3 ms·

Sure, How about Google borking a user's device with OTA updates and then telling users to go pound dirt with their silence? https://9to5google.com/2015/04/10/n

Sure, How about Google borking a user's device with OTA updates and then telling users to go pound dirt with their silence? https://9to5google.com/2015/04/10/nexus-5-nexus-7-bricked-android-lollipop/ https://9to5google.com/2015/04/10/nexus-5-nexus-7-bricked-an...

arcticbull 5y ago
That appears to be (a) unintentional, which is a critical distinction (b) 7 years ago and (c) if the comments section is to be believed, resolved by calling Google up, explaining the situation and receiving a complementary warranty extension. To their credit they stood behind it. Mine was repaired, FREE (October 2015) The delay was, more than likely, simply that big companies move slow. This is not the same thing.
- dse1982 5y ago
  What about this: https://www.inc.com/jason-aten/google-is-intentionally-making-its-products-worse-for-users-reason-might-surprise-you.html https://www.inc.com/jason-aten/google-is-intentionally-makin...
- ethanwillis 5y ago
  Point A is a simplification. Point B is irrelevant. If you think it's bad it doesn't matter when it's done. Or will you say that in a few years what you think is bad that this developer has done is no longer bad? This is flawed reasoning. Point C you're sugar coating it. He initially was denied and given the run around and only after making a sufficient fuss was he deemed worthy of a warranty extension. How many others weren't? It's the same thing in american healthcare where insurance companies will "Accidentally" deny coverage a few times for certain things just to get the less persistent people to give in and not bother fighting for what they're owed. But here's the real context on Point A since you don't want to actually look into it further and most outlets aren't going to bother doing it either. Once Google realized what was happening, well, it kept happening. They were pushing these OTA updates in some cases with 0 user intervention. Not to mention you're taking the comments out of order. That specific commenter had his device bricked multiple times. Why don't you quote that part of his dialogue? Maybe you should ask why devices would be bricked in the same way multiple times?
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    I'm sorry but there's no comparison between mishandling a bug causing an issue for customers unintentionally, and intentionally nuking all your customers from orbit with a malicious commit because you threw a temper tantrum. There's a ton of good ways to handle this. Find a new owner, for instance.

arcticbull 5y ago

That appears to be (a) unintentional, which is a critical distinction (b) 7 years ago and (c) if the comments section is to be believed, resolved by calling Google up, explaining the situation and receiving a complementary warranty extension. To their credit they stood behind it. Mine was repaired, FREE (October 2015) The delay was, more than likely, simply that big companies move slow. This is not the same thing.

dse1982 5y ago
What about this: https://www.inc.com/jason-aten/google-is-intentionally-making-its-products-worse-for-users-reason-might-surprise-you.html https://www.inc.com/jason-aten/google-is-intentionally-makin...
ethanwillis 5y ago
Point A is a simplification. Point B is irrelevant. If you think it's bad it doesn't matter when it's done. Or will you say that in a few years what you think is bad that this developer has done is no longer bad? This is flawed reasoning. Point C you're sugar coating it. He initially was denied and given the run around and only after making a sufficient fuss was he deemed worthy of a warranty extension. How many others weren't? It's the same thing in american healthcare where insurance companies will "Accidentally" deny coverage a few times for certain things just to get the less persistent people to give in and not bother fighting for what they're owed. But here's the real context on Point A since you don't want to actually look into it further and most outlets aren't going to bother doing it either. Once Google realized what was happening, well, it kept happening. They were pushing these OTA updates in some cases with 0 user intervention. Not to mention you're taking the comments out of order. That specific commenter had his device bricked multiple times. Why don't you quote that part of his dialogue? Maybe you should ask why devices would be bricked in the same way multiple times?
- arcticbull 5y ago
  I'm sorry but there's no comparison between mishandling a bug causing an issue for customers unintentionally, and intentionally nuking all your customers from orbit with a malicious commit because you threw a temper tantrum. There's a ton of good ways to handle this. Find a new owner, for instance.