Taking apart the 2010 Fisher Price re-released Music Box Record Player(twitter.com)
twitter.com
Taking apart the 2010 Fisher Price re-released Music Box Record Player
https://twitter.com/Foone/status/1454230585933631488
214 comments
> This modern version is a complete scam
This. It preys upon the childhood memories of parents and grandparents. Literally everything that made the original such a fond memory is gone and what you're left with is a cheap trick that had none of the lasting appeal of the original.
This. It preys upon the childhood memories of parents and grandparents. Literally everything that made the original such a fond memory is gone and what you're left with is a cheap trick that had none of the lasting appeal of the original.
Of course by its very nature selling a kids record player in the age of streaming music is preying on the parents childhood memories.
Maybe, but I think a kid can appreciate a record player for itself. It's arguably the most grab-able music format (cassette tapes are a close contender) and it's a very visual and tactile way to experience music.
I have an old phonograph cabinet and my toddler is always trying to turn the crank, then wants to be held up to see the record spinning while it plays. He doesn't care that it's an obsolete relic of generations past, he just wants to turn a crank and watch it spin.
I have an old phonograph cabinet and my toddler is always trying to turn the crank, then wants to be held up to see the record spinning while it plays. He doesn't care that it's an obsolete relic of generations past, he just wants to turn a crank and watch it spin.
Well giving them a spotify gift card or the printed out specifications for mp3 isn't going to make them very happy after all.
You can say whatever you like about vinyl, but it is tangible.
You can say whatever you like about vinyl, but it is tangible.
> This modern version is a complete scam
Applies to pretty much 90% of everything I use and buy. The world is getting shittier by the day.
Applies to pretty much 90% of everything I use and buy. The world is getting shittier by the day.
This should be a proxy measure for inflation. (If only it was quantifiable so easily…)
Instead of prices going up in this case, quality goes down.
Instead of prices going up in this case, quality goes down.
There used to be an awesome blog site called consumerist that had a "Shrink Ray" section where they would try to track all the consumer products that were secretly degraded in some way. The blog shut down a while ago. Guess big industry got to them.
[1]:https://consumerist.com/tag/shrink-ray/index.html
[1]:https://consumerist.com/tag/shrink-ray/index.html
The life blood of any independent site is advertising. Who would advertise on such a site?
Good point.
> 's been passed around to relatives, but last I heard, it still works after what must be almost 40 years
I think this is the reason for the new version. Fisher Price won't earn any money if the toys never breaks and never have to be replaced, to the detriment of everyone (including the environment) except the stakeholders.
The new version is much more suspicable to breakage and hence, a better chance at profits for the company.
I think this is the reason for the new version. Fisher Price won't earn any money if the toys never breaks and never have to be replaced, to the detriment of everyone (including the environment) except the stakeholders.
The new version is much more suspicable to breakage and hence, a better chance at profits for the company.
If you’re ever in the market to sell that thing, it sounds like my kids could use the mechanical version…
I also spent many hours futzing with one of these. The music-playing mechanism in the arm was particularly interesting, for some reason. I remember spending time plucking out songs using a screwdriver.
The original Fisher-Price "Record Player" is really a kids version of a Polyphon [0] a type of record like music player that was popular in the late 1800's to early 1900's. You can see some playing on YouTube [1]
I thought it would be interesting to 3D print additional records for the thing. Was super disappointed when I bought one for our daughter last year and found that they had changed it to a digital music player that only uses the records for song selection.
A lot of the modern day versions of the original Fisher-Price toys don't hold up to the originals. For example on the xylophone they replaced the Wood base with plastic and the thing sounds like crap.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphon
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk4zjQshq14
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soQLAvqnTOQ
I thought it would be interesting to 3D print additional records for the thing. Was super disappointed when I bought one for our daughter last year and found that they had changed it to a digital music player that only uses the records for song selection.
A lot of the modern day versions of the original Fisher-Price toys don't hold up to the originals. For example on the xylophone they replaced the Wood base with plastic and the thing sounds like crap.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphon
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk4zjQshq14
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soQLAvqnTOQ
If you want music toys for kids look to hohner http://hohnerkids.com/. They make a line that are real musical instruments. They tune their xylophone for example.
They are still cheap plastic, but the quality is good enough for real music.
They are still cheap plastic, but the quality is good enough for real music.
These large polyphons sounds superbly full to me. full metal not so compact disc :)
I mean really.. ave maria is a little magical https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu4FWixsUM8
gosh
I mean really.. ave maria is a little magical https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu4FWixsUM8
gosh
Sometimes I feel as if there will be a trend to go back to these amazing mechanical devices as technology consumes more and more of the world. We are already seeing it with the rise of Vinyl and using dumb phones.
Found a little talk and play by Wintergatan (the guy who built the musical marble machine) of a polyphon in a museum in The Netherlands
https://youtu.be/LyXY4Bz3PLs
https://youtu.be/LyXY4Bz3PLs
O yeah, his tours of that museum are really great. The original Fisher Price player worked exactly the same as the one they show in that video with a little gear that coupled the records to the comb.
It sucks how cheaply kid's toys are made these days, but there are companies that stand out by making things that last. When my kid was little we bought a lot of Melissa & Doug toys because they were actually made of wood and would survive multiple children.
I'm not sure how common this is in other countries, but here in Germany we have quite a few "water playgrounds". There are some pumps in the sand, sometimes small aqueducts and the likes, so during summer, the kids can play with water. The pumps used to be real pumps. Now they are electronic. They have a sensor to detect how fast the handle is moving and at a certain speed you'll hear a clicking sound, a valve opens and the water starts flowing.
I think some children will realize how these things work. They might start to find them dumb if they find out that the strenuous repetitive movement is in fact unnecessary. At least to me it feels like a dishonest contraption and I'd prefer if they simply put a button on it.
I think some children will realize how these things work. They might start to find them dumb if they find out that the strenuous repetitive movement is in fact unnecessary. At least to me it feels like a dishonest contraption and I'd prefer if they simply put a button on it.
> I think some children will realize how these things work.
Conversely, I’ve seen some kids play with real pumps and they seem to find it incredibly fun when they realize that more and faster movement brings more water.
Hell, I thought it was fun myself just seeing how fast I could make it go.
Conversely, I’ve seen some kids play with real pumps and they seem to find it incredibly fun when they realize that more and faster movement brings more water.
Hell, I thought it was fun myself just seeing how fast I could make it go.
This is how the Wii works too. It tells you to swing the wiimote like a bat or a golf club or a tennis racket or steering wheel, but it works better when you just flick your wrist.
A friend of mine from engineering school had pretty much this exact idea for a joke record player: Require the user to provide a record and place the needle on it, but then use image-recognition to identify the label/cover art and stream the album while the record spun uselessly.
Seeing someone do this, but unironically and for a real product specifically meant for humans who are actively developing their sense of how the world around the works, feels somewhere between cynical and outright deceptive. It reminds me of the Mechanical Turk (the original one, not the Amazon service): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_Turk - a machine deliberately designed to mislead.
Seeing someone do this, but unironically and for a real product specifically meant for humans who are actively developing their sense of how the world around the works, feels somewhere between cynical and outright deceptive. It reminds me of the Mechanical Turk (the original one, not the Amazon service): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_Turk - a machine deliberately designed to mislead.
Can't seem to find it now, but a while ago there was an art project posted on here that was basically a mock tourist camera where it would use the GPS and IMU to infer your subject, and combine that with time of day info to grab you a top-rated picture off Instagram instead of whatever lousy one you were trying to take yourself.
And here's the inverse of that— a camera that blocks you from taking photos too many other people have taken: https://philippschmitt.com/archive/2018/work/camera-restrict...
And here's the inverse of that— a camera that blocks you from taking photos too many other people have taken: https://philippschmitt.com/archive/2018/work/camera-restrict...
I love the irony of the new toy containing an actual music box inside that isnt used to play the music.
Perhaps whatever hapless engineer was tasked with desecrating the Fisher Price toy that might have nudged their own early cognitive development... retreated into a dark sense of humor about it.
Mechanical toys can be “screwed with” a lot. Like experimenting with a ton of “what if…”
Electronic toys generally don’t give you much of this.
And I think this really represents a fundamental change in a lot of aspects of life: there’s a specific way to interact with things, prescribed by the maker.
I absolutely loved the quiet weekends as a kid where I could spend hours and hours making ridiculous contraptions by mixing toys and a bit of tape and such.
Electronic toys generally don’t give you much of this.
And I think this really represents a fundamental change in a lot of aspects of life: there’s a specific way to interact with things, prescribed by the maker.
I absolutely loved the quiet weekends as a kid where I could spend hours and hours making ridiculous contraptions by mixing toys and a bit of tape and such.
Electronic toys have much more potential for modification. It just takes a more advanced skill set.
Glitch musicians would like a word.
Maybe you mean digital. As electronic toys can still be modified/screwed with.
Maybe you mean digital. As electronic toys can still be modified/screwed with.
Just you wait until your mini-moog has a boot process with a required chain of trust that will reject any circuit bending. That'll teach ya :P
Man, this makes my day. I was born during the original production run and, of course, had one of these. Lovely, fun little toy. So when our first child was born and some kind family member bought her one, it put a big smile on my face…
…until I looked closer! Fraud! Deception! And saddest of all, I tried the same thing foone did, knowing that the unused binary codes (maybe not 0000 but surely the other five) were surely hiding a few extra songs. But no, complete and total disappointment. Par for the course.
This thing has survived two young daughters now, but it is utterly devoid of soul.
…until I looked closer! Fraud! Deception! And saddest of all, I tried the same thing foone did, knowing that the unused binary codes (maybe not 0000 but surely the other five) were surely hiding a few extra songs. But no, complete and total disappointment. Par for the course.
This thing has survived two young daughters now, but it is utterly devoid of soul.
They probably skip 0000, 1111 and all single bit ones because those are the most likely codes you get if you press the buttons with a finger?
It's not that I'm nostalgic for analog, I just don't like the new version because it's basically a fraud. Presenting itself as analog when really it's just a skeuomorphic presentation of a cheap digital music player.
And charging more for it because of all the plastic.
This is basically the same kind of chip that is in electronic greeting cards.
It is a shame, because we live in the age of 3D printers, and making your own tunes is now not that hard for the original music player, but the new player itself is now so limited.
This is basically the same kind of chip that is in electronic greeting cards.
It is a shame, because we live in the age of 3D printers, and making your own tunes is now not that hard for the original music player, but the new player itself is now so limited.
One of the worse aspects of growing old is having to watch things previously done well and delivering genuine thoughtful value mutate into illusory branded trash done just well enough to fleece consumers.
Capitalism at its finest.
The updated Fisher Price Tape Recorder got a similar treatment, the original played real cassettes but the modern one does not.
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Fisher-Price-Classics-Play-Tape-R...
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Fisher-Price-Classics-Play-Tape-R...
With the original Fisher-Price cash register, the 3 different denominations were of different sizes, so each only fit into its own slot. With their modern remake, the 3 different denominations are all the same size.
That’s the thing about their remakes, all across the board—they look similar to the originals, but lost their a lot of the details and functionality that made them charming. As a Buffalonian I still have a soft spot for Fisher-Price, but these are just disappointing.
That’s the thing about their remakes, all across the board—they look similar to the originals, but lost their a lot of the details and functionality that made them charming. As a Buffalonian I still have a soft spot for Fisher-Price, but these are just disappointing.
Fisher-Price once made a toy camcorder that used audio cassettes. A 90 minute tape held 11 minutes of video, monochrome 120×90 at 15fps.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PXL2000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PXL2000
This new version of the Fisher-Price Record Player is heartbreaking. I learned so much from trying to understand how it worked. Concepts like stored energy: experimenting with trying to over-wind, under-wide, a few turns, many turns, slowly adding pressure to the winding knob until it would start playing and try to maintain just enough pressure to play. Physically slowing and speeding up the turntable to change to the tempo. Trying to intentionally misaligning the head to play out of tune. Turning it on it's side, upside down, trying to peek at the teeth on the head and manually play individual notes. All at an age before I could read. That toy was indestructible, because if it weren't I would have torn it down to individual components (just like my very expensive 6 million dollar man action figure, to the great chagrin of my parents). It wouldn't be until much later I'd have to tools to dissemble one, and by then I was taking apart real record plays.
This toy is a good analog for a real record player and with grooves that move a needle and play sound encoded on the disk. Leading to understanding of sound waves.
This new toy is a mix of new and old tech. How can a per-literate child be expected to decipher binary encodings and how they map to individual songs? What deeper understanding of how things work are within the grasp of a child that cannot yet use a screwdriver, wire cutters, and a volt meter?
This new toy is boring. Once you learn how to turn it on, it can have no appeal to a child exposed to much better music players all around them: cell phones, iPads, computers, tvs. This is just a piece of plastic and e-waste destined for the landfill, purchased by some sentimental old timer who has fond memories of the original F-P record player.
This toy is a good analog for a real record player and with grooves that move a needle and play sound encoded on the disk. Leading to understanding of sound waves.
This new toy is a mix of new and old tech. How can a per-literate child be expected to decipher binary encodings and how they map to individual songs? What deeper understanding of how things work are within the grasp of a child that cannot yet use a screwdriver, wire cutters, and a volt meter?
This new toy is boring. Once you learn how to turn it on, it can have no appeal to a child exposed to much better music players all around them: cell phones, iPads, computers, tvs. This is just a piece of plastic and e-waste destined for the landfill, purchased by some sentimental old timer who has fond memories of the original F-P record player.
Yup. I'm pissed by this. And I never even owned a toy like that.
The new toy is just fucking up with kids' development. It literally boils down to a 10-button panel for selecting which song to play. All the things that make it look like a turntable are nonfunctional lies. There's no direct relationship between what disk you have in it, and whether it's turning, because the music isn't even encoded on it in the first place. The disk is just representing two possible states, and the turning is for show.
How did they imagine a kid will process such a toy? How much disappointment will a child feel when they realize, after trying to physically play with the turning disks, that it's just a dummy?
They could've made this toy with a single disk with a motor under it, and 10 buttons to pick songs, and it would be better because it wouldn't lie. It would look like a record player, not pretend to be one. Or perhaps I'm just angry because the old model was an actual record player, so we have a clear example of them having a superior design available (and most likely cheaper to produce), and then choosing to make it worse for re-release.
Anyway, there's a software analogy in here, but I'm not in a mood to be able to write a coherent and short summary of it. Suffice it to say: the continuous dumbing down of software all across the board is sometimes called "Fisher-Pricing the UI". Never before have I felt this term is so apt as I feel now.
The new toy is just fucking up with kids' development. It literally boils down to a 10-button panel for selecting which song to play. All the things that make it look like a turntable are nonfunctional lies. There's no direct relationship between what disk you have in it, and whether it's turning, because the music isn't even encoded on it in the first place. The disk is just representing two possible states, and the turning is for show.
How did they imagine a kid will process such a toy? How much disappointment will a child feel when they realize, after trying to physically play with the turning disks, that it's just a dummy?
They could've made this toy with a single disk with a motor under it, and 10 buttons to pick songs, and it would be better because it wouldn't lie. It would look like a record player, not pretend to be one. Or perhaps I'm just angry because the old model was an actual record player, so we have a clear example of them having a superior design available (and most likely cheaper to produce), and then choosing to make it worse for re-release.
Anyway, there's a software analogy in here, but I'm not in a mood to be able to write a coherent and short summary of it. Suffice it to say: the continuous dumbing down of software all across the board is sometimes called "Fisher-Pricing the UI". Never before have I felt this term is so apt as I feel now.
> How much disappointment will a child feel when they realize, after trying to physically play with the turning disks, that it's just a dummy?
Absolutely nothing, since they don’t know what to expect. My son has a similar music player from a different brand (more like a diskman) and just accepts that putting in the disk is enough, no need for spinning or anything.
Of course the machine screams “Open!” and “Lets play!” When you open or close the disk cover respectively, so it’s orders of magnitude more satisfying than the fisher price thing (you can try playing with cover open, or rapidly open/close it to see what happens).
Absolutely nothing, since they don’t know what to expect. My son has a similar music player from a different brand (more like a diskman) and just accepts that putting in the disk is enough, no need for spinning or anything.
Of course the machine screams “Open!” and “Lets play!” When you open or close the disk cover respectively, so it’s orders of magnitude more satisfying than the fisher price thing (you can try playing with cover open, or rapidly open/close it to see what happens).
> Absolutely nothing, since they don’t know what to expect.
Exactly. This is the problem though. Look back at the threads when Sir Clive Sinclair died. The number of people (like me) who have a career due to just having something you can experiment with. Now, it's all "press this allowed button and the allowed action will happen". A company like Fisher Price, with their deserved reputation for producing quality learning toys, should be embarrassed by this.
Exactly. This is the problem though. Look back at the threads when Sir Clive Sinclair died. The number of people (like me) who have a career due to just having something you can experiment with. Now, it's all "press this allowed button and the allowed action will happen". A company like Fisher Price, with their deserved reputation for producing quality learning toys, should be embarrassed by this.
>so we have a clear example of them having a superior design available (and most likely cheaper to produce)
This is probably not the case. The blob chip is probably in the pennies. And while I didn't look at the pictures extremely deeply I bet they did part and assembly reduction using the following methodology.
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bZGWOrDBpg
This is probably not the case. The blob chip is probably in the pennies. And while I didn't look at the pictures extremely deeply I bet they did part and assembly reduction using the following methodology.
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bZGWOrDBpg
“I'm taking a HN break until the end of year. See you in 2022!” :-)
On the other hand there are things like this:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/upperstory/spintronics-...
Now it will be up-to parents to decide whether they want to bring up an iPhone consumer kid or more of a PC creative kid.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/upperstory/spintronics-...
Now it will be up-to parents to decide whether they want to bring up an iPhone consumer kid or more of a PC creative kid.
I honestly don't see these explicitly-teach-your-kids-STEM products solving the problem. They're unaffordable for most parents, they're narrow in scope, and there's a good chance your kid won't even like them.
It reminds me a bit of Oliver's, a fast food chain in Australia. They set up shop at roadhouses along major highways, and market themselves as a healthy alternative to McDonalds or KFC. You look at the menu, though, and it consists of organic acai berries, quinoa, antioxidant-rich kale smoothies and the like. They've hyper-optimised their brand's goal/mission to the point where the product is unapproachable and unaffordable for most consumers.
All we want is chicken and rice, but our choice is between a double bacon cheeseburger or an overpriced organic bliss bowl.
It reminds me a bit of Oliver's, a fast food chain in Australia. They set up shop at roadhouses along major highways, and market themselves as a healthy alternative to McDonalds or KFC. You look at the menu, though, and it consists of organic acai berries, quinoa, antioxidant-rich kale smoothies and the like. They've hyper-optimised their brand's goal/mission to the point where the product is unapproachable and unaffordable for most consumers.
All we want is chicken and rice, but our choice is between a double bacon cheeseburger or an overpriced organic bliss bowl.
> our choice is between a double bacon cheeseburger or an overpriced organic bliss bowl
If you ever fly to (the US via) SFO, perhaps check out Amy's at terminal 1B:
https://amysdrivethru.com
(Technically I think you cannot/should not drive through the airport location.)
If you ever fly to (the US via) SFO, perhaps check out Amy's at terminal 1B:
https://amysdrivethru.com
(Technically I think you cannot/should not drive through the airport location.)
I don't see chicken on the menu, but it does offer things you could consider an actual meal, and definitely better than just acai berries.
Yeah, it doesn't seem super healthy, but seems genuinely really tasty.
If I was on holidays in the US, I don't think I'd be looking for healthier options as much as I'd want BBQ sauce, ribs and burgers.
If I was on holidays in the US, I don't think I'd be looking for healthier options as much as I'd want BBQ sauce, ribs and burgers.
Tinkering with a computer is not the only real creativity, you can also actually use it. GarageBand would have been a dream when I was a child.
The Spintronics video mentions the simulation of resistors, capacitors, batteries...but not logic gates. It doesn't seem to teach the magic of boolean logic at all, which is a bit disappointing. (but not as disappointing as the Fisher Price music player!)
Or "DIY Hand-cranked Music Box Wooden Box + Hole Puncher + Paper Tapes": https://www.ebay.com/itm/182794446978
I think Fisher-Price's target market would destroy that product in a heartbeat.
My 15-month old can't even be left alone with a paper book!
Side note. How is an iPhone not a "personal" computer?
The iPhone is a personal device but it's not a computer. It merely has a computer inside it. What sets it apart from a real computer is the fact it only does what manufacturer designed it to do. They're the ones programming the computer, not the users. So the iPhone is just a device that does cool things. Like one of those nice electronic watches with a ton of cool functions but you get to download new features from Apple's store.
It's not about being a personal computer. An iPhone may be personal, but it's hardly a computer.
I mean, technically it is, but then so is the microwave timer controller.
In terms of user interaction, an iPhone does its best to be an appliance, not a general-purpose computer. So do Android smartphones - lest one thing it's an Apple problem, it's not. It's a modern computing problem.
I mean, technically it is, but then so is the microwave timer controller.
In terms of user interaction, an iPhone does its best to be an appliance, not a general-purpose computer. So do Android smartphones - lest one thing it's an Apple problem, it's not. It's a modern computing problem.
> So do Android smartphones
At least you get to run arbitrary software on them as a standard feature. And on many, the bootloader is unlockable, so you could root the thing and/or tinker with the OS.
The modern computing problem isn't this particular thing, it lies higher. It's presuming that the user is stupid and can't possibly be trusted with figuring stuff out and making their own informed decisions. Won't be surprised if people who design software like this consider every setting a liability.
At least you get to run arbitrary software on them as a standard feature. And on many, the bootloader is unlockable, so you could root the thing and/or tinker with the OS.
The modern computing problem isn't this particular thing, it lies higher. It's presuming that the user is stupid and can't possibly be trusted with figuring stuff out and making their own informed decisions. Won't be surprised if people who design software like this consider every setting a liability.
> The modern computing problem isn't this particular thing, it lies higher. It's presuming that the user is stupid and can't possibly be trusted with figuring stuff out and making their own informed decisions.
I agree with that. It's pretty much an unquestioned axiom in the industry. You can see it mentioned in almost every article or book about writing software, doing UI design or UX work. The user is stupid. They're incapable of thinking for themselves, figuring things out, having their own goals. They have to be carefully guided so they follow the exact path the software prescribes for them, and incentivized along the way with "engagement patterns", lest they get bored mid way.
> Won't be surprised if people who design software like this consider every setting a liability.
Which is funny, because the first thing every single piece of software on this planet does, is disclaiming any and all liability for anything.
So the kind of liability they feel, I believe, is just that of getting bad press over some reviewers deciding something is too confusing, leading to reduced sales.
I agree with that. It's pretty much an unquestioned axiom in the industry. You can see it mentioned in almost every article or book about writing software, doing UI design or UX work. The user is stupid. They're incapable of thinking for themselves, figuring things out, having their own goals. They have to be carefully guided so they follow the exact path the software prescribes for them, and incentivized along the way with "engagement patterns", lest they get bored mid way.
> Won't be surprised if people who design software like this consider every setting a liability.
Which is funny, because the first thing every single piece of software on this planet does, is disclaiming any and all liability for anything.
So the kind of liability they feel, I believe, is just that of getting bad press over some reviewers deciding something is too confusing, leading to reduced sales.
> It's presuming that the user is stupid and can't possibly be trusted with figuring stuff out and making their own informed decisions.
It's even more malicious than that. The corporations and governments are hostile towards users. They lock the computer down so we can't do anything that harms business and government interests. Can't copy or share files. Can't use strong cryptography the government can't crack.
These people believe computers are too subversive to allow the masses unrestricted access to them. They would rather we have nothing but restricted appliances that obey them instead of us. The computer doesn't serve us, it serves them as a tool to control us.
It's even more malicious than that. The corporations and governments are hostile towards users. They lock the computer down so we can't do anything that harms business and government interests. Can't copy or share files. Can't use strong cryptography the government can't crack.
These people believe computers are too subversive to allow the masses unrestricted access to them. They would rather we have nothing but restricted appliances that obey them instead of us. The computer doesn't serve us, it serves them as a tool to control us.
An Android phone is primarily a device for media consumption and the collection of your personal data, but it can be tricked into being more than that. Without rooting it you can install a terminal and use it to learn some perl or python. There's no reason why you couldn't do that with an iphone except Apple not wanting you to. The capabilities are there, but it's not what those devices are for any more than a toaster is a gaming PC just because you can hack it enough to get Doom to run. If someone is going to develop creativity and tech skills using a smartphone it'll be despite their device not because of it.
Though unlocking the bootloader isn't what I would call hacking. It's a feature deliberately built into many devices. Jailbreaking iOS, on the other hand, is hacking, because it inevitably involves exploiting a vulnerability to take over the system.
There’s always jsbin. It’s sandboxed, but it’s Turing complete.
It's a general-purpose computer inside but it was intentionally handicapped by Apple to be an appliance that only does what Apple approves of.
That is such an amazing idea. Wish I had kids so I could learn with them!
As well, the beautiful vulnerability and realness, the imperfections, the notes sometimes slightly flat or sharp because of mechanical aberrations — they were wonderful to observe. The humming sounds of the windings, the realness of it. The tactile dots, the understanding of how they related to musical notes. What a thing it was to behold, an authenticity that the child in us could always appreciate and be impressed and moved by.
We're still in the wave of digital purity (and the VR/meta chapter won't help). Come back in 50 years for a reappreciation of analog, complex, fragile and non linear. By this time digital computing will probably be chaotic too.
> and the VR/meta chapter won't help
Tangential to this thread, I listened to Carmacks keynote[0] for the Facebook Connect event, and it’s very refreshing to hear him push back, in ways that just make sense , instead of towing some corporate line that’s part fantasy and snake oil. See his comments on “social metaverse” and “3D vs flat screens”.
[0] https://youtu.be/BnSUk0je6oo?t=1845
Tangential to this thread, I listened to Carmacks keynote[0] for the Facebook Connect event, and it’s very refreshing to hear him push back, in ways that just make sense , instead of towing some corporate line that’s part fantasy and snake oil. See his comments on “social metaverse” and “3D vs flat screens”.
[0] https://youtu.be/BnSUk0je6oo?t=1845
Digital computing at the server scale is already chaotic, since "complex systems operate in a degraded state". Personally I prefer deterministic systems over mysterious race conditions in concurrent code, so I mainly work in closed systems (desktop rather than cloud) with closed-form correctness criteria, and find and exterminate race conditions and unintended nondeterminism with prejudice (since I think heisenbugs are complex, fragile, nonlinear, and bad). And complexity and fragility is the enemy of self driving cars, and if you build systems that handle it inadequately, people die.
Aside from the practical reasons, I think unknowable unresolvable problems make me psychologically distressed.
Aside from the practical reasons, I think unknowable unresolvable problems make me psychologically distressed.
> Aside from the practical reasons, I think unknowable unresolvable problems make me psychologically distressed.
I too, I'm wired to enjoy closed / defined systems. Yet, the few I've read about old EE books, is that the guys managed to analyse and comprehend noisy, irregular systems. Today mainstream computing is still about digital/clean/closed but one day I assume the analog/noisy/chaotic will become a thing in a normal curriculum. It's an easy/shallow prediction but still.
I too, I'm wired to enjoy closed / defined systems. Yet, the few I've read about old EE books, is that the guys managed to analyse and comprehend noisy, irregular systems. Today mainstream computing is still about digital/clean/closed but one day I assume the analog/noisy/chaotic will become a thing in a normal curriculum. It's an easy/shallow prediction but still.
I mean some people are already getting nostalgic about CRTs for being so analog. And it's been what, only ~15 years since LCDs and other types of digital flat-panel displays started becoming cheap and widespread?
Part of the reason for using CRTs today is their analog characteristics, and part of it is because they're near-zero-latency by design.
The latency part is somewhat getting alleviated by higher refresh rate displays tho
I'm part of that group (I ever regretted breaking my beloved mitsu diamondtron[0]) but still the mainstream is massively about digital purity, beyond biological retina sampling and displaying .. in that era good luck talking about the "value" of imperfect media, it's like fighting a tsunami to me.
[0] to cope, I scavenged a few portable TVs from the 90s to toy with the small tubes.
[0] to cope, I scavenged a few portable TVs from the 90s to toy with the small tubes.
I got stuck on the 6 million dollar action figure part and ignored all the rest afterwards. What's the story?
An action figure of the "six million dollar man" (from a tv show). Though sadly I can't rule out a toy fetching that now adays.
https://nostalgiacentral.com/pop-culture/toys-games/six-mill...
A quick look on ebay shows they're typically selling for less than $100.
A quick look on ebay shows they're typically selling for less than $100.
My family has had one of these for a few years. I remember studying it and immediately realizing there was no way the discs had any data, and sure enough I felt the pins under the head and could make it play different songs by pushing them in differently.
As for the dial, I remember thinking it felt so music-box-like, but I had no idea it was an actual music box!!
Alas, I never experienced the mechanical version. Such a shame.
As for the dial, I remember thinking it felt so music-box-like, but I had no idea it was an actual music box!!
Alas, I never experienced the mechanical version. Such a shame.
Which is amusing because the music box is silenced and only sued for regulating the spin.
I wonder if the original revamp had planned to have it just be a wind up music box and only play one song.
I wonder if the original revamp had planned to have it just be a wind up music box and only play one song.
My guess is that the toy in the Twitter thread was the result of a kind of refactor. If you find a recording of the original it has a traditional music box inside which actually plays the songs (you can hear the tinny sound of the metal tines). So they probably took the original, figured out how it worked, replaced the audio generation with speakers and the microcontroller and changed the read head. Since the newer ones apparently use a switch and no spring, that was an intermediate step to the current incarnation.
The first version was an electronic imitation (complete with winding) of the original. Once the winding was rendered unnecessary, you get the current version without that imitation and it loses the tactile component.
The first version was an electronic imitation (complete with winding) of the original. Once the winding was rendered unnecessary, you get the current version without that imitation and it loses the tactile component.
The original didn’t have a music box in the base; there was a spring motor to turn the record, but the actual music-box part was in the head (running along the record, which had detents in the plastic to pull the tines for the notes)—this is why you could get different songs by changing the disc.
This music box in the base of the new model is probably simply the cheapest way to get a spring motor for the turntable these days, rather than custom-manufacturing one that matches the original.
This music box in the base of the new model is probably simply the cheapest way to get a spring motor for the turntable these days, rather than custom-manufacturing one that matches the original.
I got one of these for my kids around 2014 and was also hugely disappointed. I realized very quickly that it was just a gimmick to lure the Gen-Xers and Millenials who remember these from their childhood.
I, too, was disgusted that it took batteries but you still had to wind the knob, but I was even more offended by the awful staticky sound from the tiny speaker.
Like foone, I also got a kick out of playing with the switches and seeing what happened when you held the disc stil, but I was never curious enough to open it up. I'm glad I didn't, though -- I think the sight of an actual music box would have broken my heart.
I, too, was disgusted that it took batteries but you still had to wind the knob, but I was even more offended by the awful staticky sound from the tiny speaker.
Like foone, I also got a kick out of playing with the switches and seeing what happened when you held the disc stil, but I was never curious enough to open it up. I'm glad I didn't, though -- I think the sight of an actual music box would have broken my heart.
I remember playing with the original, although it wasn't mine. A friend must have had it.
It would be interesting to know the cost in 1980, and compare it (with inflation) to the current cost.
It would be interesting to know the cost in 1980, and compare it (with inflation) to the current cost.
I, too, was very curious about this and was able to find out that when it launched in 1971, the record player was $6.85 [1]. That’s about $46 in today’s money. So I guess the question is how many parents today would pay that much for the “good” version of this toy in comparison to how many will pay $10 less for the fraud version. I’m guessing the business case points strongly toward the latter being revenue maximizing.
[1] https://christmas.musetechnical.com/ShowCatalogPage/1971-Sea...
Side note: like others here, I loved the hell out of this thing as a kid and I’m pretty sure we got it as a hand-me-down from my older cousin. It still worked like a champ after many years of abuse.
[1] https://christmas.musetechnical.com/ShowCatalogPage/1971-Sea...
Side note: like others here, I loved the hell out of this thing as a kid and I’m pretty sure we got it as a hand-me-down from my older cousin. It still worked like a champ after many years of abuse.
> It still worked like a champ after many years of abuse.
Maybe they found this to be a problem, so they made an updated version that is easier to break.
Maybe they found this to be a problem, so they made an updated version that is easier to break.
That’s a good point. I wonder what kind of tolerances were needed to make the original records? It probably wasn’t terribly tight, but still necessary to make a playable record. Versus a simple microcontroller that can play any number of songs and very limited physical tolerances.
The electric version might actually be cheaper to produce.
The electric version might actually be cheaper to produce.
"any number of songs" = 10, in this case, and up to 16 but the extra 6 can't be delivered since there's no update mechanism. Versus the original which could play a much larger variety of songs based on the records themselves. Presumably using a music box like mechanism, not a vinyl record style mechanism, which greatly loosens the quality constraints on the records (based on listening to a recording of the original).
The original is very similar to a music box. It's likely doable to make your own disc for the original using 3D printing.
Yes, [1] is an instructable from some years ago. It should be achievable on a recent hobbyist printer nowadays, e.g. [2].
[1] https://www.instructables.com/3D-printing-records-for-a-Fish...
[2] https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4648393
[1] https://www.instructables.com/3D-printing-records-for-a-Fish...
[2] https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4648393
[deleted]
This seems to be a theme. Toy quality going down. There was a tape recorder with mic from fisher price. You could use the mic to record on the tape and keep it around. I thought to buy it for my kids because I had good memories of it, but guess what. They replaced the tape with tiny memory that you have to overwrite all the time. If they at least would have supported some removable memory.
> They replaced the tape with tiny memory that you have to overwrite all the time.
Until that point I fully expected you to say that they replaced the tape with storage on a cloud account. I bet this will happen one day. So many toys are already trying to suck on kids' data and hook up the parents to cloud services (see e.g. toys that feature "extra experiences" that you access by pointing your smartphone camera at them, and looking through the toy maker's app).
Until that point I fully expected you to say that they replaced the tape with storage on a cloud account. I bet this will happen one day. So many toys are already trying to suck on kids' data and hook up the parents to cloud services (see e.g. toys that feature "extra experiences" that you access by pointing your smartphone camera at them, and looking through the toy maker's app).
I can totally see that happening. And then it's 'oops we leaked all your kids audio', 'our ml researchers are listing to your kids audio to improve ads that will soon play on your tape recorder', etc.
Yup.
> And then it's 'oops we leaked all your kids audio'
Especially that this has already happened at least once - there was a company storing unencrypted audio from a plush teddy bears in a publicly-accessible MongoDB instance.
https://www.techrepublic.com/article/iot-connected-teddy-bea...
> And then it's 'oops we leaked all your kids audio'
Especially that this has already happened at least once - there was a company storing unencrypted audio from a plush teddy bears in a publicly-accessible MongoDB instance.
https://www.techrepublic.com/article/iot-connected-teddy-bea...
Thanks for sharing! Didn't read about that one.
Vintage Fisher Price toys are an absolute marvel of engineering. We have a few of the "little people" sets - my favorite is still the garage with an elevator that still works, including raising and lowering "stop" gates and a floor that raises on an incline only when the elevator reaches the top and the gate opens. My second favorite is the "sesame street play house" featuring a pathway where the little people can "walk". As you turn a crank the pathway moves slowly forward, and then jerks suddenly back. The result is your toy slowly steps forward, and then the track jerks back too fast for the toy to follow, so the toy "walks" and then goes down the slide. It's just a complete joy to operate.
I'm surprised they still make this. Usually kids toys are modeled after what they see adults doing. Some people still have turntables, but it's rare enough that I wasn't expecting there to be much demand for this.
We have a turntable, and our 2½ year old listens to records on it. He's not putting the records on himself just yet of course, but it's nice to have some technology where the physical aspect is so prominent — records have two sides, you have to manually place the needle and stop the turntable after listening, and records hold a specific album.
He'd love a toy like that (the original that is).
On a related note: it's nice that some old records with children's content are actually really good, and often much nicer — slower, more focussed, and with better articulation — than modern content for his demographic. Although I admit that the much-loved audio play about a field mouse visiting her mousy friend who lives in the city to learn all about the sounds in a family's house is a bit… anachronistic. The shower, electrical razor, and hoover are fine, but the typewriter and landline telephone may be a tad confusing, and the baker who hawks his bread at the door hasn't shown up in reality yet (but fast-food delivery is a close-ish thing). His parents both use mechanical keyboards though, so the sound isn't too far-fetched.
People will buy this toy mostly for the nostalgic feeling. I just don't get why Fisherprice didn't just remake the battery-less original though; it would have hit just the right note nowadays. The remake just damages their brand.
He'd love a toy like that (the original that is).
On a related note: it's nice that some old records with children's content are actually really good, and often much nicer — slower, more focussed, and with better articulation — than modern content for his demographic. Although I admit that the much-loved audio play about a field mouse visiting her mousy friend who lives in the city to learn all about the sounds in a family's house is a bit… anachronistic. The shower, electrical razor, and hoover are fine, but the typewriter and landline telephone may be a tad confusing, and the baker who hawks his bread at the door hasn't shown up in reality yet (but fast-food delivery is a close-ish thing). His parents both use mechanical keyboards though, so the sound isn't too far-fetched.
People will buy this toy mostly for the nostalgic feeling. I just don't get why Fisherprice didn't just remake the battery-less original though; it would have hit just the right note nowadays. The remake just damages their brand.
Nostalgia. Parents and grandparents who remember it will buy new toys based on their toys from childhood, regardless of the modern sensibilities.
Exactly. A good business always has to remember who the actual customer is. For kids, in many cases the actual customer is mom & dad, so make sure your product is aimed at them. Same with selling software to a business, the customer is management not the engineers who will actually use it.
That's a good point. lmao what a weird hauntology. the past generation bought the toy for their children because of its resemblance to everyday items in their lives, and the next generation buys a facsimile for their children for its resemblance to the toy from their childhood. i wonder how many iterations will the chain continue
In this case, it'll end with the current generation of children, because toys like the one we're discussing here have nothing in them to create lasting memories. They cut the things that made the toy special out in the redesign.
This comment was striking enough that I thought it deserved more than a simple upvote.
Thanks for showing us this perspective :)
Thanks for showing us this perspective :)
Yeah, the sad fact of baby toys is that they are fundamentally selling to the adults, not to the tots.
The tot phase is pretty fast, so parents don't really seem to get a feel for what is a "good" baby toy in time.
I really wish there would be more general study of this rather than being at the mercy of a sales market that fundamentally doesn't have the baby in mind, mostly just the parents buying the stuff.
But then again, "learning acceleration" in babies is probably bunk anyway.
The tot phase is pretty fast, so parents don't really seem to get a feel for what is a "good" baby toy in time.
I really wish there would be more general study of this rather than being at the mercy of a sales market that fundamentally doesn't have the baby in mind, mostly just the parents buying the stuff.
But then again, "learning acceleration" in babies is probably bunk anyway.
My mother is a developmental psychologist specialised in babies / toddlers. According to her most research showed that behavior of the parents was a far far bigger factor in the speed of development. And on the toys side of things that it's mostly about allowing for creativity in play, meaning kids want to invent their own game with whatever you give them.
Simple wooden building blocks or a stack of cups that fit in each other already allow for that for early age, no need for more advanced toys / battery driven things.
Simple wooden building blocks or a stack of cups that fit in each other already allow for that for early age, no need for more advanced toys / battery driven things.
On sight, I recognize Für Elise on the cylinder.
There's also the modern version of the See 'n Say. The original one is mechanically brilliant. The new one has much better sound quality and a flip-over semicircle that gives it two full circles of things to point to. Is it better? Hard to say.
On the other hand some modern electronic toys are brilliant. The Leapfrog one with the 8x8 LED array and the light pen is absolutely brilliant in how much play value it gets out of that simple hardware and already feels like a classic.
On the other hand some modern electronic toys are brilliant. The Leapfrog one with the 8x8 LED array and the light pen is absolutely brilliant in how much play value it gets out of that simple hardware and already feels like a classic.
I have to think this is mostly due to modern toy factories and their standard tooling. You'd probably have a hard time finding a factory that could mass produce the old toy because that's just not how toys are made today.
I feel like you're about half correct here. For instance, most of these factories aren't "toy factories" they are "injection molding" or "pcb" or "electronic assembly" factories.
I would invite you to submit any examples of how you think modern toys are made of "mostly" standard tooling... that's not how this works. China has more mold designers, mold makers, and mold shops in many towns than other countries have within their borders.
I do agree with you that the old clockwork motor would be too expensive to manufacture now, but I think you should keep thinking about the rest of your thesis.
I would invite you to submit any examples of how you think modern toys are made of "mostly" standard tooling... that's not how this works. China has more mold designers, mold makers, and mold shops in many towns than other countries have within their borders.
I do agree with you that the old clockwork motor would be too expensive to manufacture now, but I think you should keep thinking about the rest of your thesis.
What baffles me is how this could be cheaper to manufacture than the original design. It was literally just music box tines in the head of the arm, and it was plucked by the bumps on the rotating record, just like a music box. This new version even contains a silenced music box! How does this make any kind of sense?
in case others are interested, I was curious about the original and found a good description the mechanism of the original in the patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US3710668A/en.
Part of the value of the original was kids could see and feel how it worked. That made it a fascinating toy. It's all been lost.
Lots of great 70s and 80s toys that are still around are terrible. Super soaker? A joke, premium prices and way worse than squirt guns 1/4 the price, which are themselves not as good as early Super Soakers. Tank's not even removable which means it's basically not even the same sort of product at all—I'm sure the gaskets added too much to the production cost. Loopin' Louie? Motor's too weak, and it's lighter, so it doesn't work as well. They even managed to make Hungry Hungry Hippos suck. Rock 'em Sock 'em? Really bad compared to the original (you can find the original at flea markets sometimes—it's so much better, this isn't just nostalgia). The usual approach seems to be to cut vital features, shrink everything 10-30% (it's sometimes hard to tell if you don't have the original to compare it to, but it's really obvious when you do), and make all the plastic paper thin.
I think it's part of most things that aren't computers getting worse over the last few decades. Shit would be double the price if they still "made it like they used to". Even fast-food pizza—Pizza Hut's in fact way worse than it was even in the mid 90s (they've had at least two major reformulations of the sauce, for one thing, getting worse each time), but if you find a different pizza place that makes pizza around 90s PH quality it'll be 50+% more expensive.
But yeah, inflation's only low-single-digits percent a year. LOL sure.
I think it's part of most things that aren't computers getting worse over the last few decades. Shit would be double the price if they still "made it like they used to". Even fast-food pizza—Pizza Hut's in fact way worse than it was even in the mid 90s (they've had at least two major reformulations of the sauce, for one thing, getting worse each time), but if you find a different pizza place that makes pizza around 90s PH quality it'll be 50+% more expensive.
But yeah, inflation's only low-single-digits percent a year. LOL sure.
Our kids were gifted "Guess Who" (a game which is problematic in a whole host of other ways). I was shocked that it was thin plastic and cardboard. The while thing felt disposable.
I feel that this must be a strategy used on toys that were previously popular. They're not going to return to being the popular must-have item that people will pay a premium for, but there is residual value in the marketing campaign from the 80s. So the toy companies push the build quality as low as they can and milk the last good will from the brand by making it a cheap impulse purchase.
To your larger point, there are still high quality toys around. You just avoid the big Toys R Us style stores and go to an independent or smaller toy story. Plan Toys and Green Toys stick out to me as two brands which felt consistently high quality and were widely available.
I feel that this must be a strategy used on toys that were previously popular. They're not going to return to being the popular must-have item that people will pay a premium for, but there is residual value in the marketing campaign from the 80s. So the toy companies push the build quality as low as they can and milk the last good will from the brand by making it a cheap impulse purchase.
To your larger point, there are still high quality toys around. You just avoid the big Toys R Us style stores and go to an independent or smaller toy story. Plan Toys and Green Toys stick out to me as two brands which felt consistently high quality and were widely available.
> But yeah, inflation's only low-single-digits percent a year. LOL sure.
Compounded inflation/interest is pretty powerful.
2% compounded over 25 years (to mark your "mid-90s" reference) would be a 64% increase, which lines up with your 50+% pretty directly.
Agreed that Pizza Hut sucks now. I sometimes wonder which has changed -- the me, or the thing. Good to know that at least with Pizza Hut, it's not all in my head.
My personal pet peeve is the plastic playing pieces of board games. Formerly well-weighted and painted, now thin cheap and with a bad sticker. How much can plastic playing pieces actually cost?
I wonder if Monopoly still ships with cast metal pieces...
Compounded inflation/interest is pretty powerful.
2% compounded over 25 years (to mark your "mid-90s" reference) would be a 64% increase, which lines up with your 50+% pretty directly.
Agreed that Pizza Hut sucks now. I sometimes wonder which has changed -- the me, or the thing. Good to know that at least with Pizza Hut, it's not all in my head.
My personal pet peeve is the plastic playing pieces of board games. Formerly well-weighted and painted, now thin cheap and with a bad sticker. How much can plastic playing pieces actually cost?
I wonder if Monopoly still ships with cast metal pieces...
From what I can tell pump to charge water guns like the original super soaker simply don’t exist anymore, only pump to fire. I think you’re right that the gaskets/hardware necessary for the pressure tank add a lot of cost, and I wonder if there’s a liability factor as well. Nothing you can buy today can fire with nearly the same power as a super soaker since there’s no charged pressure tank. I had kind of assumed there’d be some small brand selling “classic” water gun designs but a quick google looks like most people only recommend vintage.
Yeah, this brought back an early memory of my sparkling new brain examining the mechanism of the original version of this toy with my eyes and fingers without any words to describe what I was learning. Just some kind of sense of mastery that I couldn't communicate, but made me feel more confident about my understanding of the world.
It seems pretty cynical to market this in order to appeal to people like me with memories like this, with a huge dimension of the enrichment value stripped away.
It seems pretty cynical to market this in order to appeal to people like me with memories like this, with a huge dimension of the enrichment value stripped away.
> kids could see and feel how it worked. That made it a fascinating toy
I assume all of us here on HN are the type-of-person who as a child would have been fascinated about how mechanical and electromechanical toys and gizmos worked - and probably disassembled the thing to our parents' chagrin and figured out how it works (and hopefully put it back together correctly!) and ended the day with a sense of satisfaction from learning something new.
...and then I'm remind myself that we are not like everyone else: I'm still able to vividly remember the things I did with my mechanical/electro toys to see and try to understand how they worked, but that most of the other kids my age didn't: their objective was simply to use the toy as entertainment or make-believe-play or the like - not as an object of curiosity - and they weren't particularly interested in any explanation I'd have for them (it didn't help that I wouldn't have asked them if they wanted to hear my explanation in the first place though... heh)
So for us, this digital-fake of a classic toy is an insult to our imagined younger-selves of the 21st century, but when I think about this ultra-modern toy from the perspective of someone just after something of solely nostalgia value - and a modern-day kid uninterested now (and shall most-likely forever-be uninterested) in how things work then indeed none of what we're griping about here matters - in fact it's the opposite: this 2010 remake is demonstrably tougher and more resilient to damage and wear than the mechanical original despite being superficially the same - given we're in the minority overall (...I think?) then this new design is objectively better as far as moral-utilitarianism is concerned.
...and it's not like Fischer-Price is selling this remake as a toy of interest to kids with a curiosity for things mechanical. They're not being totally dishonest.
I assume all of us here on HN are the type-of-person who as a child would have been fascinated about how mechanical and electromechanical toys and gizmos worked - and probably disassembled the thing to our parents' chagrin and figured out how it works (and hopefully put it back together correctly!) and ended the day with a sense of satisfaction from learning something new.
...and then I'm remind myself that we are not like everyone else: I'm still able to vividly remember the things I did with my mechanical/electro toys to see and try to understand how they worked, but that most of the other kids my age didn't: their objective was simply to use the toy as entertainment or make-believe-play or the like - not as an object of curiosity - and they weren't particularly interested in any explanation I'd have for them (it didn't help that I wouldn't have asked them if they wanted to hear my explanation in the first place though... heh)
So for us, this digital-fake of a classic toy is an insult to our imagined younger-selves of the 21st century, but when I think about this ultra-modern toy from the perspective of someone just after something of solely nostalgia value - and a modern-day kid uninterested now (and shall most-likely forever-be uninterested) in how things work then indeed none of what we're griping about here matters - in fact it's the opposite: this 2010 remake is demonstrably tougher and more resilient to damage and wear than the mechanical original despite being superficially the same - given we're in the minority overall (...I think?) then this new design is objectively better as far as moral-utilitarianism is concerned.
...and it's not like Fischer-Price is selling this remake as a toy of interest to kids with a curiosity for things mechanical. They're not being totally dishonest.
But play is supposed to be a learning tool. If a toy's only value is "push a button for a predefined thing to happen", there is no opportunity for exploration. Might as well give the toddler an iphone.
I agree with you, "we" are probably not like most people. But taking the opportunity to experiment away is such a huge loss. Giving a kid the opportunity to learn on their own is so important. It's not just the one toy, you need to give them loads of different opportunities like these. They'll pick up on some.
Maybe i never would have experimented with this particular toy as a kid. For me, it was getting a screwdriver and taking old electronics apart (and the challenge of putting them back together and still having them work!) that sparked my curiosity. Plenty of things did not, however... But the point is, i was given opportunities.
I agree with you, "we" are probably not like most people. But taking the opportunity to experiment away is such a huge loss. Giving a kid the opportunity to learn on their own is so important. It's not just the one toy, you need to give them loads of different opportunities like these. They'll pick up on some.
Maybe i never would have experimented with this particular toy as a kid. For me, it was getting a screwdriver and taking old electronics apart (and the challenge of putting them back together and still having them work!) that sparked my curiosity. Plenty of things did not, however... But the point is, i was given opportunities.
> I assume all of us here on HN are the type-of-person who as a child would have been fascinated about how mechanical and electromechanical toys and gizmos worked - and probably disassembled the thing to our parents' chagrin and figured out how it works (and hopefully put it back together correctly!) and ended the day with a sense of satisfaction from learning something new.
Yeah. But no, that's a stereotype.
I hated my mecano things, it was too hard to play with. I enjoyed storytelling with my LEGOs much more, my creations were just bare bones scaffoldings for the flesh my imagination would put around it.
I still work in IT and tear stuff apart every day.
With that being said it still saddens me they are digitalising full mechanical toys. It's surely rose-tinted glasses but it looked so much cooler.
Yeah. But no, that's a stereotype.
I hated my mecano things, it was too hard to play with. I enjoyed storytelling with my LEGOs much more, my creations were just bare bones scaffoldings for the flesh my imagination would put around it.
I still work in IT and tear stuff apart every day.
With that being said it still saddens me they are digitalising full mechanical toys. It's surely rose-tinted glasses but it looked so much cooler.
When I was a kid the "toy" to take apart was a disposable camera. The sort you used to buy on vacation and then drop off to have the film developed without getting the camera back. I discovered after charging it that touching the capicator gives a nice electrical shock. I spent a great deal of effort teaching this painful lesson to anyone I could trick into learning it.
The objects of curiosity don't need to be a toy, or even meant for children. Anything that can be disassembled will be disassembled by a curious child.
Too bad it's no longer possible for end users to disassemble mobile phones.
The objects of curiosity don't need to be a toy, or even meant for children. Anything that can be disassembled will be disassembled by a curious child.
Too bad it's no longer possible for end users to disassemble mobile phones.
It's a tradeoff, though. The loss of explorability means that kids no longer have (with these newer toys) the same opportunity for exercising their curiosity that the older toys permitted. My sister never took our toys apart and reassembled them, that was all on me. With a toy like this one I would have (and probably did, with whatever equivalent I had) taken it apart and seen how the music box worked (the metal tines, the bumps on the record corresponding to notes, etc.). The new version removes that opportunity, taken or not. That is a loss.
I agree, I’d pay a little more for a mechanical version.
If this trend continues even wooden blocks will some day come with batteries :p
If this trend continues even wooden blocks will some day come with batteries :p
I seem to recall looking into wooden blocks for my kids when they were a little younger, and finding not that they need batteries, but the new normal-tier wooden blocks are now kinda shit—small, uneven finish and size consistency isn't good, et c.—and you have to start looking into niche "premium" toys to get good ones.
We got some of those cube ones with the letters and numbers at one point, and they were noticeably smaller and worse-finished than the ones I had as a kid in the 80s, which I'm sure were just the only blocks of that type that some cheap local store had and were probably the same quality as all such blocks on the market at the time, not something special. The newer ones looked very similar in a photo, but were missing lots of textures (kinda, you know, a big deal to babies and early toddlers) and details that mine had, and the paint chipped more easily (probably a thinner coat, I guess, plus probably just lower-quality paint).
We bought our first kid a rolling walker/phone thing with some other features—yeah, electronic crap, but at least this one had a volume setting, unlike many modern ones that are just fixed to "deafen your child" with no other options unless you break out a soldering iron. By ~4 years later, between seeing other people's version of the same thing—same brand and all—they bought a couple years after ours, and seeing newer version at the store when toy shopping, we'd noticed that the "same" product, which looked nearly identical, had had a couple revisions, each one making parts that used to move or be interactive fixed & dormant, and otherwise lowering the quality.
We got some of those cube ones with the letters and numbers at one point, and they were noticeably smaller and worse-finished than the ones I had as a kid in the 80s, which I'm sure were just the only blocks of that type that some cheap local store had and were probably the same quality as all such blocks on the market at the time, not something special. The newer ones looked very similar in a photo, but were missing lots of textures (kinda, you know, a big deal to babies and early toddlers) and details that mine had, and the paint chipped more easily (probably a thinner coat, I guess, plus probably just lower-quality paint).
We bought our first kid a rolling walker/phone thing with some other features—yeah, electronic crap, but at least this one had a volume setting, unlike many modern ones that are just fixed to "deafen your child" with no other options unless you break out a soldering iron. By ~4 years later, between seeing other people's version of the same thing—same brand and all—they bought a couple years after ours, and seeing newer version at the store when toy shopping, we'd noticed that the "same" product, which looked nearly identical, had had a couple revisions, each one making parts that used to move or be interactive fixed & dormant, and otherwise lowering the quality.
and will also have bluetooth
Exactly right. That’s why I bought an “antique” one on eBay for my young son a few years ago. I had zero desire for the new garbage version. It was maybe twice as expensive, but 100% worth it to me.
and nowadays you could 3dprint new records for it
I have a music box that uses a paper tape, it was an extra as I was making a gift for a family member and Thinkgeek (long before the Gamestop acquisition) accidentally sent me two. It was actually a lot of fun to make extra songs for it, the toy becomes interactive for the player. Which is a much better thing for kids than something that can only ever play 10 songs, and which they cannot alter in any meaningful sense.
Not the same, but this "DIY Hand-cranked Music Box Wooden Box + Hole Puncher + Paper Tapes" might appeal in a similar way: https://www.ebay.com/itm/182794446978
If space aliens ever get this as an artefact they'll never make sense out of it.
“This is a toy zombie.”
— https://twitter.com/wangtian/status/1454329529569218566
— https://twitter.com/wangtian/status/1454329529569218566
That music box record player is a perfect metaphor for distributed supply chains in global manufacturing. In fact, one could say that it is a representation of them.
Back in the 60s we had an actual cheap-ass record player for 78s, and the 78s were thick - very thick - like more than an eighth of an inch thick. But these kids' "record players" nowadays? Naaah. A mere shadow. No actual appreciation of retro technology required - or wanted.
Are you talking about the toy in the thread or actual turntables?
An actual record player.
So are you suggesting that a 33 RPM LP is not a "real" record? Or that anyone who has a turntable today doesn't appreciate the format? I find both hard to believe.
My turntable is from 2014, I am well aware of the principles on which it operates. That's why I bought it.
My turntable is from 2014, I am well aware of the principles on which it operates. That's why I bought it.
Re: vinyl records
Has anyone proven / disproven Benn Jordan's video about why vinyl is basically poisonous?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ2czFuIYmQ
I haven't watched it for a while but the summary is:
- Vinyl records outgas harmful things that you can detect with air quality meters. (VOCs I think)
- You can't dispose of them because they can't be recycled and aren't supposed to go in landfills. So buying new records from new bands violates the "reduce, reuse, recycle" principle
"It's just that it's _so_ lame and uncool to shit on vinyl..."
"This is just my objective opinion based on a whole lotta research... If you're an avid collector whose peepee hurts after watching this video, understand that my peepee hurts a whole lot more."
Has anyone proven / disproven Benn Jordan's video about why vinyl is basically poisonous?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ2czFuIYmQ
I haven't watched it for a while but the summary is:
- Vinyl records outgas harmful things that you can detect with air quality meters. (VOCs I think)
- You can't dispose of them because they can't be recycled and aren't supposed to go in landfills. So buying new records from new bands violates the "reduce, reuse, recycle" principle
"It's just that it's _so_ lame and uncool to shit on vinyl..."
"This is just my objective opinion based on a whole lotta research... If you're an avid collector whose peepee hurts after watching this video, understand that my peepee hurts a whole lot more."
I’m not sure about records, but it is well established that vinyl flooring emits various toxic compounds. Apparently it’s mostly other ingredients besides the PVC.
https://floortechie.com/is-vinyl-flooring-toxic/
Just search “vinyl off gassing”.
Here’s an EPA pdf purely about vinyl chloride: https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files...
https://floortechie.com/is-vinyl-flooring-toxic/
Just search “vinyl off gassing”.
Here’s an EPA pdf purely about vinyl chloride: https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files...
This guy was unable to replicate his result and casts some aspersions on the accuracy of the metering technology, however he did find lead residue on one record: https://youtu.be/gx5B44YeRpY
Confirmed. Depending on pvc's point in it's lifecycle, it's either offgassing hydrogen chloride which turns into hydrochloric acid when inhaled, all the way to releasing dioxin when incinerated, and dioxin is considered the most congeners. You can get the same effect when burning your pcb. One of the deadliest fires in US history was the MGM Grand fire in Las Vegas and iirc all of the fatalities were due to the fumes from the burning pvc carpet and none were heat related.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM_Grand_fire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM_Grand_fire
I will guess your average human emits more hazardous VOCs than a vinyl record.
I'd put this down to "someone thinks something is cool and fun! we have to show them how wrong they are!"
I'd put this down to "someone thinks something is cool and fun! we have to show them how wrong they are!"
I'd recommend you read up a more about vinyl - you really aren't treating a very dangerous material seriously enough. PVCs are highly toxic, and at this point there are many regulations to ban their use in plumbing, consumer goods, and especially toys because they are so poisonous. Vinyl records are a hold-out. They leach high levels of phthalates into the air quite quickly which are highly toxic, far, far more toxic than the typical emissions of your average human.
http://www.safemarkets.org/toxic-chemicals-in-products/pvc/v...
http://www.safemarkets.org/toxic-chemicals-in-products/pvc/v...
Yes, but I’d be much more worried about vinyl flooring, trim, windows, and shower curtains than records.
Wise to not have any of the stuff anywhere. The off-gassing from records is nearly instantaneous and reaches measurable levels where it's dangerous within minutes - having the extra surface area for off-gassing from the grooves makes it much worse. A vinyl collection is certainly better than other vinyl things like you mentioned since an album won't off-gas much in its sleeve, but playing one will definitely do a bit of liver damage if you're near it.
> playing one will definitely do a bit of liver damage if you're near it
That sounds a bit exaggerated. There is evidence that occupational exposure to PVC compounds causes liver damage or cancer, and that’s mostly regarding workers in production lines. You’d have to be closely sniffing your record collection for hours on end to get the same effect.
If this was true you’d have entire generations from the 19x0s suffering from liver failure, as vinyl was the only media available, with billions of records sold.
That sounds a bit exaggerated. There is evidence that occupational exposure to PVC compounds causes liver damage or cancer, and that’s mostly regarding workers in production lines. You’d have to be closely sniffing your record collection for hours on end to get the same effect.
If this was true you’d have entire generations from the 19x0s suffering from liver failure, as vinyl was the only media available, with billions of records sold.
I meant a bit in a diminutive sense, since the trace exposure to phthalates and dioxins which you will be exposed to when unsheathing a record will have lasting effects on your liver. They won't be severe, but the liver has to work extremely hard to cope with phthalates and it leaves a mark even if it's just a bit and leaves a trace mark. You're taking the least generous spirit possible while talking about phthalate exposure which has strong and lasting effects on the liver even in trace amounts:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6373551/
Quotes from the 1984 study:
> Livers from rats provided with diet containing 2% DEHP show an increased number of peroxisomes after a few days
> In spite of the lack of direct evidences […] the indications so far obtained are sufficiently unequivocal not to be neglected
> We have reasons to believe that accumulating toxicity is valid for humans
> which means that evaluation of chronic human toxicity cannot be performed until around 2000 to 2020!
From that to “vinyl records will damage your liver” seems like a huge jump.
> Livers from rats provided with diet containing 2% DEHP show an increased number of peroxisomes after a few days
> In spite of the lack of direct evidences […] the indications so far obtained are sufficiently unequivocal not to be neglected
> We have reasons to believe that accumulating toxicity is valid for humans
> which means that evaluation of chronic human toxicity cannot be performed until around 2000 to 2020!
From that to “vinyl records will damage your liver” seems like a huge jump.
I’m sure vinyl records off gas, but I’m extremely dubious about the liver damage you propose. With all substances the poison is in the dose; you’d need a huge vinyl collection to match the amount of vinyl typical in a typical home with a shower curtain and vinyl windows, let alone one that uses vinyl flooring.
You're not going to die or feel any ill effects from a brief exposure to the phthalates and dioxins released by vinyl, but those phthalates and dioxins both hit the liver very hard while dioxins are carcinogens even in trace amounts. It would be wise to avoid even brief contact:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6373551/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6373551/
[deleted]
> I will guess your average human emits more hazardous VOCs than a vinyl record.
As I recall, when Benn did the test, putting the record back in its sleeve caused the air quality to go back to normal.
So whatever VOCs he is emitting, I don't think his meter picked them up.
> I'd put this down to "someone thinks something is cool and fun! we have to show them how wrong they are!"
Re-check the part about "how much my peepee hurts". I really want to like vinyls, but I'm never going to buy one if they're basically Forever Chemicals that got grandfathered in by being part of pop culture decades ago. And Benn says in the video that he could stand to make a lot of money if he sold out and had vinyls of his work manufactured.
As I recall, when Benn did the test, putting the record back in its sleeve caused the air quality to go back to normal.
So whatever VOCs he is emitting, I don't think his meter picked them up.
> I'd put this down to "someone thinks something is cool and fun! we have to show them how wrong they are!"
Re-check the part about "how much my peepee hurts". I really want to like vinyls, but I'm never going to buy one if they're basically Forever Chemicals that got grandfathered in by being part of pop culture decades ago. And Benn says in the video that he could stand to make a lot of money if he sold out and had vinyls of his work manufactured.
But was "normal" based on an earlier meter reading with him in the room? Or a proven baseline that applies in general?
Have any evidence to back that claim up?
And even of its true, reducing VOCs still sounds like a positive goal
And even of its true, reducing VOCs still sounds like a positive goal
[deleted]
Skeuomorphism at work ... :(
The new toy is an insult.
I had the old one as a kid and kept it long enough to take it apart and learn so much...
This one has lessons too, but not the same ones. Maybe just as useful, in a dark way.
I had the old one as a kid and kept it long enough to take it apart and learn so much...
This one has lessons too, but not the same ones. Maybe just as useful, in a dark way.
This is the kind of content I come to Hacker News for.
Funny, then you should know that Foone hates hacker news, mostly because they're appropriating Foone's content to push Hacker News and Y Combinator importance ("stealing links" is how Foone put it).
I highly recommending following Foone on twitter and using the thread unroll app. There's several more years of stuff like this on twitter.
I highly recommending following Foone on twitter and using the thread unroll app. There's several more years of stuff like this on twitter.
Followed on Twitter, but that’s unfortunate that they feel that way. “Stealing links” seems like a fundamental misunderstanding of how the web works. Websites linking to each other is kind of the whole point.
The future of cargo cults is now!
something something baudrillard, especially the music box
Better readability -
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1454230585933631488.html
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1454230585933631488.html
God I love foone
How does Foone spend so much time on all these "here's something interesting I found, now it's a 12-hour-long deep-dive into something I never thought I could care passionately about" things and still have a job?
Turing's living the dream... (the family name has to be a coincidence, right?)
Turing's living the dream... (the family name has to be a coincidence, right?)
they use they, not he, but they have a lot of followers on ko-fi! https://ko-fi.com/fooneturing
Do they have a day job? I thought they lived off their Patreon. They definitely changed their first and last name at some point, I remember a Twitter thread mentioning it.
They're a Continuous Integrator at Backblaze, according to their LinkedIn.
Is it multiple people writing the Twitter posts?
Yes honestly one of the most entertaining follows on twitter
And foone hates HN and wishes his tweets would stop being posted here lol.
Summary of stated justifications: [1]
* Foone likes to do tweet storms and not blogs and some people on HN have a "Why isn't this a blog?" sentiment which is bothersome to foone.
* HN scraping bots on twitter mention foone which is bothersome to foone.
* HN community frequently assumes he/him for foone. Foone goes by they/them. This does not seem to bother foone on its own, but HN commenters correcting HN commenters about how foone goes by they/them sometimes leads to grammatical argument about using they as a singular pronoun which is bothersome to foone.
* Generally, discourse beyond "whoops sorry!" about he/him/they/them is bothersome to foone.
* Elements of HN discourse represent larger problems of male-dominant sexism that are trenchant in technology, which are bothersome to foone.
[1] https://twitter.com/foone/status/1440375176604966924?lang=en
* Foone likes to do tweet storms and not blogs and some people on HN have a "Why isn't this a blog?" sentiment which is bothersome to foone.
* HN scraping bots on twitter mention foone which is bothersome to foone.
* HN community frequently assumes he/him for foone. Foone goes by they/them. This does not seem to bother foone on its own, but HN commenters correcting HN commenters about how foone goes by they/them sometimes leads to grammatical argument about using they as a singular pronoun which is bothersome to foone.
* Generally, discourse beyond "whoops sorry!" about he/him/they/them is bothersome to foone.
* Elements of HN discourse represent larger problems of male-dominant sexism that are trenchant in technology, which are bothersome to foone.
[1] https://twitter.com/foone/status/1440375176604966924?lang=en
On the plus side, at least right now as I write this (the post has been up for 5 hours, with 96 comments), there is, in this HN post:
* No mention of the Twitter thread being better as a blog post, and someone has already posted a Thread Reader App link with the thread unrolled.
* A single instance of someone getting corrected for misgendering, but with no follow-ups or toxic discussion around it.
So maybe things are getting better?
But really, though, I just kinda find foone's annoyance about being posted on HN to be annoying in and of itself. The bot @-mentions I agree are annoying (and I don't know of a good solution; playing ban whack-a-mole every time a new one pops up is lame to have to do), but the other bits have a simple solution: don't read the HN comments. I know sometimes it's hard to resist the temptation, but I personally appreciate these foone threads getting posted here (as I don't really use Twitter much, so I wouldn't otherwise see them). And it's just a little weird to criticize people for linking to something you posted on the web, since linking is what the web is for.
* No mention of the Twitter thread being better as a blog post, and someone has already posted a Thread Reader App link with the thread unrolled.
* A single instance of someone getting corrected for misgendering, but with no follow-ups or toxic discussion around it.
So maybe things are getting better?
But really, though, I just kinda find foone's annoyance about being posted on HN to be annoying in and of itself. The bot @-mentions I agree are annoying (and I don't know of a good solution; playing ban whack-a-mole every time a new one pops up is lame to have to do), but the other bits have a simple solution: don't read the HN comments. I know sometimes it's hard to resist the temptation, but I personally appreciate these foone threads getting posted here (as I don't really use Twitter much, so I wouldn't otherwise see them). And it's just a little weird to criticize people for linking to something you posted on the web, since linking is what the web is for.
> So yeah. The original one required you to crank it up to spin the disc, because spinning the disc was vital to the operation of the original music box.
> The modern "classic" one requires you to crank it up, because it won't start playing until you've cranked it up.
Maybe I'm just cranky today. But this quote perfectly encapsulates so much of what's wrong with a lot of modern technology.
> The modern "classic" one requires you to crank it up, because it won't start playing until you've cranked it up.
Maybe I'm just cranky today. But this quote perfectly encapsulates so much of what's wrong with a lot of modern technology.
Skeuomorphism is a time honored tradition, eg folders in a filesystem. Users often find its use is annoying, but other times it's a necessary analogy for users to make sense of the UX.
This isn't skeumorphism, it's just fake.
An adult fake design is the Linea Mini espresso machine by La Marzocco. I’d like one, but having a fake brew paddle on a machine in that price range makes me back away. The paddle is just an on/off switch.
https://international.lamarzocco.com/en/machine/linea-mini/
https://international.lamarzocco.com/en/machine/linea-mini/
It is an intentionally skeuomorphic design, critical to its entertainment value as a toy. A simple box with a play button would not fulfill the same goals.
Toys should have educational as well as entertainment value; this is because playfulness in young mammals (including humans) is a preparation for adulthood. The old toy achieved this as it was a mechanical machine for making sound.
The new one is just a fake, a lie. The only thing it teaches kids is that technology is incomprehensible magic that they shouldn't try to understand, a form of learned helplessness where people only rights/abilities with respect to technology is to buy it from big corporations. This is contemptible and disgusting.
The new one is just a fake, a lie. The only thing it teaches kids is that technology is incomprehensible magic that they shouldn't try to understand, a form of learned helplessness where people only rights/abilities with respect to technology is to buy it from big corporations. This is contemptible and disgusting.
I don't disagree. Bad toys lack educational value, and this is a bad toy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeuomorph
>A skeuomorph (also spelled skiamorph, /ˈskjuːəˌmɔːrf, ˈskjuːoʊ-/)[1][2] is a derivative object that retains ornamental design cues (attributes) from structures that were necessary in the original. Examples include pottery embellished with imitation rivets reminiscent of similar pots made of metal and a software calendar that imitates the appearance of binding on a paper desk calendar.
>A skeuomorph (also spelled skiamorph, /ˈskjuːəˌmɔːrf, ˈskjuːoʊ-/)[1][2] is a derivative object that retains ornamental design cues (attributes) from structures that were necessary in the original. Examples include pottery embellished with imitation rivets reminiscent of similar pots made of metal and a software calendar that imitates the appearance of binding on a paper desk calendar.
This isn't just an artistic decision though. The product gives the impression that it's an actual functioning record player, like the old one.
No. This toy "gives the impression that it's an actual functioning record player", even though it isn't. The old one was an actual functioning record player. Or at least a cross between a record player and a music box. But the point is: the old one was actually playing music off the disks, the new one only pretends to do it.
cranking it up increases 'engagement', probably
the limits of a design should be when it actively makes an object less functional. Car designers in particular blithely ignore this. This is another good example.
Someone out there thinks this is better.
Probably just cheaper.
I wonder if this was originally planned to be more like the original with songs mechanically encoded in the disks but they either found the cheap microswitches in the tone arm to not have the right reaction speed or they realized developing the sound generation for the IC took too long/needed a more powerful+expensive micro controller so they went with this instead.
Not sure what you mean. The original had no electronic parts. It was basically a hand-wound music box with interchangeable discs.
More reliable too. The old music player was far more resilient compared to a non-toy, but still suffered from gunk/grime on both the records and pin.
Right, a fully mechanical version would have far higher DPPM, and as a result likely not be profitable.
I don’t understand how it could be made profitably 50 years ago but not today.
It's not a question of being profitable or not profitable, but of being profitable or more profitable. Also the market situation probably is very different, nowdays there is most likely more demand for cheaper toys and more competitive pressure to keep prices down.
Am I the only one who loves the meme that Foone hates being on the front page and always ends up on the front page? :D
why is this a twitter thread? why not a blog?
Because that's how the author chose to write it.
Because that's where the audience they write for is.
Because they prefer Twitter threads to blog posts.
Because they get more readers that way.
(And probably anyone here can come up with some more reasons that might be true if they put their minds to it.)
But mostly, the format someone chooses to make this available in is the least interesting thing about it.
Because that's where the audience they write for is.
Because they prefer Twitter threads to blog posts.
Because they get more readers that way.
(And probably anyone here can come up with some more reasons that might be true if they put their minds to it.)
But mostly, the format someone chooses to make this available in is the least interesting thing about it.
I love that absolutely no one got the joke.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Foone/status/1454530751475552256
Foone is a sociopath who doesn't feel certain words should be used to refer to Foone because they don't like them. In fact no one should talk about Foone ever.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Foone/status/1454530751475552256
Foone is a sociopath who doesn't feel certain words should be used to refer to Foone because they don't like them. In fact no one should talk about Foone ever.
It's unfortunate, as soon as I saw it was Twitter and waiting for the page to load I left and opted to skip reading this one.
robbiet480(1)
That's just sickening. I'm disgusted to my core.
I remember trying to get the spin faster/slower, stopping the spring, etc.
Since it required no batteries it was always working, even when you found it at the bottom of toy bin after months/years.
This modern version is a complete scam, especially since the outside look seems absolutely identical to the original. I'd be very disappointed if I bought one for a toddler, only to realize when unboxing it's crap.
By the way, we still have the original toy from my childhood. It's been passed around to relatives, but last I heard, it still works after what must be almost 40 years.