THE EFFECTS OF PLANNED AND PERCEIVED OBSOLESCENCE ON MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES
Rationale
In this analytical publishing project, I present a balanced critical analysis of the effects of planned and perceived obsolescence on mobile technologies. During my 30-year cumulative professional experience in computers, electronic, higher education field, and variety of mobile devices and related technologies, I have been witnessing a significant shift toward the value engineering and growth of planned obsolescence philosophy in all industrial production fields. The planned obsolescence has been around for more than 90 years, and through decades gradually evolved into the unwritten industry standard that brings fast profits. In this analytic publishing project, I will critically focus on the impacts of planned and perceived obsolescence on mobile device technologies, as a vital parts of the mobile ecosystems worldwide.
1. What is Planned and Perceived Obsolescence?
Planned Obsolescence (design for the dump) is the deliberate shortening of product life spans to guarantee consumer demand and profits. It is usually a result of value engineering implemented by manufacturers to design products with short life-span in order to shorten product life-cycle and force consumers to replace products quicker. That practice brings more profit to manufacturers and retailers, and more tax money to governments, but causes consistent drain on wealth of consumers, and negative environmental impact.
Products of all types - cars, incandescent bulbs, appliances, iPod, iPad and iPhone - are designed with planned obsolescence in mind, and due to rapid development and technology changes, the electronic industry is leading the planned obsolescence trend.
I believe we've all experienced this or similar scenario:
Just after the warranty expired, an electronic appliance/device breaks and you take it for repairs, so you usually experience these 2 common problems, as follows:
1. the repair of the broken appliance/device costs as much, if not more than a new one,
2. the broken appliance/device is no longer serviceable due to lack of parts or vendor/manufacturer support.
In this case, the only solution is to dump the old appliance/device and buy a new one.
This example of planned obsolescence angers many customers and after that bad experience, many would avoid purchasing and repairing such identified products.
The concept of planned obsolescence is simple. If customers can be convinced or forced to repurchase a product, then the manufacturers/retailers/governments will make more money during the same time period.
From a consumer’s perspective, it is hard to see the reasoning behind such an apparent “cheat” and wasteful concept. However, in some cases planned obsolescence is the result of a process known as value engineering where acknowledging that technological advances will be made in a year or two and designing a product to last longer than that, will only increase its price with minimal extra benefit.
From the manufacturers’ perspective, arguments for planned obsolescence revolve around driving technological advancement and market necessity. With planned obsolescence a market encourages rapid innovation verses long-lasting products and slow innovation. The fear is that if all products are designed to last, then new innovations may be stalled as producers will wait for the estimated payback period on a product before marketing a new one.
Or in a competitive market where a rival will take advantage of a postponement, product appeal will only last a short time. Therefore expecting customers to want something new soon, there is no benefit from designing a product to last longer.
2. Types of Obsolescence:
This is the obsolescence caused by the advancement of technology and purposely lacking reverse compatibility. An example would be the shift from tapes to CDs. That is a technological advancement that greatly enhanced the storage and transfer of data and tape players were unable to play CDs. The shift from CDs to DVDs again boasted the same advancement in functionality and though for a period of time a few DVD players were able to play VCD, the market was eventually dominated by DVD only players forcing people to shift to DVDs.
Tape stands and holders were then functionally obsolete since tapes were no longer used. For the meantime, CD holders and racks can still be used for DVDs and Blu-Ray discs, but the question is how much longer produces will adhere to this particular hardware structure before reaching its theoretical limit.
A common problem especially noticed with mobile devices, phones and other hand-held gadgets, where the battery life gets shorter and shorter. Usually this is accounted for by the chemical decay of the battery, however some batteries are programmed to “die” sooner. Rechargeable lithium batteries contain an integrated circuit that helps monitor the charge of the battery. For “safety reasons” the battery is programmed to recharge to under its maximum charge with a calculated rate of decay. However some manufacturers program a very drastic rate of decay arguably for safety reasons, thereby shortening the real lifetime of the battery. The fact is that we’re accustomed to planned obsolescence in mobility ecosystem.
New models of mobile devices come out every year, faster, shinier and just plain better. But before the iPhone, cell phones without user-replaceable batteries were almost unheard of. Apple realized that they could sell more phones if they built the phone with an integrated battery, prompting users to upgrade once the battery wore down. A phone isn't very useful once you can’t take it away from the charger for more than an hour, which is guaranteed to happen with every iPhone. The Lithium-Ion batteries are wonderful technology, but they have a finite life of 300 to 500 cycles. If you use up your battery completely every day, it’ll only last a year or so. Once the battery is worn down, it needs to be replaced, just like the light bulb in your refrigerator or the air filter in your car. Until the iPhone, all consumer product designs included a way to replace consumables. Apple’s consumer-hostile approach has turned product design on its head. For sustainability and environmental reasons, it is unacceptable to tolerate such wasteful engineering, and yet somehow Apple has forced us all into an involuntary annual upgrade cycle.
Example:
In 2003, the Apple manufacturer deliberately installed irreplaceable, short-life lithium batteries into iPods that lasted only 18 months, with the intention to make consumers buying new iPods sooner. After Apple lost the class action lawsuit in 2005, they had to extend the warranties and replace the iPods that had faulty batteries.
The similar practice continues with iPhones 3, 4, and 5 where Apple does not supply spare parts, including batteries, to anybody.
Apple defends itself claiming that you can always pay them to replace the battery. That’s true, for iPhone 4 it costs $85.95, takes a week, and Apple will erase your phone’s memory during the procedure. That’s the only way. There are no other officially sanctioned options, and Apple constantly refuses to authorize any independent iPhone battery replacement centers. Their onerous replacement procedure is intentionally expensive, because they don’t want you to replace the battery. Apple wants to profit from you when you buy a new phone—but if you insist on doubling your iPhone lifespan by replacing your battery, they want to make some money in the process. The iPhone batteries retail for just $24.95, and cost Apple far less than that.
Also, as a result of planned obsolescence, a number of Android based mobile devices (Motorola Droid, Razr, Maxx, and Nokia Lumia 900, etc.) come with non-replaceable batteries, while low end phones come with outdated OS versions, and due to Android NAND flash memory fragmentation, phones lose performances with time.
Mobile phone makers intentionally install non replaceable batteries and want you to buy a new phone at least every two years, and not gift/sell the old phone to someone else, because then the new owner does not buy a new phone.
Otherwise, with the user accessible battery covers, it was far more likely that someone buys for $10 a compatible third party battery, and continues to use the phone, not needing to buy a new one.
Systemic obsolescence is when producers purposely alter the system of newer models and versions thereby causing compatibility issues. Microsoft moves so fast in pumping out new Windows versions (and earning billions of dollars) that many programming companies (e.g. professional specialist programs) and other third party software producers can’t keep up. Microsoft supports earlier operating systems for a period of time, but will usually stop supporting soon after newer operating systems are out.
We all remember Windows Vista, and its built incompatibility with the Windows 2000/XP applications, where the customers were forced to upgrade or buy a new hardware.
Not to mention the older Windows 98/Me software incompatibility? With the launch of Vista, they all come to an end of life, so we had to buy a new set of compatible software and new computer hardware? Do you remember the MS Office 2007/2010 compatibility issues with older MS Office formats? Customers did not ask for that format change, so millions of customer complaints forced Microsoft to provide the Compatibility pack for older formats.
Bill Gates, the founder and CEO of Microsoft Corporation, said:
“The only big companies that succeed will be those that obsolete their own products before someone else does”
Also, previously released Android devices with mobile OS 2.3 "Gingerbread" for smartphones, and Android 3.0 "Honeycomb" for tablets, are not upgradeable to the more secure versions of Android 4.x "Ice Cream Sandwich", which renders those devices non-secure and prematurely obsolete, forcing customers to upgrade their devices (buy new ones) to avoid security holes and get better performances.
Let’s look at an example of systemic obsolescence implemented by Apple.inc.
Do you still own an original iPad 1? Can you upgrade your original iPad 1 to iOS6? NO, it is not possible because Apple wants us to buy newly released models of iPads, leaving millions of customers who own iPad 1 in cold, without the possibility to enjoy the advanced features that iOS6 brought to the market. So, Apple intentionally made the original iPad obsolete in 18 months, forcing consumers to buy new iPads if they want to use advanced features, such as Siri.
Perceived Obsolescence is the part of planned obsolescence that refers to “desirability”. In other words, a product may continue to be functional, but it is no longer perceived to be stylish or appropriate, so it is rendered obsolete by perception, rather than by function. Fashion is all about perceived obsolescence, and the fact is that perceived obsolescence is the result of the media and advertising industry creation of desirable style and massive public perception about products.
This perceived obsolescence is driven mainly by aesthetic appeal and peer pressure. By constantly changing the design of a product, people are able to identify how long ago a purchase was made, leading to uncomfortable assumptions about social or financial welfare. The automotive industry and the fashion industry worldwide are known to take advantage of this obsolescence. The automotive industry reliance on style obsolescence to drive sales is crucial. With general functionality mainly determined by industry standards, only the changing of car body shape and few other non-important details, suggests a newer model. Fashion is all about looks and that implies style. It is a pity that the industry has also decided to reduce the durability of products. It is commonly known that products older than 20, 30 years were a lot more durable than current products.
Style obsolescence is heavily dependent on marketing hype and how customers take to the products. It is a heavily mental marketing ploy and is highly dependent on the audience.
This is a semi-brainwash mind trick where due to a customer’s lack of technical knowledge, trust is placed in producers that “they know better” and hence allows them to practically dictate how a product should be used and frequency of replacement. Usually some form of notification (ink or toner replacement warning, expiration date on HP cartridges, etc.) tells the user it is time to get a new replacement, regardless of whether the item is truly dysfunctional. A similar kind of notification warns HP and SONY laptop users that the battery reached its end of life, and has to be replaced with an original HP battery.
As mentioned earlier, planned obsolescence is often the result of value engineering.
Value engineering is a design process that seeks to use as little material as possible in a product while still delivering an acceptable lifespan.
It also suggests that all the parts in a product should fail at about the same time, so that none are “overbuilt” relative to the rest.
Over-engineering would be the opposite process however it tends to either make a product expensive or complicated to handle. An application for this is usually in regards to maximizing safety where severe injury or life is at risk. Otherwise it is usually regarded negatively as customers will tend to choose a cheaper product or one that is easier to use.
When a company tries to make its product more appealing than rival products, one sure way is to be cheaper. In the efforts to be cheaper while still making a reasonable margin on sales, costs are cut and usually cheaper materials are selected resulting in the loss of durability. The example: Apple iPhone and Samsung Galaxy competition.
3. The Effects of Planned and Perceived Obsolescence on Mobility Ecosystem
There are some positive and much more negative consequences of planned and perceived obsolescence on mobile technologies, mobility ecosystem and various elements of society.
Positive consequences:
· Continual advancements of mobile technologies are positives in society
· Competitive improvement and innovation of mobile devices and services.
· Pushing the boundaries helps finding solutions for mobile technology problems
Negative consequences:
The negative impact is enormous and has a significant footprint on us, as consumers, our culture, industry, education, environment, and society in general. The planned and perceived obsolescence is a phenomenon and the culture that widely impacts world economy in general, and my focus in this critical analysis will be the impact on nowadays ubiquitous mobile technologies, and related electronic industry, very important pillars of the mobility ecosystems worldwide.
To learn more, watch The Story of Stuff video about the Planned Obsolescence negative impact on environment.
Also, watch this video to learn more about the conflict-causing minerals used in production of mobile devices.
4. How to Decrease and Overcome the Negative Effects of Planned and Perceived Obsolescence on Mobile Technologies in Education
Considering the increased use of various kinds of mobile devices and related ecosystem infrastructural resources in education, it is clear that increased demand for mobile devices worldwide causes higher production and higher depletion of resources. Also, more frequent purchase of new mobile technologies requires more funds to be spent on mobile devices that otherwise may be utilized for funding other needs with the purpose for enhancing education in general.
For that reason, below is a set of best practices in educational institutions at all levels, to proactively decrease and overcome the negative impacts on educational environments.
To decrease and overcome the negative impact of planned obsolescence on mobile technologies for education, the following practices should be implemented:
5. How to Decrease and Overcome the Negative Impact of Planned and Perceived Obsolescence on Mobile Technologies and Society in General?
Government and mobile industry policies and regulations:
Customer education on responsible purchase and use of mobile devices:
7. Conclusion
As is quite clear now, the constant race for fast profit and market dominance of industry in general, and especially mobile and electronic industry, have caused the gradual implementation of planned and perceived obsolescence in their practices, resulting in making products with shorter life span to profit more, especially during the last few decades. That resulted in parallel promotion and development of consumerism and mobile device throw-away mentality, primarily in developed countries, and additionally caused negative footprint on sustainability, environment, society and on the wealth of consumers.
The above practices would direct mobile technologies worldwide onto a more sustainable course, and gradually decrease and eradicate the culture of planned and perceived obsolescence, promote sustainability, therefore stop wasting resources, and damaging the environment.
The free mobile market is powerful and beneficial, but an efficient mobile market requires knowledge. Once mobile consumers become informed about the planned and perceived obsolescence, they can better use the mobile market to buy more efficient mobile products. This will benefit consumers, responsible businesses, society in general, and the environment.
Changing the consciousness of the mobile consumers and the fast-profit philosophy of the mobile industry will take time, but that is the only way to transition from the mobile device throwaway society to the more sustainable paths in mobile device production, use, recycling and environmental protection.
We, as a society reached the point where we have to act proactively to stop the corporate greed, pollution, preserve the environment, and make the life on Earth sustainable for future generations.
“Let’s move away from a throwaway culture towards an economy sustained by more durable goods." Tim Cooper, 2010
8. References
http://www.storyofstuff.org/movies-all/story-of-stuff/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF-sJgcoY20&feature=player_embedded
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence
http://www.nowsell.com/marketing-guide/planned-obsolescence.html
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Planned_obsolescence_%28business%29
http://www.uselessgoods.com/Planned_obsolescence/encyclopedia.htm
http://www.servinghistory.com/topics/planned_obsolescence::sub::Types_Of_Obsolescence
http://perc.org/blog/planned-obsolescence-good-and-bad#sthash.34Xn2H9W.dpuf
http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/columns/engcol8.html
https://www.adbusters.org/category/tags/obsolescence
http://www.electronics-lab.com/articles/Li_Ion_reconstruct/
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/planned-obsolescence-460210
http://nottinghamtrent.academia.edu/TimCooper
This analytical publishing project has been created with the free Weebly.com account, and has been fully optimized for viewing on mobile devices. © by mzivko, 2013.
Rationale
In this analytical publishing project, I present a balanced critical analysis of the effects of planned and perceived obsolescence on mobile technologies. During my 30-year cumulative professional experience in computers, electronic, higher education field, and variety of mobile devices and related technologies, I have been witnessing a significant shift toward the value engineering and growth of planned obsolescence philosophy in all industrial production fields. The planned obsolescence has been around for more than 90 years, and through decades gradually evolved into the unwritten industry standard that brings fast profits. In this analytic publishing project, I will critically focus on the impacts of planned and perceived obsolescence on mobile device technologies, as a vital parts of the mobile ecosystems worldwide.
1. What is Planned and Perceived Obsolescence?
Planned Obsolescence (design for the dump) is the deliberate shortening of product life spans to guarantee consumer demand and profits. It is usually a result of value engineering implemented by manufacturers to design products with short life-span in order to shorten product life-cycle and force consumers to replace products quicker. That practice brings more profit to manufacturers and retailers, and more tax money to governments, but causes consistent drain on wealth of consumers, and negative environmental impact.
Products of all types - cars, incandescent bulbs, appliances, iPod, iPad and iPhone - are designed with planned obsolescence in mind, and due to rapid development and technology changes, the electronic industry is leading the planned obsolescence trend.
I believe we've all experienced this or similar scenario:
Just after the warranty expired, an electronic appliance/device breaks and you take it for repairs, so you usually experience these 2 common problems, as follows:
1. the repair of the broken appliance/device costs as much, if not more than a new one,
2. the broken appliance/device is no longer serviceable due to lack of parts or vendor/manufacturer support.
In this case, the only solution is to dump the old appliance/device and buy a new one.
This example of planned obsolescence angers many customers and after that bad experience, many would avoid purchasing and repairing such identified products.
- Why is Planned Obsolescence widespread?
The concept of planned obsolescence is simple. If customers can be convinced or forced to repurchase a product, then the manufacturers/retailers/governments will make more money during the same time period.
From a consumer’s perspective, it is hard to see the reasoning behind such an apparent “cheat” and wasteful concept. However, in some cases planned obsolescence is the result of a process known as value engineering where acknowledging that technological advances will be made in a year or two and designing a product to last longer than that, will only increase its price with minimal extra benefit.
From the manufacturers’ perspective, arguments for planned obsolescence revolve around driving technological advancement and market necessity. With planned obsolescence a market encourages rapid innovation verses long-lasting products and slow innovation. The fear is that if all products are designed to last, then new innovations may be stalled as producers will wait for the estimated payback period on a product before marketing a new one.
Or in a competitive market where a rival will take advantage of a postponement, product appeal will only last a short time. Therefore expecting customers to want something new soon, there is no benefit from designing a product to last longer.
2. Types of Obsolescence:
- Technological and Functional Obsolescence
This is the obsolescence caused by the advancement of technology and purposely lacking reverse compatibility. An example would be the shift from tapes to CDs. That is a technological advancement that greatly enhanced the storage and transfer of data and tape players were unable to play CDs. The shift from CDs to DVDs again boasted the same advancement in functionality and though for a period of time a few DVD players were able to play VCD, the market was eventually dominated by DVD only players forcing people to shift to DVDs.
Tape stands and holders were then functionally obsolete since tapes were no longer used. For the meantime, CD holders and racks can still be used for DVDs and Blu-Ray discs, but the question is how much longer produces will adhere to this particular hardware structure before reaching its theoretical limit.
- Programmed Obsolescence
A common problem especially noticed with mobile devices, phones and other hand-held gadgets, where the battery life gets shorter and shorter. Usually this is accounted for by the chemical decay of the battery, however some batteries are programmed to “die” sooner. Rechargeable lithium batteries contain an integrated circuit that helps monitor the charge of the battery. For “safety reasons” the battery is programmed to recharge to under its maximum charge with a calculated rate of decay. However some manufacturers program a very drastic rate of decay arguably for safety reasons, thereby shortening the real lifetime of the battery. The fact is that we’re accustomed to planned obsolescence in mobility ecosystem.
New models of mobile devices come out every year, faster, shinier and just plain better. But before the iPhone, cell phones without user-replaceable batteries were almost unheard of. Apple realized that they could sell more phones if they built the phone with an integrated battery, prompting users to upgrade once the battery wore down. A phone isn't very useful once you can’t take it away from the charger for more than an hour, which is guaranteed to happen with every iPhone. The Lithium-Ion batteries are wonderful technology, but they have a finite life of 300 to 500 cycles. If you use up your battery completely every day, it’ll only last a year or so. Once the battery is worn down, it needs to be replaced, just like the light bulb in your refrigerator or the air filter in your car. Until the iPhone, all consumer product designs included a way to replace consumables. Apple’s consumer-hostile approach has turned product design on its head. For sustainability and environmental reasons, it is unacceptable to tolerate such wasteful engineering, and yet somehow Apple has forced us all into an involuntary annual upgrade cycle.
Example:
In 2003, the Apple manufacturer deliberately installed irreplaceable, short-life lithium batteries into iPods that lasted only 18 months, with the intention to make consumers buying new iPods sooner. After Apple lost the class action lawsuit in 2005, they had to extend the warranties and replace the iPods that had faulty batteries.
The similar practice continues with iPhones 3, 4, and 5 where Apple does not supply spare parts, including batteries, to anybody.
Apple defends itself claiming that you can always pay them to replace the battery. That’s true, for iPhone 4 it costs $85.95, takes a week, and Apple will erase your phone’s memory during the procedure. That’s the only way. There are no other officially sanctioned options, and Apple constantly refuses to authorize any independent iPhone battery replacement centers. Their onerous replacement procedure is intentionally expensive, because they don’t want you to replace the battery. Apple wants to profit from you when you buy a new phone—but if you insist on doubling your iPhone lifespan by replacing your battery, they want to make some money in the process. The iPhone batteries retail for just $24.95, and cost Apple far less than that.
Also, as a result of planned obsolescence, a number of Android based mobile devices (Motorola Droid, Razr, Maxx, and Nokia Lumia 900, etc.) come with non-replaceable batteries, while low end phones come with outdated OS versions, and due to Android NAND flash memory fragmentation, phones lose performances with time.
Mobile phone makers intentionally install non replaceable batteries and want you to buy a new phone at least every two years, and not gift/sell the old phone to someone else, because then the new owner does not buy a new phone.
Otherwise, with the user accessible battery covers, it was far more likely that someone buys for $10 a compatible third party battery, and continues to use the phone, not needing to buy a new one.
- Systemic and Compatibility Obsolescence
Systemic obsolescence is when producers purposely alter the system of newer models and versions thereby causing compatibility issues. Microsoft moves so fast in pumping out new Windows versions (and earning billions of dollars) that many programming companies (e.g. professional specialist programs) and other third party software producers can’t keep up. Microsoft supports earlier operating systems for a period of time, but will usually stop supporting soon after newer operating systems are out.
We all remember Windows Vista, and its built incompatibility with the Windows 2000/XP applications, where the customers were forced to upgrade or buy a new hardware.
Not to mention the older Windows 98/Me software incompatibility? With the launch of Vista, they all come to an end of life, so we had to buy a new set of compatible software and new computer hardware? Do you remember the MS Office 2007/2010 compatibility issues with older MS Office formats? Customers did not ask for that format change, so millions of customer complaints forced Microsoft to provide the Compatibility pack for older formats.
Bill Gates, the founder and CEO of Microsoft Corporation, said:
“The only big companies that succeed will be those that obsolete their own products before someone else does”
Also, previously released Android devices with mobile OS 2.3 "Gingerbread" for smartphones, and Android 3.0 "Honeycomb" for tablets, are not upgradeable to the more secure versions of Android 4.x "Ice Cream Sandwich", which renders those devices non-secure and prematurely obsolete, forcing customers to upgrade their devices (buy new ones) to avoid security holes and get better performances.
Let’s look at an example of systemic obsolescence implemented by Apple.inc.
Do you still own an original iPad 1? Can you upgrade your original iPad 1 to iOS6? NO, it is not possible because Apple wants us to buy newly released models of iPads, leaving millions of customers who own iPad 1 in cold, without the possibility to enjoy the advanced features that iOS6 brought to the market. So, Apple intentionally made the original iPad obsolete in 18 months, forcing consumers to buy new iPads if they want to use advanced features, such as Siri.
- Perceived (Style) Obsolescence
Perceived Obsolescence is the part of planned obsolescence that refers to “desirability”. In other words, a product may continue to be functional, but it is no longer perceived to be stylish or appropriate, so it is rendered obsolete by perception, rather than by function. Fashion is all about perceived obsolescence, and the fact is that perceived obsolescence is the result of the media and advertising industry creation of desirable style and massive public perception about products.
This perceived obsolescence is driven mainly by aesthetic appeal and peer pressure. By constantly changing the design of a product, people are able to identify how long ago a purchase was made, leading to uncomfortable assumptions about social or financial welfare. The automotive industry and the fashion industry worldwide are known to take advantage of this obsolescence. The automotive industry reliance on style obsolescence to drive sales is crucial. With general functionality mainly determined by industry standards, only the changing of car body shape and few other non-important details, suggests a newer model. Fashion is all about looks and that implies style. It is a pity that the industry has also decided to reduce the durability of products. It is commonly known that products older than 20, 30 years were a lot more durable than current products.
Style obsolescence is heavily dependent on marketing hype and how customers take to the products. It is a heavily mental marketing ploy and is highly dependent on the audience.
- Notification Obsolescence
This is a semi-brainwash mind trick where due to a customer’s lack of technical knowledge, trust is placed in producers that “they know better” and hence allows them to practically dictate how a product should be used and frequency of replacement. Usually some form of notification (ink or toner replacement warning, expiration date on HP cartridges, etc.) tells the user it is time to get a new replacement, regardless of whether the item is truly dysfunctional. A similar kind of notification warns HP and SONY laptop users that the battery reached its end of life, and has to be replaced with an original HP battery.
- Value Engineering and Over-engineering
As mentioned earlier, planned obsolescence is often the result of value engineering.
Value engineering is a design process that seeks to use as little material as possible in a product while still delivering an acceptable lifespan.
It also suggests that all the parts in a product should fail at about the same time, so that none are “overbuilt” relative to the rest.
Over-engineering would be the opposite process however it tends to either make a product expensive or complicated to handle. An application for this is usually in regards to maximizing safety where severe injury or life is at risk. Otherwise it is usually regarded negatively as customers will tend to choose a cheaper product or one that is easier to use.
When a company tries to make its product more appealing than rival products, one sure way is to be cheaper. In the efforts to be cheaper while still making a reasonable margin on sales, costs are cut and usually cheaper materials are selected resulting in the loss of durability. The example: Apple iPhone and Samsung Galaxy competition.
3. The Effects of Planned and Perceived Obsolescence on Mobility Ecosystem
There are some positive and much more negative consequences of planned and perceived obsolescence on mobile technologies, mobility ecosystem and various elements of society.
Positive consequences:
· Continual advancements of mobile technologies are positives in society
· Competitive improvement and innovation of mobile devices and services.
· Pushing the boundaries helps finding solutions for mobile technology problems
Negative consequences:
- Resource depletion - the quicker a mobile product fails, the quicker we need a new one, and the more resources are needed, so faster resources will be depleted.
- Waste generation - if mobile device is made to fail, it usually gets thrown away and ends up contributing to the ever-growing electronic world-wide waste.
- Greater energy (electricity, oil, gas) and water consumption - the more mobile devices we manufacture the more energy and water we use.
- Throwaway mentality - the idea that mobile devices can be used, abused and thrown away, only acts to perpetuate an unsustainable, mobile device throwaway society, and will take a lot of effort to undo.
The negative impact is enormous and has a significant footprint on us, as consumers, our culture, industry, education, environment, and society in general. The planned and perceived obsolescence is a phenomenon and the culture that widely impacts world economy in general, and my focus in this critical analysis will be the impact on nowadays ubiquitous mobile technologies, and related electronic industry, very important pillars of the mobility ecosystems worldwide.
To learn more, watch The Story of Stuff video about the Planned Obsolescence negative impact on environment.
Also, watch this video to learn more about the conflict-causing minerals used in production of mobile devices.
4. How to Decrease and Overcome the Negative Effects of Planned and Perceived Obsolescence on Mobile Technologies in Education
Considering the increased use of various kinds of mobile devices and related ecosystem infrastructural resources in education, it is clear that increased demand for mobile devices worldwide causes higher production and higher depletion of resources. Also, more frequent purchase of new mobile technologies requires more funds to be spent on mobile devices that otherwise may be utilized for funding other needs with the purpose for enhancing education in general.
For that reason, below is a set of best practices in educational institutions at all levels, to proactively decrease and overcome the negative impacts on educational environments.
To decrease and overcome the negative impact of planned obsolescence on mobile technologies for education, the following practices should be implemented:
- Educate students and staff about the negative impact of planned obsolescence on society, educational institutions, consumers, taxpayers and environment worldwide,
- Implement and use the best mobile technology evaluation frameworks (FRAME, SETT, SECTIONS, M3, etc.), to choose technology for the best mobile learning outcomes
- Buy mobile products that have extended warranties, or that are guaranteed for a reasonable number of years, to save the institution money and preserve environment,
- Commit to buy conflict-free mobile products, to protect society and environment,
- Support legislation to stop conflict minerals (Tin, Tungsten, and Tantalum) exploitation
- Promote prolonged use of mobile devices for positive financial and sustainability effects,
- Promote and opt for the modular mobile device design initiatives, such as Phonebloks
- Promote research initiatives on the sustainability of mobile technologies in education.
5. How to Decrease and Overcome the Negative Impact of Planned and Perceived Obsolescence on Mobile Technologies and Society in General?
Government and mobile industry policies and regulations:
- Research consumer influences and expectations on mobile product life-span
- Design lasting mobile products that offer enhanced value, while reducing negative environmental impacts
- Promote and support the modular device design initiatives, such as Phonebloks
- Explore and design a strong marketing platform for mobile product quality and durability
- Define and set mobile and electronics industry standards to save resources and improve product usability
- Examine and promote the quality and durability in manufacturing of whole range of mobile devices
- Define and set policies for mobile product longevity to extend mobile product life-spans.
- Create conditions for the re-use of mobile packaging, Green, and Zero Waste initiatives.
- Create fewer but better quality mobile products, look after them carefully and invest more in repair, renovation and upgrading, and adjust the law on mobile device guarantees and repair work.
- Promote “DESIGN TO LAST” policies in mobile industry design and manufacturing.
Customer education on responsible purchase and use of mobile devices:
- Long life products - Choose to buy mobile products that have extended warranties, or that are guaranteed for a reasonable number of years.
- Buy quality - Look for mobile products that are built to last. Support the small companies where possible, but make it practical as well, because cheaper isn't always better for you or the environment.
- Good materials - Look for mobile devices that are made out of durable materials.
- Recyclability - Look for mobile devices that are made out of recycled materials, or that can be recycled to prevent environmental pollution.
- Look for a company promise - Buy mobile products that have buy-back, take-back or recycling programs as a part of their service.
- Repairs and upgrades - Look for mobile products that can be repaired under warranty, but also ones that are more compatible with other, newer parts.
- Look after your devices - Taking care of your mobile devices is a sure way to increase their life. Be mindful of where you leave your mobile devices, and how you handle them. Don't leave mobile devices exposed to the elements, like the sun, salt and moisture.
- Second hand goods - Buying second hand mobile products can save you money, which saves on raw materials and keeps unnecessary things out of landfills.
- Regular servicing - Have mobile products with moving parts serviced regularly to maintain their efficiency and increase their longevity.
- Fulfill the life-cycle - Make sure you use a mobile product until it is completely unusable and then recycle it. Only buy a newer item when it is absolutely necessary.
7. Conclusion
As is quite clear now, the constant race for fast profit and market dominance of industry in general, and especially mobile and electronic industry, have caused the gradual implementation of planned and perceived obsolescence in their practices, resulting in making products with shorter life span to profit more, especially during the last few decades. That resulted in parallel promotion and development of consumerism and mobile device throw-away mentality, primarily in developed countries, and additionally caused negative footprint on sustainability, environment, society and on the wealth of consumers.
The above practices would direct mobile technologies worldwide onto a more sustainable course, and gradually decrease and eradicate the culture of planned and perceived obsolescence, promote sustainability, therefore stop wasting resources, and damaging the environment.
The free mobile market is powerful and beneficial, but an efficient mobile market requires knowledge. Once mobile consumers become informed about the planned and perceived obsolescence, they can better use the mobile market to buy more efficient mobile products. This will benefit consumers, responsible businesses, society in general, and the environment.
Changing the consciousness of the mobile consumers and the fast-profit philosophy of the mobile industry will take time, but that is the only way to transition from the mobile device throwaway society to the more sustainable paths in mobile device production, use, recycling and environmental protection.
We, as a society reached the point where we have to act proactively to stop the corporate greed, pollution, preserve the environment, and make the life on Earth sustainable for future generations.
“Let’s move away from a throwaway culture towards an economy sustained by more durable goods." Tim Cooper, 2010
8. References
http://www.storyofstuff.org/movies-all/story-of-stuff/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF-sJgcoY20&feature=player_embedded
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence
http://www.nowsell.com/marketing-guide/planned-obsolescence.html
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Planned_obsolescence_%28business%29
http://www.uselessgoods.com/Planned_obsolescence/encyclopedia.htm
http://www.servinghistory.com/topics/planned_obsolescence::sub::Types_Of_Obsolescence
http://perc.org/blog/planned-obsolescence-good-and-bad#sthash.34Xn2H9W.dpuf
http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/columns/engcol8.html
https://www.adbusters.org/category/tags/obsolescence
http://www.electronics-lab.com/articles/Li_Ion_reconstruct/
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/planned-obsolescence-460210
http://nottinghamtrent.academia.edu/TimCooper
This analytical publishing project has been created with the free Weebly.com account, and has been fully optimized for viewing on mobile devices. © by mzivko, 2013.