5 ms·

How scummy, not even a banner saying that support is ending.

by makerofspoons 5y ago

pvarangot 5y ago
It's worse than that, this ones haven't even had security patches for a while.
andybak 5y ago
Let's all buy one and join a class action.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  I think you should habe a valid claim, if you buy a new device you still have warranty and to have a device disabled during warranty preiod is unprecedented.
- jeffbee 5y ago
  Your beef would be with the retailer, not with Google. It is the retailer who makes the implied warranty of suitability for purpose, not the manufacturer (who also, in this case, is not Google).
  - commoner 5y ago
    That's not accurate, at least in the United States. Product warranties are issued by manufacturers, and Google's pages for TP-Link[1] and Asus[2] confirm this. The manufacturer warranty is 2 years for both the TP-Link[3] and Asus[4] OnHub models. If there were a class action, it would be against TP-Link and Asus. These manufacturers would then take the losses into consideration before collaborating with Google in the future. [1] https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/6279787 https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/6279... [2] https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/6314187 https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/6314... [3] https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tp-link-google-onhub-ac1900-dual-band-wi-fi-router-black/4409400.p?skuId=4409400 https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tp-link-google-onhub-ac1900-dua... [4] https://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-onhub-wireless-ac-router-with-nat-firewall-slate-gray/4588401.p?skuId=4588401 https://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-onhub-wireless-ac-router-w...
    - jeffbee 5y ago
      Those are not implied warrantees. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_warranty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_warranty
      - commoner 5y ago
        Yes, maufacturer warranties are not implied warranties. They are explicit promises from the manufacturer to repair or replace products that fall below certain standards within a period of time. For example, the TP-Link limited warranty explicitly identifies TP-Link USA Corp. as the warrantor: > TP-Link USA Corp. (“TP-Link USA”) provides a limited warranty on all eligible TP-Link products purchased in the United States. https://www.tp-link.com/us/support/replacement-warranty/ https://www.tp-link.com/us/support/replacement-warranty/
        jeffbee 5y ago
        They specifically end that warranty at a fixed point after the EOL date without regard to sale date. If you buy a wifi router and you take it home and it cannot be setup because that backing services have been turned down, it is the retailer with whom you have a claim. They sold you a product that was not suited to its purpose.
        commoner 5y ago
        > They specifically end that warranty at a fixed point after the EOL date without regard to sale date. TP-Link's warranty says otherwise: > The limited warranty starts from the original data of purchase and is only applicable to the original purchaser of the product. > If the defective product(s) are discontinued, end of life, or out of stock, TP-Link will issue a replacement with product(s) of equivalent value or features. TP-Link is the company that made a promise to support its routers for 2 years from the date of purchase, not the retailer. Edit: I do agree that the retailer has a responsibility to provide refunds for returns of products that are not fully functional at the time of sale or within the retailer's return period. But, that doesn't cancel the manufacturer warranty, which is separate and almost always lasts longer than the retailer's return period.
  - gpm 5y ago
    Google just told me "OnHub regularly updates its software with the newest features, so it never stops working well." (emphasis added) Google presumably financially benefits from me buying it's products. I'd be shocked if there wasn't a valid fraud claim here (assuming I had recently purchased a device without being aware of the end of support). This isn't just a question of warranty, it's a question of lying for financial benefit.

How scummy, not even a banner saying that support is ending.

pvarangot 5y ago

It's worse than that, this ones haven't even had security patches for a while.

andybak 5y ago

Let's all buy one and join a class action.

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
I think you should habe a valid claim, if you buy a new device you still have warranty and to have a device disabled during warranty preiod is unprecedented.
jeffbee 5y ago
Your beef would be with the retailer, not with Google. It is the retailer who makes the implied warranty of suitability for purpose, not the manufacturer (who also, in this case, is not Google).
- commoner 5y ago
  That's not accurate, at least in the United States. Product warranties are issued by manufacturers, and Google's pages for TP-Link[1] and Asus[2] confirm this. The manufacturer warranty is 2 years for both the TP-Link[3] and Asus[4] OnHub models. If there were a class action, it would be against TP-Link and Asus. These manufacturers would then take the losses into consideration before collaborating with Google in the future. [1] https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/6279787 https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/6279... [2] https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/6314187 https://support.google.com/product-documentation/answer/6314... [3] https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tp-link-google-onhub-ac1900-dual-band-wi-fi-router-black/4409400.p?skuId=4409400 https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tp-link-google-onhub-ac1900-dua... [4] https://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-onhub-wireless-ac-router-with-nat-firewall-slate-gray/4588401.p?skuId=4588401 https://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-onhub-wireless-ac-router-w...
  - jeffbee 5y ago
    Those are not implied warrantees. Please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_warranty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_warranty
    - commoner 5y ago
      Yes, maufacturer warranties are not implied warranties. They are explicit promises from the manufacturer to repair or replace products that fall below certain standards within a period of time. For example, the TP-Link limited warranty explicitly identifies TP-Link USA Corp. as the warrantor: > TP-Link USA Corp. (“TP-Link USA”) provides a limited warranty on all eligible TP-Link products purchased in the United States. https://www.tp-link.com/us/support/replacement-warranty/ https://www.tp-link.com/us/support/replacement-warranty/
      - jeffbee 5y ago
        They specifically end that warranty at a fixed point after the EOL date without regard to sale date. If you buy a wifi router and you take it home and it cannot be setup because that backing services have been turned down, it is the retailer with whom you have a claim. They sold you a product that was not suited to its purpose.
        commoner 5y ago
        > They specifically end that warranty at a fixed point after the EOL date without regard to sale date. TP-Link's warranty says otherwise: > The limited warranty starts from the original data of purchase and is only applicable to the original purchaser of the product. > If the defective product(s) are discontinued, end of life, or out of stock, TP-Link will issue a replacement with product(s) of equivalent value or features. TP-Link is the company that made a promise to support its routers for 2 years from the date of purchase, not the retailer. Edit: I do agree that the retailer has a responsibility to provide refunds for returns of products that are not fully functional at the time of sale or within the retailer's return period. But, that doesn't cancel the manufacturer warranty, which is separate and almost always lasts longer than the retailer's return period.
- gpm 5y ago
  Google just told me "OnHub regularly updates its software with the newest features, so it never stops working well." (emphasis added) Google presumably financially benefits from me buying it's products. I'd be shocked if there wasn't a valid fraud claim here (assuming I had recently purchased a device without being aware of the end of support). This isn't just a question of warranty, it's a question of lying for financial benefit.