> I have heard that newer LED Bulbs now have some kind of built in obsolescence. This is from someone I know who is an engineer working for the US military.

BigClive covers this issue a fair amount on his Youtube teardown videos. It's not exactly built-in obsolescence, so much as being built to cost.

The cheapest way to build an LED bulb is to minimize the number of components. Instead of spreading the light emission out over a couple of dozen LEDs, it's cheaper to use a handful of LEDs but really overdrive them with high currents.

The result is a bulb that's cheap to make, but in ordinary use the chips and phosphors inside will run at high temperatures and degrade much more quickly. This effect will be even more pronounced with enclosed fixtures (like ceiling lights) that have little to no ventilation.

Manufacturers could design their way out of this by increasing the component count (spreading the light generation over more LED chips at lower current), but that's an expense that doesn't translate well to a brand or marketing claim. As it stands, ordinary consumers are unlikely to try to exercise their warranty on a bulb that fails after 1,000 hours rather than a rated 3,000 or so; there's no reason to expect that "this bulb is more expensive but will last a really long time" would make it in the consumer-facing market.

Glad to see someone referencing BigClive's teardowns and explanations.

As for the business rationale, I think it's less about consumer demand and more about the recurring revenue for the light manufacturers. Products like this exist where mandated - see his video on the Dubai LEDs - but aren't made broadly available.

I think GP's explanation is compatible with "Products like this exist where mandated".

Even if the producer expects absolutely zero return customers (and therefore no recurring revenue), having the more durable product be more expensive, and durability being hard to advertise, means there's a race to the bottom where the more durable product is competed out of existence.

If everybody is forced to make the durable product, the race to the bottom disappears.

(Alternatively, having better packaging regulations that make it easier to identify long-lasting products would also help)

> in ordinary use the chips and phosphors inside will run at high temperatures and degrade much more quickly. This effect will be even more pronounced with enclosed fixtures (like ceiling lights) that have little to no ventilation.

So, if I want bulbs that are less likely to fail, would it help to always buy enclosure-rated ones, even for applications where they're not going to be enclosed? It seems like that could be a way to get the safety margin that manufacturers aren't bothering with.

> unlikely to try to exercise their warranty

I'm in this exact situation now, and it's because of the hassle. You must take the bulbs back to the store. There are various issues like waiting in line, and I haven't done it. I bought name-brand bulbs thinking they'd be good, but now I'm unhappy because the guarantee process is such a bother.

I wonder if a company could make a viable product by differentiating in this area. Make a truly no-cost, no-hassle return process. Allow me to print a pre-paid shipping label and just drop it in the mail. No in-person store visits, waiting on hold for customer support, etc. And really push this in marketing. Maybe even put some kind of hour meter on the bulbs as a visible sign that I am buying the one brand of LED bulb that takes reliability seriously. People might pay more just to be spared from the headache of LED bulbs that fail a lot.

I tried to make a warranty claim since I had a whole batch of bulbs die within a few months. GE required me to ship them the bulbs. I abandoned the claim, switched to another manufacturer, and don't put stock in those warranties at all anymore. I doubt they get very many claims and surely someone there is using that as proof of customer satisfaction.

> It's not exactly built-in obsolescence, so much as being built to cost.

How do you know this? Seems completely implausible. Source please.

Traditional incandescent bulbs were not immune to planned obsolescence, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel

“The cartel lowered operational costs and worked to standardize the life expectancy of light bulbs at 1,000 hours (down from 2,500 hours)..”

Planned obsolescence and fictitious durability scores are a class action lawsuit waiting to happen

They are almost certainly referring to the use of 85°C capacitors. These are much cheaper and die quicker compared to their pricier counterparts.

It's not so much "planned obsolescence" as it is "consumers shop on price primarily". And its even harder because there really isn't much benefit to putting specs on your bulbs because 99.9% of consumers won't understand them anyway.

What should happen is a mandated "nutrition facts" that gets put on all bulbs so people can familiarize themselves with a standard fact sheet.

I think the european commission was considering something like this with right-to-repair laws? Having a "durability score" on the package, or something like that.

I'm finding this true with the bulbs I've bought in the past 5 or so years. The first one I bought about 15 years ago is still going, but most, if not all more recent LEDs have died. Even the ones in the basement that are mounted with no case to increase the heat around them.

I read the "guarantee" when I buy new bulbs but who keeps receipts or track of light bulbs?

You can write the install date (and store name) on the bulb housing with a sharpie when you put it in the socket. It's not a receipt but it at least gives you a shot at getting a return when it fails early.

You could also just write an arbitrary date and the name of the most convenient shop when it fails, so I really don't see what good that does, it's very far from a receipt.

At the very least, it gives you an idea which receipt to look for in your box of receipts/warranties.

And no, I am not happy about having to think about storing receipts for mundane things like light bulbs either, but it is the only thing that calms down my nerves when yet another bulb with 5 year warranty fails in a year.

Or for me, search my google photos for the receipt near that date

If you run a store, and a customer comes in and says "I bought this item on $x date; I don't have the receipt but this is how I know", you have two choices:

a) you can choose not to trust them

b) you can choose to trust them

For a $3 item, most retailers would pick #b every time.

I'm starting to suspect that it's not the LEDs themselves that are failing but the transformer packed inside the base. I haven't really dug in though.

Are there any good brands of LED bulbs these days -- bulbs that are likely to work as long as is claimed on the box? I've already scratched GE and FEIT off the list.

I've read that it is the controller circuit which is cheaply made. The LED would continue to work fine if the current source hadn't failed. I had a lot of trouble with GU10 LED lamps, finding ones that last as long as a halogen.

Not exactly "the transformer", but yeah. See the afore-mentioned videos by Big Clive on YouTube to find out how to hack your bulbs to make them last indefinitely (albeit at a reduced light output).