Lemdro.id

15 points

1 year ago

Why? But regardless, the product was beyond warranty, and not getting warranty service on a stolen device is normal.

Steam having the ability to blacklist devices massively compromises their value. The completely open nature of the device is a big part of what they advertised and how they sold it.

report

[ - ]

Deceptichum@kbin.social

24 points

1 year ago

You poor Americans. Product isn’t even 2 years out of release and you accept that as a decent lifespan for an electronic device like this.

Likewise warranties exist to guarantee the quality of product, there’s no reason the company should be absolved from that simply because the user has changed.

report

[ - ]

-11 points

1 year ago

This is idiotic.

The life span of the device is perfectly fine. There is no reason for or benefit to sending the device back to whatever random third party Valve wants to hire for service.

It’s fucking stolen. There is no warranty.

report

[ - ]

Deceptichum@kbin.social

23 points

1 year ago

Being stolen is a seperate beast.

You said “ But regardless, the product was beyond warranty” it wouldn’t be if you had proper consumer protections.

report

[ - ]

-20 points

1 year ago

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.

report

[ - ]

Deceptichum@kbin.social

18 points

1 year ago

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.

report

[ - ]

LwL@lemmy.world

3 points

1 year ago

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.

report

[ - ]

-14 points

1 year ago

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.

report

wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one

Show more comments

[ - ]

9 points

1 year ago

Our consumer protections are fetid rotting meat, my guy, what the fuck are you smoking

report

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works

[ - ]

0 points

1 year ago

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.

report