4 ms·

> What's interesting about it? If that occurs past the warranty period, you have to pay out of pocket to replace the defective part like any other. > There's p

by tmh88j 4y ago

> What's interesting about it? If that occurs past the warranty period, you have to pay out of pocket to replace the defective part like any other. > There's plenty of examples of bad design in motorcycles. Sure, but you don't have to pay just to use the hardware you already own. If a part breaks you're paying 3x for that component - Once with the initial purchase, once to "use it", and again to replace it if it breaks. Do you work for KTM? You've posted numerous times in this thread defending these awful practices and every single response has basically been "I'm fine with being nickel and dimed because the company needs to make money too", which is nonsense because the parts are already paid for.

avalys 4y ago
What “additional fees on top of replacing the part” are you talking about? I don’t work for KTM, I work in optical R&D. I’ve posted multiple times in the thread because I find the groupthink on this topic ridiculous and I enjoy pointing it out. Do you think prices should be set by parts cost alone? What’s the parts cost of a copy of Halo?
- tmh88j 4y ago
  > What “additional fees on top of replacing the part” are you talking about? At this point I'm not even sure you understand what's being discussed, but I thought it was blatantly obvious > At 1500km/932 miles, the functionality is taken away automatically, and you are then software blocked from using the full capabilities of a vehicle you purchased until you pay for it to be unblocked.
  - avalys 4y ago
    I think you’re the one who’s not following the thread you’re responding to here. Why don’t you look at the post I immediately responded to - the author mentioned a more specific scenario than the post you quoted.
    - tmh88j 4y ago
      Am I being trolled by a bot right now? It's very obvious the comment you responded to is in line with what I've been saying. > It will be interesting to see what happens if one of the "subscription" hardware parts that has been deactivated has a problem that renders the rest of the bike unusable I don't know how else to make it clear. You've defended numerous times paying fees to use hardware that's already been paid for. I don't understand how you're so enthusiastic about paying twice.
      - avalys 4y ago
        The comment I was responding to asked: > what happens if one of the "subscription" hardware parts that has been deactivated has a problem that renders the rest of the bike unusable. In this hypothetical scenario (which is quite unlikely in the first place), you pay for the hardware once when you buy the bike, and again if it were to hypothetically fail out of warranty and disable the bike. My point is that this is the same as any other out-of-warranty hardware component. You are imagining a different situation, I guess, and asking what happens if you are paying for a subscription for this functionality and the required hardware fails out of warranty. I don't know about that but the article doesn't actually talk about a subscription at all. And regarding being enthusiastic about paying twice: in my mind, parts cost for the subsystems we're talking about here is just completely inconsequential. And so the two groups that are griping here are: A) People complaining about paying what amounts to $25 extra for some sensors and electronic components they're "not going to use". B) People complaining about paying $25 in the base price and $475 in software upgrades, rather than $500 as a single line item, for something they would have bought anyway. I think both groups are being silly. And yes, I don't really care about "paying twice". If you think the result here is that the total cost of the KTM is too high relative to the competition - well that is a really boring complaint. You can always go buy another bike.

by tmh88j 4y ago

avalys 4y ago

What “additional fees on top of replacing the part” are you talking about? I don’t work for KTM, I work in optical R&D. I’ve posted multiple times in the thread because I find the groupthink on this topic ridiculous and I enjoy pointing it out. Do you think prices should be set by parts cost alone? What’s the parts cost of a copy of Halo?

tmh88j 4y ago
> What “additional fees on top of replacing the part” are you talking about? At this point I'm not even sure you understand what's being discussed, but I thought it was blatantly obvious > At 1500km/932 miles, the functionality is taken away automatically, and you are then software blocked from using the full capabilities of a vehicle you purchased until you pay for it to be unblocked.
- avalys 4y ago
  I think you’re the one who’s not following the thread you’re responding to here. Why don’t you look at the post I immediately responded to - the author mentioned a more specific scenario than the post you quoted.
  - tmh88j 4y ago
    Am I being trolled by a bot right now? It's very obvious the comment you responded to is in line with what I've been saying. > It will be interesting to see what happens if one of the "subscription" hardware parts that has been deactivated has a problem that renders the rest of the bike unusable I don't know how else to make it clear. You've defended numerous times paying fees to use hardware that's already been paid for. I don't understand how you're so enthusiastic about paying twice.
    - avalys 4y ago
      The comment I was responding to asked: > what happens if one of the "subscription" hardware parts that has been deactivated has a problem that renders the rest of the bike unusable. In this hypothetical scenario (which is quite unlikely in the first place), you pay for the hardware once when you buy the bike, and again if it were to hypothetically fail out of warranty and disable the bike. My point is that this is the same as any other out-of-warranty hardware component. You are imagining a different situation, I guess, and asking what happens if you are paying for a subscription for this functionality and the required hardware fails out of warranty. I don't know about that but the article doesn't actually talk about a subscription at all. And regarding being enthusiastic about paying twice: in my mind, parts cost for the subsystems we're talking about here is just completely inconsequential. And so the two groups that are griping here are: A) People complaining about paying what amounts to $25 extra for some sensors and electronic components they're "not going to use". B) People complaining about paying $25 in the base price and $475 in software upgrades, rather than $500 as a single line item, for something they would have bought anyway. I think both groups are being silly. And yes, I don't really care about "paying twice". If you think the result here is that the total cost of the KTM is too high relative to the competition - well that is a really boring complaint. You can always go buy another bike.