Talk:Planned obsolescence

My -adding shenanigans aside, this article could really do with a few sources. Just to make it probable that this is something that actually happens, not to mention is done on purpose. -- AKjeldsen Godspeed! 14:11, 6 February 2008 (EST)
 * Yeah, I agree. It's one thing to "know it and write it", but there an overall assertion of nefarious intent that should be backed up.  At least it doesn't accuse any particular party of this heinous crime!  Someone call Mr. Researcher? human  14:46, 6 February 2008 (EST)
 * Unfortunately, Mr. Researcher seems to be busy with other articles.  00:59, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Mission
'NOTE: It is incumbent on the editor who adds this template to an article to explain why they did so, in order to start the discussion. "Drive-by" templating without stopping to discuss is discouraged.' fröhlich"gay" and "happy" 23:43, 10 January 2009 (EST)
 * I put my reason in the edit summary when adding the template. I will duplicate it here: The article has nothing to do with the anti-science movement, crank ideas, authoritarianism or fundamentalism. [[Image:Mjollnir.svg|20px]]ListenerXTalkerX 23:47, 10 January 2009 (EST)
 * The edit summary is only transiently obvious. :).
 * As a hallmark of capitalism, planned obsolescence and the accompanying waste of resources and labour is spot on for the rather left of center attitude of RW. IMHO fröhlich"gay" and "happy" 23:57, 10 January 2009 (EST)
 * My reason for removing the template was wasted in my edit comment.  ħ uman  00:20, 11 January 2009 (EST)
 * We are supposed to be refuting conspiracy theories, not promoting them. [[Image:Mjollnir.svg|20px]]ListenerXTalkerX 00:27, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Corpotism
This always makes me mad. Things lasted much longer and broke far less when I was younger than today. Talsley (talk) 17:20, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

About the example with the light bulb
If I recall correctly, you could make a very long lasting incandescent light bulb by reducing the voltage or lowering the filament temperature (there seem to be several factors), but the lighting efficiency would be very low (I think, that you can also achieve this effect via dimming). In my opinion that part of the article comes across as if there were no trade-offs.

P.S.: I was reminded of that theme, when I found a thread from skepticproject.com (which in return I found, when I searched for the Zeitgeist movies. Probably via rationalwiki.) in my bookmarks: http://politics.skepticproject.com/forum/5517/thoughts-on-planned-obsolescence/ I don't know, how well suited it is as a source though, because it contains a lot of copy-paste from a reddit thread. There are a few usable links though (to consumerreports.org etc.). Amorill (talk) 10:49, 20 July 2018 (UTC)