> What they’re doing currently is forcing their early-adopter customers to bear the risks of the new technology.
We generally call this "being an early adopter."
We generally call this "being an early adopter."
I'm not even sure "looking cool" was a factor in some of the worst ones. "Winning industrial design awards for being thinner than possible" stands out to me. In pursuit of that, they had four years worth of laptop keyboards that didn't work long term, and got rid of the most amazing feature ever for laptop charging (MagSafe), to thin things out further with USB-C. Not a bad connector, but definitely a bad charging connector compared to MagSafe for people with kids, pets, etc.
I'm glad they've gone back to a laptop that seems to work, but... I've lost interest.
Was it the Apple // era, Macs, iPods, iPhones, iPads, Watches, AirPods, etc?
What feature phone in 2021 has anything that a modern consumer would find acceptable?
I’ve had Androïd for a decade after Apple forced an update to the iPhone 3G that made it so slow you couldn’t even dial a number anymore.
But a couple years ago, I bought a used iPhone 6s because I got tired of the Androïd flakiness and lack of quality in general. All my trust in google also eroded over time.
I don’t regret jumping ships again. The iPhone works well, I can still block all ads (except in the YouTube app) using nextdns.io, my 6 years old iPhone still gets updates and runs well. The only thing I miss is newpipe but the trade off was worth it.
The 50$ China androids you mention are riddled with spyware and provide few or no updates once the phone has been released. Then you have to deal with alternative roms if they exist which means you’re spending more time making your phone work that actually being able to use it normally.
Not saying it can appeal to some but it’s not for everyone if you want something that just works and is affordable.
I paid 200$ for my used iPhone 2 years ago and I’m keeping it until they stop proving iOS updates AND then new features in the new iOS would actually be useful to me.
I replaced the battery myself last year (cost 10$ + the ifixit tool set for 70$ which I’ve used many times to fix other things). It’s not quite 50$ but it’s not 1000$ either.
Edit: not talking about MacBooks. This is a completely different story with brain dead decisions to look good even if it fails constantly (their shitty keyboards of the last 4–5 years) or refusing to even acknowledge let alone fix serious issues (like that MacBook with the gpu desoldering itself and failing in groves while apple was saying lalalalala and ignoring the problem for YEARS. I won’t ever buy a MacBook, they’re not good value and I don’t trust Apple to make good decisions about them or own up their mistakes with them. Plus they cost multiples more than a decent used laptop or workstation on which you can run Linux and upgrade components whenever needed so it can last you 5–10 years.
No one owes you anything. Furthermore all applicable warranties are communicated at time of purchase.
Bottom line, if the risk adjusted return is not worth it, then don't buy it. You may not be an early adopter
i.e. the reversed burden of proof during the first 6 months, where it is assumed the device is at fault, and they supplier has to prove it is not.
So in this case I'd agree, I see little proof just an assertion, and would suggest they institute the process for their equivalent of a Small Claims Court case.
This is in the EU, where manufacturers are required to provide a two year guarantee [0], which can't be voluntarily opted out of.
[0] https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/gua...
Well yeah. Buying something early is the most expensive time to buy it. The inefficiencies haven't been worked out of the manufacturing process yet, and there's not an established wide customer base to spread the R&D over yet.
Radios in the 1920s cost over 100 hours of wages for a lot of people. TVs in the 50s were stupid expensive. Computers in the early 60s were literally hundreds of thousands of dollars. And all of these things were pretty garbage compared to what you think of today. Hell, the computer from the early 60s could probably lose a math race to a seasoned abacus veteran.
In exchange for the high risk and high payment, you get to play with something that might be cool, and you get bragging rights (depending on your personality type, one of these might excite you more than the other).
> Any decent company would fix it, full stop.
Well, probably. I'm not going to defend samsung here. They're acting pretty garbage.
But the point about new tech being risky, is entirely fair. If something's still exciting, it's probably a good idea for the risk-averse to avoid it.
How is this remotely like the life changing effect of getting a radio or tv?
The point was that it was all 4 together of: expensive, immature, unsupported, and not sold as unsupported.
It was sold with a standard warranty like any product, yet in reality they just deny the claim no matter how valid.
The expense only means that's why you care, that they take your money which did not break on them a few weeks later, and don't honor their promises.
I try to get gen 2 or later after a new revision.
I made an exception with my current car because all the electronics are new which to be frank are probably the biggest risk, but Isuzu engines, drive trains and gear boxes have barely changed in 10+ years. And they're the parts I'm more worried about and the 6 year warranty covers everything else.
But as you said, the same reliability can never be expected in consumables like computers, phones and the like.
Seems like you're saying a person who bought a thousand euro phone and couldn't get it repaired under warranty after a month of mild use is "risk-averse" if they dislike that experience.
Would a truly non-risk-averse person be overjoyed by this experience or see no problem with it? Would they accept it as the price they pay for being an early adopter and see no reason to complain? I'm confused.
I'm saying that a person who is risk-averse should probably avoid this. There aren't very many third party repair places yet, so you're completely at the mercy of a single company.
There's also an increased risk if said company is based outside your country (or supra-national political union, should you live in one). It's harder for a country to force a company in another jurisdiction into compliance.
> As with any new technology it takes time to iron out early problems. Things break, need to be fixed, improved etc. That’s all fine! I wasn’t angry when the phone broke, I was angry when it wasn’t repaired.
That the phone might break is inherent in the fact that it's a new technology. The question is who pays for it when it does, the customer or the manufacturer.
I was an early adopter of a Chumby (damn I loved that thing). The risk I took was that they would go out of business and no longer support the eco system - that risk proved real.
I can accept taking a risk and it not working out, this is taking one risk and having the company try and pin other risks on you.
Blaming the customer for your weak ass product is not the early-adopter risk, its the caveat emptor / screw you risk. I reject the idea that early adopter means accepting bad quality.
I recently had an issue with my car (A volvo for what it matters) with some painted plastic pealing. It was the first model year, I wasn't surprised, things need to get worked out...the early adopter risk is from them working things out. I took it in and they initially rejected the warranty claim and blamed me. I offered to have a paint chemist friend look at it and do an analysis - that changed their tune quickly. The early adopter risk I took was to my time that there might be some manufacturing quirks...not to them being sleazy about standing by their products.
Yes, I think vendors should not have put this out on the market, but it seems people were very happy to pay for such a gimmick.
To me it was obvious this was a giant failure point. It's not risky when you know it's going to fail. Maybe a tradeoff is a better name for it.
Better to wait for it to mature first in newer versions than to jump into the hype squad and leave disappointed.
But the model number mentioned in the post resolves to "Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G" which sounds not "first edition"? According to wikipedia samsung's first foldable phone came out in 2019.
Now the first Apple Watch…
> There you go. Never buy the first edition of a new product innovation or technology.