Planned Obsolescence vs. Designed Deterioration
by Collin Dunn, Corvallis, OR, USA on 07.20.07
Core77 points us to a great essay by designer Khoi Vinh about the relationship between planned obsolescence -- the idea that objects are designed with a specific lifetime in mind -- and "designed deterioration" -- the very TreeHugger idea that we should be designing objects that actually improve with age. Held up as examples are digital hardware (like the iPhone) vs. a cast-iron pan.
I've noticed recently that the concept of what we might call designed deterioration is fairly anathema to digital hardware. The objects we purchase from purveyors of digital technology are conceived only up to the point of sale; the inevitable nicks, scratches, weathering, and fading they will encounter is not factored in at all. The result is that as they see more use, their ignorance may recede, but they wear it poorly. They don't age gracefully.
A striking (and unfortunate) irony in this is the ubiquity with which this digital hardware has so fully integrated itself in our lives. Though a case can be made that the iPhone will be the last phone you'll buy, planned obsolescence and technological advancement suggest otherwise; yet, Apple still sold approximately 500,000 of them during the gadget's opening weekend of sale. A similar case can be made for Apple's iPod, which Steve Jobs suggested that "If you always want the latest and greatest, then you have to buy a new iPod at least once a year." Check out our review of "Made to Break" for more on this.
While digital hardware that "ages gracefully" may be something of a pipe dream, there is definitely something to be learned from the iron skillet paradigm that Vinh mentions:
It’s a little unbecoming when you think about it; in fact, though I clean it, it’s a dirty piece of cookware, and it resembles its original, store-bought state not at all. But it’s also a beautiful piece of design. After cooking in it and cleaning it up, I’ve spent a lot of time just looking it over, marveling at how its very deterioration has been incorporated into the design of the object, at how it’s gotten more attractive -- less ignorant -- the more I use it.
We've seen similar results with other kitchen items, like cutlery and things like reclaimed wood flooring and even t-shirts -- anything that involves the word "patina." Sadly, everything can't be designed (and won't be designed) to age like fine wine; Vinh sums it up thusly: "For all the beautiful design being created for digital products today, it’s a shame that we’ll hang on to so few for very long." Read the whole piece at ::Subtraction via ::Core77
That's funny, I have a strong bond to my iron sklillet as well! I have a hemp shirt that seems to get better with age too. I also have a three year old iPod that is covered in wonderful scratches. I refuse to buy a case for it. Ironically, people spend way too many dollars covering up the design of the iPod. Just to protect it from normal wear and tear.
Some things age better than others, like people, just because of the nature of their build and the nature of their use.
Take a look at this from Japanese philosophy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi-sabi
You really picked the wrong item here Colin, the iPhone is probably best designed, long lasting piece of electronics you can buy. Check out the price on eBay for these things used; they are near the price of buying new.
Planned obsolescence is a personal choice; everyone decides when they will shell out their dollars for new electronic products. This is encouraged in many ways of course, but the ultimate decision rests with the consumer - the iPhone can be the last phone you buy, if you decide it will be.
mjo
**Author's comments**
Hey Mark,
Thanks for your comments. I think you're right about planned obsolescence being a consumer choice (heck, I still have the first cell phone I ever bought, that's over 5 years old), and I agree that the iPhone is ingeniously designed, but given that its something that doesn't subscribe to designed deterioration (as, say, a cast-iron skillet would), it will not age well, I don't think. Though it may well outlast the 18 months or so that an average iPod clicks along, it's still a consumer electronic and therefore subject to being lapped by technological innovation and shinier things that people love to buy (see the link to Lloyd's article near the end for more on this).
So perhaps the real question is: how to get people to realize that planned obsolescence is a choice, and that you don't have to buy the newest shiny gadgets, just because they exist (and are shiny). I'd argue that designed deterioration is one way to do it, and I think iPhone has a lot of catching up to do to get to the cast-iron skillet. Time will tell, though, for sure.
I have an ancient Wagner skillet with a wooden handle. Uncoated cast iron cookware can actually provide bioavailable iron to your diet!
Of course, our economy as arranged now would crash and burn if people only bought one skillet every fifty years. The way to adopt the economy is to make more durable products and just make their initial cost more expensive. Look at the legendary 1980's Mercedes Benz, many of which which are still on the road looking brand new!
[the iPhone is probably best designed, long lasting piece of electronics you can buy. Check out the price on eBay for these things used; they are near the price of buying new.]
Spoken with such authority - one might forget that the device was only made available in the last month...
There's a persistent rumor going around that when you send in your iPhone for battery replacement you're not going to get back your phone, but a refurbished model in its place.
As to "better with age", the phone is software upgradable, which means, feature-wise, that it WILL improve with age.
I feel I should mention the iPhone will not age gracefully at all. Yes, it has a scratch-proof exterior, but it has a few fatal flaws. For one, the battery compartment is sealed. Lithium ion batteries decay, as anyone with an older iPod will tell you. This will require users to send in their iPhone to Apple to get repaired out of warranty, which will probably cost them about half the price of the unit. Most consumers will simply buy the latest model at that point. Also, the type of people currently buying the iPhone are obsessed with novelty. It's a great phone, but once Apple makes a new model with more features, many of these people will buy a new phone to replace their current, functioning phones.
Granted, the iPhone may be more durable than what's usually out there. I blame clamshell phones for the recent trend of everyone having a broken phone. Back when everyone had candy bar phones, none of them ever broke. The mechanism is just too fragile if you're likely to drop the thing. The iPhone's design, with no moving parts, should be better off.
Of course, some technology ages well. The Apple eMate 300 computer, designed for education back in the 90's, is a good lightweight laptop for those who want to text edit on the go, or check their email (it supports wireless cards). It's basically a big Newton PDA with a large touch-screen and full keyboard, but it seems to be a good alternative to the AlphaSmart Dana, which has a screen the size of a mailbox slot and a full keyboard, and it runs Palm OS. Plus, the eMate can be had for $10 on ebay, while the Dana costs $300. The eMate is also durable, with a thick polycarbonate shell and no moving parts aside from the screen's clamshell.
I take me back to my comment on the old car versus the new efficient one :
is the 35 years old still running maytag cloth washer worth changing it for the new 3000$ Bosch super-energy-efficient front loader ?
ask yourself witch one will still be alive 10 years from now ?
hint : my bet is on the steel ball bearing maytag, not on the plastic sleeved bushings Front loader.
do we realy save energy changing perfectly working stuff in the name of efficiency/design ?
Colin,
I hope you aren't USING that five-year-old cell phone! New phones give out far less radiation. You should scrap that big iron! (You often get a recycling mailer for your old phone in the new phone package!)
**Author's comments**
Hey Rob,
Thanks for your concern -- I am still using it! Don't worry, though, I checked and it's well within the FCC's accepted SAR level.
-CD
The rumors are that they were working on an iphone "nano" concurrently with the development of the iphone.
Rumors for the second generation iphone include a GPS tracking chip to enable it to function as a GPS device.
Certainly in two years, $600 for 8 gb is going to sound like a rip off, when you'll be able to pay $400 for 30 gb.
To say that the iphone is revolutionary is stating the obvious. To say that this phone is the last phone you'll ever need/want/whatever because of upgradable software or because it's so revolutionary is just silly. It'd be like saying the first ipod Apple made was the last mp3 playing device you'll ever need when it came out. Apple will always be there to sell you nifty little gadgets that will continually improve over time making the stuff you buy today obsolete.
Same happens with buildings and most of modern constructions, homes in particular. Old mexican haciendas, from 1800, are still standing, while "new" homes made of concrete last about 60 or 70 years.
LOL the iphone the last phone you need? Maybe if your 15 and don't need a business phone. LOL on Apple producing a quality 1st gen hardware? Ha. While neat, like someone said before, as soon as the iphone2 is out a majority of the people will get it.
I get the idea behind this article, but comparing an iPhone to an Iron skillet (or an iSkillet) seems a bit disengenious to me. The Iron skillet is a product that has been around for an incredibly long period of time and has a well proven design and something about comparing it to the iPhone doesn't jive with me. Of course if you are going to be comparing the two objects on the basis of looks and wear and tear, then a hunk of iron is definitely going to last longer then a gadget.
Energy costs continue to spiral upward, and this is undoubtedly going to have an inflationary effect, slowing down product development cycles. This means that older technology will likely have a longer useful life, with a trickle-down effect, reselling more older technology in poorer countries. It will also just induce people to hold on to stuff for longer. I still use my four-year old laptop every day, I just abide the slower boot times and burn more and more to a backup drive.
This post is pretty cool in that it reminds me of Sandbenders, which appear in William Gibson's novel Idoru
a description of sorts can be found here:
http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=80
As an eco-geek, I love the idea of having mostly permanent hardware made from beautiful, natural, and renewable things. Keep the cases, keyboards, and input devices, and just replace the insides and the OS' as needed...
Buying an iPhone from Apple, is like buying a cheeseburger from an old infested restaurant.
Apple is not green, and no matter what, buying an iPhone does not 'help the environment'. Last phone I ever buy? Seriously, TreeHugger editors really have to start cracking down on nonsense articles.
If you love Apple, go ahead. But that does not fit the green on TreeHugger posts.
What is sad is that replacement parts are not available. As much as we cringe at the plastic parts, it is the electronic guts that likely contain the most toxic and energy content. Often the internal guts are still functional even with a cracked case. Sometimes the manufacturer will make replacement parts available, such as a replacement screen cover for the GameBoy Advanced for under four bucks. Other times, vendors charge a fortune for a few cents of plastic. Most time you are lucky to any replacement parts. Too bad there are not any "wrecking yards" for consumer electronics.
For computers it is still often possible to upgrade parts of the system. The life of a system can often be extended by simply adding more RAM or upgrading to a faster CPU. When those ugly beige boxes many of us have under our desks become just too geriatric you can often gut them and reuse the case, power supply and other components. And peripherals such as monitors, keyboards and mice often have a different life cycle from the main computer.