Author Topic: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.  (Read 9611 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online PsiTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10385
  • Country: nz
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #75 on: August 12, 2023, 11:08:49 am »
I'd like to see it extended to most consumer goods too, obvious exceptions for consumables and physical damage but TV's, appliances, phones etc should be warrantied for 5 years minimum.

You can often make a valid legal argument that if the manufacturer or retailer is offering an extended warranty option for extra cost. Then it's reasonable to expect that type of product should last that long.

So if your local consumer laws state that a product must last for a reasonable length of time then by them offering an option of an extended warranty they have proved what "a reasonable length of time" is and so everyone gets that length warranty for that device under the law.

Of course you have to argue it and the reseller might force you to go to small claims court to win.
But that is usually pretty cheap, being small claims court.  Depending on where you live.
More of a time cost than a money cost.

This is why extended warranty are often a scam.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2023, 11:14:55 am by Psi »
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline Zero999

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20363
  • Country: gb
  • 0999
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #76 on: August 12, 2023, 11:24:04 am »
I'm generally against regulation, but I do support legislation to for a minimum warranty of five years on LED lamps, to cut down on waste. This is easy to do, but most people don't keep receipts and wouldn't bother with warranty claims.

Another option is to have a deposit system, when the customer can return their dead lamp to where they purchased it from, in exchange for a small sum of money. It would make the lamps more expensive, but it will give manufactures more of an incentive to make them last longer. This would probably be more effective, than the first option, but come at greater cost.

LOL!!!  Both of these ideas are totally impractical.  The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns.  The deposit has no advantage at all.  It has no impact on the bulb maker.  It's just a hassle for the retailer.
Are you trolling now? If you bothered to read my post, you'll find I already said it's not perfect, because people don't hang on to receipts, but that doesn't make it worthless.

And large retailers have considerable leverage on suppliers and therefore manufacturers.
 

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #77 on: August 12, 2023, 11:53:33 am »
I'm generally against regulation, but I do support legislation to for a minimum warranty of five years on LED lamps, to cut down on waste. This is easy to do, but most people don't keep receipts and wouldn't bother with warranty claims.

Another option is to have a deposit system, when the customer can return their dead lamp to where they purchased it from, in exchange for a small sum of money. It would make the lamps more expensive, but it will give manufactures more of an incentive to make them last longer. This would probably be more effective, than the first option, but come at greater cost.

LOL!!!  Both of these ideas are totally impractical.  The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns.  The deposit has no advantage at all.  It has no impact on the bulb maker.  It's just a hassle for the retailer.
Are you trolling now? If you bothered to read my post, you'll find I already said it's not perfect, because people don't hang on to receipts, but that doesn't make it worthless.

And large retailers have considerable leverage on suppliers and therefore manufacturers.

There won't be pressure on the retailers, because people won't remember where they bought a lightbulb two years ago, etc., etc., etc.   
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #78 on: August 12, 2023, 11:54:23 am »
The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns. 

Depends, some places only require receipts for cash refunds.  But if it's a faulty product and you just want to swap it for a good one it's fine without a receipt.

So buy stuff at Walmart prices and return them to Home Depot?  Sounds good to me!
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Online PsiTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10385
  • Country: nz
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #79 on: August 12, 2023, 12:01:10 pm »
The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns. 

Depends, some places only require receipts for cash refunds.  But if it's a faulty product and you just want to swap it for a good one it's fine without a receipt.

So buy stuff at Walmart prices and return them to Home Depot?  Sounds good to me!

Why does it sound good to you, it doesn't gain you anything to do that. In both cases all you get is the same replacement item.
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline themadhippy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3266
  • Country: gb
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #80 on: August 12, 2023, 01:55:54 pm »
Quote
I'd like to see it extended to most consumer goods too, obvious exceptions for consumables and physical damage but TV's, appliances, phones etc should be warrantied for 5 years minimum.
sale of goods act already gives you up to 6 years,but good luck trying to make a claim
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7336
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #81 on: August 12, 2023, 02:56:48 pm »
Quote
I'd like to see it extended to most consumer goods too, obvious exceptions for consumables and physical damage but TV's, appliances, phones etc should be warrantied for 5 years minimum.
sale of goods act already gives you up to 6 years,but good luck trying to make a claim

Sale of Goods Act has been repealed for about 8 years now.  You just have the Consumer Rights Act which has the same statutory limit but in all cases beyond 6 months you must demonstrate that the goods are defective from origin, it is not a warranty.
 

Offline m k

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2651
  • Country: fi
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #82 on: August 12, 2023, 04:05:27 pm »
Not so long ago I changed an incandescent bulb to LED.
So the spot missed the CFL period.

Other place has >15 years old dimmed halogens, small stick it in type of some sort.
Once one stopped operating but tapping the lamp glass brought it back to life.

Seems that we are in the middle of change again.
Now household AC lighting system must go.
No idea how it is with new buildings.
Advance-Aneng-Appa-AVO-Beckman-Danbridge-Data Tech-Fluke-General Radio-H. W. Sullivan-Heathkit-HP-Kaise-Kyoritsu-Leeds & Northrup-Mastech-OR-X-REO-Simpson-Sinclair-Tektronix-Tokyo Rikosha-Topward-Triplett-Tritron-YFE
(plus lesser brands from the work shop of the world)
 

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7509
  • Country: va
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #83 on: August 12, 2023, 06:58:00 pm »
I'd like to see it extended to most consumer goods too, obvious exceptions for consumables and physical damage but TV's, appliances, phones etc should be warrantied for 5 years minimum.

You can often make a valid legal argument that if the manufacturer or retailer is offering an extended warranty option for extra cost. Then it's reasonable to expect that type of product should last that long.

So if your local consumer laws state that a product must last for a reasonable length of time then by them offering an option of an extended warranty they have proved what "a reasonable length of time" is and so everyone gets that length warranty for that device under the law.

The other way of looking at this is that the manufacturer is stating that the warranty is only good for the no-extended period (otherwise it would be the extended period free of charge). The extended warranty is in fact insurance, and it's expected that there will be failures during the extended warranty period (hence the charge). So the 'reasonable length of time' would indeed be the normal warranty period.
 

Offline AVGresponding

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4931
  • Country: england
  • Exploring Rabbit Holes Since The 1970s
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #84 on: August 12, 2023, 07:27:30 pm »
I'm generally against regulation, but I do support legislation to for a minimum warranty of five years on LED lamps, to cut down on waste. This is easy to do, but most people don't keep receipts and wouldn't bother with warranty claims.

Another option is to have a deposit system, when the customer can return their dead lamp to where they purchased it from, in exchange for a small sum of money. It would make the lamps more expensive, but it will give manufactures more of an incentive to make them last longer. This would probably be more effective, than the first option, but come at greater cost.

LOL!!!  Both of these ideas are totally impractical.  The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns.  The deposit has no advantage at all.  It has no impact on the bulb maker.  It's just a hassle for the retailer.

In fact this is already covered under WEEE regulations. There's a small levy on the price in order to fund legacy disposal, and new products have to include recycling as part of their design. Retailers are legally obliged to take old electronic items for recycling. This includes lamps.
nuqDaq yuch Dapol?
Addiction count: Agilent-AVO-BlackStar-Brymen-Chauvin Arnoux-Fluke-GenRad-Hameg-HP-Keithley-IsoTech-Mastech-Megger-Metrix-Micronta-Racal-RFL-Siglent-Solartron-Tektronix-Thurlby-Time Electronics-TTi-UniT
 

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #85 on: August 12, 2023, 07:51:19 pm »
I'm generally against regulation, but I do support legislation to for a minimum warranty of five years on LED lamps, to cut down on waste. This is easy to do, but most people don't keep receipts and wouldn't bother with warranty claims.

Another option is to have a deposit system, when the customer can return their dead lamp to where they purchased it from, in exchange for a small sum of money. It would make the lamps more expensive, but it will give manufactures more of an incentive to make them last longer. This would probably be more effective, than the first option, but come at greater cost.

LOL!!!  Both of these ideas are totally impractical.  The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns.  The deposit has no advantage at all.  It has no impact on the bulb maker.  It's just a hassle for the retailer.

In fact this is already covered under WEEE regulations. There's a small levy on the price in order to fund legacy disposal, and new products have to include recycling as part of their design. Retailers are legally obliged to take old electronic items for recycling. This includes lamps.

You seem to be confused.  Disposing of bulbs is not a deposit return.  Read what has been discussed.
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline AVGresponding

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4931
  • Country: england
  • Exploring Rabbit Holes Since The 1970s
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #86 on: August 12, 2023, 07:56:43 pm »
I'm generally against regulation, but I do support legislation to for a minimum warranty of five years on LED lamps, to cut down on waste. This is easy to do, but most people don't keep receipts and wouldn't bother with warranty claims.

Another option is to have a deposit system, when the customer can return their dead lamp to where they purchased it from, in exchange for a small sum of money. It would make the lamps more expensive, but it will give manufactures more of an incentive to make them last longer. This would probably be more effective, than the first option, but come at greater cost.

LOL!!!  Both of these ideas are totally impractical.  The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns.  The deposit has no advantage at all.  It has no impact on the bulb maker.  It's just a hassle for the retailer.

In fact this is already covered under WEEE regulations. There's a small levy on the price in order to fund legacy disposal, and new products have to include recycling as part of their design. Retailers are legally obliged to take old electronic items for recycling. This includes lamps.

You seem to be confused.  Disposing of bulbs is not a deposit return.  Read what has been discussed.

I'm not confused, but you are a boring troll. The deposit aspect is mostly irrelevant, save to try and get those who don't care about waste to return the lamp themselves. Mostly they are siphoned out of the household waste recycling stream.
Still, the rate is lower than it could be, so maybe a deposit system is something that could be looked at; there was such a system on glass soft drink bottles in this country some years back and it worked well, and is being resurrected in some places.
nuqDaq yuch Dapol?
Addiction count: Agilent-AVO-BlackStar-Brymen-Chauvin Arnoux-Fluke-GenRad-Hameg-HP-Keithley-IsoTech-Mastech-Megger-Metrix-Micronta-Racal-RFL-Siglent-Solartron-Tektronix-Thurlby-Time Electronics-TTi-UniT
 

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #87 on: August 12, 2023, 10:15:54 pm »
I'm generally against regulation, but I do support legislation to for a minimum warranty of five years on LED lamps, to cut down on waste. This is easy to do, but most people don't keep receipts and wouldn't bother with warranty claims.

Another option is to have a deposit system, when the customer can return their dead lamp to where they purchased it from, in exchange for a small sum of money. It would make the lamps more expensive, but it will give manufactures more of an incentive to make them last longer. This would probably be more effective, than the first option, but come at greater cost.

LOL!!!  Both of these ideas are totally impractical.  The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns.  The deposit has no advantage at all.  It has no impact on the bulb maker.  It's just a hassle for the retailer.

In fact this is already covered under WEEE regulations. There's a small levy on the price in order to fund legacy disposal, and new products have to include recycling as part of their design. Retailers are legally obliged to take old electronic items for recycling. This includes lamps.

You seem to be confused.  Disposing of bulbs is not a deposit return.  Read what has been discussed.

I'm not confused, but you are a boring troll. The deposit aspect is mostly irrelevant, save to try and get those who don't care about waste to return the lamp themselves. Mostly they are siphoned out of the household waste recycling stream.
Still, the rate is lower than it could be, so maybe a deposit system is something that could be looked at; there was such a system on glass soft drink bottles in this country some years back and it worked well, and is being resurrected in some places.


I can't be a troll.  We all know how to handle trolls.  NEVER REPLY TO THEM!  Since you seem obsessed with replying, I think we know who the troll is.
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline Zero999

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20363
  • Country: gb
  • 0999
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #88 on: August 13, 2023, 09:40:58 am »
I'm generally against regulation, but I do support legislation to for a minimum warranty of five years on LED lamps, to cut down on waste. This is easy to do, but most people don't keep receipts and wouldn't bother with warranty claims.

Another option is to have a deposit system, when the customer can return their dead lamp to where they purchased it from, in exchange for a small sum of money. It would make the lamps more expensive, but it will give manufactures more of an incentive to make them last longer. This would probably be more effective, than the first option, but come at greater cost.

LOL!!!  Both of these ideas are totally impractical.  The warranty is of no use at all, because very few hang onto receipts which will be required for warranty returns.  The deposit has no advantage at all.  It has no impact on the bulb maker.  It's just a hassle for the retailer.

In fact this is already covered under WEEE regulations. There's a small levy on the price in order to fund legacy disposal, and new products have to include recycling as part of their design. Retailers are legally obliged to take old electronic items for recycling. This includes lamps.

You seem to be confused.  Disposing of bulbs is not a deposit return.  Read what has been discussed.

I'm not confused, but you are a boring troll. The deposit aspect is mostly irrelevant, save to try and get those who don't care about waste to return the lamp themselves. Mostly they are siphoned out of the household waste recycling stream.
Still, the rate is lower than it could be, so maybe a deposit system is something that could be looked at; there was such a system on glass soft drink bottles in this country some years back and it worked well, and is being resurrected in some places.

He's doing a good impression of a troll, so I won't respond to him.

I suppose it's not the same as a deposit for bottles, which will be reused, because the lamp won't be, but hopefully much of it will be recycled. The advantage it has over WEEE is it provides an incentive for people to return their dead lamps, as well as for the manufacturers to make them last longer.
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7336
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #89 on: August 13, 2023, 09:47:09 am »
What on earth is happening in this thread with all the different colours.
 

Offline jonovid

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1546
  • Country: au
    • JONOVID
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #90 on: August 13, 2023, 10:00:13 am »
What on earth is happening in this thread with all the different colours.
just wait till they get to using size & fonts style.
Hobbyist with a basic knowledge of electronics
 

Online PsiTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10385
  • Country: nz
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #91 on: August 13, 2023, 12:04:29 pm »
What on earth is happening in this thread with all the different colours.

Trolls like shinny colorfully things I guess.
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline Microdoser

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 423
  • Country: gb
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #92 on: August 13, 2023, 10:47:42 pm »
What on earth is happening in this thread with all the different colours.

No idea, but it makes it very easy to not read those posts, or rather it makes them very hard to read.
 
Tomato, potato.
 

Offline Zoli

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 583
  • Country: ca
  • Grumpy old men
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #93 on: August 13, 2023, 10:58:41 pm »
I can't be a troll.  We all know how to handle trolls.  NEVER REPLY TO THEM!  Since you seem obsessed with replying, I think we know who the troll is.
Sorry to say, but there's a better way: Ignore list. Now, if only the ignore list would cut it out completely...
 

Online PsiTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10385
  • Country: nz
Re: LED lighting and planned obsolescence, intentional or not.
« Reply #94 on: August 14, 2023, 08:45:15 am »
If any mods are around, feel free to lock the thread.
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 
The following users thanked this post: Microdoser


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf