Wow. Again, companies make something for a cheap as possible to meet the requirements. That's capitalism. There is currently a "race to the bottom" with appliances. The issue is most customers are extremely price sensitive. They want the "cheapest" product. Features, Quality, all are secondary to price. If price is low enough, they just throw away and buy again. Look at Harbor Freight. This is why trying to pull cheap Chinese goods out of the market will cause people to go nuts. We are a throw away culture, the companies are merely responding to customer behaviors.

Software as a service is just the latest trend and honestly most people DID upgrade every 2-3 years AND if the price is right for the subscription its the same thing.

Have you seen the proliferation of Car Washes recently? You know how that works? Monthly Memberships (unlimited washes for a set monthly price). People LOVE that stuff. I don't know why, but it sells. So companies offer it.

 

What am I missing? When I look at a car wash "Club" price, I calculate how much I typically spend per month or year on car washes, and compare that to what the club will cost me. If I save money with their club, I'll buy in. Otherwise I just pay for washes individually.

 

I don't think most people can calculate. They are just told that "If you wash once a week, this monthly deal will work for you.".

 

There is a difference between cheap parts that are junk, and complex technological parts that are unnecessary(and also possibly junk).
There is a difference between owning something outright and being charged a subscription to use it with 'borrowed time'.

Being cheap or junk is not mutually exclusive with unnecessarily complex and difficult to service, and neither is modern technology with difficult to repair. You can use modern technology to re-create a 1998 Corolla engine in all its original glory with the added boost of modern materials science and engineering while keeping it mostly the same parts and practices and maintainability. But instead now modern engines are more disposable than maintainable and mostly impossible to work on for the average diy at home. Modern technology didn't do that, doesn't do that, has nothing to do with that. They just make it seem that way. its for 'emissions'. Like electric vehicles. The power still produces waste at the power plant and aircraft still use fuels and produce emissions at levels that the vehicles we own don't obey laws for in one way or the other.

 

I'll bite. What's the difference? If nothing changes for 10 years, depending on the price, ownership MAY make sense. If you have to buy updates every 6 months or the software won't work with someone else's software, buying might not be worth it.

I really don’t think how things were when we were young is coming back anytime soon. I imagine the last generation had that thought too and the generation before them.

 

I'm not sure what you are asking exactly. The difference between what? The question I posted as rhetorical, it is an obvious state of affairs.

For example I own photoshop 6.0 CD-ROM. When I needed to publish a paper in bioengineering journal , I do all my photo editing and graphical spacing setting up in photoshop that I own from 20 years ago. I didn't have to sign up for a sub or keep paying a sub all the time. It does the same thing as modern photoshop, point A to point B, like an old Corolla from the 90's. But I only had to buy it once back 20 years ago and I own it forever. These days you have to pay every month even if you don't use it for a month. Its difficult to cancel sometimes there are hoops to jump through. Its easy to forget subscriptions also. Its also more resource consuming and demanding on a computer than the old software , kind of like how a modern car is more demanding in terms of service and tools. Unnecessarily so for the most part. You can make parts and software like old parts and old software if you want. But nobody would do that because the profit isn't as high I guess. Or engineers have lost their way. It is possible to be totally unaware of the possibilities available and think something is impossible or unavailable via hubris and conditioning.

 

I don't know about photoshop but I have had experience with the Word and it is the same as it was 20 years ago if you just want to type it like a typewriter. The old ones were pretty klugey compared with what we have today with the subscription. The suite works much better today than it did 20 years ago. Yes, I get that you paid for it and now you pay for it every year. I didn't tear into it but just a cursory search and AI turned up

Key Evolution Milestones

• 1980s (The Beginning): Launched in 1983, it introduced "What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get" (WYSIWYG) editing and mouse support.
• 1990s (GUI and Dominance): Moved to Windows, adopting graphical menus and establishing market dominance, say Wikipedia.
• 2000s (Ribbon Interface): Introduced the "Ribbon" toolbar system (2007) for easier navigation.
• 2010s (Cloud & Collaboration): Shifted to Office 365 (2013), introducing OneDrive integration, web versions, and real-time co-authoring.
• 2020s (AI & Modernization): Integrated with Teams (2020), added advanced AI text prediction, voice-to-text dictation, and AI-powered drafting with Copilot.
  Microsoft +6

Major Functional Improvements

• Collaboration: Real-time co-authoring, advanced commenting, and document tracking.
• Intelligent Assistance: Text predictions, grammar checks, and "Focus Mode" to reduce distractions, say DocFly.
• Accessibility: Built-in tools like Dictation, Immersive Reader, and Accessibility Assistant.
• Format Flexibility: Ability to open/edit PDFs and save directly to the cloud, say Core Technology Systems.
• Improved Creativity Tools: Improved "Draw" tab with diverse digital pens and SVG/3D image libraries, say
  this YouTube video
  .
  YouTube +5

As to engineers losing their way, what is it you think the engineer can do? Refuse to follow corporate and do it the way they thinks is best? Kinda like me telling my boss I refuse to sell the product they want me to. More than likely, I will end up unemployed and I can't afford my principles.

I get you are probably older and want things to stay the same as they did in the days when you were young. Those were the good old days and they make more sense to you. Kinda like my wife can't understand why people like Taylor Swift anymore than Swifties can understand why she likes the music that is ancient. A friend of mine didn't understand the modern times either. Thing was, he did appreciate the medical discoveries that gave his son another 20 some years when that particular type of cancer wasn't fixable just a year before he was diagnosed. In short, people like the older days but seem to be forgetful of the shortcomings of the past.

 

My thoughts exactly. I use Amsoil oil and filter, as it is best I have seen. It is just a little higher priced than the Mobil 1 but the testing Ive seen is it is superior. Does it make a difference on what brand you use?, IMO probably not. As my father always said,"Its like picking fly **** out of pepper". Sometimes the old man is right.

Ken

 

The bigger question is, do you use the correct oil filter and the required GM oil spec? Do you use the Amsoil EA15K50 filter?

 

AMSOIL Oil Filter
EA15K50 (EA15K50-EA)
Qty: 1
$13.90

AMSOIL Signature Series 0W-40 100% Synthetic Motor Oil
Gallon Jug (AZF1G-EA)
Qty: 2
$88.58

Filter Wrench (76 mm)
One (GA251-EA)
Qty: 1
$5.25

 

In a few weeks, I will be able to see what the difference between 0W-40 vs 5W-30 from a mileage standpoint. So far, 0W-40 was able to go past the 4500 mile limit imposed by the OLM. Lets see if 5W-30 can as well. This would be for MY driving style and conditions. Have you tested Amsoil for your driving style and conditions?

 

Great oil. You might reconsider that Filter. It doesn't have the GM LT1 required bypass pressure of 22 psi. That filter could be bypassing oil with a bypass pressure as low as 8 psi.

 

According to THIS, it is 18-24

 

It's actually very hard to find the true bypass pressure on the AMSOIL filters. AMSOIL doesn't list the bypass spec, not sure why.

AI INFO:
The AMSOIL EA15K50 oil filter is a full-flow filter, not a bypass filter. It features an internal bypass valve, which is typically set to open between 8 and 15 psi to maintain engine oil circulation.

This is good info straight from the AMSOIL website.

SEOC4 - Although AMSOIL recommends the use of 0W-40 motor oil for this engine, (LT1 C7), Chevrolet recommends a 15W-50 engine oil for use in track events or competitive driving. Under these high performance driving conditions, Dominator Synthetic 15W-50 Racing oil is recommended.

 

The latest PF64 is part no. 25206966
Just installed one yesterday. 22 PSI

 

So maybe it is a convenience thing if you race? So like buying a soda or candy from a Convenience Store, it will cost you more for that convenience?

 

Google search:
GM current oil DEXOS R requirement for C7 corvette document.

 

I could have 50 PhD certifications if I could defend my thesis the lazy way. "Go find reasons to support my assertion.". Perhaps you can show us where GM said "Going forward, DEXOS R or nothing."?

 

If there is a better product available, then why not use it. It's really a no brainer for me. It's not even that much different in price if that's a concern.
But seriously, a dollar or two per quart???

 

Define "better"? If you are trackingband have to dump 15W-50 for 5W-30 when you get home so you can daily drive, absolutely more convenient. Better at protecting the engine? By how much?

Where do you get your number? I can get a 5 qt jug of Mobile 1 5W-30 almost anywhere. 0W-40, not so much.

So, once again, show me the numbers when you say "better" and we can see if it is worth "better".