> I will note that when I forget and leave clothes after a wash for more than a day, they do get a slight mildew smell. The same thing happens with the top loader at my in-laws. Another wash gets rid of it in both cases.
"More than a day?" It's about 3 hours for me. If I leave it more than a day, I need to run a load with bleach to get rid of the smell. Maybe I just have a terrible front-loader.
Mainly it's just everybody grew up using top-loaders, though it's also easier to get clothes in and out of a top-loader than a front (unless you have a huge machine). [edit]Oh, and also the up-front cost of a top-loader was about $100 less when I last bought a machine.
I've used a front-loader now for years and the only thing I really miss from my top-loader is that I could just leave the lid open for it to dry out. The door of the front-loader is perennially in the way if you leave it wide open, so we have to prop it open to prevent mildew.
I once had top-loader in the bathroom of an apartment that I lived in by myself.
Leaving the lid wide open was a pretty great way of living life. I'd shed my clothes to take a shower and just toss them directly into the washing machine. When it came time to start a load it was a simple matter to put some soap in and push start.
I dunno why anyone would want a front loader. If the seal fails, you have water on your floor. If the machine fails during the wash cycle, again, no way to easily get your clothes out without getting water on the floor. If a top loader fails, neither of these things can happen.
Got a new LG washer, but some clothing item with a metal button got stuck between the seal and tore a bit of it off, causing leaks. A new seal from LG isn't too expensive, about ~$70, however, it requires the entire front and top of the machine to be removed, so it's not a cheap operation (When hiring someone to fix it).
I don't think I'd ever pick a top loader still, but front loading machines do seem to fail in more annoying ways.
Seals rarely fail, this is not a realistic problem. The water level during wash is mostly lower than the seal, only during rinse cycles does it reach above the seal. If the machine fails for some reason during a cycle it can be drained through a drain hose which uses nothing more than gravity.
Front loaders use less water and with that less energy (which mostly goes into heating water), are less likely to tear clothes, have higher spin cycle speeds (1400 to 1600 rpm vs. 600-800 for top loaders) and can be (and often are) stacked.
Why would anyone want a top loader? What is the advantage other than the supposedly greater ease of loading which is negated by putting the front loader on a pedestal? I see no advantages, only disadvantages. It is not as if we never had the choice between these types as I remember them from the laundromat some 55 years ago. They were phased out, most likely for the reasons stated above.
Given the choice between a front loader or top loader without an agitator, the front loader wins easily. They use less water and do a much better job cleaning.
I will note that the locking mechanism on my LG is quite strong. I tried to get past the safety lock (for high-temp washes) but couldn't get in. And in the case of catastrophic failure, you'll have much less water (and weight) to deal with vs the top load.
I think the idea is that most people have more space vertically than horizontally and like to stack appliances, e.g. washer on the bottom, dryer on top
In other words, they're so gentle they barely clean lightly-soiled clothes, and that's why they also use much less water; forget about heavy soiling or thicker textiles. For true cleaning, you need a top-loader that submerges them in detergent water and actually forces it through the materials with an agitator.
One thing I love about top-loaders is that if you’ve found a piece of laundry you forgot, you can just throw it in mid-cycle. Not necessarily ideal but hey.
The older ones usually make you wait for a minute or two before the door is unlocked. I have one in my current apartment that doesn’t do that, but I’ve tried it a couple times and it does spill some water when you open it.
With top-loaders, you don’t even have to pause, the lid is always open; and the water stays inside, obviously.
With both my 2006 Whirlpool front loader (trash) and 2022 LG front loader (excellent), the duration from when you press the "pause" button to when the agitator stops and the door unlocks is approximately one second. No water is spilled.
How do you do that without the water spilling out? Or do you mean waiting for it to drain, opening it, and then refilling (along with more detergent, having wasted the previous dose)?
The water level in a front loading washing machine is lower than the door seal. The seal only contains splashing water from the agitation. You hit the "pause" button, it stops agitating and unlocks the door, you throw your skidmarks in the washer, you close the door and press "start".
Since gravity continues to act in a downward direction, yes, the water stays pooled at the bottom of the drum and does not teleport upwards and outwards.
It works well but takes up more space because you can't stack washer/dryer, in Europe apartments and houses are a bit smaller so if you can save a square meter then that's good.
An apartment I’ve rented in Vietnam had a top-loader with a drying program. I think it put a stream of (cold) air through the clothes while spinning somehow, and IIRC the clothes were not completely dry at the end, but definitely closer than just after a spin. (I think if they’ve added a dehumidifier to the process it would work just as well as a standalone dryer!)
Front loaders also get moldy and stink because they have to be sealed up so tightly. If you're not there to immediately pull out the clothes after the cycle, you're screwed. And in a small laundry room there isn't always room to let the door stay open to dry out the inside.
In my experience with front-loaders, all of these are non-problems.
But my understanding is that top-loaders are always inefficient: they have to use a lot more water, because the clothes have to be submerged, and thus they also have to use a lot more energy to heat it.
They use more water because they do a much better job at cleaning than side-loaders, especially the new "high efficiency" ones that seem to barely work. Just look at all the complaints online.
and thus they also have to use a lot more energy to heat it.
This statement just makes me think of a line from The Diamond Age in which two kids in a post-nanotech future first see a scrap of hand-woven cloth and after thinking decide that it must have been made by nanomachines because no human could make something so regular.
> Because there are two games going on, and they have different winners. In the code game the resource is the software itself, and free wins every time, because anybody can copy code, so any attempt to charge for it invites a copy that doesn't. In the supply game the resource is not having to think about where the code comes from, and that game is won by whoever is the default.
This is, IMO misdiagnosing what's going on. Spending money is always friction. The number of ICs that can spend 4 figures of company money on a whim is much smaller than the number of ICs that can download libre software on a whim.
Then once the company knows they are using the libre software and it adds value, people who can spend large sums of company money will want to do so to protect that value.
That's a question without a good answer; compare asking the same question about e.g. Thomas Road Baptist Church (minus the "Bay Area" part).
Many members of the Effective Altruism movement have given away substantial fractions of their income to e.g. paying for mosquito nets in Africa. A non-trivial fraction have donated a kidney to a stranger. They're also an onanistic Bay Area group.
Because getting your stuff upstreamed in Linux is more work than releasing a custom kernel.
reply