Re: OT Hot paper

["Patricia M. Godfrey" priscamg@xxxxxxxx]

Harry Binswanger wrote:
> Years ago, an economist friend explained to me how "planned
> obsolescence" is a myth. The myth is based on the confusion of sales
> with profits. Companies seek to maximize profits, not sales.
> snip<

This perfectly reasonable example leaves one important factor out
of the equation: Moore's law. That makes "planned obsolescence"
not, perhaps, the precise term wanted. It's more like structural
obsolescence. If both manufacturer and consumer know that
something better, faster, more powerful can be made and sold for
less in a year of so (or less), what incentive is there for the
manufacturer to make, or the consumer to want, something that
will last?

--
Patricia M. Godfrey
priscamg@xxxxxxxx