Huh, I had the TVs that I bought in the 90s well into the 00s, and only reason it broke was the material for the casing was crumbling.

I also have both my HDTV one is from 5 years ago, and one is from 8 years ago working at perfect condition. TVs I want to upgrade much lesser degree, however mobile I do upgrade every 2 years, because I have an upgrade option on my phone plan. 

It was Sharp, my 8 year old LCD is also Sharp. 

Ya I know, and I am like that with phones, not that they do not work, just that I have silly upgrade options and I take advantage of them. I am planning on getting Pixel next month. 

As for consoles, the New3DS is the first time I bought something really like that for video game hardware side of that. I gave my 3DS to my close friend. 

Not sure what quality TV's you were buying. I still have my Sony Trinitron from the 90's (working in office), weighs 40kg and takes up too much room but can't bring myself to throw it away. I still have my first Panasonic Plasma (at my mothers now) purchased just prior to 2000, still have my Samsung and my newer Panasonic plasma, the only TV I have that died was a Panasonic plasma when my house got hit by lightning.

regardless the reality is planned obsolescence is a necessary evil, without you will need to pay a much higher price for items as with the cost of research means profit margins would need to be much much higher.

It depends. I generally don't care about obsolescence through new formats or improved models of existing products/formats (things like SD to HD video, VHS to DVD, PS3 to PS4, etc.); however, I definitely disagree with the concept of companies building their products to purposefully fail after a set amount of time (if that actually happens).

I'm not someone that needs or desires the newest technology though. I'm still using a smartphone from 2011, a laptop from 2011, a 1080p LCD from 2013, a 720p LCD from 2009, a desktop from 2007 and two old CRTs from the mid-to-late 90s. I have no plans to upgrade to a new smartphone, laptop or desktop any time soon and I'm content with all four of the TVs I currently own too. It's also why I largely don't care about the New 3DS, Xbox One S, Scorpio or PS4 Pro as I already have launch models of all three platforms and don't currently see any reason to upgrade (that may change if software starts suffering even more on the older hardware, as has been the case with some 3DS titles).

Usually when my things break is because I don't give a shit about maintenance. Things break when they break and I couldn't even tell if it was my fault or planned obsolescence.

I also have an urge for cutting edge technology so I don't mind cycling through my hardware regularly. Someone has to keep the economy running.

I dont think thats very true to TVs at least.I still have my TV for the last five years or so and it is still in great condition(as far as I can tell).But phones in another hand....

I think it depends on the market.As I said, I think phones do that.I had an old phone that I got from my dad that was more than 10 years old, and worked perfectly, even in places that modern phones didnt work.It ended up breaking, but that took an eternity to happen.Phones nowadays though...

All our lightbulbs are those LED light ones, that use 1/10th of the power and last 20+years instead, and generate much less heat.

However they do cost like 4-5times as much as the normal ones, but imo worth it.

1100+ lumens for 75watts of power with a normal bulb, vs 8watts or so with a LEB lightbulb.

The powerbill alone will earn back its higher cost, and the fact that they basically never break, and last so damn long makes them a much better buy.

I'm all for it because it forces all of you to buy new things so that the last models price drops for me when it's discontinued.
Thank you.

Planned obsolescence is bullsh*t and a pure conspiracy theory. The reality is that if you want an electronic device to work for life (or a long time), you have to pay a huge price. You don't want to pay thousands of dollars for a TV? Then expect some of the parts to fail after a while. That's basic engineering. You can't put anything of an unnecessary quality in a product because it costs a lot. So you put something of an acceptable quality instead. And the more parts there are in a product, the more chance it has to fail one day or another. So today's cars full of electronic devices are a lot more likely to stop working than cars from a long time ago with no electronics and a lot fewer parts. And this without mentioning the more likely production defects (more parts, more production steps, more likely defects). And for the "warranty conspiracy" a lot of people talk about too to "prove" the planned obsolescence, it's just as easy, companies run failure tests for each products. You have a failure spike at the beginning of the product life cycle (production defects), then almost no failures for a while, and then a new spike when you attain the end life of some parts. The goal of the warranty is to insure the first spike and part of the "almost no failures" period, but not the last spike (or it would cost a lot of money to the companies). So yes, your product is more likely to fail right after you buy it and after the end of the warranty.

All of this comes from production costs and engineering issues, nothing to do with the so-called "planned obsolescence". There is no conspiracy to kill your product after a planned period in order to force you to buy a new one. And the fact that a lot of people are stupid enough to buy an iPhone every year because the camera has 1MP more, even when their current phone still works, has nothing to do with planned obsolescence either, it's just peer pressure and pure stupidity. I've had some products (TV, computer...) for 10 years and they still work, the only reason to change is if we want something better and more modern, not because of a planned obsolescence.