I got mine in 1996 or 1997. Waiting for it to die.
| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| Microwave https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=10577 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Micheal [ Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Microwave |
My microwave died this morning. I've already replaced it. Rather than being upset, ranting and carrying on, I said, oh well. I checked to make sure it hadn't blown a fuse, which it never had done, but you know, you check, just to make sure. Then I accepted its demise. It had come home from the store with me, then sat on the counter faithfully heating things up for not quite 20 years. It was a black SHARP Carousel, 1000 watts, 1.something cubic feet, with several functions I used very few times. Lately, it hadn't been heating as well, taking longer to heat, etc. I kind of expected it to go out eventually. It was still a surprise when it went, but not a big one. Waste of good oatmeal. It this era of stuff that needs to be replaced regularly, I'm delighted I got 20 years out of a basic appliance. I need to replace the refrigerator before too long, it has been running for 25 years. The Washer and Dryer are only a few years old. The dishwasher is about eight years old. I don't expect to have to replace any of them anytime soon. The heater and air conditioner are long past needing replacement, probably next spring. Ahh, the joys of home ownership, Still, 20 years of life for a microwave makes me happy, even if having to replace it doesn't. |
|
| Author: | Numbuk [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
20 years is certainly a good lifespan for an appliance with moving parts. Sorry you still had to replace it though. |
|
| Author: | Serienya [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I got mine in 1996 or 1997. Waiting for it to die.
|
|
| Author: | Khross [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Numbuk wrote: 20 years is certainly a good lifespan for an appliance with moving parts. Sorry you still had to replace it though. I disagree. Durable goods should be durable.
|
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think you should hold a memorial service for it. |
|
| Author: | Hopwin [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Khross wrote: Numbuk wrote: 20 years is certainly a good lifespan for an appliance with moving parts. Sorry you still had to replace it though. I disagree. Durable goods should be durable.Lifespan > 3 years = durable. It lasted 6x that life. |
|
| Author: | Khross [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
3 years does not constitute a durable good; that's a disposable item, Hopwin. |
|
| Author: | Hopwin [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Khross wrote: 3 years does not constitute a durable good; that's a disposable item, Hopwin. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/durable+goods |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 10:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Whether or not 3 years is durable, 20 years sure as **** is. |
|
| Author: | Khross [ Tue Nov 19, 2013 10:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Hopwin wrote: Khross wrote: 3 years does not constitute a durable good; that's a disposable item, Hopwin. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/durable+goodsDiamondeye: 20 years is pretty much what I would expect at a minimum. |
|
| Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Khross wrote: 20 years is pretty much what I would expect at a minimum. You must be frequently disappointed. Anyway, in college, I discovered that my roommate's ancient microwave did not turn itself off when you opened the door. That was... disconcerting. |
|
| Author: | Khross [ Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Arathain: My definition of a durable good is something that I should generally never have to replace if well maintained. I have airplanes older than any living Glader; they still fly; they're still safe; they're still around. That's pretty much the benchmark I use. My PT-17 is 77 years old. |
|
| Author: | Taskiss [ Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Khross wrote: 20 years is pretty much what I would expect at a minimum. You must be frequently disappointed. I'd be disappointed if a washer or dryer less than 15 -20 years old was cheaper to replace than to repair. A coffee pot... not so much. The dictionary reference above puts them in the same category, but I think it's better for the purposes of this discussion to separate them. Microwave magnetrons should last 15 or more years, fans and such should be fairly cheap. Heating elements in dryers are easily and cheaply replaced, motors less so. Bulbs, buttons, switches, elements, etc, yeah, they can go out, just get the device fixed. Compressors in refrigerators, transmissions in washers, stuff like that are the key components, when they go out its time to replace the device, and consumers should be able to expect 15-20 years of life at a minimum before that occurs. |
|
| Author: | Khross [ Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Taskiss: You and I are obviously from different generations and regions than the urbanite Gladers who tell us durable goods should last 3 years. |
|
| Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Thu Nov 21, 2013 1:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Khross wrote: Taskiss: You and I are obviously from different generations and regions than the urbanite Gladers who tell us durable goods should last 3 years. No, but I'm an engineer and realize that you don't really understand what you are talking about. Everything is designed with a life expectancy. Typically there is a factor of safety involved, but everything is given an expiration date. This is for two key reasons: First, no engineer has the balls to say his design will last forever. Second, economics. It is not economically viable to design things to last forever. You prepare a life cycle cost estimate for maintenance and compare this to the cost of replacement. There is no justifiable reason to double the manufacturing cost of a product to increase its life expectancy 150%. The life expectancy of a product serves the need of the consumer. Does he want the 10-year carpet or the 20-year carpet for more money? There's no right or wrong answer, it depends on the needs of the consumer. As for lasting forever, if key items are replaced, this is feasible. However, it has to be economically viable to do so. From an engineering perspective, there is probably no reason whatsoever to keep your planes around. Furthermore, I guarantee you that your use of those planes are not "per design". I'm guessing they were intended for much heavier operation than you are currently doing. In other words, in terms of passengers or freight moved / maintenance dollar (or even time in the air / maintenance dollar since you referenced a trainer), I doubt they make economic sense at all. So, in short - I highly doubt there is either a design intent or an economic justification to make a microwave last longer than 20 years. And since everything is designed with a life expectancy, and you don't think it should be, that's the reason for my statement that you must be frequently disappointed. |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
The running examples of steam locomotives I like to talk about so much are at least 60 years old; some closer to 100. Some even still haul an occasional revenue freight train. That does not mean steam locomotives in general were built with the expectation theyd still be operating in heavy mainline service in 2013. Even if an item can be maintained in operational status for a very long time, technology is still likely to bypass it and demand replacement anyhow. |
|
| Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Diamondeye wrote: The running examples of steam locomotives I like to talk about so much are at least 60 years old; some closer to 100. Some even still haul an occasional revenue freight train. That does not mean steam locomotives in general were built with the expectation theyd still be operating in heavy mainline service in 2013. Even if an item can be maintained in operational status for a very long time, technology is still likely to bypass it and demand replacement anyhow. Sure - but bear in mind that these locomotives are not currently operating per design. Sure, they carry something periodically, but not at the design usage. And just because they CAN haul freight, doesn't mean they should, from an economic perspective. Maintenance costs increase with age, so even ignoring better technology, it still probably doesn't make sense to keep these old timers around. They're kept around for purposes other than intended. |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Microwave |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Diamondeye wrote: The running examples of steam locomotives I like to talk about so much are at least 60 years old; some closer to 100. Some even still haul an occasional revenue freight train. That does not mean steam locomotives in general were built with the expectation theyd still be operating in heavy mainline service in 2013. Even if an item can be maintained in operational status for a very long time, technology is still likely to bypass it and demand replacement anyhow. Sure - but bear in mind that these locomotives are not currently operating per design. Sure, they carry something periodically, but not at the design usage. And just because they CAN haul freight, doesn't mean they should, from an economic perspective. Maintenance costs increase with age, so even ignoring better technology, it still probably doesn't make sense to keep these old timers around. They're kept around for purposes other than intended. That's what I was getting at. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|