Product lifetime: planned obsolescence and designing for repair

How can a phone that has never broken be finished? Picture two phones, bought in the same year for similar money. Four years later, one has had a new battery fitted, and it still gets updates. The other works perfectly. Nothing is cracked and nothing is broken, but it can no longer install the apps you need, and its battery is glued in. It is tempting to say the second phone got old. But nothing on it wore out. One of these phones was designed to be replaced. The two phones stay side by side while their two designs get their names.

This video is about product lifetime: how long one product is kept before it is replaced. That is a different idea from the product life cycle, the sales curve of a product range, which is not drawn here. Planned obsolescence means designing a product to have a limited useful life, so that it will need replacing. Obsolete means no longer useful. It happens in more than one way. Parts may be impossible to repair or replace. Software support may stop. Spare parts may stop being made. Or a style is designed to go out of fashion, so the product soon looks dated. Which of those ways finished the second phone? Two at once: its software updates stopped, and its glued-in battery cannot be swapped. Nothing broke; the design ended its life. Companies do it to keep demand going. Owners have to buy the newer model, which keeps sales and profit up, and moves people onto new technology. The cost lands on the planet and on you. A working product is thrown away early, with its mined metals and oil-based polymers. More finite materials are used to replace it, and you pay again. There is another side. People get newer technology sooner, products can be made more cheaply, and steady sales keep people in work. An answer about planned obsolescence needs an example. It has to be a durable product, one built to be used for years, like a phone, a tablet, a printer, a games console or a TV. Here's a check: is a pen that runs out of ink a fair example, and why? No. A pen is a consumable: it is made to be used up, so nothing has been designed out of use. One examiner's report says this: Consumable products like batteries, glues, pens and tissues were not accepted as example products. The fix is to keep a safe list and stick to it: phones, tablets, printers, games consoles and TVs. The same report also records: Many correct responses were given, with students providing an example to clarify their response. So a safe example is the habit to keep.

A tablet maker stops sending updates to its tablets after four years, even though they still work. Asked to explain planned obsolescence here, two students write very different answers. The first writes: it's when things are made to break. The second writes: it is designing a product to have a limited useful life, so it will need replacing. Once updates stop, apps no longer install and security holes stay open, so the tablet becomes useless though nothing is broken. The second goes on: the company does it to keep demand going, because owners must buy the newer model. The cost is waste, as a working tablet, with its mined metals and oil-based polymers, is thrown away early. What is wrong with answer one, and what does answer two add? The first is thin, and misleading too: nothing on the tablet broke. The second explains how this one product shows it, why it is done, and the harm it does. One examiner's commentary on a thinner answer ends with this: Further justification is needed. The fix is four parts every time: what it means, how this product shows it, why the company does it, and what it costs.

Design for maintenance is the opposite approach. It means designing a product so it can be serviced and its worn parts replaced, so it lasts longer. It shows up as real features. Standard screws instead of glue. Standard parts that any repairer can buy. Batteries and filters that clip in and out. And spare parts kept in stock for years. To be repaired, a product also has to open without breaking. A kettle's heating element can be unscrewed and replaced with a standard spare part. One term on offer is planned obsolescence, another is design for maintenance, a third is continuous improvement, and the last is just in time. Which of the four terms describes that kettle? Design for maintenance. The kettle is built so a worn part can be swapped and the kettle kept in use. Planned obsolescence is its opposite, a product designed to be replaced. Continuous improvement is small improvements over time, and just in time is a way of ordering stock. A bigger task now: a cordless vacuum cleaner. Describe two ways it could be designed for maintenance, and how each helps the environment. Can you plan two features for the vacuum, each with what it saves? First, the battery clips in and out and is sold as a spare. A worn battery is swapped rather than the whole cleaner replaced, so the motor, body and head stay in use, and no new finite materials are needed for them. Second, the body is held with standard screws, not glue, and the filter and brush bar lift out. A repairer, or the owner, can open it and replace just the worn part. With spares kept in stock for years, the cleaner is repaired, not thrown away. That means less waste to landfill, and less energy spent making new ones. One examiner's report notes this about extending the life of electronic products: Only a few candidates coherently demonstrated how designers could extend the life of electronic products, limiting their ability to be awarded maximum marks. The fix is to name real features, like clip-in batteries and screws instead of glue, each with what it saves.

Both terms come back whenever a product or new technology is judged, as one plain test: will it be kept, repaired or replaced. Now the phones from the start: which design is better for the planet, and why? The repairable one. A new battery and continued updates keep it in use for years, so no new phone, with its mined metals and oil-based polymers, is made to replace it. The other design still has its reasons: the company sells more, may price it lower, and keeps people in work. For the planet, though, the phone that is kept comes out ahead.

See how much of this you can answer from memory, starting with the term itself. What does planned obsolescence mean? Designing a product to have a limited useful life, so that it will need replacing. Now another: a toaster with standard screws, and spares sold for ten years. Which term? Standard screws let it open without breaking, and spares in stock mean worn parts can be replaced, so it is design for maintenance. Here's a different one: is a tube of glue a fair example of planned obsolescence? No. Glue is a consumable, meant to be used up. Choose a durable product, like a printer or a games console. Now the last: why was the second phone finished, though nothing on it was broken? Planned obsolescence. Its updates stopped, so the apps would not install, and its glued-in battery could not be replaced.

If both terms are clear and you can pick a safe example, you're comfortable with it, so a thumbs up saves you coming back. If the two terms still swap places in your head, keep the video saved, and if that felt fast, that's normal.

Next in the chapter is Ecological footprint and carbon footprint. Hopefully that's next in your feed, but if not, search for ScholaFly D T oh seven, oh five.

Every other video is on scholafly.com too, easy to search by video code or by keyword. Whatever you're revising, go there and have a look, or, watch the next video.