Re: Planned obsolescence

[Leslie Bialler xywrite@xxxxxxxx]

Peter Brown wrote:
>
> McSwain, Leslie, and all,
>
> Here, here to you all. I don't usually think of myself in league with
> the Luddite movement, but the great churning maw of "advanced"
> technology and its effects on XyWrite has me Mad As Hell, and I Can't
> Take It Anymore.

Thanks. I don't consider myself to be in league with the Luddite movement,
either. I simply happen to believe that just because something _can_ be done it
_needs_ to be done.

An example from New York City history: In the 1970s a fleet of subway cars were
ordered that were then state of the art equipment. Trouble was, the cars kept
breaking down. Thbe NYCTA (Transit Authority) then embarked upon a plan of
"desophistication," in which some of the advanced technology that failed to work
was simply unplugged or bypassed. Those cars continue to run. (A worse fate
befell our bus fleet--the new high-tech busses developed a tendency to burst
into flames at unscheduled hours. These were simply removed from service and
resold. Perhaps they now ply their trade in Baghdad.)

This lesson is one that never seems to be heeded. When something that serves a
real purpose (the VCR, e.g.) or is a real improvement (the CD over the LP) comes
along, it is quickly embraced by the public. When a product appears for which
there is no real need, or is poorly planned (the 8 track, e.g.) it is not.

Then, too, mfgs. and developers don't always understand the implications of what
they are creating. It was easy to see the public would want VCRs. It was less
easy to see that they would wish to rent movies rather than purchase them, and
even less easy to see that they would prefer the inferior VHS to the
technologically superior Beta simply because the VHS tapes played an hour
longer.

>

even organizations get hobbled by this dynamic.


They surely do. I think this is the good old "The Joneses have it so we must
have it too" syndrome.

--
Leslie Bialler
Columbia University Press
lb136@xxxxxxxx