Thanks to Ben for pointing out another case of them just not making stuff like they used to

In this case the "stuff" is the Apple iPod, which has a rechargeable battery. Because of the Apple "closed architecture" philosophy you need to shell out a significant portion of the original purchase price to replace the battery if it no longer recharges very well. This issue seems to have caused a media backlash fueled by a home movie (made on a Mac) created by one very irate customer.

On the one hand, the anger isn't entirely fair. If you busted the LCD on a portable electronic device, or the hard drive, or any part of the motherboard then you'd be okay with having to shell out $60-$100 to fix it. Somehow because its a battery, this is not acceptable. What if they had called it the "DiLithium Power Core"? I bet people wouldn't get so grouchy then.

On the other hand, quality and longevity issues are an inevitable result of the relentless pursuit of "cheaper, cheaper, cheaper." Am I saying that you get what you pay for? Yes and no. The market will fix low quality in one of two ways (not exclusive) either a market will develop for a premium-priced higher-quality, longer-lasting product or a producer will price the low-quality product such that the item is not longer considered a consumable. Would you pay $75 for a new PDA every year? Probably.

Of course, human inventiveness and human unreasonable expectations leave open the possibly that some clever design and engineering team will create an MP3 player that is nigh indestructible, holds terrabytes of storage, costs only a nickel, and steals the songs and movies right out of the studios without any possibility of detection. Then the music and film industry folds. In the ensuing dark age, mankind is replaced by generous, kind, and peace-loving hyper-intelligent roaches.