[Ed Shapiro]

I am not thinking or saying that cameras and other gear are designed to self distruct as per a policy of manufacturers. I am saying that in some cases when more longevity can be built in to shutters and other major parts simply is not.

A good automotive analogy- remember the Checker? This was a car built from the late 40 into the early 70s. It looked like a 55 Chevrolet on steroids and was put together like a brick outhouse. The body was made of aluminum and the general construction was military tough. The interiors were made of hard wood and leather and the motors and transmissions were selected from other manufacturers which were making the better products from year to year. A car am have had a GM engine and Chrysler transmission depending on the model year. The cars were commonly used for Taxicab service in large urban cities and were also issued in a consumer model with slightly more attractive trim. 7 Passengers could comfortably sit in the back seating area- there was the main seat and two folding jump seats- another passenger could sit next to the driver.

Theses cars went in excess of three hundred thousand miles and oftentimes faulty engines or transmissions were simply replaced. As the consumer demand leaned more toward style, the Checker soon became a thing of the past but thousands of them were on the road many years after the went out of production. The technology was there to build an almost indestructible car but this was not, in the long term, a profitable policy for the company. Ever tale a close look at a army 2 1/2 ton truck?...I will say no more.

We live in a very disposable world and most things are not made or meant for lifetime service- perhaps tombstones?

Ed