Seems to depend where you’re located. US here:

Cars and airplanes do have 3D printed parts. They’re much more common in the prototyping phase, but they are used in production and are making their way to space.

I completely agree with your general sentiment though. Any time a new piece of technology shows promise there are a ton of people who will loudly proclame that it will completely replace <old and busted technology> in <a massive amount of areas> while turning a blind eye to things like scaling and/or practical limitations.

See also: low/no code, which has roots going back to the 1980s at least.

I agree with you on planned obsolescence, but I think there’s more to the story. The quantity of things/conveniences in our lives is greater than at any point in history. We have two younger kids and the quantity of… junk they have is astounding. As parents, we’ve sought out lower quality/throw away/gimmicky toys for things like goodie bags at birthday parties. Sticky hands, silicone squeeze toys, etc. To some extent, the internet is contributing to this since shipping and handling aren’t free and buying a single fidget spinner for $5 doesn’t sound like a good deal when you can get a bag of them for $8.

There are also plenty of instances of people replacing perfectly functional items because the newer version became available. People buy them for status or for a perceived increase in convince/quality. This is true for compute/tech, but has been extending into things like smart home (replacing a functional light-bulb, switch, doorbell, thermostat etc for a IoT device). I get that some people are into these things, but it seems disingenuous to say that the only thing driving this is planned obsolescence.

We have to move toward less carbon intensive means of production, but we also need to figure out how to change the endless stream of “better/faster/newer” that people feel compelled to purchase.

I think the idea was “reduce consumption”. As a society we buy tons of stuff, way more than 50 or 100 years ago.