I would think they are selling you the complete package and would hope they be held accountable to that whole package, but not to each part on its own.
You would think wrong, then!
It would be like someone replacing the engine in their car with another one of their making and then asking the auto manufacturer to still uphold the warranty.
Exactly, and the auto manufacturer does still have to uphold the warranty unless it can prove that the new engine caused whatever else to break (or unless the new engine itself is what broke).
Believe it or not, that is actually how it works!!!
Or maybe someone else buys the old engine and puts it in another car and wants the warranty on that, too. Where does it end?
That's an interesting question I've never thought about before. But it stands to reason that if the engineless car retains its warranty (and it does), then the carless engine does too. The warranty doesn't extend to encompass the new engine (or new car) though -- it ends as it normally would, when its term expires or the item(s) are destroyed by non-covered events.
There's no reason why a similar rule shouldn't be applied to consumer electronics.
The same rule -- namely, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act -- does apply to consumer electronics. In fact, it applies to all "consumer products," which are defined in the Act as "any tangible personal property which is distributed in commerce and which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes."
Note that many expensive brands offer excellent warranties. Break a Snap-On wrench and it will get replaced even if you intentionally cut it in half. Others are still good, just less so.
Pretty sure the warranty on Sears Craftsman hand tools is like that too. Speaking of which: you know the difference between Craftsman and Evolv (a cheaper Sears tool brand)? They both have lifetime warranties, but with Craftsman you only need to bring in the tool while with Evolv you need to bring in the tool and the receipt.
If you install some 3rd party OS on your iPhone that creams the cpu and it, say, discolours the screen, or maybe cracks the case - then surely you can't expect a warranty replacement?
If the device doesn't have a hardware failsafe (similar to your laptop), then the design is wrong and the designer should be liable.
By the way, your laptop's charging connection probably failed from snagging the cord too many times.
No matter what you do with the software, it shouldn't ever break hardware barring overclocking and the like and so they should still have to allow claims for hardware issues.
Unless Apple is somehow magically immune to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, that is how it works. Why nobody appears to be calling Apple out on it, I don't know.
Exactly, and that perfectly explains why "Intelligent Design" is not science: the entire point of science is asking questions and then finding the answers through experimentation. No questioning, no science!
But even so, where do you draw the line. What is the principle involved here: that you should be able to examine the software (and presumably hardware?) design of any device that has impact on your survival?
I would say that I should be able to examine the software (and of course hardware!) of any device that I own. People have certainly never needed anybody's permission to examine, and even modify, their own property since the beginning of time; why the heck should that magically change now just because there's a computer involved?!
You should not tolerate being disallowed to look at the source code for your devices in exactly the same way you should not tolerate having the hood welded shut on your car.
HTC compiles their proprietary binary drivers straight into the kernel itself, then distributes the whole thing as a big monolithic blob. When it's time to distribute the source, they go in, rip out the source to anything proprietary, and dump the rest into a tarball for download.
My account was disabled by Valve once (or it got hacked and had the password changed... either way, I couldn't access it). I had to take photos of my physical discs and CD-keys (the only thing on the account at the time was Half-Life Platinum Collection) and email them to Valve in order to prove that I owned the games so that they would reinstate it.
If I'd actually bought the games on Steam, rather than as physical boxed copies, I doubt I would have gotten them back.
The OP was talking about a device that worked in the same way the birds' eyes do. I'd be very much surprised if the birds' eyes were emitting a particle stream.
My mother knowing this had to be a mistake as she had a similar receipt for $400 in cash called and explained the situation and expected it to be cleared up--after all we always paid with cash and never had problems before. After accusations of lying and trying to scam the resort out of money it was later determined that 7 or 8 other families met similar fates.
Your mother called who? The hotel, or the credit card company? You'll almost always have better results (and fewer accusations of lying) with the latter...
On the contrary, I do have to "take it out" on you, because you are enabling and abetting Comcast's fraud. Comcast claims that it is somehow the government's fault that they are forcibly shutting off their customer's service and extorting set top box rental fees from them, which is a blatant lie. You, by repeating that lie, prove yourself to be a Comcast shill.
Uhhh..maybe because carbon credits are a scam and even on the small scale they are currently being used major scams are occurring?
That's a problem with the particular implementation, not the principle.
If you really want to make a change give companies tax breaks that design easily recycled materials, while having higher taxes on those that make e-garbage.
Just look at how well the government has done when it comes to keeping wall street honest, you really think they'll do better with big business and the environment?
Wait, what? You object to carbon credits (the free-market solution) in favor of direct taxes and subsidies on the grounds that the government does a bad job? Either I'm misunderstanding you, or you're not making sense.
Digital isn't the problem. Encryption is the problem, and the solution is clear QAM. Comcrap just doesn't like the solution, because it means giving up the box rental fees. Comcrap needs to be told "too fucking bad; shut off the damn encryption!"
Slashdot Mirror
What it makes me think is "whoa, that guy drinks way too much soda!"
You would think wrong, then!
Exactly, and the auto manufacturer does still have to uphold the warranty unless it can prove that the new engine caused whatever else to break (or unless the new engine itself is what broke).
Believe it or not, that is actually how it works!!!
That's an interesting question I've never thought about before. But it stands to reason that if the engineless car retains its warranty (and it does), then the carless engine does too. The warranty doesn't extend to encompass the new engine (or new car) though -- it ends as it normally would, when its term expires or the item(s) are destroyed by non-covered events.
The same rule -- namely, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act -- does apply to consumer electronics. In fact, it applies to all "consumer products," which are defined in the Act as "any tangible personal property which is distributed in commerce and which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes."
Pretty sure the warranty on Sears Craftsman hand tools is like that too. Speaking of which: you know the difference between Craftsman and Evolv (a cheaper Sears tool brand)? They both have lifetime warranties, but with Craftsman you only need to bring in the tool while with Evolv you need to bring in the tool and the receipt.
If the device doesn't have a hardware failsafe (similar to your laptop), then the design is wrong and the designer should be liable.
By the way, your laptop's charging connection probably failed from snagging the cord too many times.
Why not? Most of the other devices they've made, from the Apple I to the Macbook Air, manage to be that way!
Bricking isn't an accidental consequence of "escaping the insulated ecosystem;" bricking is a deliberate punishment for trying!
Unless Apple is somehow magically immune to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, that is how it works. Why nobody appears to be calling Apple out on it, I don't know.
Just like how AT&T did on the POTS network, once upon a time. If only the cellular (and cable) companies would hurry up and suffer the same fate!
The hypothetical "Margaret" managed to send an email; if you can do that, you can probably use Word sufficiently well enough to make the poster too.
No argument about the "fucking prick" part, though!
Exactly, and that perfectly explains why "Intelligent Design" is not science: the entire point of science is asking questions and then finding the answers through experimentation. No questioning, no science!
Yeah, but we USians should be better than that.
I would say that I should be able to examine the software (and of course hardware!) of any device that I own. People have certainly never needed anybody's permission to examine, and even modify, their own property since the beginning of time; why the heck should that magically change now just because there's a computer involved?!
You should not tolerate being disallowed to look at the source code for your devices in exactly the same way you should not tolerate having the hood welded shut on your car.
How the fuck is that not a GPL violation?!
The worst thing about Google Voice transcription is that there's no interface for correcting it.
My account was disabled by Valve once (or it got hacked and had the password changed... either way, I couldn't access it). I had to take photos of my physical discs and CD-keys (the only thing on the account at the time was Half-Life Platinum Collection) and email them to Valve in order to prove that I owned the games so that they would reinstate it.
If I'd actually bought the games on Steam, rather than as physical boxed copies, I doubt I would have gotten them back.
All DRM is evil, period, because DRM inherently violates the doctrine of first sale. QED.
The OP was talking about a device that worked in the same way the birds' eyes do. I'd be very much surprised if the birds' eyes were emitting a particle stream.
Why "switch between?" If you implant the enhanced eyes early enough in life, maybe the brain will be able to adapt to process all the input at once.
Your mother called who? The hotel, or the credit card company? You'll almost always have better results (and fewer accusations of lying) with the latter...
On the contrary, I do have to "take it out" on you, because you are enabling and abetting Comcast's fraud. Comcast claims that it is somehow the government's fault that they are forcibly shutting off their customer's service and extorting set top box rental fees from them, which is a blatant lie. You, by repeating that lie, prove yourself to be a Comcast shill.
Solution: make it format itself the first time the end user turns it on.
That's a problem with the particular implementation, not the principle.
Wait, what? You object to carbon credits (the free-market solution) in favor of direct taxes and subsidies on the grounds that the government does a bad job? Either I'm misunderstanding you, or you're not making sense.
But even despite all that, they still manage to be better than Comcrap!
Digital isn't the problem. Encryption is the problem, and the solution is clear QAM. Comcrap just doesn't like the solution, because it means giving up the box rental fees. Comcrap needs to be told "too fucking bad; shut off the damn encryption!"
Stop repeating this lie, you Comcrap shill! RAAAARRR!!!