Thoughts on Obsolescence

I've had this pair of earphones for about two years. I used to think that everything about them spoke of quality. That's why I bought them. I had to replace my old Apple headphones which got crushed when, one day, my Mom closed the glove compartment on them. These shiny ones had a lot going for them - they were built of machined aluminum, instead of plastic. They looked great and sounded great. They were stylish. The cord seemed a little less sturdy, but I figured that if the earpieces were so solid, then the cord must have been designed and manufactured to a similar standard.

So I was unpleasantly surprised when I found, one afternoon, that the plastic around the cable had opened up at the jack end, exposing the inner wiring. I devised a way to wrap hot-glue around the damaged area, as if applying a cast to a broken leg. This fix worked quite well (although it didn't look terribly attractive, as you can see from the photo). I was happy to save the cord before it flaked out.

Not long afterward, however, the two parts of aluminum in one of the earpiece separated. Not being one to give up easily, I carefully glued the parts back together, and they stayed together for a time. My earphones were still outputting music perfectly, but my perception of their build quality was waning. Finally, about three weeks ago, sound became intermittent in the left earpiece (you can see where the cord is bent and weak). I could only listen with them if I sat perfectly still. Any movement at all would cause the sound to cut out. This rendered the headphones practically unusable.

Although I did yank the cord a couple of times, I took very good care of these things - I always wrapped them up and stowed them safely in a little pouch when they needed to go into my backpack. Portable products like these should be designed and made to take a beating. Most importantly, they should be able to last for longer than two years. People seem to accept the fact that any electronic device they buy now will be useless in just a few years. In fact, we assume this to be true, and take it for granted. It's easy to get brainwashed into needing "the next best thing," but what frustrated me about my poor headphones was that they didn't even need to be replaced! They were still perfectly in style, and they sounded just as good as any comparable earphones currently on the market.

This whole ordeal shouldn't have come as a surprise to me. I should have known that this is just the way products are made today. I should have gone back to the store and bought another pair. Why bother getting the current pair fixed? The warranty was up, and it would be cheaper (and faster) to simply buy a new pair than get the old ones repaired. But here is a symptom of a much larger problem: planned obsolescence - a methodology that's been in use since near the dawn of Industrial Design.

Products we buy today aren't designed to last for very long. This is because corporations have figured out that they can make more money by forcing people to buy new stuff on a regular, rapid basis. Annie Leonard, a prominent scholar and supporter of sustainability, tells us that less than one percent of all the stuff we buy is still in use just six months after consumption (Leonard). According to that statistic, it's a wonder my headphones lasted so long! But in all sincerity, a major part of why this figure is so dismal is because of planned obsolescence - if corporations can keep people buying, then the economy can stay healthy, and even grow (and the corporations can make a lot of money). So they design their products to break long before they really should, so that people are forced to go buy new products to replace the old ones. This is precisely what seems to have happened with my headphones.

Planned obsolescence was developed shortly after World War I, when mass production began to blossom. Originally, consumers had reason to be angry if something they bought was made cheaply - if it broke before they expected, they would have to wait for a long time to get it fixed, or pay a high price to get it replaced. With mass production, however, it became easier, and much less costly to replace a broken product. Here is where corporations found the opportunity to take advantage of consumers. They knew that it had become easier, in some cases, to replace instead of fix. So they strove to make replacing the norm in all cases. They did this using planned obsolescence. But they also used another related method.

Leonard discusses perceived obsolescence. This is an effect of style and fashion. Things that break truly do have need of being fixed or replaced, but through the criteria of fashion, something may 'need' to be tossed even if it is perfectly useful. It simply has to look outdated, and people are willing and ready to leave it in the dust for the new model, whose only difference is cosmetic. It's arguable that aspects of the Functionalist movement operate at this level - although the products may have been advertised as working more efficiently, or being more "functional," all that really changed in the end was their appearance and aesthetic.

Our lives are increasingly revolving around consuming, especially with the ever-accelerating rate of technology advancement. Consumer electronics are the prime example of planned obsolescence. They aren't built with the future in mind - they have very few expandable or upgradeable components. So when new software is developed that doesn't work on certain hardware, the entire computer has to be thrown away.

What's so scary to me about this industrial design practice is just how clever it actually is. It seems counter-intuitive that people would accept purchasing things that break after such a short period of use. But it's a testament to our collective attention span, and our sensitivity to brainwashing. It's easy to forget how long we've owned a cheaply made product when we are bombarded with advertisements presenting newer, better, more stylish versions of that product. Advertisements are designed to distract us, and push us out of touch with what really matters. Just as our relationships with animals have become ever more distant (as I've discussed here), our attachments to, and perceived values of the products we own have become vastly distorted. We need to start caring about what we buy, and how long our stuff lasts. Just pay attention to what Annie has to say in the video below - it's one of the most important, relevant, and informative short films I've seen in a long time.

References:

Leonard, Annie. "The Story of Stuff." http://storyofstuff.com/

Slade, Giles. "Made to Break: Technology and Obsolescence in America." Published by Harvard University Press. http://books.google.com/books?id=YMoxdac6J-cC&printsec=copyright&dq=planned+obsolescence

related post by a fellow ID blogger:
"Slow Design" by Kevin Quale

The Language of Functionalism

With the industrial revolution of the early twentieth century, the design motto “form follows function” grew into its own language. It sprouted not only a change in design thinking, but a change in form and style. The language of that style is encompassed under the term “functionalism.” Furniture design driven by functionalist themes paralleled architectural modalities of the time. Clean forms, void of decoration, presented their simplicity and reveal their manufacturing process rather than conceal it. Chairs were designed for mass production. It’s intriguing, however, that the functional chairs we make today look quite different from those of the early 1900s. The question is: what is the difference between functional design functionalist design?

De Stijl as influence - 1917

Although this chair cannot be considered part of the functionalist movement, due to its creation process (it resides more in the art wold, and would not have been practical for mass production), its design language and intent informed and inspired designers of the Bauhaus.

Breuer of the Bauhaus, “Stuhl” cantilever - 1928

Marcel Breuer was both an architect and furniture designer based in the Bauhaus movement. He designed an array of chairs with simplicity of form and manufacturing in mind. This chair hides little about its materials, and in its shape suggests material weight, counterbalance, and flexibility. It is devoid of decoration.

Eames Plywood Dining Chair - 1946

Charles and Ray Eames worked often in laminated plywood, and always sought to create functional objects. Every part of the chair is of uniform material, and undergoes the same process to manufacture. Its rounded edges speak clearly in the language of functionalist design.

Herman Miller “Mirra” - 1994

Awarded for its comfort and control, the Aeron/Mirra chair has become an icon of the savvy office. Its functionalist component is inherently different from the chairs above - this is perhaps the crossover example from functionalist to functional. And yet much of its form speaks in a common language to functionalist chairs by its wide, curves and distortion of planes in three-dimensional space.

Savo “Ikon” - 1997

Another, even more recent office chair design harkens more directly back to elements of earlier functionalist chairs. But choice of form here has less to do with function than those designs which it references. The functionality of this object comes from its overall structure.

Interactive Light

We first encountered light as something quite out of our control. The sun illuminated the world intermittently; when fire broke out it was deadly, not useful. But over time we have learned to harness light, generate it, and ultimately, control it. Our mastery of light has allowed us to develop unique interactions which bring to light a tangible, tactile quality. Light is, in its purest form, something we cannot hold, grip, or direct But we have designed the means to perform these actions by incorporating light into physical objects, like flashlights. Explored below are some of the ways in which interactive light creates experiences larger than the sum of its wavelengths.

“Lite-Brite” - 1967

A revolutionary interactive toy by Hasbro, Lite-Brite allowed users to insert colored pegs into a backlit grid. A piece of black paper was usually placed over the grid to hide empty holes. When the backlight was turned on, the pegs illuminated. Users had freedom to create any design they could imagine.

motion/sound detecting lights - 1970s

Early light bulbs required physical interaction in order to turn them on and off. When various sensing technologies became more widespread, these were incorporated into lights for various purposes. The light itself did not change much, but the way we interact with it did. We can now activate light just my moving, or by clapping our hands.

interactive illuminated dance floor - 1999

Tactile floors have existed since as early as 1987, but were later built to incorporate light. In this example, users find light not only in an unusual place (the floor), but find they have the ability to control the dynamics of the light by the weight of their bodies - more specifically their feet. Depending on the product, they can change the color, pattern, or even brightness of the floor. The light can follow them wherever they walk.

multi-touch displays - 2000

Touch sensitivity also began without the use of light. At first, touch input from one sensor could be translated onto a display - now the sensors are the displays. Users can essentially manipulate light with their hands by touching the displays. They have total control over all of light’s characteristics, and have the ability to create language with light (such as typing directly on the screen).

360 degree interactive light field display - 2007

Light reveals form to objects in our surroundings, but the light itself is intangible as a physical entity. With the development of this light display, light itself becomes formal, at least if it is an illusion. A mirror angled at 45 degrees spins rapidly, displaying light bouncing off of it from above at five thousand frames per second. Users can walk around the display and see an object from all angles and in correct perspective.

Click on the image to watch a fascinating video of this technology in action.