The Death of a Digital Artifact

[Richard G]

My 2004 Nikon Coolpix 4500 still going strong. I pulled the top off my Hexar to fix the shutter button thanks to the info on RFF. The friend who bought me lunch pulled apart a little Canon digital and admired the engineering genius of such a compact construction, before tipping the pieces into the bin, certain that he would never get it back together.

[buzzardkid]

Originally Posted by willie_901

My Apple 165C, the first color display Apple lap top, circa 1992 still works fine. Howvever the battery no longer holds a charge.

Not all digital artifacts die an early death.

True. And this whole thread is based on a digital dying on the OP but it may have been a faulty part in this particular camera while all other Fuji S3 Pro's still churn out their (beautifully exposed!) portraits.

My 1999 Nikon D1 is used by my 11-year old son. He's using it like any pro would not pampering it. And it still works. Again, might be a sample variation though.

[jarski]

IMO there is philosophy behind manufacturing today, that has relies to cheap and abundant energy. when energy reserves are depleted, some decades from now. only then will philosophy again change, and products are made to last forever, and servicing (not replacing) them will become new normal.

[Aristophanes]

Originally Posted by jarski

IMO there is philosophy behind manufacturing today, that has relies to cheap and abundant energy. when energy reserves are depleted, some decades from now. only then will philosophy again change, and products are made to last forever, and servicing (not replacing) them will become new normal.

I disagree. Manufacturing has become far more productive per nit of energy than it was in the years post-WW2 to the late 1970's energy crisis.

This economic benefit has actually propelled even more cycling of new products, not less. A factory can now churn out through JIT inventory and production systems about 6x the # of widgets than they could even 20 years ago. Computer automation helps as well. It's not all just been cheap Asian labour at work in this dynamic.

[loquax ludens]

I read jarski's comment differently than you apparently did, Aristophanes. I believe he was referring to the quality and durability of a manufactured good being a product of cheap and abundant energy, not that it is a product of efficiency (or lack thereof) of manufacturing per unit of energy. After all, you can make cheap disposable crap in a very energy and resoruce efficient manufacturing process, but that doesn't mean the product is finely made or durable. Efficiently manufactured crap is still crap. And he didn't say or imply anything at all about the cheap Asian labor you referred to.

I'm not sure I agree with his premise, but I beileve you misunderstood his comment entirely.

[sepiareverb]

Originally Posted by shadowfox

That's just beautiful.
So, it runs on a Stirling engine or what?

Under the hood was a small kerosene burner and a steam tank, the "works" as they were called by the driver are under the car.

http://www.stanleymotorcarriage.com/...ges/Engine.pdf

Interesting tidbit I just discovered from the Wikipedia article:

Twins Francis E. Stanley (1849–1918) and Freelan O. Stanley (1849–1940) founded the company after selling their photographic dry plate business to Eastman Kodak.

[giellaleafapmu]

Mmmmh,

what you say doesn't fit with my recent experience of digital cameras. I have Olys E-1 (two of them) working fine and they are from 2002 or so, I have a S5-Pro a bit younger still going strong and I even have a Dell computer from about the same time running a now vintage version of Linux. I think it has not been rebooted in the last five years. I think the only difference between a mechanical and an electronic camera is that a mechanical device if not used breaks (e.g. oil stiffens and when you try to move parts something breaks or wears down too much leading to a break) and electronic ones may die as just one little part of a circuit not conducing electricity in the right way means nothing works.
Bottom line: use the gear you have!
(Maybe actually someone can fix your camera.)

GLF

[Gabriel M.A.]

"Death of a Digital Artefact" sounds like the name of a track in an album called "Digital Noise", by (who else) Digital Banding.

[jarski]

Originally Posted by loquax ludens

... After all, you can make cheap disposable crap in a very energy and resoruce efficient manufacturing process, but that doesn't mean the product is finely made or durable. Efficiently manufactured crap is still crap.

yes. I agree completely that Internet, computers and whatnot has optimized the manufacturing and logistics to something that could not even be envisioned some decades ago. and recycling has reduced the waste considerably. but even after all the improvements, stuff is made and transported to be consumed and thrown away after few years. and without cheap energy it would be impossible todo so. so summing it all, the OP will get Leicaflex-like cameras (in durability and maintenance sense) again, when worlds energy party is over

[kully]

Take it to an electronic repairman.

Things are not 'made to fail', people have just not cottoned on that they need fixing with more elaborate tools and different skills. Much in the same way that a man on a horse might look in bewilderment at a rudimentary steam engine.

About things being 'made better' back in the day. Rubbish, people forget the tat because it gets chucked in the bin and only the expensive, well made stuff survives. Check out an old Box Brownie, or the myriad mechanical cameras made for the masses over the decades - if anything they are manufactured to a lesser standard than your S3 because there was no precision moulding and robotised assembly.

[kully]

I also wonder what small percentage of us here could have afforded to buy our cameras, lenses and film brand new when they were manufactured? i.e. what percentage of a yearly wage would my Leica IIIa and Summitar have been in 1939.