Well first you have to reach manufacturing quality standards where a product is robust and durable.
There is a cost associated with that quality control. During Soviet times the planned economy did not encourage quality manufacturing. Designs were created for utility and ease of volume manufacture in order to meet quotas of a planned economy. There was no consumer economy, no market selection. Quality control was rudimentary. Consumers would look for clues. They knew how the factories worked with monthly quotas. Standards were sloppy at the beginning of the month, crazy busy at the end to meet the quota. So a manufacturing date in the middle of the month was preferred.
Built in obsolescence emerges in market economies where the market has been distorted by manufacturers colluding to defraud the public by operating as a cartel. The intention is to lower design standards to stimulate demand for replacement products.
If you have a large manufacturing capacity that is greater than the market demand, then there is pressure to resort to such methods. Standards and market regulation are intended to stop such practices. But manufacturers can and do capture regulatory processes by political lobbying and representation on standards boards.
Built in obsolescence is not the only trick. For more expensive items, there are profits to be made on maintenance and servicing. The auto industry is a famous example of this and it is being brought into stark relief with the transition from high maintenance ICE vehicles to low maintenance EVs and cost of ownership comparisons.
Personal computers are another interesting example. Designs for the consumer market are of a very different standard compared to those intended for the corporate market. You want consumers to come back in a year or so and buy another laptop. However selling to a corporation, where you may have a maintenance contract, the dynamics are different. You want them to be robust and repairable to lower maintenance costs and so maximise maintenance income. I buy second hand Thinkpads and HP laptops originally sold to the
corporate market for this reason. Their consumer models are very different - much more difficult to repair or upgrade.
There are signs that this is changing. Governments are becoming concerned about the mountain of electronic waste that has to be disposed of each year. There is a cost to designed obsolescence and manufactures may be required bear the cost of disposal or recycling.
These syndromes arise from the economics of manufacturing and they are common in consumer mass markets, especially those that are highly price sensitive.
You want a washing machine that lasts for a decade or more? You buy an expensive Miele or another quality manufacturer. You want cheap? Then buy from one of the usual suspects who all use the same cheap parts that tend to fail after a few years.
The light bulb example is often taken because it is a very simple product. Reliability can improved by rigorous quality control and optimised design. But any technology has limits to its performance in a product. This becomes clear when the technology changes. So it is with light bulbs and the transition from incandescent to LED. If light bulb manufacturers could secretly make incandescent bulbs which lasted a hundred years, then surely we would see them emerge onto the market to see off LEDs and protect their investment? That clearly has not happened.
There are some that imagine there are all sorts of wonderous inventions that are kept hidden from the world because of the evil corporations intent on defrauding the public. That story will never die.