←back to thread

413 points samclemens | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.205s | source
Show context
pistoleer ◴[] No.41856374[source]
It surprises me to read about "fixed metal frame" awnings. You don't _have_ to make that trade off.

In the Netherlands a lot of houses have electrically retractable awnings (or even just mechanically windable by hand), especially above the giant windows facing the back yard.

During winter and bad weather, we retract the awning. When it's too sunny, we deploy it.

typical row house layout with big windows on both sides: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doorzonwoning

retractable awning: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zonnescherm

replies(7): >>41856655 #>>41856798 #>>41857327 #>>41857558 #>>41857924 #>>41858177 #>>41861411 #
dumbo-octopus ◴[] No.41856655[source]
We have them in america too. But every moving part comes with inflated costs for both acquisition and ongoing maintenance.
replies(3): >>41856679 #>>41856685 #>>41858309 #
pistoleer ◴[] No.41856685[source]
In the Netherlands it costs around a grand, as for maintenance... Haven't needed to do any in more than 15 years. The actual screen retracts into a weather proof metal casing, so there's not that much that goes wrong, whereas fixed awnings are exposed to the full weather gamut 24/7.

Let me put it this way: it's cheap enough that a lot of social housing and other cheap forms of housing inhabited by the "lower class" feature them.

replies(2): >>41856747 #>>41857614 #
dumbo-octopus ◴[] No.41856747[source]
A government paying for a thing does not in any way imply that the thing is a good use of money. How many decades of fabric replacements could you get from the savings of bolting on a simple metal frame as compared to an elaborate electromechanically actuated arm mechanism?
replies(5): >>41856873 #>>41856877 #>>41856973 #>>41856997 #>>41857020 #
pistoleer ◴[] No.41856973[source]
> A government paying for a thing does not in any way imply that the thing is a good use of money.

Agreed, nor is the inverse implied of course. But what is your point?

> How many decades of fabric replacements could you get from the savings of bolting on a simple metal frame as compared to an elaborate electromechanically actuated arm mechanism?

That's what I'm saying, fabric doesn't really need to get replaced in 15 years and going from personal experience. The mechanism is simple enough to be reliable as well.

Ultimately, it's impossible to analyze the cost benefits of this. It's a matter of personal taste and what the harshness of the local climate allows. I don't doubt that fixed awnings are cheaper - but actuating awnings fix their drawbacks, and the maintenance they introduce is minimal in my experience. And frankly, for the price of giving up a single vacation in 15+ years, it's not that expensive. Again, cheap enough that those in social housing can make the choice to get them installed.

ETA: my point of mentioning social housing is to say that people with lower income can still get them. The government doesn't pay for it. I just wanted to paint a picture of the relative cost.

replies(1): >>41857005 #
dumbo-octopus ◴[] No.41857005[source]
What is your point in stating that public housing uses them? (aka the government buys them).

No clue why this turned into a huge debate. I don’t have a dog in this fight, all I’m saying is that america has retractable awnings, they have some downsides, and a government (or a “low class” individual) buying something doesn’t convince me it’s a good investment.

replies(1): >>41857131 #
1. kuschku ◴[] No.41857131[source]
> What is your point in stating that public housing uses them? (aka the government buys them).

Who said anything about the government buying them? The renters in public housing usually buy and install them by themselves. That's why usually every balcony has a different type of awning, in a different state of disrepair.

While I'm nowadays in IT, when I was a child our family lived in this type of public housing, and we had a retractable awning of exactly that kind that my parents had installed themselves.