Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/06/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Consumerism [was RE: [Leica] Digital Leica M]
From: bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen)
Date: Tue Jun 13 19:12:42 2006

Actually, Dick, I'll be that any washer or dryer you'd buy today would be
far more efficient, use less energy, etc., than your 35-year-old machine.
The only thing inherently valuable in a 35-year-old washer or dryer,
compared to today's machine, is the set of memories that goes with it - all
those loads of little kids clothes, etc. etc. ;-)


On 6/13/06 10:05 PM, "Richard S. Taylor" <r.s.taylor@comcast.net> wrote:

> Don - Economics always rules.  Thanks to largely automated production
> processes it's often cheaper to build new than stock replacement
> parts and repair the old.  Repair always involves labor and time.
> 
> I've followed this unfortunate path myself.  When my five-year old
> dehumidifier died recently the choice was either to spend $100
> minimum to repair it or $200 to buy a new, better one.  I went for
> the new, just like most of us would do, but it still rankles.
> 
> There's something seriously out of whack here.
> 
> On the other hand, if my now 35-year old Maytag washer or dryer
> developed a problem I'd almost certainly repair it.  There's
> something inherently valuable in those machines, like our Leicas.
> (Whew! Back on topic, didn't think I'd make it.  :-)  )
> 
> Dick
> 
>> Richard,
>> The waste is in the engineering.  I have three cordless drills that all 
>> use
>> different batteries not to mention battery design.  We rush designs out
>> without thinking through the process because it is too easy to set up
>> another factory deeper in China/Indonesia/Mexico to build whatever was
>> rushed out the door.
>> 
>> I think that one of the things that most of us liked about Leica's is that
>> not that much changed over the decades and that most of it still played
>> nicely with the older pieces or younger pieces.  There was some serious
>> engineering going on behind the scenes.
>> 
>> Don
>> don.dory@gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> On 6/13/06, Richard S. Taylor <r.s.taylor@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> (snip)
>>>> I had a friend who had a big screen TV.... it cost him $4K, he had
>>>> it for a year, then threw it out when it went bad.  His new
>>>> replacement was less costly ($2700) and bigger.  Made sense to him......
>>>> 
>>>> Obviously not me.   I like mechanical cameras.
>>>> 
>>>> Frank Filippone
>>>> red735i@earthlink.net
>>> 
>>> (snip)
>>> 
>>> The consumer economy at it's worst - and an astonishing waste of
>>> energy (think) oil) to boot.  But that's what keeps the economy
>>> humming.
>>> 
>>> It makes my teeth grind to think of all the human and physical energy
>>> wasted when gear like that screen (or a DSLR, to get back on topic)
>>> is thrown out after so little use.
>>> 
>>> End of rant.  :-))
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Dick
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard S. Taylor) (Consumerism [was RE: [Leica] Digital Leica M])
Reply from scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin) (Consumerism [was RE: [Leica] Digital Leica M])
In reply to: Message from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard S. Taylor) (Consumerism [was RE: [Leica] Digital Leica M])