|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
> Then again, maybe that's because I'm still thinking like a consumer. When
> I buy something, I want it to *not* brake. The manufacturer, on the other
> hand, has a vested interest in making it so flimsy that it won't last 5
> minutes. That way they get more repeat business. (In addition to the
> materials savings, obviously.)
I think more people would steer away from a brand if it got a reputation for
breaking all the time, usually manufacturers have exact targets for how many
devices are returned failed after certain amounts of time. They are
carefully calculated (to produce a device that doesn't break too often, but
is also sensible to manufacture) and then the product is carefully designed
and tested to meet these targets. The bad reputations usually come from
mistakes rather than deliberate design intention. Still this is usually a
result of poor design/testing procedures, which are obviously related to
cost.
> Personally it makes me angry that somebody would deliberately design
> something to be defective so that they can make more money out of me.
I doubt anyone designs something intentionally to fail, no matter what it
might seem like as a consumer. It's quite hard to design something to be
fine within warranty but then to fail just after, you risk a huge
replacement bill if you try that tactic, plus you'll get a very bad
reputation.
> (I still don't understand why digital devices *need* thousands of analogue
> components in them in the first place, but anyway...)
On our boards nearly all of the discrete components are part of the power
supply or to round off the data signals to improve EMI/EMC performance.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |