The idea that buying a product obligates the company to service it until the end of time is deranged. The life span of any product is heavily dependent on how a user cares for it. Cars with a 5-10 year warranty will easily last 25 years if used reasonably, and easily die in less than their warranty length if you abuse them. If you required a 25 year warranty on cars because that’s how long they should last, the only outcome is that people who take care of their cars would have to pay more to subsidize idiots who break them.
Every other product is identical. It’s not a coincidence that consumer electronics cost more in every country with “better consumer protection laws”, even accounting for your ridiculous tax rates. It’s because everyone is forced to pay extra, up front, to offset the costs of the people who aren’t willing to take proper care of their devices. That’s not better or better “value” to anyone.
It’s completely ranged mate and it’s how the system operates in Australia. Would not be surprised to hear of similar from the kiwis, cannucks, or euro’s.
We require products to meet up with certain expectations, such as lasting a reasonable lifespan. No one in their right mind would buy a laptop or a console if they expected it to stop working after just one year.
And quickly comparing 2 tax calculators, I would be taking home less money in the US after taxes. I’m not sure how accurate the US one is, because their government doesn’t offer any such service themselves it seems so I had to trust a 3rd party site but I guess those taxes are going towards good things like the military and not useless things like improving citizens lives so that’s a small price to pay.
Your entirely unhinged laws are why everything costs twice as much there.
If the steam deck dies after a year, 99.9999999% of the time, it’s because of you. The lifespan of a mobile electronic device is almost entirely a product of how it is treated. The Deck is built like a tank and can take heavy abuse. Warranty service is not life span, and longer default warranties on consumer electronics literally always mean that responsible customers are charged extra, up front, to subsidize idiots.
You’ve got weak rights and protections as a consumer, and you don’t even have cheap prices like they do in China to justify it. That’s gotta be embarrassing.
The difference in longevity isn’t running it over with a car. It’s the day to day handling of the device.
It is impossible for an obligatory long term warranty on a device a meaningful portion of customers abuse to not result in responsible owners paying more to subsidize bad ones. The number of devices between 1 to 5 years that fail due to manufacturer defects compared to abuse is far, far less than negligible.
IDK, I can’t remember the last time I actually used a warranty, and I know I have consciously decided not to on multiple occasions. It’s generally easier for me to repair something myself than to go through the warranty process, even if that process is smooth.
So I kind of get where the OP is coming from. At least in my perspective, the warranty needs to be just good enough that enough people exercise it so making good products is cheaper for the company than trying to scam people out of the warranty. Consumers pay for warranties through increased purchase prices, so the better and longer the warranty is, the more the product costs.
In general, I much prefer an easily repairable product to one with a comprehensive warranty, so I’d rather push for Right to Repair than better warranty coverage.
A warranty is merely insurance, so you pay extra to have some assurance of a refund or repair. It only needs to be good enough to keep the company honest. Defects are usually caught at the beginning of a product’s lifecycle, so a warranty past the first two-years (again, generally speaking) is generally a repair plan, which is probably more expensive on average than just repairing it yourself.
From my experience, warranties in the US are good enough for that first “product defect” period, we’re just missing the parts availability for repairs. The reason people seem to want longer warranties is because manufacturers charge a ridiculous amount for out of service repairs. For example, it’s usually cheaper to buy a new phone than get a battery replaced by the manufacturer, despite the battery itself probably costing <$50.
So the problem here is not that warranties suck, but that manufacturers have a monopoly on certain repairs and can therefore push people into buying new instead of getting the repair. That’s the problem we should be solving. Improving warranties doesn’t really protect consumers, it protects large companies because they can just increase the price of their products because it’s just an insurance product.
I’m not saying it’s the best, I’m saying it’s sufficient.
I’d rather have no warranty, bountiful parts availability, and lower prices instead of a great warranty, poor parts availability, and higher prices. I want to own things, not rent them, and an expensive warranty is closer to rental than ownership. However, I also think defects should be covered, so a short initial warranty is good (like 1-2 years for most things). I can get that with my credit card, so I don’t need manufacturers to provide it.
In short, I want manufacturers to make things, not service them. I don’t want Valve to fix my Steam Deck, I want it to be cheaper and for replacement parts to be cheaply available. Getting both means I’m paying more, since I’m subsidizing the warranty and support systems they need to provide.
Our consumer protections are perfectly fine.
The idea that buying a product obligates the company to service it until the end of time is deranged. The life span of any product is heavily dependent on how a user cares for it. Cars with a 5-10 year warranty will easily last 25 years if used reasonably, and easily die in less than their warranty length if you abuse them. If you required a 25 year warranty on cars because that’s how long they should last, the only outcome is that people who take care of their cars would have to pay more to subsidize idiots who break them.
Every other product is identical. It’s not a coincidence that consumer electronics cost more in every country with “better consumer protection laws”, even accounting for your ridiculous tax rates. It’s because everyone is forced to pay extra, up front, to offset the costs of the people who aren’t willing to take proper care of their devices. That’s not better or better “value” to anyone.
It’s completely ranged mate and it’s how the system operates in Australia. Would not be surprised to hear of similar from the kiwis, cannucks, or euro’s.
We require products to meet up with certain expectations, such as lasting a reasonable lifespan. No one in their right mind would buy a laptop or a console if they expected it to stop working after just one year.
And quickly comparing 2 tax calculators, I would be taking home less money in the US after taxes. I’m not sure how accurate the US one is, because their government doesn’t offer any such service themselves it seems so I had to trust a 3rd party site but I guess those taxes are going towards good things like the military and not useless things like improving citizens lives so that’s a small price to pay.
EU is a general 2-year minimum warranty. Not sure if there are any product specific rules for longer warranty, but yea the US situation is insane.
Your entirely unhinged laws are why everything costs twice as much there.
If the steam deck dies after a year, 99.9999999% of the time, it’s because of you. The lifespan of a mobile electronic device is almost entirely a product of how it is treated. The Deck is built like a tank and can take heavy abuse. Warranty service is not life span, and longer default warranties on consumer electronics literally always mean that responsible customers are charged extra, up front, to subsidize idiots.
Not at all to do with us being a small population island nation in the arse end of the world. And electronics prices are almost at parity these days between the two countries (6.52% cheaper in US).
You’ve got weak rights and protections as a consumer, and you don’t even have cheap prices like they do in China to justify it. That’s gotta be embarrassing.
…warranty generally doesn’t apply when a device is grossly mishandled. Surely that’s obvious.
The difference in longevity isn’t running it over with a car. It’s the day to day handling of the device.
It is impossible for an obligatory long term warranty on a device a meaningful portion of customers abuse to not result in responsible owners paying more to subsidize bad ones. The number of devices between 1 to 5 years that fail due to manufacturer defects compared to abuse is far, far less than negligible.
Our consumer protections are fetid rotting meat, my guy, what the fuck are you smoking
IDK, I can’t remember the last time I actually used a warranty, and I know I have consciously decided not to on multiple occasions. It’s generally easier for me to repair something myself than to go through the warranty process, even if that process is smooth.
So I kind of get where the OP is coming from. At least in my perspective, the warranty needs to be just good enough that enough people exercise it so making good products is cheaper for the company than trying to scam people out of the warranty. Consumers pay for warranties through increased purchase prices, so the better and longer the warranty is, the more the product costs.
In general, I much prefer an easily repairable product to one with a comprehensive warranty, so I’d rather push for Right to Repair than better warranty coverage.
Wow, you mean you never used the infamously bad service because it wasnt a good service?
Wild, its almost like fetid rotting meat
Thats a fascinating dichotomy, but you do not need to pick between two common sense things.
A warranty is merely insurance, so you pay extra to have some assurance of a refund or repair. It only needs to be good enough to keep the company honest. Defects are usually caught at the beginning of a product’s lifecycle, so a warranty past the first two-years (again, generally speaking) is generally a repair plan, which is probably more expensive on average than just repairing it yourself.
From my experience, warranties in the US are good enough for that first “product defect” period, we’re just missing the parts availability for repairs. The reason people seem to want longer warranties is because manufacturers charge a ridiculous amount for out of service repairs. For example, it’s usually cheaper to buy a new phone than get a battery replaced by the manufacturer, despite the battery itself probably costing <$50.
So the problem here is not that warranties suck, but that manufacturers have a monopoly on certain repairs and can therefore push people into buying new instead of getting the repair. That’s the problem we should be solving. Improving warranties doesn’t really protect consumers, it protects large companies because they can just increase the price of their products because it’s just an insurance product.
You are stuck in the idea that the american warranty is the best version of warranties. It really isnt.
I’m not saying it’s the best, I’m saying it’s sufficient.
I’d rather have no warranty, bountiful parts availability, and lower prices instead of a great warranty, poor parts availability, and higher prices. I want to own things, not rent them, and an expensive warranty is closer to rental than ownership. However, I also think defects should be covered, so a short initial warranty is good (like 1-2 years for most things). I can get that with my credit card, so I don’t need manufacturers to provide it.
In short, I want manufacturers to make things, not service them. I don’t want Valve to fix my Steam Deck, I want it to be cheaper and for replacement parts to be cheaply available. Getting both means I’m paying more, since I’m subsidizing the warranty and support systems they need to provide.