I think we could agree that generally speaking, most for products being sold today, there is some truth to the fact that they don't last as long, and yes, we can see in a design like this some engineering choices that can potentially accelerate failures, but I think that going for the big conspiracy theories of pre planned obsolescence is a bit far fetch. Cost cutting measures, yes. Clearly, when you look at the mechanical assembly of this M28, it's clearly something made to be repaired, not disposable in an eventual failure. I believe that all manufacturers, except the the full cost no object, no compromise approach, all have to go trough their design, parts by parts and try to make it cheaper. This part is healty, it's much easier to make a design if you have zero cost restriction. Now yes cutting costs in a way that will not compromise performance beyond their specifications/performance goals, generally takes priority of extending the life span, True. but a company that don't make this exercice and just throw whatever is best and try to be competitive price wise will not survive. Still, this is not Apple here, this is Nad, Apple knows that when your phone is obsolete, you'll get another one. Nad knows that if their amps are unreliable, their reputation will suffer. Totally different. I'm not saying that they are immune to bad engineering choices, but they file it in the mistake drawer, It's not something they would want, to make your product die prematurely.