Home Appliances - best thing to do?

[disneysteve]

Perhaps, but it is worth the extra $35 for the sweater drying attachment (just as a for-instance).

Nope. That's a perfect example of how they try to upsell you with junk you don't need.

My wife wears sweaters all the time. She washes them. She dries them. Not a problem. Why would we spend $35 for a special attachment?

What really gets me annoyed is that when they add the bells and whistles, they also tend to upgrade important components. It is difficult or impossible to find a higher quality appliance that isn't loaded with features that we don't want or need (or care to pay for).

[JoeP]

The prices keeps going up while reliability and the ability to self-repair keep going down. And manufacturers add bells and whistles, along with styling cues, to distract us from these facts.

We have a w/d set that is going on 20 years. I've repaired with water pump twice and the agitator dogs once. With online resources, this was actually very easy. Downtime was a concern, sure, but it was only 2 days.

I think you have to evaluate reliability of a used set against new. The new ones are far more complex and are more difficult to repair by yourself; the warranty (or extended) can help put your mind at ease, but you still may have to real with downtime.

[bUU]

Nope.

Uh.... Yes.

That's a perfect example of how they try to upsell you with junk you don't need.

And that's a perfect example of refusing to grant the value in a worthwhile feature.

My wife ...

Goody for your wife. You're talking about value. If you don't see value in that feature, that's fine, for you, but don't presume to dictate what is and is not of value for others.

And by extension, neither of us can legitimately second-guess any of the features and bells and whistles, as we both did earlier, if there is anyone who finds them worthwhile. While the folks who see value in the features that both you and I don't see value in aren't here to defend their assessments, I am here to make very clear the value my family derives from what we value. Don't presume to contradict the fact that my family derives value from what I have told you we value.

And when there are people who derive value from a feature, manufacturers are right to provide such a feature: The whole argument against features falls apart when we see how it relies on everyone abiding by one person' personal preferences. I don't doubt that there are frivolous features, but the sweater rack is not one of them.

[disneysteve]

Uh.... Yes. And that's a perfect example of refusing to grant the value in a worthwhile feature.

And by extension, neither of us can legitimately second-guess any of the features and bells and whistles, as we both did earlier, if there is anyone who finds them worthwhile.

That's true. I'm not saying that nobody will find the features useful. There has just been a steady upscaling of what used to be very basic devices. There have actually been a number of books written on this topic that are pretty interesting reads. We've reached a point where it is nearly impossible to find a good basic stripped down model of something that isn't a piece of junk. If you want decent quality, you are stuck buying all of the bells and whistles and paying a premium price.

[bUU]

The bells and whistles are often used to make consumers feel better about paying the higher price, which in the absence of bells and whistles they'd probably face paying anyway. Basic functionality often costs more than typical consumers are willing to grant. The basic functionality can often be considered, these days, as a loss leader, serving only as a platform for the additional features that generated the revenue from which the product becomes profitable.

[JoeP]

The bells and whistles are often used to make consumers feel better about paying the higher price, which in the absence of bells and whistles they'd probably face paying anyway. Basic functionality often costs more than typical consumers are willing to grant. The basic functionality can often be considered, these days, as a loss leader, serving only as a platform for the additional features that generated the revenue from which the product becomes profitable.

I agree with this line of thinking. Our very old washing machine had only I think 5 cycles. One of those cycles, IIRC, was Beat Clothes Against A Stone. It worked great, was built like a tank, and lived a nice full life with minimal repairs.

Going out to buy a replacement was an interesting experience. We were looking for similar features, and had a very hard time finding them. Instead we found cycle options like grass stains, grease, sanitize, oxy-clean, stain boost, spray rinse...made the payout a little less painful for the reasons your cite (it made us feel like we're getting more for our money). I think we maybe use 3 cycles and 2 modifiers 99% of the time.

I just have a real hard time imagining someone shopping specifically for a washing machine with wi-fi or GPS....but I'll bet a few models that have those are on the drawing boards right now.

[bUU]

Let's hope there is, because the nature of commoditization is such that if that doesn't happen, then there will be even less reason to sell a machine that'll last five years than there is now. Roughly the same amount of money is going to flow - if the manufacturers cannot get the required level of profit from the sale, then they'll get it by cutting costs. We've seen this happen already with most home appliances. And just when we think they cannot get any crappier than they already are, manufacturers find another way to reduce cost even if it reduces dependability and reliability.

[phantom]

I just have a real hard time imagining someone shopping specifically for a washing machine with wi-fi or GPS....but I'll bet a few models that have those are on the drawing boards right now.

I'm going to hope I never want GPS in my washer. I'm pretty content assuming it will stay roughly where I put it. If it doesn't, I'm sure I'll have bigger problems.

But, I've got to admit, that I'd totally enjoy Wi-Fi. I could hook the washer into my home network, and it could use my internet connection to send me alerts when it finished. Then I could shut the door to the laundry room and not have to worry about not hearing the buzzer. I could also start it remotely. Delayed start is nice, but sometimes I don't know how long I'm going to be out, and it would be nice to be able to start the washer right before heading home. I doubt Wi-Fi would be worth the cost, but it would definitely be cool.

[bUU]

Well, that's just it. Wi-fi wouldn't "cost" much. Did you ever think that it would be "worth it" to put a computer in a washing machine? Yet there is a computer in every washing machine produced today, as sophisticated as my first personal computer. Thanks to the fact that computing devices are moving toward more standardization, slipping in a wireless card will cost very little, and building the functionality that exploits that wi-fi connection is a rather inexpensive affair, spread over millions of units. Throw in a cheap display screen that displays advertisements, and you've got a new feature that actually, itself, generates more revenue than it costs to embed and support. Will we see this in a washing machine? Perhaps not. Washing machines suffer from a distinct lack of such opportunities to withstand further commoditization. However, I'd be shocked if what I just described isn't ubiquitous across refrigerators within a couple of decades.

[JoeP]

Imagine the result of bad software updates or exploits on common appliances: your freezer gets set to 50F and you lose all your food, someone activates your ice dispenser while you're away and it ruins your floor, someone hacks your washing machine to over fill, your dishwasher heater goes to 500 degrees and causes a fire, your fridge needs a reboot because the wi-fi driver software conflicted with the IRQ for the touch screen...

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% in favor of innovation. But a lot of what I see today just looks like cramming a lot of "junk" in perfectly good appliances in order to make sales via big feature lists. I'd be much happier if reliability increased along with this.

[disneysteve]

there will be even less reason to sell a machine that'll last five years than there is now.

This is part of the problem with all the high tech stuff. It turns a utilitarian device that used to last 20 years into something that is an expensive doorstop in 4 or 5 years.

Look at cars. I know a lot of people who own antique cars from the 60s, 50s, and earlier. They still work just fine. They can still get all of the parts needed to maintain them. But what's going to happen to today's cars that are computers on wheels. Are they still going to be useable and serviceable 50 or 60 years from now? Somehow I doubt it.

If you get a washing machine that is computer-based with WiFi or whatever, how long before it is obsolete and you can't get parts or that it just doesn't work with more modern technology?

[bUU]

Imagine the result of bad software updates or exploits on

... your automobile.

Imagine the result of bad software updates or exploits on

... your telephone (which may be connected to your alarm system or your elder alert system).

Imagine the result of bad software updates or exploits on

... your neurosurgeon's medical equipment.

Imagine the result of bad software updates or exploits on common appliances

I'm comparatively unconcerned about appliances.

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% in favor of innovation. But a lot of what I see today just looks like cramming a lot of "junk" in perfectly good appliances in order to make sales via big feature lists. I'd be much happier if reliability increased along with this.

Consumers say this, but if it was really true, in general, then consumers wouldn't have driven the quality of most things down so far in pursuit of bargains.

This is part of the problem with all the high tech stuff. It turns a utilitarian device that used to last 20 years into something that is an expensive doorstop in 4 or 5 years.

I believe you have things backwards: Rather, those things were going to be driven down in quality, anyway, due to the typical consumer's maniacal pursuit of the lowest cost for everything, without adequate regard to quality and reliability. If anything, the "high tech stuff" is what is slowing the death spiral typical consumer behaviors have caused.

Look at cars.

Cars are actually as high quality as ever. What's changed is society's willingness to allow comparatively unsafe, dangerously decrepit, or otherwise inadequate vehicles on the public roads.

I know a lot of people who own antique cars from the 60s, 50s, and earlier. They still work just fine.

And they're good as novelty items. I wouldn't trust my children's safety to a 1960s automobile.

If you get a washing machine that is computer-based with WiFi or whatever, how long before it is obsolete and you can't get parts or that it just doesn't work with more modern technology?

Probably not long. Where are the people going to get the money to buy such washing machines, if the economy is structured so that no one ever needs to buy a new one? The reality is that our society survives only because of this kind of consumerism. Remove the consumerism angle - by making things last forever, without built-in obsolescence - and society will literally collapse from lack of economic activity.

If you really hate this kind of consumerism, then you'd be interested in how to turn back the tide. Do the math: The only defensible means is to significantly reduce population over time, though education and advocacy. The only defensible way our society can withstand a move away from this kind of consumerism is to reduce the need for the economic activity this kind of consumerism generates, and that means reducing the number of bodies to clothe, mouths to feed, etc. Innovation only takes you so far - our population is easily an order of magnitude greater than what innovation can cover in this regard.

[Baby_nurse]

The only bells and whistles I want to pay for is an option that folds and put away my clothes.

[snafu]

JoeP: There is not much that goes wrong with an older dryer. Were you able to ascertain whether it just needs a new heat element? That is a relatively low cost, DIY task. Would it be worth the time to try to fix it? There is a lot of information available on YouTube to walk you through the process.

Just a thought

[JoeP]

JoeP: There is not much that goes wrong with an older dryer. Were you able to ascertain whether it just needs a new heat element? That is a relatively low cost, DIY task. Would it be worth the time to try to fix it? There is a lot of information available on YouTube to walk you through the process.

Just a thought

Actually, it was the *new* dryer that had the blower failure. The old one worked perfectly for 15 years. In fact, the old one is still in service. I know about youtube and also applianceaid, and have fixed many older appliances that way.