24 ms·

iPhone App will not stay open - just flashes when trying to launch

• Iknowthatfeel 10y ago
  Reading this, I have empathy for the developer. There is a small subset of customers that will give you a bad review at the drop of a hat because they know it hurts you. They're poison. Finally one of these people got some tiny payback.
  • jimktrains2 10y ago
    > There is a subset of customers that will give you a bad review at the drop of a hat because they know it hurts you. I think you give some people too much credit. They just expect things to work and get upset when it doesn't. They're powerless to change or fix anything besides coming to you, the developer. Yes, cursing isn't a good means of communication. Yes, having empathy for the other side is a good thing when trying to get something. It's still probably not _that_ personal. > Finally one of these people got some tiny payback. At the expense of a lot of bad PR and a general loss of professionalism displayed by the company. I've never heard of this company, but I will never do business with them now.
    • derefr 10y ago
      Maybe in the case of a home automation product, "just expecting things to work" is a credible position; when it comes to other product categories, though (e.g. indie video games on Steam), there certainly are a ton of negative reviews that are seemingly done purely out of spite, or "for the lols", that can have an outsized impact on the product's visibility.
  • finaliteration 10y ago
    Acting out in retributive ways when your customers (justifiably or not) have issues and leave negative reviews is a pretty terrible way to build and run a business. Is the spite towards that one person really worth it?
    • Hydraulix989 10y ago
      I honestly sympathize with Garadget a bit more in this case. Some people are just "assholes" that are all too quick to give a one-star review over the slightest thing, and it looks like this customer was one of them. The customer is not always right. EDIT: Sorry for being inflammatory here.
      • jimktrains2 10y ago
        > The customer is not always right. "The customer is always right" never meant that customer service should be a door mat, but rather comes from advertising and the idea that consumers will spend their money on products that best fit their needs at the best value. If you sell something noone wants, or at too high a price, you'll gain little to no market share.
        • deleted 10y ago
          [deleted]
      • onion2k 10y ago
        This customer may have been an asshole in this situation but that isn't really a good reason to state he's an asshole. For all we know he might spend the rest for his time reading bedtime stories to sick kittens. Judging someone's character based on a single incident isn't a great thing to do.
        • mod 10y ago
          In the context of this thread, what is the difference, really? Should we really have to caveat the accusation with "maybe he's a really nice guy" or something?
        • deleted 10y ago
          [deleted]
        • cyberferret 10y ago
          > Judging someone's character based on a single incident isn't a great thing to do. By the same token, publicly castigating someone because you couldn't get their software to work on your device isn't a great thing to do either. Perhaps the developer sells his gadgets so he can house sick kittens, and he was up all night trying to nurse a particularly sick kitten when the angry email came through??
  • kelukelugames 10y ago
    Who here hasn't thrown a tantrum on Yelp?
    • Allan_Smithee 10y ago
      Me. I don't even have an account on it.
• jimktrains2 10y ago
  I like how they chastise Martin for poor impulse control and then go for the nuclear option of disabling someone's account over a single review. "They think my service doesn't work now, well let me show them what not working is really like!" The irony is amusing, except for Martin. Also, I'd like to take this time to note that this is another reason that it's important to have control over your own devices.
  • toomuchtodo 10y ago
    The users who are arrogant and abusive usually have zero overlap with the ones who care about control over their own devices.
    • jimktrains2 10y ago
      I mean, your statement is true for most subsets of users. "The users who are nice and kind usually have zero overlap with the ones who care about control over their own devices." That said, I do view it as important for those of us that do care to be loud about it. It's in the benefit of all consumers for devices to be secure and usable without a external support. I mean, even though I feel personally it should all be open hardware and software, I won't even go that far. Just let my stuff work when your servers stop working.
      • toomuchtodo 10y ago
        Carry the torch friend, I gave up the battle long ago. My last remnants of caring are my recurring donations to the EFF and Public Knowledge.
    • emsy 10y ago
      That's a baseless assumption.
      • toomuchtodo 10y ago
        Most of my assumptions are baseless, and only generated based on my anecdotal evidence, life experience, and the occasional Google search. No refunds!
• nneonneo 10y ago
  For context, the associated review appears to be this one: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R2XHHHGM6BEUG6/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B01KUZ2JPS https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R2XHHHGM6BEUG6/re...
  • Lazare 10y ago
    I'm sure any negative review is painful, but that hardly seems to cross any lines. "Abusive language" is really, really, really stretching it.
    • Just1689 10y ago
      Yeah, abusive language it is not. It's more of a tantrum. Looking at the other reviews, it does seem that the company is happy to help with issues even where there is a negative review.
      • PeterisP 10y ago
        Why would you call it a tantrum? It sounds like a reasonable review that a calm dissatisfied customer would make as well.
      • yunolisten 10y ago
        > It's more of a tantrum. And the knee jerk response of bricking the device is ok then?
      • Lazare 10y ago
        > it does seem that the company is happy to help with issues even where there is a negative review. Sometimes doing the right thing doesn't make doing the wrong thing okay. In the linked case, there was a negative review, they were not happy to help with with issues, and they bricked the device. Legally they may be okay.. Morally I think they're wrong. And from a PR point of view this is literally the worst possible thing they could do, what are they insane? (And as others have noted, the rep is significantly more guilty than the customer of abusive language and throwing a tantrum. Ironic...)
• Hydraulix989 10y ago
  I can't decide whether this is legal or not. I am closer to siding _with_ Garadget in that as a private business, they don't HAVE to provide a service to someone (and it looks pretty obvious that there was no particular discrimination or the like); in fact, they have the right to refuse service. That said, the person also DID purchase a physical item (in fact, Garadget probably should have refunded them first, just basing this off my own personal ethical point-of-view). That said, if a negative Amazon review IS the real reason (it looks like there was a bit more to it), then this COULD also backfire as bad publicity. Do other people want to give their business to someone who in the past has refused service to someone solely on the basis of a bad review? I've left negative Yelp reviews and tweets before in earnest to those that I think deserve them, and while I genuinely won't be giving anyone repeat business after I've been prompted to review them, I would be even more upset if I _was_ refused service on the basis of my reviews. As you can see, businesses seem to really try to find out who has personally left negative reviews, so I'm sure they all know who I am. That said, I personally don't swear in any of my negative reviews, I try to keep them constructive.
  • timv 10y ago
    > this COULD also backfire as bad publicity. Assuming the review that nneonneo found is the correct one, then a journalist has already replied wanting more info, so it seems plausible that some bad publicity will come from it. https://www.amazon.com/review/R2XHHHGM6BEUG6/ref=cm_cr_rev_detmd_pl?ie=UTF8&asin=B01KUZ2JPS&cdForum=Fx204ZCRU0P95M7&cdMsgID=Mx3TR2CGTPQDNZZ&cdMsgNo=1&cdPage=1&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=TxRUSKRZRXI5G4#Mx3TR2CGTPQDNZZ https://www.amazon.com/review/R2XHHHGM6BEUG6/ref=cm_cr_rev_d...
  • r00fus 10y ago
    So he can return it for a refund. They're revoking his usage of the service. It's petty, it's going to Streisand them for a while, but it's certainly not illegal. Perhaps a good analogy is getting banned from bnet after having bought Starcraft/Diablo CD... but in this case they're offering a refund for return.
  • walid 10y ago
    I think it should be illegal. Frame it in terms of a burger. If McDonald's says "since you say our food is bad we're messing with your burger after you bought it and we'll give you your money back if you return it" that would be illegal and probably, not sure though, a form of discrimination.
• dangrossman 10y ago
  Garadget is a "cloud-enabled garage door opener" sold for $99 on Amazon. The manufacturer seemingly disabled the product, or primary advertised features of the product, in retribution for a short negative review left on Amazon. IMO Amazon should immediately drop the product when they catch wind of that, and so should any other retailer that carries it. The manufacturer's abused their relationship with the retailer (which now has to handle a return of a perfectly good device they sold) and the customers (who now have to fear retribution for reviewing products they purchased at retailers). Regardless of whether the content of the review was justified or not, this probably won't go well for Garadget, whoever he is. A journalist has already reached out to the customer. I can sympathize with being frustrated with customers. It takes a lot of self-control to remain professional at times. If you don't have that kind of self-control, you need to hire someone else to do customer support that does, or you won't have a very successful business. Being the boss doesn't mean there are no repercussions for your actions.
  • CaliforniaKarl 10y ago
    According to the Amazon.com page for the item, it ships from and is sold by the manufacturer. So it's not a proper Amazon item, it's an Amazon Marketplace item. In this case, I don't think Amazon even is the retailer, they're just the platform, in the same sense as eBay/PayPal. Also, the guy (presumably guy) has said to return the product for a refund, so things will pretty much be zeroed out, unless the customer doesn't go through with it.
    • vidarh 10y ago
      But this now means that no Amazon reviews of this product are remotely trustworthy for the simple reason that they have made public that bad reviews risks getting your device bricked. To me that means their products are now inherently suspect.
  • dovdovdov 10y ago
    Their domain still leads to an indigogo page. People should avoid startups those use crowdfunding websites as risk free capital gainer preorder pages. They don't get proper investment for a reason.
• tobyhinloopen 10y ago
  I think this is a bad thing to do. Customers bad-mouth companies all the time, most of the times just temporary. Best to try to please them or to ignore it. "Customer is always right" is in the end one of the best strategies, even if it isn't true. It takes great arrogance to ban someone bad-mouthing your product. I don't think it is illegal and I don't think it should be, but I do think you should be able to get a full refund. Besides, getting banned for services you leave a bad review on is really bad practice. Imagine a world where leaving bad reviews results in a ban from that service... It would greatly reduce customer's trust in their products Edit: The journalist comment on the amazon review (linked below). That might burn, hehe
  • CaliforniaKarl 10y ago
    From garadget's post on their forum: > At this time your only option is return Garadget to Amazon for refund. Your unit ID 2f0036... will be denied server connection. It seems to me like garadget is perfectly willing to refund the purchaser, once the purchaser returns the item.
    • rkeene2 10y ago
      This seems a bit like altering the terms of the sale after the sale has completed. He bought the product, he's entitled to the product -- a refund is not sufficient since the purchase cannot be rolled back.
      • victorhooi 10y ago
        Err, isn't that by definition what a refund is? You roll back the purchase? Customer gets his money back, Garadget gets the device - and they don't need to deal with each other again.
        • Robin_Message 10y ago
          I'm not sure what the case law on this is, but if you form a contact to supply X and the X you supply is broken, it's not unreasonable for you to demand a working X is provided as per the contract (specific performance). Also, bricking someone's device remotely* and giving them only the option of a refund is dangerously close to criminal damage of their property. * Although in this case it sounds like they blocked it on their side rather than remotely killing the device.
• diegorbaquero 10y ago
  I don't see this story going anywhere positive for Garadget. Blocking functionality because of a bad review? This will backfire horribly.
  • LoSboccacc 10y ago
    Even if they may or may not had a legit reason I hope so, because iot and cloud based access and control scares the shit out of me, so more company dies stepping this boundary the better the ecosystem will evolve.
  • erikb 10y ago
    They didn't block it because of the review. Read the stuff in the link and not just the headline.
    • monsieurbanana 10y ago
      I read the stuff in the link, they 100% blocked the device because of the two review he wrote. What are you even talking about?
    • yunolisten 10y ago
      You've been shilling in this thread, and avoided answering the question "are you affiliated with them?"
      • erikb 10y ago
        I've been actually answering that question twice, yunoreed.
        • yunolisten 10y ago
          It's called time, you did it after being prompted multiple times, and after I posted this
• Gpugnet 10y ago
  That's not being professional
• eps 10y ago
  Not "for negative Amazon review", but for being an asshole. This guy forgot that there are people behind every product and the abstraction is as thin as it gets when it is in fact a smaller company or a startup. There are negative reviews and there are nasty reviews. He was nasty to them and they no longer wanted him as a client. No reason why a company should swallow shit that a person wouldn't. They certainly _can_ do that (no questions asked refunds, customer is always right, etc), but it's an option, not a requirement. [Edit] We had paying customers like that - sent pissy emails, no Hello, no signature, just spit and complaints about minutae with personal attacks ("only an idiot would do it that way") and a shitload of entitlement because they paid us money. In all cases they recieved an immediate refund and a goodbye. If they can't make a basic effort to keep things civil, we have no interest in working with them. The only issue with the case at hand is that they explicitly mention bad an Amazon review, while they actually dropped him because of his general toxic attitude.
  • _pmf_ 10y ago
    Read the review here [0]; it's not abusive. It's probably the review of some guy who has been burned by half-assed Amazon shovel ware before. [0] https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R2XHHHGM6BEUG6/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B01KUZ2JPS https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R2XHHHGM6BEUG6/re...
    • CaliforniaKarl 10y ago
      The guy has three reviews on Amazon, two of which are one-star. I think the abusiveness is primarily in the guys forum post, plus posting the negative Amazon review without waiting for response from the developer. But that's just my sensitivity level.
      • gre 10y ago
        He has two one-star reviews and a five-star. You can't actually fault him for only reviewing the exceptional Amazon purchases...
      • johnydepp 10y ago
• EgoIncarnate 10y ago
  His service account was also banned: rdmart7 Robert Martin This user is suspended until Dec 27, 2019 7:37 pm. Reason: attitude after writing: iPhone App will not stay open - just flashes when trying to launch Device Setup Just installed and attempting to register a door when the app started doing this. Have uninstalled and reinstalled iphone app, powered phone off/on - wondering what kind of piece of shit I just purchased here...
• aanm1988 10y ago
  I thought acting like this against a bad review was pretty much verboten on Amazon?
  • justin66 10y ago
    It would cause problems if the customer wanted to continue using the product after leaving the bad review.
• jimmies 10y ago
  I don't know why many comments about "the customer is clearly an asshole, therefore he deserves the lock not working/the company has the legal rights to do so blah blah" are modded so high right now. Even when the customer is an asshole, that has absolutely nothing to do with a security device betraying him or not. I'm very glad that the customer is now only denied access to the app. I can see one day a company that sells the "cloud-lock" will allow any thief to get in the customer's door because they left a negative review for the product (and not bragging about their vengeance in a public forum like this Garaget company did). The fact that your lock one day will betray you, or your smoke detector won't sound, your pacemaker will pump differently or your car will make a different ethical decision because the company that sells it thinks that you're an asshole is beyond crazy. If this isn't a wake-up call to anyone who doesn't realize how dangerous this DRM (Digital Rights Myass) thing is becoming, I don't know what is. This is the can of shit that's just can't wait to hit the fan for those who trust in those cloud-based proprietary "solutions." This is exactly the kind of behavior that Stallman and the EFF warned us against and guess what, they're right again.
  • rapht 10y ago
    I absolutely second that. And the problem is: the industry's interest is to lock you in on their cloud so that you end up paying a recurring fee of some sort, while the public's interest is clearly to be as free as possible from the manufacturer once you have purchased from them... So until there is clear regulation about what you own, what you don't, and what your (preferably protective) rights really are when you purchase a device that relies on the manufacturer's cloud for operation, and even more generally, when you seem to own some thing but the manufacturer explains in the fine print that you only have a "license to use" that thing that limits what you can do with it ; until that, my friends, we're going to be at the mercy of manufacturers acting in their own interest, punto.
  • usrusr 10y ago
    I don't really see that future where honest lockmakers would routinely pivot to selling access to the highest bidder, but I do see one where potential buyers would be even more likely than today to choose the devil they know (an overpriced incumbent with less innovative products, but who can be absolutely trusted to not trip into suicidal anti-customer vendettas) over the devil they don't (the charming startup that might hide a source of infinite childishness)
• cyberferret 10y ago
  Perhaps it is because I have spent the entire day today trying to mitigate a new user on our web app trying to abuse our service to send out spam, but I am leaning more towards siding with Garadget on this one. I know that 'being professional' is of paramount importance, but I wish users would remember that every time they send an abusive email to a company, an actual person is on the other end who is going to be receiving, reading and interpreting it. I've been caught hunched over my desk late on a Saturday night (the purported time that the rep received the email) after spending all day debugging an obscure issue in my software, and I can tell you that it won't take much to push my overtired brain to retreat into its 'inner child' mode at the slightest provocation. In all cases, I am glad I implemented the 'count to 10' rule or just stepped away from the keyboard for a while to gain some time to come back and look at the issue objectively. But often times the delay in responding usually aggravates the customer a little more. Such is the burden for the 'smaller shops' where only one or two people take care of everything from writing the code, to providing support to making the coffee and sweeping the floors.
  • zem 10y ago
    if they had even just said "you are a jerk and no one in this company is paid enough to deal with you; here's how to return your device for a full refund and here is a list of our least favourite competitors for all your internet-of-shit needs" i would have been 100% on their side. effectively bricking his device was beyond the pale, and says that you can't trust them to control your gadget from their servers.
    • cyberferret 10y ago
      I agree with you, and I don't condone the bricking. I am sure that the rep regretted his/her actions in the cold light of Sunday morning. But I wish that users would also take some responsibility for keeping the conversation civil. I don't like that the user is seemingly always excused for being angry and irrational, but the company, be it a one man shop or a large mega corp is always expected to be a cold, faceless, emotionless entity. ALL interactions are essentially a 1 person to 1 person interaction where simple things like common respect, politeness, understanding and constructive dialog should be considered.
• cameldrv 10y ago
  Usually Internet (and real life) shitstorms are made when two assholes collide. Customer may be an asshole trying to stick it to the little indiegogo guy in a way he knows will have a disproportionate impact. On the other hand, the iPhone app does really suck and crashes constantly. Even big companies can't seem to make reliable software these days. All of that said, you went into business, so time to put on the big boy pants and be a professional. You sold the guy a device that comes with a service, and is useless without it. Don't pretend that you can just cut off the service because you don't like the guy and you've still fulfilled your obligations as a manufacturer. On a broader note, IoT hardware that you install in your house that needs a service provided by a shaky startup company is going to cease to be a salable product fairly soon as more people get burned by it. We really need a low-attack-surface, standardized protocol to control and monitor these things without the support of the manufacturer. If we could make universal remote controls for AV equipment in the eighties, we ought to be able to make a universal remote control for home gadgets in the '10s.
  • erikb 10y ago
    Well, he's also offering a refund. Not sure where the problem is in that case with the service provider's response. If you have sh*tty customers it's smart to drop them fast and focus on your good customers.
    • kungtotte 10y ago
      Yeah, he bricked the device and then told him his only option was to return and refund through Amazon. Let's not pretend that Garadget is somehow being magnanimous here.
      • erikb 10y ago
        What device? The cloud-enabled device he sold himself? What I understand is that he's blocking that user from using the cloud.
        • Steve0 10y ago
• erikb 10y ago
  Honestly I think the app author is acting well within his means here. The user uses abusive language and apparently immediately escalates the issue when not being satisfied immediately despite his language.
  • glogla 10y ago
    You spent a lot of posts defending the company. Are you affiliated with them?
    • erikb 10y ago
      I think many people here only read the headline and immediately start aiding the destruction of what seems to be a single person's business. I have experienced myself how painful it can be to stay polite towards a*hole customers, so as said in some comment: It's totally fine to quit a customer who acts like that and refund him.
      • wapz 10y ago
        You didn't answer the question. Are you affiliated with them?
        • erikb 10y ago
          I actually did by giving my reasons. Btw, if you are into these kind of theories: ALL my comments in this thread were exactly downvoted the same number.
      • bluefox 10y ago
        I'll just note that this entry was posted twice, by two different accounts, with the same title, even though it does not appear anywhere in the site. PR effort for or against.
        • yunolisten 10y ago
          > I'll just note that this entry was posted twice, by two different accounts another behaviour that's quite common here ;)
• qume 10y ago
  Dear customer, We are a small team who don't have the resources to test every single OS version on every device. Problems will happen. As such we're happy to issue you a refund, and you can keep the device. All we ask is that you let us update the app to make sure it's working on your device, and hopefully others. Thank you for helping us find the issue. We will work tirelessly until it is fixed. If at some stage you are satisfied we would be delighted to turn your one star review into a five star one. Kind regards Company which needs a little bit of help in how to deal with customers
  • dqv 10y ago
    Yep. It usually turns out better that way. (except I'm not sure how I feel about asking them to change their review at this stage)
    • protomyth 10y ago
      I would probably be a lot more indirect about it. Thank you for helping us find the issue. We will work tirelessly until it is fixed. If at some stage you are satisfied we would be delighted to turn your one star review into a five star one. to Thank you for helping us find the issue. We will work tirelessly until we turn your one star disappointment into a five star experience.
    • vatotemking 10y ago
      I have a business selling software. And most of the the time, rude customers are just frustrated with the product. Once you start to address their concerns, they are actually very friendly and would not hesitate to change their review or give a 5 star rating.
  • libeclipse 10y ago
    I'm fine with a request to change the review, but not sure that they should tell them exactly how many stars to give.
    • bigbugbag 10y ago
• deusofnull 10y ago
  lots of good things being said here, but being honest with everyone, I can imagine why he did it.
• raverbashing 10y ago
  I can't believe people are still buying any "cloud powered" crap for their homes Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice... Don't buy anything "cloud powered/IoT stuff" unless you know what you are doing and the product has been vetted by the general public and you're aware that there will be breaches Right now the number of IoT stuff I intend to buy is Zero
  • mnw21cam 10y ago
    > vetted by the general public Or preferably vetted by Matthew Garrett. (I'm not sure - has he actually given a clean bill of health to any cloud powered/IoT device?)
  • tomc1985 10y ago
    There are already established protocols in this space that never needed and do not require a cloud connection, let alone internet. (I forget their names, but industrial control automation has a long history) Why can't device makers simply speak the language?
    • vkou 10y ago
      A few reasons. 1. Ignorance. 2. Not-invented-here syndrome. 3. They want to own your IOT ecosystem with their proprietary protocol.
    • dawnerd 10y ago
      It's not so much the protocol since most of the devices are either z-wave or zigbee (BTLE is growing). All of those can operate without a network connection - it's just the companies that decided that the hub needs to store everything in the cloud. I believe the new smarthings hub can operate offline. I've been slowly upgrading stuff in my house but steering clear of wifi only devices. They just don't work that well to begin with. Only exception being my nest thermostat - but that can even work offline, just with limited functionality.
  • yunolisten 10y ago
    > I can't believe people are still buying any "cloud powered" crap for their homes This should be closer to the top :) Sadly many consumers don't understand exactly what they're buying into.
• Rafa19994 10y ago
  Totally agree with you!
• danbolt 10y ago
  After reading this, I immediately thought of the xkcd comic about the tiniest open-source violin. [1] I find these cloud-connected ways of augmenting our home are really neat, but I think examples like these are why I wouldn't want the technology being proprietary or requiring a company's cooperation just to open a door. [1] https://xkcd.com/743/ https://xkcd.com/743/
• atemerev 10y ago
  "Throwing a tantrum"? The review in question is something along the lines of "the control app is flashing and doesn't work at all. This is junk, don't waste your money on it. 1/5 stars." If you make any public facing products, you will occasionally get such (and worse) reviews even if your product is a shiny perfection forged in heaven by angels themselves and wrapped in magic. Fact of life. On the other hand, the support engineer's response (that ends with blocking the user's device for good) _is_ a bona fide tantrum, worthy of textbooks. I am also quite surprised by the number of comments here at HN siding with Garadget. People like these shouldn't be allowed anywhere near tech support roles, as a single such incident can ruin the company unless they can spend tons of money for lawyers. (This is why it is, in my opinion, better to start with enterprise products. Enterprise sales are much less public and you can afford to fire customers you don't like with ease, and vice versa.)
  • victorhooi 10y ago
    He offered the customer a full refund for the product - I don't see the issue. (Well, ok, he could have just turned the other cheek - but I suspect most of us here, when at the receiving end of such abuse, have wanted to say - "You know what? Take your business elsewhere."
    • woof 10y ago
      He disabled the device. And you don't see the issue?
      • jlgaddis 10y ago
        To be clear, he disabled the app, not the customer's device.
        • JumpCrisscross 10y ago
          The device's primarily-marketed feature is opening your garage from an app. To do this, the app and the device talk through the company's server. This developer blocked the customer's app from the server. That breaks the device's primary functionality.
• tomc1985 10y ago
  Anyone else notice how he refers to customers identified by username by their first name? That's ... weird.
• JumpCrisscross 10y ago
  Do we know what state OP lives in? By coïncidence, I'm in a legislative meeting on Thursday concerning New York's regulation of the post-purchase responsibilities of retailers and manufacturers of devices that neeed to talk to the Internet to work.
• bigbugbag 10y ago
  I'm not sure what annoys me the most in this story, that the developer tracks users and punish customers that s/he doesn't like or that some people are "buying" "cloud" based software with no understanding that this means they are denied control and ownership of said software and that it will stop working the instant the company folds the servers. Foucault's "Surveiller et Punir" (Watch and punish) makes me wonder how cloud and smartphone are not so different from being locked up in a jail.
• Entalpi 10y ago
  Yeah, negativity/hate is not a reason to force your customers to refund their purchases. This is basically illegal, atleast in Sweden if not the EU since this voids the functionality of the product with an intent to discriminate against a group of people. Its also a dick move just in the casual way.
  • stephen_g 10y ago
    I'm pretty sure remotely bricking a device like this would be against Australia consumer law also. I imagine that kind of thing varies state-by-state in the US?
  • protomyth 10y ago
    as pointed out on Amazon this might run afoul of https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr5111 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr5111 H.R. 5111 (114th): Consumer Review Fairness Act of 2016
• chrismatheson 10y ago
  This whole area feels like the territory the super-injunctions came out of. There is almost no coming back from widespread bad publicity, no way to equally show the other side of the discussion, and its only getting easier to take your 5 minutes of frustration to the largest platform in the world and complain before doing a single minute of work, thought or reasoning. I don't think its a bad attitude to simply say "I don't want to work with those who don't want to work with me."
• antfarm 10y ago
  From the Amazon product page Q&A: What happens if the company goes out of business? Does the app require a server to be active in order to use the App? The app requires a server component as does any consumer friendly product with mobile access. There is a plan to add the support for server-less mode, though it will require users to configure domain name service and firewall. The main server component is maintained by the Particle and pre-paid for the life of the device. Additionally, unlike many products bricked by the companies going out if business, Garadget is an open source system so it welcomes third-party solutions. [https://www.amazon.com/forum/-/Tx1SJ70QRGDYZAY/ref=ask_dp_dpmw_al_hza?asin=B01KUZ2JPS https://www.amazon.com/forum/-/Tx1SJ70QRGDYZAY/ref=ask_dp_dp...]
  • Tepix 10y ago
    "pre-paid for the life of the device" Sounds a like breach of contract.
• jitix 10y ago
  We should probably start having regulations around IOT servcies. The issue here isn't that the customer or the service rep was abusive. The real issue is that the company can disable the cloud service that is essential for their product to work based on their perception of the customer. It seems really risky to purchase IOT products right now.
  • bigbugbag 10y ago
    Could it be different though ? IOT is closely related to MMO videogames in that most servers close down at some point in the not so distant future. I will not buy any IoT ever, even with regulations. Factor in that IoT has terrible security and has already been massively exploited and now you're part of a criminal ring of webcam owners or fridges or whatever gizmo that attempted to DoS a DNS root server or government or antiterrorist unit and according to laws you can be jailed/decapitated/fined or worse.
    • jitix 10y ago
      Hmm.. in that case some sort of classification should be there. Games are non-essential but temperature controller, door openers and locks are essential functionalities. As a general rule the manufacturers of IOT devices should be made by law release the server side code/binaries that a consumer could run by yourself (and also provide configuration options on the hardware device itself). I know it won't be of much use to most consumers as of now but as people become more techology-literate they should be able to download a container, choose a cloud provider and upload it to run the backend. As IPv6 become more popular home routers could expand their functionality to provide container hosting. edit: Added the part about self-hosting.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• Gonzih 10y ago
  Poor impulse control on both sides. If you are incapable of distancing yourself from not so mean or angry comments like that you should not be let handle customer support.
• itchyjunk 10y ago
  Does 1 review make or break a company? I've been seeing a lot of "5 star vs 1 star" issues recently. One of them was on an Uber article where the customers were not getting 5 start for not tipping for example and this impacted their ability to get rides (or so I think based on what I read). A lot of other smaller companies selling stuff online only and even Indi games seems to be very sensitive about reviews. Is the difference between overall 4 star vs 5 star so impactful? Maybe there is a deeper problem somewhere in here. Or maybe this is a reasonable backfire for a bad customer support.
• xer0x 10y ago
  I kinda like that they disabled the device. It's a bit strange, but I'm surprised this discussion isn't more divided.
• bschwindHN 10y ago
  What's the right way to design an IoT product to not be dependent on a startup's cloud servers? - Allow the app/device to point to a different host (running an open source version of the backend)? - Support LAN connectivity without round-tripping to a third party server? - Allow the user to load their own firmware onto the device? I don't know where the line is for these things, it seems to be a balance of convenience, ownership, and security. What's the ideal way to handle this so it works well even if the backing company disappears?
  • bigbugbag 10y ago
    > What's the right way to design an IoT product to not be dependent on a startup's cloud servers? Not designing an IoT product in the first place seems to me the right way to avoid this issue. The IoT feature can usually be achieved otherwise and seems to be added in so the company can have more power/control over the customer. If you are adamant on making this IoT anyway, the only option is a distributed and/or federated network with an optional offline mode and option use of one's own network and server.
    • bschwindHN 10y ago
      > Not designing an IoT product in the first place seems to me the right way to avoid this issue Unfortunately there is demand for these products and companies will always fill that demand if there is money to be made. If users want to control things in their house remotely, the commands need to be routed through a server one way or another. This is a matter of convenience and I'm sure most users would purchase a product they can control remotely vs. one they can only control on their home network. > the only option is a distributed and/or federated network What would a distributed network for this sort of product look like?
  • usrusr 10y ago
    If you don't want to open everything right away, put protocol specifications, keys and the like into escrow somehow, to be published when the service is discontinued (it can't be tied to the company or brand because there will always be some form of legal successor). Run a domain called $productname-support-beyond-the-grave.com or so where the escrowed data would appear and for the time being use it to explain what you are doing and why buyers should be wary of competitors without a similar commitment. Keeping a repository like that up to date costs a lot of money, the shameless self-praise is how you would make it agreeable with budgeting. There should be a service for that, with people who can build experience over multiple client lifecycles and a recognizable brand, maybe even a 3/4/5 star commitment rating that would go down e.g. when there are indications that the repository is getting stale relative to the deployed service/firmware of the still living company.
• vbezhenar 10y ago
  Client is bad. I don't care, it's his problems. Service is not that good. I care about it, those could be my problems. I don't behave like that client, but who knows, what they don't like. Actually I'm surprised if it's legal to do. In my country, if you're doing public business, you can't choose your clients. You set price, client pays money, you serve client. You can't deny your service just because of reasons. There are some exceptions like face-control on half-private parties, but those are gray areas. And, hell, no clouds near my, unless they are completely optinal. They are terrible for user. I hope, people will learn it and will avoid clouds like plague. User should own his data and code to process that data.
  • qqg3 10y ago
    Client isn't "bad". They are a customer not a client, the relationship is so very different, you can't just fire a customer or tell them to go away, especially not if you're selling your product on Amazon where people have an expectation of quality.
    • dozzie 10y ago
      > They are a customer not a client, the relationship is so very different Mind you, for many non-native English speakers this is very subtle, non-obvious difference. In my language, for instance, we don't have separate words for clients and customers.
      • umanwizard 10y ago
        I'm a reasonably literate native English speaker and I don't understand what the (supposed) difference is.
        • slededit 10y ago
          The relationship with a client is closer. Generally speaking the work is more bespoke and the level of trust between parties is higher. You see this when the product is not standardized. A customer on the other hand is anonymous and you're relationship with them will generally end after the original sale.
• Johnny555 10y ago
  I was wondering why the Amazon product page wasn't full of one-star warnings about this behavior, until I tried to post one, twice. Both times it was rejected as being against review guidelines: http://www.amazon.com/review-guidelines http://www.amazon.com/review-guidelines
  • dawnerd 10y ago
    Thats a good thing. Reviews should only be from actual customers, not people using it to post anything - good or bad. Best thing you can do is mark the negative comments about the app not working as helpful as those will be surfaced higher up.
• justin_vanw 10y ago
  This is (hopefully) someone who has very little experience dealing with customers and did a bad job today. It's not some web 3.0 holocaust that we all have to be shocked and amazed about. I'm sure he'll get chastised and everyone involved will continue to be fine (and maybe a little wiser). Or we'll turn it into some major incident with our weird fixation and the person will get fired and it will turn into a 'whole big thing'.
• hellofunk 10y ago
  Wow, I will most definitely never under any circumstances become a customer of this spoiled company and its pretentious support behavior. People like this should not be in the software business at all if they don't want to deal with customers (including the more hostile/rude ones). If you are going to sell something to the public, you must be prepared to professionally handle all kinds of people, and if you cannot, you should not be interfacing with the public at all.
• StreamBright 10y ago
  Do they realise that nobody is going to sympathize with the company in such a situation? Perfect example of how to make things worse.
• lucideer 10y ago
  I'm pretty surprised by the comments here on decorum and civility. The customer called the product a "piece of shit" - yes he used bad language, but he's criticising the product itself. An object. The rep. directly insulted the customer's character (saying he had "poor impulse control" and was throwing a "tantrum"). Is this another example of American tendencies to be extra sensitive about "profanity" or am I missing something? From my reading, the rep. was significantly more out of line even in his tone and message than the customer, even before he went and defacto-bricked the device in his own little tantrum. The character assassination gets even more childish if you look at the customer's account: > This user is suspended until Dec 28, 2019 3:37 am. > Reason: attitude
  • lawnchair_larry 10y ago
    It's more of a HN thing than an American thing.
    • lucideer 10y ago
      I dunno. Don't American's bleep their TV shows?
      • vidarh 10y ago
        It's quite amusing the see American guests on some of the ruder British talkshows, and see their reactions when some British guest swears, which often leads to more swearing when the British guests notice their reaction and choose to demonstrate just how much they can get away with. It's pretty much a standing joke on some shows - US guests on these shows fall in two categories: those who are aware of UK humour and/or the specific show (often people who live or have lived in the UK) and who are "in on it" and tend to play up the difference and play up to US stereotypes, and the unsuspecting innocents who have no idea what they're in for, and who get pounced on like prey.
        • lorenzhs 10y ago
          Here are some examples of what can happen on UK talk shows: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTd4hw7mZEI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTd4hw7mZEI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4sGU_eFc40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4sGU_eFc40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_RAE98uE7E&t=393 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_RAE98uE7E&t=393
• sametmax 10y ago
  When I had a streaming website, featuring only embedded videos, we decided to put a form so that people could tell us if something was wrong. 90% of it was garbage: - gibberish - insults - useless comment either empty of content or context - people asking us to fix things that weren't broken, or weren't broken on our site We didn't ban them. Instead, we extracted each useful information out of it: - adding missing informations to guide people on the site - adding features to remove frustrations from people - adding filters to remove fake email addresses (dns lookup on the domain name) so that we spent only time on those who are expecting an answer The client is not always right. And I don't try to be nice to rude people. But that doesn't mean you can't use rude people to improve your business. And clearly, if you can't stomach the stupidity and nastiness of humanity, don't sell to the average human. It's like getting angry at mosquitoes because they bite you, it's the most useless reaction ever. Worst, those particular mosquitoes give you money and you are not allowed to kill them. So either do your job professionally or leave. Leaving is a very sane option IMO. There is not reason you should live this experience if you don't want to if you have the choice. Any person working in an affordable bar, restaurant or shop knows that. Because they often don't have the choice.
  • bambax 10y ago
    > clearly, if you can't stomach the stupidity and nastiness of humanity, don't sell to the average human. It's like getting angry at mosquitoes because they bite you, it's the most useless reaction ever. Worst, those particular mosquitoes give you money and you are not allowed to kill them. This is gold! ;-) I sell a little object on Amazon; a person returned it with an angry message (non public) that explained that it didn't work, and while explaining it, clearly demonstrated that she didn't understand how to use it. I wrote her back to say I was sorry of what had happened and that we would try to do a better job of showing how to use the object (which we did). She didn't reply -- but bought 2 the week after...
  • forgottenpass 10y ago
    Any person working in an affordable bar, restaurant or shop knows that. Because they often don't have the choice. Working low-wage, unskilled customer service sucks, but offers important life lessons about the way other people conduct themselves, and your own options to conduct yourself in the face of behavior you don't like. The best thing about high-school jobs is they offer concentrated streams of some of the interaction types necessary to becoming a well-adjusted person. You either learn to stick to principled action while other people's behavior roll off you like water off the proverbial duck, or grow up to be the kind of person that thinks societal tut-tutting of 13 year olds on twitter an important moral cause.
• bambax 10y ago
  For those like me wondering what Garadget (garage door futurizer) is: > Garadget is a simple and elegant way to breath [sic] a new life into your existing garage doors opener. It helps prevent mishaps so familiar to many of us... ... and then introduces new ones, like: "have I used the correct words when speaking to a company representative, or else I won't be able to open my garage door". This is a general problem. It's possible that if you buy a Tesla and trash-talk the brand somewhere, you won't be able to drive it anymore, for example. This future we're living in, I'm not sure I like it. In any case I'm now certain I don't want to futurize my garage door.
• jamespo 10y ago
  I like how "throwaway2" has gone to the teacher to tell tales on that page
• codedokode 10y ago
  Maybe the real reason was that it is cheaper to ban a customer than investigate the issue?
• craig_peacock 10y ago
  Garadget does not deserve to be in business. If you are a B2C company specializing in security IoT, you don't have the right to disable your clients hardware as you see fit...Garadget have engineered a common product, but they know little about business...
  • morganvachon 10y ago
    Indeed, could you imagine the uproar if ADT (a traditional, remote monitoring security company in the US) were to lock a customer out of their own house because of a bad review? This is no different and is downright suicidal of Garadget. Even if this is the action of a single bad employee, so far the company has not stepped up to remedy the situation, and given it's a crowdfunded business out of nowhere, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the bad employee in question is a founder of the company. If that's the case, it's rotten to the core.
• yunolisten 10y ago
  The Internet of Silly things strikes again. Perhaps people will grow cautious of buying into products and services which they have no real control over.
  • OliverJones 10y ago
    IoST. (Internet of Silly Things). Love it! It's more polite than IoWJ (Internet of Worthless Junk).
    • yunolisten 10y ago
      Excellent, you can join the steering committee where we ignore all lessons learned from any previous product security failure, and add in multiple expensive features users can't comprehend, let alone use. To the cloud!
• sowbug 10y ago
  Should the result have been any different if this exchange had happened face-to-face in a brick-and-mortar store? Most stores display signs reserving the right to refuse service to anyone. Using profanity is one reason a customer might get kicked out.
• privtech 10y ago
  I was about to go with garadget... Not anymore. Terrible way of handling a situation like this. I have zero respect and zero confidence in you.
• benchaney 10y ago
  The IOT industry yet again proves that it is irresponsible and incompetent.
• nla 10y ago
  Who would use a garage door opener that has to connect to some clown company servers?
  • feld 10y ago
    I'm using their product. Let me tell my story. I have an old garage door opener -- ancient Craftsman. It doesn't even have a secure RF opener; no rollover codes or faux-crypto. My wife lost her garage door opener remote. I looked for replacements and couldn't find any that were less than $40 new or $30 used. Ridiculous. I have an outdoor keypad on the garage, which is detached. It doesn't work very well in the extreme cold because the 9V battery gives out. This solves a unique problem for me: I do not want to buy a new garage door opener. Mine was recently rebuilt with new gears and should be good to go for years. Further, would be a few hundred dollars without labor, and I don't want to do the labor myself. I've done it before; not worth my time. Now, Garadget exists. I got mine for $69. Now I have infinite remotes as long as my wifi works (It's on my IoT VLAN which only can do outbound 80 and 443). So, Garadget solved a unique problem for me in 5 minutes of work and saved me money. Hilarious that a device this advanced is cheaper than a simple RF remote, but that's supply and demand in action. Now is this a security concern for me? No. If someone wants to break into my garage they can eBay some garage door keys and just disengage the garage door from the opener via the keyhole on the front of every modern garage door. Or pick it I guess? Or they could get a kids toy and reprogram it to brute force all the garage doors in the neighborhood. https://youtu.be/iSSRaIU9_Vc https://youtu.be/iSSRaIU9_Vc tl;dr while this is the Internet of Silly Things, this is not a security concern for me. If someone hacks the company servers and starts opening and closing my garage door I'll just unplug it or remotely block it from my network.
• arihant 10y ago
  It is borderline psychopathic to track down a user who gave you bad review and brick their device. It's also illegal. People don't even spare Apple for their fuck ups. Who do they really think they are?
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• ajohnclark 10y ago
  Lost opportunity to learn, improve product and turn a detractor around.
• nkrisc 10y ago
  How's this for a review? Buyer beware! Your device could be disabled just because someone at the company doesn't like you. 1/5 stars.
• api 10y ago
  Cloud-to-butt keeps delivering.
• seesomesense 10y ago
  The item has reached international media. British tabloids, Vice and a Polish site are all reporting on it. Karma...
• linsomniac 10y ago
  Personally, if I ended a support request with "wondering what kind of piece of shit I just purchased", returning to Amazon for a refund would probably be the BEST outcome I would expect. But the founders response also could use some work. Always take the high road. "Get a lawyer" is why we can't have nice things.
• mizzao 10y ago
  Welp, seems like a massive Streisand effect (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect) going on here. Really torpedoeing their reviews... https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/reviews/B01KUZ2JPS/ https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/reviews/B01KUZ2JPS/
• davidgh 10y ago
  I was a co-founder of a business where I served as the lead product developer and served as tech support for many years at the same time. When you craft something with your own two hands - pouring sweat and tears (literally) into it - and a customer contacts you with half truths, unfair accusations and has made very little effort to fairly examine the situation, it is incredibly difficult to not take it personally. In the heat of the moment, I occasionally found myself typing up a nasty response. Out of habit, I would re-read my response before sending it. That always caused me to pause. I don't recall a situation where I sent my original gut reaction. Inevitably, I would re-write the response in a much less personal and much more professional tone. This caused my customer to (almost always) respond in a similar manner, and in time a personal and professional relationship of trust was the result. Nonetheless, it seemed to be somehow therapeutic to bang out my initial reaction, even though I didn't send it. It allowed me to put my frustrations down on paper, which caused me to think through the situation. It also allowed me to "vent" and blow off the steam caused by my ooo-so-personal connection to the business. And perhaps most importantly, it allowed me to see that the nature of my gut response was at least partially unjustified, somewhat immature and certainly unprofessional. I shudder to think of the opportunities (and genuine friendships) that would have been forever lost if I had pushed "send" on my initial responses. The satisfaction of such responses lasts but a moment yet the consequences last forever.
• thrillgore 10y ago
  Garadget probably just cost themselves a lot of potential customers.
• gargravarr 10y ago
  Seen from the company's perspective, a user posting a negative Amazon review BEFORE contacting the manufacturer for help is upsetting, especially when as others have noted, it's a product you've invested a lot in, and suddenly you have someone publicly advising others not to buy it. Of course this can cause even a well-meaning employee to go straight to damage control. Not that I'm defending the person here, though. This is a total overreaction, and very condascending. Insulting your customer by questioning their maturity is not going to help your relationship, they've basically abandoned all hope of solving the customer's problem right from the start (going directly against their role as customer support) and again tried to do damage control, not realising they're part of the Twitter generation. What's even worse is that the account name is the exact name of the company/product, so it's totally official, and endorsed by the head of the company. If it was any other name, it could be passed off as a rogue representative having a bad day, but to see something like this coming from the official account, that if you don't play how we want you to play, we'll kick you out, is sure to put others off. Not that I needed or ever wanted a 'cloud-connected garage door opener' but hell, I would never buy one from this company now.
  • laurent123456 10y ago
    > a user posting a negative Amazon review BEFORE contacting the manufacturer for help is upsetting I don't know about that to be honest. Contacting the manufacturer, trying to work with them to get it working, it's all nice but actually it's just another step to turn customers into free QA staff. Companies managed to make this acceptable for software, then for videogames, and now they try with regular devices. If it's released, if it's on Amazon, it has to work. If it doesn't, I'm glad the guy complains about it and rate it one star, so that I don't buy it myself and waste time with a buggy device.
    • gargravarr 10y ago
      I don't disagree on the QA staff point, but any new product, no matter how well designed, will have problems. And this is across anything that can be bought and sold, software, devices, ideas... nothing is ever perfect first time. A related concept is that no amount of testing is ever going to cover every corner case. I mean, for the sake of argument, let's say this guy's iPhone hasn't been updated in who-knows-how-long and is running an OS that's five years past its sell-by date. It's probably next to impossible to buy an identical phone to test with, but their software needs an update that was introduced two years ago, and there's no way around it. This all could have been conveyed in a calm and pleasant (and constructive) forum thread without resorting to name-calling on anyone's part. I get that first impressions stick, make no mistake, and having the product fall on its face as soon as you get it out of the box is one of the worst. To a degree, users have unrealistic expectations (I'm a developer-turned-engineer), but companies are guilty of that by letting their marketing divisions claim perfection to the point of making your morning tea the moment you open the package. Just saying that, yes, an out-of-box experience gone bad is not what you pay for, but a polite email to the company or seller can often resolve it quietly and calmly, and in the extreme case, they'll offer a refund. I've dealt with several bad buying experiences this way and usually end up rewarding the seller for doing their utmost to make things right after a firm but professional email exchange. No need for cursing, just telling the seller you are unhappy. Of course, being more technical than the average, my expectations are probably much closer to reality from the outset. Most people buying into the IoT market seem to be average Joe's expecting magic. If the company had responded correctly, this could well have been a positive outcome and the circumstances that caused the initial complaint nullified, so nobody else has a similar out-of-the-box experience, and the one-star review becomes obsolete. In that scenario, I as a seller would be extremely eager not to let that one bad experience spread and taint perceptions of my product. Of course, that didn't happen here. The company is way more at fault, no question, but the buyer had no reason to curse a device that didn't live up to his expectations, however unrealistic they are, until the company has had a chance to explain themselves (whether they take it or not). However, now it's all blown up. As for whoever's behind that official forum account, I sincerely hope they're either fired, or if it's the boss himself, his product probably deserves to fail. No room in this world for two Elon Musks...
• konceptz 10y ago
  Just an FYI update for those still looking. Admin posted a response: <Quote> Ok, calm down everybody. Save your pitchforks and torches for your elected representatives. This only lack the death treats now. The firing of the customer was never about the Amazon review, just wanted to distance from the toxic individual ASAP. Admittedly not a slickest PR move on my part. Note taken. A quote from a random guy132. PS: Anybody has Streisand's phone number? </quote>
  • justin66 10y ago
    It's mostly just too bad modern finance doesn't offer a way to short the stock of a small indiegogo thing that's doomed to fail...
• HelloNurse 10y ago
  When judging the social and technical skills, business sense, self-preservation instincts etc. of the involved parties, consider that these people are special enough to devise and produce a ridiculously unsound IoT device and to buy it. Learning about this incident made me feel on the winning side of natural selection.
• TEEKAYBINATOR 10y ago
  https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurradio/comments/5iklei/ham_radio_deluxe_support_disabled_the_software_of/ https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurradio/comments/5iklei/ham_ra... ahh memories.
• LeoNatan25 10y ago
  Why was the original title modified? I thought it captured exactly what happened perfectly, and was not a click-bait. Anyway, the Amazon page is getting attention from ArsTechnica and Vice journalists. It's getting more and more interesting.
• libeclipse 10y ago
  Someone left some advice for the customer of the company on the linked thread and that rep deleted it and locked it. Does anyone have it?
• jalibster 10y ago
  Unless this unprofessional business owner not only refunds the money but establishes in writing no harm has befallen the owner as a result of using his device, he's probably got a lawsuit coming. The fact of the case are public knowledge now. No amount of abuse by customer legally or ethically justifies removing the primary feature of the device that was purchased. Money must be refunded before the account can be closed. The behavior is not only unprofessional and incredibly poor judgement as well as emotional control. This company has a an open-shut case against them from what I know of the law here. It also sets a nasty precedent that would possible compel to throw the book at the business owner to discourage similar behavior from other IoT companies. Really bad call, Garadget. IoT's are proving dangerous enough without company owners doing things like this.
• jalibster 10y ago
  Unless this unprofessional business owner not only refunds the money but establishes in writing no harm has befallen the owner as a result of using his device, he's probably got a lawsuit coming. The fact of the case are public knowledge now. No amount of abuse by customer legally or ethically justifies removing the primary feature of the device that was purchased. Money must be refunded before the account can be closed. The behavior is not only unprofessional and incredibly poor judgement as well as emotional control. This company has a an open-shut case against them from what I know of the law here. It also sets a nasty precedent that would possible compel to throw the book at the business owner to discourage similar behavior from other IoT companies. Really bad call, Garadget. IoT's are proving dangerous enough without company owners doing things like this.
• aanm1988 10y ago
  I'm gonna go against the grain here and say I don't think this should be legal. Hiding behind the idea "we only sold you a license" is ridiculous. You sold a product, it includes supporting software. Unless their is actual misuse by the customer you shouldn't have the right to arbitrarily terminate that license. That seems like a contract that clearly shouldn't be allowed.
• jinishans 10y ago
  The question is not about this IoT Garage Door disabled, it's about how safe our devices are if it's gone connect to the providers server. I'm sure this Startup will comeup with a story saying it was by a 'so called' bad employee and try to manage the PR for the day. How's that this and other co are going to safeguard our data/access to our own product/home if it happens to say a Smoke Detector or Smart Lock if we give bad review. Will they unlock it and claim its' a glitch because I've given a bad Review and sigh go nuke and use abusive language ? What the hell is this ? I thought the Govt alone is acting in a Totalitarian mentality, looks like it's given Co. also the feeling that they can act like this in a Democracy. What ST is this ? Who to believe ? What to buy ? What if a Smart Smoke Detector co employee decides not to alarm/notify me when my kids are at home alone ? If a life is lost will they be able to give back ? We need LAWS to CLOSE DOWN such Co. so that they don't hide behind 'so called' bad employee or 'so called' bug/glitch in their program. It raises a larger question, are Smart Devices are really Smart or gone screw us one day like this ?
• HurrdurrHodor 10y ago
  I'm kind of happy that this is happening. Whatever the legal situation may be this is just wrong and it needs to be fixed. On steam you don't buy games anymore you only buy the right to play them so you cannot resell them. You are effectively buying a service. Now in this case you are buying a device that does not work without the service and you don't have a right to the service? No, this does not make sense.
• itsnotvalid 10y ago
  Even if the customer is a dick, you can't lock someone out of their own door. Now let's think again when you trust some third-party for something as important as your home door.
• bartread 10y ago
  To be honest if I'd bought a product that in some way controlled access to my property and which malfunctioned and locked me out, I'd probably not show too much patience either. There are any number of reasons it could be important for me to get into my house or garage right now: I've left the stove on, I've left a soldering iron on on my workbench, my partner has collapsed, I've popped out to pick something up from the garden and have accidentally locked myself out and my baby is inside unattended, or I'm just really effing tired at the end of a long and draining day at work and it's that one last straw (and the list goes on). Sure, I probably wouldn't lead with swearing, but I can pretty much guarantee that if the situation wasn't resolved very quickly swearing would result. All of this just strengthens my resolve against the idea of living in a "smart" home. Give me a physical lock and key, and a decent EDC solution for carrying the latter, and I'm happy. The one improvement you could make (which a friend pointed out to me the other day) is to add central locking. I.e., I leave by any exit and lock the door, and every door and window in the house locks. Of course, there are ways that could backfire so it needs some careful thought, but you get the idea. Anyway, I won't be buying a Garadget or any similar device anytime soon.
• stefek99 10y ago
  > I'm happy to provide the technical support to the customers on my Saturday night but I'm not going to tolerate any tantrums. > At this time your only option is return Garadget to Amazon for refund. Your unit ID 2f0036... will be denied server connection. HELL YEAH! Finally someone with the balls! Bending over backwards - NOPE - why don't you contact support first? Why do you use course words? WELL DONE