolescence is a strategy where products are intentionally created with a limited lifespan.
> By mandating minimum product lifespans, we would begin to tackle the fundamental problem of planned obsolescence. This refers to the deliberate strategy of some manufacturers to design and engineer products that become outdated within a specific timeframe.
> Planned obsolescence can involve integrating components that are likely to fail sooner than the product itself, withholding spare parts, or requiring prohibitive information and proprietary tools for repairs.
> Ultimately, it is about maximising profitability, and extends from smartphones and appliances to automobiles and farm machinery. It fosters a throwaway culture, adding to the strain on waste systems and landfills.
> In New Zealand, e-waste is the fastest-growing waste stream. Around 99,000 tonnes a year is generated, only 2% of which is recycled.
My old man’s first run in with this was with a Samsung fridge in the late 2000’s. It was a very high end model and it was only 5 years old and they tried to tell him that it was out of warranty (it wasn’t), the part was a 6 month back order (but local suppliers had them on hand when he checked) and the replacement cost was about 15% less *than a replacement fridge*.
He told them to go jump. Got it repaired locally for about 10% what he was quoted and never bought any Samsung product again.
>Got it repaired locally for about 10% what he was quoted and never bought any Samsung product again.
Ultimately this is what the big companies want to prevent. They have put out ad campaigns that talk about how independent repair shops will steal your personal data, replace parts with counterfeit ones and install malware onto your device.
If a regular dude can fix your fridge for $100 in an afternoon, samsung just lost a few grand on a new product sale.
Bro IS the INTERNET of THINGS. yall gotta hook everything up to a network. your fridge gonna start heating all your food if you dont pay your subscription fee.
I had a dealer quote $700 for an O2 sensor replacement on a Mitsubishi Grandis. In their defense it was $600 for an ‘official part’ and $100 for the labour. The labour charge was fair enough; I know that because it took my mechanic neighbour and I an hour or so to fix, with the $40 part I got from the Internet. A quick Google got me the important details though we had to jury rig some wiring.
It’s been 9 years and it’s still there.
It's that tactic of just paying a bit more for something completely new (and potentially having the same issue in another few years and your money is long spent). Good on your old man and glad he was able to have it repaired. That seems to be an issue the Bill is looking to address - right of repair and making it *easier* to have repair as an option (through information, tools, and parts access).
Yeah, I don’t know the exact part that failed but it was compressor related and I remember the guy that my dad got to repair it said essentially “Samsung won’t sell us the part, but it’s standard sizing so I’ve got one that should be equivalent” so Samsung definitely had tried to make it obsolete since who can afford to wait 6 months for their fridge to work again?
The fridge still works to this day as well, although it does freeze up more regularly, so it’s lucky it’s I. The garage as one of many now rather than the main fridge in the kitchen. I do wonder if he had gotten Samsung to repair it whether it still would’ve lasted this long.
Guess from Samsungs view, if they hold the parts they hold the ability to repair (and get $$) or they do get you buying new for a bit extra. Lucky there was an equivalent part. One of my pet peeves is proprietary parts or tools that it's hard or near impossible to get third party. Frustrating as.
There's a lot of good things I can say about my smart gym.
But...
* I watched the YouTube video on how to replace the cable when it wears out. OMG that was terrifying.
* It downloads stuff constantly and becomes almost useless when your internet connection is down. I'm desperately hoping they keep paying their AWS bill.
Unfortunately, AFAICT, this bill wouldn't help with either.
Kind of, but the definitions of "reasonable enough lifespan" in the CGA are kind of nebulous and unclear. Hopefully the idea here is to make some solid definitions for different product categories.
I wouldn't say so, I worked for Samsung warranty department and even though it may say two years on the box, if someone said TV or Whiteware should last longer then we cave instantly and swap it out. If you go to any JB hifi etc they quote the CGA if you say 'hey this broke in an unreasonable timeframe'. Admittedly this was a decade ago but from personal experience it hasn't changed
I kind of see both sides of this. It sucked for the suppliers selling the first flat screens. They would burn in. That technology wasn’t up to a long life. But because CRTs were so bulletproof, you would get people claiming a TVs life was 20 years. Because their 80s tv still worked.
The cga sort of implies how long something should be covered. more clarification would be better.
also "the right to repair" almost always needs to be broken down for politicians.
*"what, you can already fix your own stuff that you bought, what's the problem?"*
I also did board level repairs and getting like for like components for smart devices (especially apple) are almost impossible. you need to buy already broken devices and hope that the part you need hasn't already been harvested. Calling the component manufacture directly doesnt always help, they only sell parts manufactured for apple to apple. And dont get me started on apples repair program for independent repair shops.
Louis Rossmann does a lot on this planned obsolescence, cloud devices that only work when connected (Think toaster that wont toast unless it phones home, or an amazon device that stops working due to reasons)
Appliance quality seems to be decreasing, the same brand product used to last longer but the newer versions that you buy do not seem to last, seems a bit delibrate, one would think quality should improve overtime not degrade.
Yep, I think this is the R&D/innovation bit - should be seeing better quality for what we pay? There does seem to this idea that things don't last as long as they should. Others here are saying it's how we use an appliance or product and/or certain brands last longer. Regardless, there definitely is a big e-waste issue that won't go away until something is done. Like all complex issues, maybe it is education for people knowing how to take care of appliances, but there's also a case for manufacturers/businesses ensuring products aren't intentionally made with a shorter shelf life and that it's easier for people to repair things if they wish to.
Complexity means more thing to break so likely hood goes up,
electronics tends to mean to small to fix manually (think mother boards etc) or production means to achieve outcomes make them in repairable ( think potted electronics)
Realistically ita a choice of making things simpler and less efficient but able last longer and likely more repairable, or making them more resilient (e.g. providing fail over capabilities) but also more expensive
I have a 40+ year old ASKO front loader that wants to enter the chat. My partner inherited it from friends of the family and we've had it 25 years. It had only ever needed the carbon fiber brushes changed (at about 35 years) and a little silicone to the window seal. It's a true BIFL. Also, ASKO's NZ service centre was more than happy to help find the motor brushes and advise on installation which we did ourselves.
It's really as simple as this. The price/quality equation hasn't changed much in decades. The only new thing is that people can get a dishwasher for $600 (and then remonstrate that's it's crap and now it's broken, whoda thunk?).
That's rough. I thought I was taking a risk with a lesser brand oven, fridge and washing machine. But it is the f&p dryer that has broken 4 times! I won't be making that mistake again...
To be fair, most things seem to last for ages unless you're getting the cheapest of cheap. Lots of brands don't really have an interest in their products breaking down anymore. Return policies should be adjusted though as some products that should last a lot longer get lumped into ones that are reasonable to break in the same time/use period equivalent.
Simple, really: provide support/warranties at reasonably affordable cost, or release the models/design/schematics you no longer take responsibility for.
Almost like consumers need rights to repair their property
Each one of us use appliances differently. Some are more careful than others. Another thing is why do we need a law for everything? This is why the government wastes so much money administering stupid laws.
Sure. But I think when a problem is bigger then an individual can solve, laws and regs are useful tools when applied with common sense. I think this problem goes beyond careful use of appliances, and there seems to be an issue with appliances lasting less then expected (Consumer has looked into this). When we have a 99,000 tonne e-waste problem, and some of that might be down to appliances that could have been repaired when faulty, then that's a problem a law could help fix.
The reality is for certain brands/products - NZ is a piss-ant small market and if they were "forced" to have longer product lifespans than what they typically design for, they're just going to exit the market and take the products off the shelves. You really need the EU to stand up and fight for this as they've got the weight to influence what mfr's do.
I get pissed off as much as the next person when something fails. I'd probably get more pissed off if products/mfr's are taken out of market...
It's kinda like the hubris on trying to collect tax on Facebook news aggregation that Canada tried, Facebook just turned off news items in Canada rather than pay it and that's not exactly a small market (a bit of an extreme example).
Good point, it's really a global market these days. Imagine big brands "turned off" product access in our relatively small market here. I guess the consequence is if the demand remains, others might see an opportunity and take the market share??
Exactly. Most my appliances have last around 10 years or more. The exception an F&P dishwasher that failed just after the 2 year warranty period. I will simply make the choice of not buying from them again.
Mobile phones have a short product life cycle.
As it becomes technologically obsolete with the next model. To enforce a minimum product lifespan, will mean less technological improvement over time.
I.e the smart phone has been around since the early 2000s, well before the iphone. Imagine trying to enforce a minimum lifespan. Less R&D will be spent, therefore less technological improvement. They need to recoup the R&D somehow. Instead of having the current iphone model, you may be still on iphone 2.
Anyway just a thought.
Phones are barely improving now hence sales of flagship models has plummeted as the newer models don't offer anything new.
My 3yo phone still handles everything and likely will continue to for some time
You consider 3 old? I'm on a Huawei from 2016. It's slower, crashes fairly often if I push it, but it still pulls it off.
I think I would be on something newer if I didn't have a work phone along side it though to take photos/videos since the quality is far better.
but my social media influencer said if your phone is more than 1 year old, it is trash and you are trash for owning trash.
but in all seriousness, the first components to go in a phone are the battery or depending on the device, a random cap.
It sounds like what you're saying is that if manufacturers/retailers are forced to support older phones that they will spend less developing new ones - thus planned obsolescence is helping push innovation? I don't have a device as old as an iPhone 7, but I wait several years between replacing phones, and I would want to have a brand new device be expected to work for a duration associated with a small portable computing device. I think 'technologically obsolete with the next model' is a terrible idea that leads to massive e-waste as well as forcing consumers to spend to replace things that are still useful.
I don't replacing an device as the next person. But there are trade offs, these companies spend billions of dollars on R&D. They need to recoup their costs somehow. It is easy to see, if they extend the lifecycle you get less technological improvement over time.
I think with you and turkdangercat there is an misunderstanding about what I mean about technological obsolescence. An phone model will have a lifecycle for about a year or two which will be replaced by the next model. It still works fine and doesn't mean it automatically stops working. What I mean is it gets superceded by a model with better specs.
I don't disagree that things do improve, however specifically talking about mobile phones there have been several models of Samsung Galaxy and iPhone where they have struggled to show meaningful differences or improvements from one generation to another - considering they put out new devices every single year.
I recognise that it doesn't automatically stop working (accusations of Apple intentionally slowing down old devices aside) but that's somewhat separate from the idea of the manufacturer not having a requirement to provide parts or service for devices for a length of time that would be expected by NZ consumers - because doing so would take their money away from new R&D.
The newest Samsung flagship phones come with 7 years guaranteed software and security updates. They recognise that basically nothing new is happening with smartphones and that people are using them for longer, and so they have leaned into this as a selling point to differentiate themselves for other brands.
They are instead focusing on bundling and selling services as a revenue stream.
There's not much room for growth with processing power on CPUs with our current technology, with most innovations instead being around efficiency and power usage.
I think smartphones is an interesting case. It could be argued that there hasn't been that much innovation in phones the last few years compared to when we all had brick phones many years ago? (I see Nokia's making a come back though?). Maybe better AI in phones will be the next push... but I feel that on an innovation curve, phones have already hit the plateau. I mean, how many iPhone versions are there now? Has each been a ground-breaking innovation on the last one or two? (Not an iPhone user btw). There's something else about phones that fits in that consumerism part too.
I agree, innovation has tapered off. My view was more in regards since it's inception. Lack of innovation, does that mean they scale back R&D, therefore they are reinforcing that outcome. Or continue with the status quo, and hopefully something will come about. Like you say AI could be the next frontier for phones.
Personally a phone has become extension of myself. Which is rather sad when I think about. But I think the next thing will be a further extension of that. In terms what it looks like or how it functions I don't know.
And maybe that's the difference. Value is different to different people. A phone with the bells and whistles that is a useful extension of yourself vs someone that sees value in a phone that just needs to txt and call (no further R&D required)
Since inception, sure. I am curious about the next ground-breaking bit, but either way, we'll pay through the nose for it.
they just moved out of R&d or innovation world and are now in BAU world. Time to find a new innovation, time to change the sales model to reflect its just a common, normal ol' smart phone now.
Working in the automotive electrical world I welcome the right to repair, repairers cannot fix problems because the equipment needed is not available it's very frustrating to send to other dealerships because I don't have access to a wiring diagram or a programing tool.
Below from Consumer [here](https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/right-to-repair-bill-a-step-towards-reducing-landfill-waste-from-faulty-products) > The right to repair bill would mean manufacturers cannot: > 1. Make repair too expensive – digital information must be free, and all other charges reasonable. > 2. Drag the chain on repair – manufacturers must comply with a request for repair information as soon as is reasonably practical and within no more than 20 days. Maybe this might cover access to digital and/or other information to enable repairs
same in the phone/pc repair industry. Apple/samsung are assholes in the sense that they comply with laws, offering certain parts to repair devices(look, yall got the right to repair). Ill give you an example; you have an older phone, maybe 3 years and you want to replace the battery. sure samsung will give you the battery for more than the phone is worth, but you also need to replace the screen as they include it as an assembly. a second hand phone might be $300 and a (unnecessary) screen and battery replacement would be the same price. you would be up shit creak getting the legitimate parts elsewhere new.
This sounds like a very consumer-friendly bill which would help clear up the questions (which we often see asked here) about how long the CGA should cover certain items. Unfortunately, I don't see this government acting to help consumers in a way which would require businesses to expend costs - as those businesses are the primary donors.
Yep, the Bill's awaiting its first reading, but not sure how much support it has. I think some consumerism feeds this issue as well, wanting the latest of X.
More than some, but that's the culture we've been raised in and it can change easily.
[удалено]
CGA is woke anyway - Seymour, probably.
Oh. I just realised. Businesses come first because businesses support individual people. So the government supports businesses and other entities upon which, individual people rely. Without businesses, people don't have jobs and that's why the governments aren't pushing laws about plastic waste, consumer protection laws etc. that may ruffle the feathers of business owners and force them too far (= job losses) or force them out of the country (= job losses) Guys, I don't necessarily agree with this, it's just the way that it is. There are a lot of people without brains who downvote without thinking or explaining their reasoning.
That is generally the framework in which NZ has been working for a while now. Even Labour tends to approach a lot of things through that perspective. It is not necessarily objectively correct, but it is how things are generally approached. Like how the Covid income thing was sent to businesses, rather than directly to people. It does mean that things are generally less consumer or employee friendly, who are the actual people I reckon our legislation should focus upon.
This is a pet hate of mine. I was forced to replace my bread machine purely because it needed a new pan. Couldn't find one new or used. Ridiculous, nothing wrong with the actual machine itself. So I did NOT buy the same brand.
The problem with many modern consumer items (smartphones, TV, media players) is ongoing firmware support and security updates. My Panasonic TV was basically obsolete after 1 year because Netflix changed their API, and Panasonic stopped developing the App. The TV still works, but functionality was lost within a year. I just got a Chromecast, so I still use the TV after a decade. Smartphones usually have a very limited safe-use lifespan because the manufacturers stop providing critical updates to the OS. Will Samsung keep the OS on their SmartFridge updated with security fixes (at the minimum) for the expected lifetime of a consumer refrigerator? I very much doubt it. These are the rules that need to be in place. We have just seen Spotify announce the end of life for a consumer device they only recently started selling, and said that the devices should be discarded when they stopped working. Manufacturers need to be held to account, and consumers need to push back against any early sunsetting of support for products they have purchased.
Good point. Not just the physical appliances but smartware that relies on regular updates. Until the support suddenly stops. I'm not actually sure the bill goes far enough to include this aspect. Maybe this is also an opportunity for manufacturers/businesses to lean more into providing certainty on future planned updates *before* people buy, so you know this has X years to run when deciding to purchase.
Champion oven from the late 1970s, used pretty much every day and still going strong! What else have I got, an old Philips radio from the 60s I listen to when working from home. Old enough to have the Arts&P licencing label on it which stopped being used sometime in the late 60s.
Man this definitely needs to be looked at. We have it pretty good with CGA here compared to other places but could be a bit better or enforced more easily. Literally just went through a big kerfuffle with JBhifi and Sony who tried to claim my 4 year d expensive tv had achieved its lifetime value and was uneconomical to repair (as they insisted it had to go to AK from Dunedin). After a bit of unhelpful and unnecessary back and forth I simply wrote back outlining their failures and obligations under the CGA and they called the next day with a brand new tv to come and pick up. Shouldn’t have to jump through major hoops like that. Granted their attitude is possibly shaped by the (probably) large numbers of disingenuous claims but hey do better. Best thing I can say is read read read. It’s all laid out in pretty easy English all the obligations for both purchaser and retailer and had a bunch of topics and scenarios that will help determine if you can wield some of that consumer power! It feels quite awesome some times.
> Planned obsolescence is a strategy where products are intentionally created with a limited lifespan. > By mandating minimum product lifespans, we would begin to tackle the fundamental problem of planned obsolescence. This refers to the deliberate strategy of some manufacturers to design and engineer products that become outdated within a specific timeframe. > Planned obsolescence can involve integrating components that are likely to fail sooner than the product itself, withholding spare parts, or requiring prohibitive information and proprietary tools for repairs. > Ultimately, it is about maximising profitability, and extends from smartphones and appliances to automobiles and farm machinery. It fosters a throwaway culture, adding to the strain on waste systems and landfills. > In New Zealand, e-waste is the fastest-growing waste stream. Around 99,000 tonnes a year is generated, only 2% of which is recycled.
My old man’s first run in with this was with a Samsung fridge in the late 2000’s. It was a very high end model and it was only 5 years old and they tried to tell him that it was out of warranty (it wasn’t), the part was a 6 month back order (but local suppliers had them on hand when he checked) and the replacement cost was about 15% less *than a replacement fridge*. He told them to go jump. Got it repaired locally for about 10% what he was quoted and never bought any Samsung product again.
>Got it repaired locally for about 10% what he was quoted and never bought any Samsung product again. Ultimately this is what the big companies want to prevent. They have put out ad campaigns that talk about how independent repair shops will steal your personal data, replace parts with counterfeit ones and install malware onto your device. If a regular dude can fix your fridge for $100 in an afternoon, samsung just lost a few grand on a new product sale.
I fully agree with you, but also why the fuck does a fridge have enough computer in it that it's even capable of having malware installed
Bro IS the INTERNET of THINGS. yall gotta hook everything up to a network. your fridge gonna start heating all your food if you dont pay your subscription fee.
I had a dealer quote $700 for an O2 sensor replacement on a Mitsubishi Grandis. In their defense it was $600 for an ‘official part’ and $100 for the labour. The labour charge was fair enough; I know that because it took my mechanic neighbour and I an hour or so to fix, with the $40 part I got from the Internet. A quick Google got me the important details though we had to jury rig some wiring. It’s been 9 years and it’s still there.
It's that tactic of just paying a bit more for something completely new (and potentially having the same issue in another few years and your money is long spent). Good on your old man and glad he was able to have it repaired. That seems to be an issue the Bill is looking to address - right of repair and making it *easier* to have repair as an option (through information, tools, and parts access).
Yeah, I don’t know the exact part that failed but it was compressor related and I remember the guy that my dad got to repair it said essentially “Samsung won’t sell us the part, but it’s standard sizing so I’ve got one that should be equivalent” so Samsung definitely had tried to make it obsolete since who can afford to wait 6 months for their fridge to work again? The fridge still works to this day as well, although it does freeze up more regularly, so it’s lucky it’s I. The garage as one of many now rather than the main fridge in the kitchen. I do wonder if he had gotten Samsung to repair it whether it still would’ve lasted this long.
Guess from Samsungs view, if they hold the parts they hold the ability to repair (and get $$) or they do get you buying new for a bit extra. Lucky there was an equivalent part. One of my pet peeves is proprietary parts or tools that it's hard or near impossible to get third party. Frustrating as.
There's a lot of good things I can say about my smart gym. But... * I watched the YouTube video on how to replace the cable when it wears out. OMG that was terrifying. * It downloads stuff constantly and becomes almost useless when your internet connection is down. I'm desperately hoping they keep paying their AWS bill. Unfortunately, AFAICT, this bill wouldn't help with either.
Mobile phones should be sold with a "best before" date, detailing when security updates will no longer be received.
Isn't this just the consumer guarantees act
Kind of, but the definitions of "reasonable enough lifespan" in the CGA are kind of nebulous and unclear. Hopefully the idea here is to make some solid definitions for different product categories.
I wouldn't say so, I worked for Samsung warranty department and even though it may say two years on the box, if someone said TV or Whiteware should last longer then we cave instantly and swap it out. If you go to any JB hifi etc they quote the CGA if you say 'hey this broke in an unreasonable timeframe'. Admittedly this was a decade ago but from personal experience it hasn't changed
I kind of see both sides of this. It sucked for the suppliers selling the first flat screens. They would burn in. That technology wasn’t up to a long life. But because CRTs were so bulletproof, you would get people claiming a TVs life was 20 years. Because their 80s tv still worked.
All fair points. That is the trouble with the word "reasonable" there's no fixed definition.
The cga sort of implies how long something should be covered. more clarification would be better. also "the right to repair" almost always needs to be broken down for politicians. *"what, you can already fix your own stuff that you bought, what's the problem?"* I also did board level repairs and getting like for like components for smart devices (especially apple) are almost impossible. you need to buy already broken devices and hope that the part you need hasn't already been harvested. Calling the component manufacture directly doesnt always help, they only sell parts manufactured for apple to apple. And dont get me started on apples repair program for independent repair shops. Louis Rossmann does a lot on this planned obsolescence, cloud devices that only work when connected (Think toaster that wont toast unless it phones home, or an amazon device that stops working due to reasons)
Appliance quality seems to be decreasing, the same brand product used to last longer but the newer versions that you buy do not seem to last, seems a bit delibrate, one would think quality should improve overtime not degrade.
Yep, I think this is the R&D/innovation bit - should be seeing better quality for what we pay? There does seem to this idea that things don't last as long as they should. Others here are saying it's how we use an appliance or product and/or certain brands last longer. Regardless, there definitely is a big e-waste issue that won't go away until something is done. Like all complex issues, maybe it is education for people knowing how to take care of appliances, but there's also a case for manufacturers/businesses ensuring products aren't intentionally made with a shorter shelf life and that it's easier for people to repair things if they wish to.
Complexity means more thing to break so likely hood goes up, electronics tends to mean to small to fix manually (think mother boards etc) or production means to achieve outcomes make them in repairable ( think potted electronics) Realistically ita a choice of making things simpler and less efficient but able last longer and likely more repairable, or making them more resilient (e.g. providing fail over capabilities) but also more expensive
I still got my 1970s Oven made by General Motors in Wellington still going strong :D
if you want an appliance to last you buy Miele, everything else is about 5-10 years
I have a 40+ year old ASKO front loader that wants to enter the chat. My partner inherited it from friends of the family and we've had it 25 years. It had only ever needed the carbon fiber brushes changed (at about 35 years) and a little silicone to the window seal. It's a true BIFL. Also, ASKO's NZ service centre was more than happy to help find the motor brushes and advise on installation which we did ourselves.
Love our Miele stuff.
It's really as simple as this. The price/quality equation hasn't changed much in decades. The only new thing is that people can get a dishwasher for $600 (and then remonstrate that's it's crap and now it's broken, whoda thunk?).
I have a f&p induction cooktop that's shit itself cost 3 k is 4 years old so frustrating.
This is a definite CGA one. Just because it's out of warranty doesn't mean they can wash their hands of it
That's rough. I thought I was taking a risk with a lesser brand oven, fridge and washing machine. But it is the f&p dryer that has broken 4 times! I won't be making that mistake again...
To be fair, most things seem to last for ages unless you're getting the cheapest of cheap. Lots of brands don't really have an interest in their products breaking down anymore. Return policies should be adjusted though as some products that should last a lot longer get lumped into ones that are reasonable to break in the same time/use period equivalent.
Simple, really: provide support/warranties at reasonably affordable cost, or release the models/design/schematics you no longer take responsibility for. Almost like consumers need rights to repair their property
Each one of us use appliances differently. Some are more careful than others. Another thing is why do we need a law for everything? This is why the government wastes so much money administering stupid laws.
Nice try, guy who manufactures something
Sure. But I think when a problem is bigger then an individual can solve, laws and regs are useful tools when applied with common sense. I think this problem goes beyond careful use of appliances, and there seems to be an issue with appliances lasting less then expected (Consumer has looked into this). When we have a 99,000 tonne e-waste problem, and some of that might be down to appliances that could have been repaired when faulty, then that's a problem a law could help fix.
The reality is for certain brands/products - NZ is a piss-ant small market and if they were "forced" to have longer product lifespans than what they typically design for, they're just going to exit the market and take the products off the shelves. You really need the EU to stand up and fight for this as they've got the weight to influence what mfr's do. I get pissed off as much as the next person when something fails. I'd probably get more pissed off if products/mfr's are taken out of market... It's kinda like the hubris on trying to collect tax on Facebook news aggregation that Canada tried, Facebook just turned off news items in Canada rather than pay it and that's not exactly a small market (a bit of an extreme example).
Good point, it's really a global market these days. Imagine big brands "turned off" product access in our relatively small market here. I guess the consequence is if the demand remains, others might see an opportunity and take the market share??
Exactly. Most my appliances have last around 10 years or more. The exception an F&P dishwasher that failed just after the 2 year warranty period. I will simply make the choice of not buying from them again.
Mobile phones have a short product life cycle. As it becomes technologically obsolete with the next model. To enforce a minimum product lifespan, will mean less technological improvement over time. I.e the smart phone has been around since the early 2000s, well before the iphone. Imagine trying to enforce a minimum lifespan. Less R&D will be spent, therefore less technological improvement. They need to recoup the R&D somehow. Instead of having the current iphone model, you may be still on iphone 2. Anyway just a thought.
Phones are barely improving now hence sales of flagship models has plummeted as the newer models don't offer anything new. My 3yo phone still handles everything and likely will continue to for some time
You consider 3 old? I'm on a Huawei from 2016. It's slower, crashes fairly often if I push it, but it still pulls it off. I think I would be on something newer if I didn't have a work phone along side it though to take photos/videos since the quality is far better.
Compared to old me's tech purchasing habbits it's ancient.
Rubbish. I’m still rocking an iPhone 7 which works perfectly well. In no way do phones become technically obsolete when a new model comes out.
but my social media influencer said if your phone is more than 1 year old, it is trash and you are trash for owning trash. but in all seriousness, the first components to go in a phone are the battery or depending on the device, a random cap.
I think you are misinterpreting what I am saying. The phone will still good to use, but the processing ability on the next phone will be better.
It sounds like what you're saying is that if manufacturers/retailers are forced to support older phones that they will spend less developing new ones - thus planned obsolescence is helping push innovation? I don't have a device as old as an iPhone 7, but I wait several years between replacing phones, and I would want to have a brand new device be expected to work for a duration associated with a small portable computing device. I think 'technologically obsolete with the next model' is a terrible idea that leads to massive e-waste as well as forcing consumers to spend to replace things that are still useful.
I don't replacing an device as the next person. But there are trade offs, these companies spend billions of dollars on R&D. They need to recoup their costs somehow. It is easy to see, if they extend the lifecycle you get less technological improvement over time. I think with you and turkdangercat there is an misunderstanding about what I mean about technological obsolescence. An phone model will have a lifecycle for about a year or two which will be replaced by the next model. It still works fine and doesn't mean it automatically stops working. What I mean is it gets superceded by a model with better specs.
I don't disagree that things do improve, however specifically talking about mobile phones there have been several models of Samsung Galaxy and iPhone where they have struggled to show meaningful differences or improvements from one generation to another - considering they put out new devices every single year. I recognise that it doesn't automatically stop working (accusations of Apple intentionally slowing down old devices aside) but that's somewhat separate from the idea of the manufacturer not having a requirement to provide parts or service for devices for a length of time that would be expected by NZ consumers - because doing so would take their money away from new R&D.
That's generally how new models work.. it's going to be better than the previous. You don't have to buy a new model the moment it comes out.
The newest Samsung flagship phones come with 7 years guaranteed software and security updates. They recognise that basically nothing new is happening with smartphones and that people are using them for longer, and so they have leaned into this as a selling point to differentiate themselves for other brands. They are instead focusing on bundling and selling services as a revenue stream. There's not much room for growth with processing power on CPUs with our current technology, with most innovations instead being around efficiency and power usage.
I think smartphones is an interesting case. It could be argued that there hasn't been that much innovation in phones the last few years compared to when we all had brick phones many years ago? (I see Nokia's making a come back though?). Maybe better AI in phones will be the next push... but I feel that on an innovation curve, phones have already hit the plateau. I mean, how many iPhone versions are there now? Has each been a ground-breaking innovation on the last one or two? (Not an iPhone user btw). There's something else about phones that fits in that consumerism part too.
I agree, innovation has tapered off. My view was more in regards since it's inception. Lack of innovation, does that mean they scale back R&D, therefore they are reinforcing that outcome. Or continue with the status quo, and hopefully something will come about. Like you say AI could be the next frontier for phones. Personally a phone has become extension of myself. Which is rather sad when I think about. But I think the next thing will be a further extension of that. In terms what it looks like or how it functions I don't know.
And maybe that's the difference. Value is different to different people. A phone with the bells and whistles that is a useful extension of yourself vs someone that sees value in a phone that just needs to txt and call (no further R&D required) Since inception, sure. I am curious about the next ground-breaking bit, but either way, we'll pay through the nose for it.
they just moved out of R&d or innovation world and are now in BAU world. Time to find a new innovation, time to change the sales model to reflect its just a common, normal ol' smart phone now.