Built to Fail: The Hidden History of Planned Obsolescence
The Business of Breaking Things
Hey folks 👋
Welcome back to another SK NEXUS deep dive.
If you’ve been following this series, you know what we’re about: unpacking the messy, under-explained corners of tech. The kind of topics that either get ignored, or covered in jargon so heavy that people leave more confused than when they started.
We’re not here to reinvent the wheel, but to make sense of it. To take ideas floating around the internet and strip them down into something clear, practical, and maybe even entertaining along the way.
We’re not The Verge or Wired (not yet, anyway). Think of us as your local guide through the global tech noise - by the time you’re done, you’ll actually get it, and maybe even explain it better than half the “experts” out there.
That being said, let’s get into it.
We’ve been told that updates make things better.
More secure. More powerful. More efficient.
But what if that’s not the full story?
What if updates, especially in the modern tech world - are quietly designed to make things worse?
This isn’t a new concept. It has a name: planned obsolescence.
A strategy that’s been around for almost a century. A system where products aren’t built to last, they’re built to break, slow down, or age out right on schedule.
And now, that same tactic is being baked into your phones, laptops, and even software updates. Not to help you. But to push you toward buying something new, again and again.
This piece breaks down the following:
How we got here
How planned obsolescence is being used in today’s world
Why your tech might be working exactly how they want it to: worse
The Origins of Planned Obsolescence
Planned obsolescence - sounds like something out of a sci-fi movie, right?
But it’s not fiction. It’s real.
And it’s been shaping the way we buy, use, and replace tech for nearly 100 years.
I’ve mentioned this term before, but let’s break it down properly.
What exactly is planned obsolescence?
Where did it come from?
Who started it?
Understanding this is important.
Because once you understand the origin
You’ll start seeing the pattern.
You’ll realize it’s not a bug in the system. It is the system.
You’ll unlock the forbidden sight.
1920s: The Beginning of Something New
The Lightbulb Conspiracy
Let’s rewind to the early 20th century.
Back then, companies had figured out how to make lightbulbs that could last forever. Literally, there’s a bulb in a California fire station that’s been glowing since 1901, for over 100 years.
Sounds like innovation at its finest, right?
But there was one problem.
It was bad for business.
If people only needed to buy a lightbulb once in a decade, how would manufacturers survive?
So, in 1924, the world’s biggest lightbulb makers - General Electric, Philips, Osram, and others - formed a secret alliance called The Phoebus Cartel.
Their goal?
Not to improve lighting. Not to reduce costs.
But to intentionally reduce the lifespan of bulbs to just 1,000 hours.
They standardized failure and rigged the game to boost sales by making products die faster.
Engineers who made longer-lasting bulbs were punished.
Factories were fined for producing bulbs that exceeded the “lifespan quota.”
This wasn’t a side effect. It was the business model.
And this was just the starting.
How GM Made You Hate Your Old Car
The Phoebus Cartel wasn’t the only group flipping the rules of innovation in the 1920s. Around the same time, something else was happening in the world of automobiles.
Back in 1908, Henry Ford launched the legendary Model T, which was one of the first mass-produced cars. His vision? A vehicle built to last forever.
Ford proudly declared, “We want the man who buys one of our cars never to have to buy another.”
But by the 1920s, a new problem hit the auto industry: “Everyone already had a car.”
Sales slowed. People had what they needed. No reason to upgrade.
That’s when General Motors stepped in with a bold new tactic:
If the product doesn’t break… make it feel old.
Starting in 1924, GM began redesigning its cars every year. New models, different colors, all to trigger one thing in the buyer’s mind: “My car is outdated.”
This wasn’t about utility.
It was psychology.
And guess what?
In 1934, the average person kept a car for about 5 years.
By 1955, that number dropped to just 2 years.
1930s: Obsolescence as an Economic Strategy
Depression-Era Economics Meets Design
Just when you thought that planned obsolescence couldn’t get darker, it got even darker.
In 1932, during the depths of the Great Depression, London, a real estate broker named Bernard London, wrote a paper titled “Ending the Depression Through Planned Obsolescence.” And yes, it’s exactly what it sounds like.
His proposal?
Every product should have a predetermined expiration date. Once that date passed, you’d be forced to discard it and buy a new one, or pay a fine for still using it.
That’s right: “a tax for hanging onto old stuff.”
London argued that this forced cycle would “keep the wheels of industry turning” and rescue the economy from collapse. In other words, breaking things on purpose… to fix the system.
At the time, most people ignored him.
But the scary part? His vision eventually came true… not as law, but as strategy.
And it hasn’t stopped since.
Creative Waste: The Spin That Made It Sound Smart
Right after Bernard London pitched forced obsolescence, some clever minds gave it a rebrand.
In 1932, designers Roy Sheldon and Egmont Arens dropped a book titled “Consumer Engineering: A New Technique for Prosperity.” In it, they introduced a new phrase: “creative waste.”
The idea behind it?
Society should intentionally toss out the old to make room for the new. Not because things were broken, but because doing so would keep the economy running hot.
Their logic was the same as London’s. But instead of pushing fines and expiration dates, they dressed it up in the language of design and progress.
And it landed.
During the 1930s, people weren’t buying much; they were scraping by, saving up for their first car, fridge, or radio. But by the time the post-war boom hit, industries were ready. The economy rebounded, the factories roared back to life…
And eventually, creative waste became the default setting for the economy.
Nylon Stockings and DuPont’s Downgrade
These stockings were Indestructible at first.
But, then… it got quietly downgraded for profit.
If you’ve ever worn stockings, you know how easily they rip. But when nylon stockings were first introduced in 1939 by DuPont, they became popular fast due to it being so good. So popular, in fact, that people lined up for hours to buy them.
In some cities, demand was so intense that riots broke out.
But here’s the twist:
They were too good. DuPont soon realized that if stockings lasted years, people wouldn’t need to keep buying them. So, quietly, the company changed the formula.
The next versions were weaker, designed to rip faster.
They did this, not because they had to.
But because it meant more sales.
What started as an innovation…
…ended as another planned downgrade
1950s: The Industrialization of Obsolescence
Brooks Stevens & the Desire Machine
By the 1950s, planned obsolescence was no longer a hidden trick; it had become a business norm. And America’s growing consumer culture made it the perfect breeding ground. People weren’t just buying what they needed; they were chasing what was new.
One of the biggest champions of this mindset was Brooks Stevens, a post-war industrial designer. In 1954, he famously defined planned obsolescence as:
“Instilling in the buyer the desire to own something a little newer, a little better, a little sooner than necessary.”
His approach?
Don’t make junk. Just make the next thing slightly more attractive, shinier, and better. Something that makes your current product feel just outdated enough.
Sound familiar, right?
That’s dynamic obsolescence in action.
And companies like Apple have mastered it to perfection.
The Rise of the “Throw‑Away” Culture
In 1955, Life magazine published a piece titled “Throwaway Living.” It didn’t warn against waste or raise alarms. No. It celebrated the concept.
The article painted a glowing picture of a new trend - one where dishes, cups, diapers, and even furniture were designed to be used once and tossed out.
And people loved it.
Because in post-war America, convenience wasn’t just helpful - it was patriotic. Disposable goods became a status symbol, a sign that you had made it. Why fix a toaster when you could just buy a prettier one?
People didn’t realize that:
This wasn’t just about making their life easier.
It was about conditioning consumers to crave constant replacement.
Refrigerators, stoves, and other appliances were no longer sold for their longevity.
They were sold for their aesthetics. One year it was pastel blues, the next it was mint green.
The result?
A culture trained to throw out perfectly working items just to stay “on trend.”
And all this wasn’t accidental - It was strategic.
Manufacturers realized something critical:
Durability doesn’t scale. Disposability does.
1980s: Obsolescence Goes Digital
The rules changed in the digital age.
In the past, planned obsolescence meant parts breaking or styles shifting.
But with the rise of computers and software updates, the rules evolved…
Now, the product doesn’t need to break. It just needs to feel outdated.
This is digital obsolescence, and it works without touching the hardware. You just wake up one day and feel like your gadget can’t keep up anymore.
But how exactly do they pull this off?
That’s where we’re heading next:
The world of software updates and forced upgrades.
Let’s dive in.
Welcome to the Software Era: Obsolescence 2.0
We’ve looked at the past - bulbs built to fail, cars designed to feel old, and appliances discarded for looking “last year.”
But that was just Phase One.
Now, we’ve entered Obsolescence 2.0 - the software era.
And this version? It’s stealthier. And far more manipulative.
You don’t need faulty wiring or broken parts anymore, Now all it takes is a software update. And before you realize, everything starts to slowly change
Your phone slows down.
Your battery mysteriously drains faster.
UI gets redesigned to pull you in towards getting new devices.
And all this?
They say it’s for “security.”
They call it a “performance boost.”
But behind that soft language is a hard truth:
You’re being forced into the future - whether you want to go or not.
And no, I’m not making this up.
There are case studies and court filings.
There are fines paid by the biggest names in tech.
Apple. Microsoft. Even your favorite phone brand isn’t clean.
They’ve all played the game. Quietly and systematically.
I bet you are curious to know all this.
So, let’s not wait anymore and get to it.
The Long Shadow of Battery Gate and Apple’s Bigger Game
iOS Updates Slows Down Older iPhones
The real story goes back to iOS 10 - the infamous Battery Gate. Apple admitted to throttling older iPhones, claiming it was to prevent shutdowns.
And here’s the thing: once you know that history, every new iOS update feels suspect. iOS 11, 12, 13… you’ll find complaints every single time. It doesn’t even make headlines anymore because it’s become routine. The frustration is still there, but the outrage is gone. People expect their iPhones to age badly, and that’s the real victory of Apple’s business model.
There’s much to discuss but for now, here’s the main takeaway:
Planned obsolescence in 2024 doesn’t always show up with broken parts.
Sometimes it comes dressed as a software update.
Battery gate: When Apple Got Caught
Back in 2017, during the iOS 10 era, users started noticing something strange: older iPhones became sluggish after software updates.
Then came the receipts…
Tech analysts ran benchmarks comparing performance before and after updates.
What they found? Apple was throttling CPU speeds on older iPhones - especially those with worn-out batteries.
In defense - Apple claimed it was to “prevent unexpected shutdowns.” That slowing the phone down helped preserve battery life.
Maybe they were right…
Or maybe… they were just quietly nudging people toward upgrades.
The real issue wasn’t what Apple did - it was how they did it:
That’s what triggered a global backlash and lawsuits.
In 2020, Apple agreed to pay up to $500 million to settle the class-action lawsuit in the U.S. Other countries followed with their own investigations and fines.
And ever since, Apple’s trust with users has been a bit more fragile and a bit more shallow.
You must have noticed - whenever a new iOS version rolls out - people start complaining again, it’s déjà vu for them because it’s not the first time Apple has done this. They know they have already been burned by a “performance update,” once - due to which people stopped assuming it's for their benefit.
Fast Forward To Today
Now with iOS 26, Apple has gone all-in on its very cool Liquid Glass UI. I have to say that it looks stunning on the latest iPhones… but older devices are struggling to keep up.
Stutters, overheating, and drained batteries are becoming the norm.
In other words: the story hasn’t changed. The faces have. Once again, perfectly usable phones are being quietly pushed toward obsolescence - not because they can’t run, but because they can’t keep up with Apple’s newest design choices.
Design as Psychological Warfare
Take a moment and zoom out for a second.
Now, look closely at how tech evolves not under the hood, but on the surface:
Rounded edges become squared
The camera starts popping out
New colors roll in, and suddenly your perfectly good phone looks ancient
But here’s the catch: nothing’s really changed.
Not enough to justify the upgrade. Not in terms of function.
But in terms of status? Absolutely.
And in our society, when you are buying a phone.
You’re not just buying a phone - you’re buying the feeling of being “caught up.”
And that’s the point.
This isn’t just Apple. Every major brand plays the same game - phones, cars, wearables, even kitchen appliances. They try to make last year’s model feel old, not by breaking it… but by designing around it.
And the funny thing is:
It works. Every. Single. Time.
Not a Bug - A Business Model
Think about it, every single time your old iPhone starts acting up - lagging, heating,
draining faster than ever.
And then?
Boom! A new model drops.
Smarter. Faster and more “revolutionary” than the last.
That’s not a coincidence
That’s conditioning
People are being slowly trained to associate glitches with the need to upgrade.
They don’t even question it anymore. They just assume their phone is “too old.”
But the truth is:
They don’t push new models for your benefit.
They do it to make money off your backs - year after year, glitch after glitch.
And once you start seeing the pattern… you can’t unsee it.
Microsoft and the Windows 11 Trap
The silent push to scrap millions of perfectly usable PCs.
So here’s the deal - Microsoft is ending support for Windows 10 in 2025. That’s not the issue - tech evolves, sure.
But here’s where it gets sketchy:
Windows 11 has a “requirement” - TPM 2.0. It’s a chip. A security module. And without it, your PC is locked out of the upgrade path.
Millions of older PCs? Suddenly declared “incompatible.”
Not because they can’t run Windows 11 - they can. In fact, thousands have already bypassed the restriction and installed it manually using some unofficial ways.
So, at least one thing is clear:
It’s not about safety or performance.
It’s about control and disposal.
They want you to toss out a working machine, spend hundreds on new hardware, and pretend it’s “for your protection.”
But in reality - It’s just another version of digital obsolescence in disguise.
According to Tom’s Hardware, an estimated 240 million PCs will get junked globally by 2025. Not because they’re broken. But because Microsoft decided they’re no longer invited.
And what’s worse?
People will go along with it - not because they want to, but because the system is slowly push them there.
I’ve broken this issue down fully before, and built a step-by-step guide on how you can keep using Windows 10 safely - no jump to windows 11 required, check this out if you want to dive deeper - You Don’t Need Windows 11, You need to do this.
The Update Paradox: When “Fixes” Make Things Worse
Updates are supposed to patch flaws, strengthen security, and improve usability.
But increasingly? They do the exact opposite:
Slow everything down.
Force confusing UI/UX changes.
Add pre-installed bloat.
Push ads or AI features you never asked for - especially in Windows.
Windows 11 in Practice: A Case Study
Recall Feature - Automatically screenshots your activity and sends it to Microsoft servers, privacy feel broken? That’s because it is.
UI Disaster - The taskbar is clunky, Start menu feels locked-down, and forced AI features bog down performance - particularly on older PCs.
It’s no surprise users complain of sluggishness, more crashes, and worse battery life after “updating.” A recent July 2025 update (version 24H2) made things even worse for many:
Cursor blinking
Mouse lag and overheating issues, etc.
Microsoft’s promised fixes, but barely moved the needle.
Everywhere, Not Just Microsoft
Funny this - this isn’t unique to Windows. Every major player - Apple, Google, Samsung - follows the same playbook.
There are so many examples that I can about it all day:
Android 16 lock screen chaos - Pixel users say their lock screens no longer wake up, fingerprint scans fail, and apps crash after unlocking. The result? An update that weakens basic functionality
iOS 18 battery nightmares - Users overwhelmingly report battery drain, app freezing, inconsistent gestures, and UI slowdowns - even on iPhone 12, 13, and newer models .
Reddit chorus - From iPhones freezing after iOS 17 to Android flagging slowdowns on Pixel and OnePlus devices, consumer forums are full of stories where updates feel like digital degradation not improvement.
Why This Keeps Happening
Sure, you could blame bad QA or rushed development.
But when every major platform does this?
It’s more than buggy code - it’s a coordinated strategy.
This is their golden formula:
Create friction → Make old feel obsolete → Sell you upgrade → Repeat.
Noticed something? The real “feature” of many updates today isn’t improvement, It’s planned digital obsolescence. And yes, almost every tech product out there follows this plan.
The Real Question: Should You Stop Updating?
Updates are supposed to make your device better.
But if you’ve made it this far, you already know: that’s not always true.
So here’s some no B.S. list of pros and cons:
When Updates Help
Critical security patches for newly discovered threats.
Fixes for serious bugs or crashes.
Major feature upgrades if your device can actually handle them.
When Updates Hurt More Than Help
Slows down older devices (especially 2+ years old).
Breaks UI/UX for no reason.
Adds bloatware, ads, or unwanted features.
Pushes you toward buying a new device.
If your phone or laptop is older?
You’re more likely to get mugged by performance issues than hackers.
But What About Security?
Totally valid concern. But here’s what most people don’t realize:
Updates don’t protect you from malware on their own.
You do, through how you browse, download, and interact online.
In fact, I broke down those precautions in this post - How to Actually Secure Your Device From Spywares
Control - Don’t Fully Disable
Instead of going Snowden mode… take control of your updates:
On Windows - Use tools like Group Policy Editor or O&O ShutUp10++ to choose what gets updated and what doesn’t.
On Mac or iPhone - Turn off auto-updates. Delay new iOS versions by a few months. Wait and watch.
On Android - Use package managers like ADB to uninstall/disable bloat post-update if needed.
My point is:
You don’t need to stop updating completely.
You just need to stop being blind about it.
Updates aren’t good or bad by default.
They're just a tool. But like any tool, in the wrong hands (or wrong timing), they can wreck more than they fix.
A Quick Side note:
I haven’t written a detailed post yet on how to selectively install only what you need while skipping the rest. But if guys are facing difficulties with selectively updating things and want a guide on surgical updates - what to keep, what to block - drop a comment. I’ll make it happen.
Anyway, Let’s get back to where we left.
Planned Obsolescence Isn’t a Bug - It’s the Product
If you made it this far - kudos. Here’s a digital candy 🍬. You’ve earned it.
We started with lightbulbs that were too good for business. Then cars that were outdated even when they worked perfectly.
Now - we’re dealing with software updates that don’t update - they downgrade.
Hardware that works just fine… until it “can’t run” the latest OS.
And designs that are built to mess with your brain, not your life.
But the formula behind the scenes? Still the same.
This wasn’t just a trip down history lane. I wrote this to arm you with awareness.
Because once you understand what’s going on - you start seeing the pattern.
And once you see the pattern, you don’t fall for it again.
You make better decisions.
On your terms.
Not theirs.
Your Turn
I have talked enough, now it’s your time:
Have you ever felt your phone or laptop suddenly got worse after an update?
Do you think obsolescence is inevitable or forced?
Drop a comment. I actually read them. And I reply too - unless I’m deep in some rabbit hole.
If you want more content like this, hit subscribe and restack. I’m on a mission to help people see through the noise, and make them understand what’s going on behind the curtain.
But for this to reach more people, I need your support. Subscribes and restacks aren’t just numbers - they’re what keep this mission alive and spreading.
So if you found value here, back me up.
Let’s get more people aware, more people secure.
And hey, if you want to talk 1-on-1, don’t hesitate to DM me.
I’m always up for a good conversation.
One IT expert told me he'll only use Windows 7! Planned obsolescence is something I avoid by stopping all and every use of that manufacturer as it affects the item in use. So, 2026 is when I will probably stop all use of any computer, etc. And I will purchase a non digital 'phone' if they're still around. My 'digital' items are slowly being disconnected from the Internet as the tech guys play with truth which, to me, is immutable. Are we being forced back into real 'dark ages'?