6 ms·

As long as they refund people it's all good. Would of been nice for them to open source the SDK too.

wongarsu 2y ago
To a consumer it's fine. For a business the amount of money spent is only one part of the equation. Some places will have spent significant time both in the procurement process and setting this thing up. Time that can be translated to opportunity cost. As the person proposing such purchases you want to be able to show successes. Amazon just bricking it means you don't have much to show for, probably burnt political capital for nothing to get these, and if anyone was opposed to getting these they are now proven right. Both on the organizational and individual level these kinds of things are far more impactful in business products than in a hobbyist product
- hdhshdhshdjd 2y ago
  Exactly, time is money. Amazon wasted customer time, therefore money. Very bad look.
- CydeWeys 2y ago
  It's also not necessarily super easy to refund money to a business. I know that accounts receivable at my company is a serious pain in the ass, and it's not a given that refunds on anything purchased via PO are gonna be easy or quick. And of course there are restrictions on how you can purchase things that might easily have required these to be bought via PO (rather than corporate CC).
  - j16sdiz 2y ago
    It's not only a refund. It's a refund + $300 credits. Have fun doing accounting for those credits.
- Someone 2y ago
  > To a consumer it's fine. Is it? Let’s say I buy a Foo rather than a Bar because it brings better value for money. A few months later, the device is bricked, and I get my money back, but Bar doesn’t sell my 2nd choice anymore or it got more expensive. Even if it isn’t, I may have made additional investments in time (e.g. learning how to operate it) or money (e.g. buying an longer charging cable) that I won’t get back.
  - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
    I think basically any consumer buying something like this thinks of it as an expensive toy, not a permanent investment in their lifestyle. What would the Bar even be to the Astro's Foo?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - chillfox 2y ago
    Definitely not ok with Comsumer products either, especially once they are in this price range. It's basically in the range of an expensive laptop, fancy fridge + dishwasher, big couch, etc... Something that might have taken multiple weekends to shop for and maybe even a day off work to get delivered, possibly followed by months of personalization for an electronics product like a laptop.
- throwaway562if1 2y ago
  [dead]
greenthrow 2y ago
It's not all good just because you refund someone. You're also ending something they bought to fulfill a purpose. Making every device require a specific back end to continue working and making them unusable if the manufacturer no longer wants to provide that back end should be illegal. They should have to open the devices up. This practice creates so much unnecessary e-waste.
krisoft 2y ago
> As long as they refund people it's all good. If you are a business owner who bought one of these and happy with the device would you be “all good” with a refund? There are costs associated with fielding new tech. At the minimum now people have to evaluate and install some new tech/service. Possibly you are now scrambling around to get a new guard service which can keep your property secure, perhaps at an elevated rate. At the worst your property is going to be burglarised because of the lack of security coverage. This sucks. It damages Amazon’s reputation a tiny little bit. Every time anyone evaluates some tech or service they think about “will this thing go away one day and leave me in the lurch”? Doing this just increased the estimated probability of Amazon flaking out on you just a tiny bit. That means the next time they are selling something their own brand they will have just a tiny bit harder time to convince companies to be the early adopters. This kind of damage is cumulative in a non-linear way. And reputation is one of those things which are very hard to restore once you have ruined it. There is nothing “all good” about it. At best this is an “on balance of costs and benefits this course of action was less damaging for Amazon than the alternatives”.
- Aeolun 2y ago
  Us hearing it is probably the most damaging. After all, they know only 30 people in the entire US bought the thing (number for illustration).
  - krisoft 2y ago
    > Us hearing it is probably the most damaging. Without a doubt. > After all, they know only 30 people in the entire US bought the thing Do you have a source for that? > number for illustration What do you mean by that? What is it illustrating? Is this some post-truth thing where you make up something and then provide a weird disclaimer to let people know that you just made up a thing out of thin air? If so, it ain’t cool.
    - lovemenot 2y ago
      They could have said "only X were sold". Or X sold, where X is a very low" number". Instead, they went with an abitrary low number and declared it to be arbitrary. const ILLUSTRATIVE_LOW_SALES = 30 Seems fine to me.
mihaaly 2y ago
I am doubtful that people bought these to park their money in it so as long they get back the money 'it is all good'. Whatever the vague use of this was that failed so bad those purchased it for a purpose that needs to be fulfilled, again. Waste of efforts, have to try again. The root comment was not about money but reputation. How confidently can someone buy something from Amazon to use if a 'sorry, I changed my mind, give it back and solve your task some other way, I am out of here!' is hanging over the head.
- 999900000999 2y ago
  They could of also supported it for another 2 or 3 months, to get to a full year( most electronics are only warrantied for a year), and then bricked them without a refund. It's the risk of buying experimental tech. If you don't want this to happen you can wait until it's an established product.
colechristensen 2y ago
It’s not “all good”. Businesses have to invest in change, employee time is expensive, refunding equipment doesn’t refund the cost of resources put into the project and resources required to change after the plug is pulled.
kccqzy 2y ago
I mean Google refunded all Stadia customers and yet many people (including many friends of mine) were still mad at them for canceling it.
- chillfox 2y ago
  Well, yeah, those people now need to find a new solution and they lost their data (save files).
  - kelvie 2y ago
    The save files were available on Google Takeout, I successfully transferred my save into steam for Into the Breach, for example.
    - chillfox 2y ago
      sure, but the Google Takeout process is too complicated for the average gamer. These days with most platforms managing cloud saves for you most people have lost the skill of handling actual save files if they ever learned it to begin with.
password4321 2y ago
I miss my Amazon Glow and would love an SDK. It was clearly sold as a trial run and refunded but I haven't found a replacement that works as seamlessly.

To a consumer it's fine. For a business the amount of money spent is only one part of the equation. Some places will have spent significant time both in the procurement process and setting this thing up. Time that can be translated to opportunity cost. As the person proposing such purchases you want to be able to show successes. Amazon just bricking it means you don't have much to show for, probably burnt political capital for nothing to get these, and if anyone was opposed to getting these they are now proven right. Both on the organizational and individual level these kinds of things are far more impactful in business products than in a hobbyist product

hdhshdhshdjd 2y ago
Exactly, time is money. Amazon wasted customer time, therefore money. Very bad look.
CydeWeys 2y ago
It's also not necessarily super easy to refund money to a business. I know that accounts receivable at my company is a serious pain in the ass, and it's not a given that refunds on anything purchased via PO are gonna be easy or quick. And of course there are restrictions on how you can purchase things that might easily have required these to be bought via PO (rather than corporate CC).
- j16sdiz 2y ago
  It's not only a refund. It's a refund + $300 credits. Have fun doing accounting for those credits.
Someone 2y ago
> To a consumer it's fine. Is it? Let’s say I buy a Foo rather than a Bar because it brings better value for money. A few months later, the device is bricked, and I get my money back, but Bar doesn’t sell my 2nd choice anymore or it got more expensive. Even if it isn’t, I may have made additional investments in time (e.g. learning how to operate it) or money (e.g. buying an longer charging cable) that I won’t get back.
- SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
  I think basically any consumer buying something like this thinks of it as an expensive toy, not a permanent investment in their lifestyle. What would the Bar even be to the Astro's Foo?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- chillfox 2y ago
  Definitely not ok with Comsumer products either, especially once they are in this price range. It's basically in the range of an expensive laptop, fancy fridge + dishwasher, big couch, etc... Something that might have taken multiple weekends to shop for and maybe even a day off work to get delivered, possibly followed by months of personalization for an electronics product like a laptop.
throwaway562if1 2y ago
[dead]

greenthrow 2y ago

It's not all good just because you refund someone. You're also ending something they bought to fulfill a purpose. Making every device require a specific back end to continue working and making them unusable if the manufacturer no longer wants to provide that back end should be illegal. They should have to open the devices up. This practice creates so much unnecessary e-waste.

krisoft 2y ago

> As long as they refund people it's all good. If you are a business owner who bought one of these and happy with the device would you be “all good” with a refund? There are costs associated with fielding new tech. At the minimum now people have to evaluate and install some new tech/service. Possibly you are now scrambling around to get a new guard service which can keep your property secure, perhaps at an elevated rate. At the worst your property is going to be burglarised because of the lack of security coverage. This sucks. It damages Amazon’s reputation a tiny little bit. Every time anyone evaluates some tech or service they think about “will this thing go away one day and leave me in the lurch”? Doing this just increased the estimated probability of Amazon flaking out on you just a tiny bit. That means the next time they are selling something their own brand they will have just a tiny bit harder time to convince companies to be the early adopters. This kind of damage is cumulative in a non-linear way. And reputation is one of those things which are very hard to restore once you have ruined it. There is nothing “all good” about it. At best this is an “on balance of costs and benefits this course of action was less damaging for Amazon than the alternatives”.

Aeolun 2y ago
Us hearing it is probably the most damaging. After all, they know only 30 people in the entire US bought the thing (number for illustration).
- krisoft 2y ago
  > Us hearing it is probably the most damaging. Without a doubt. > After all, they know only 30 people in the entire US bought the thing Do you have a source for that? > number for illustration What do you mean by that? What is it illustrating? Is this some post-truth thing where you make up something and then provide a weird disclaimer to let people know that you just made up a thing out of thin air? If so, it ain’t cool.
  - lovemenot 2y ago
    They could have said "only X were sold". Or X sold, where X is a very low" number". Instead, they went with an abitrary low number and declared it to be arbitrary. const ILLUSTRATIVE_LOW_SALES = 30 Seems fine to me.

mihaaly 2y ago

I am doubtful that people bought these to park their money in it so as long they get back the money 'it is all good'. Whatever the vague use of this was that failed so bad those purchased it for a purpose that needs to be fulfilled, again. Waste of efforts, have to try again. The root comment was not about money but reputation. How confidently can someone buy something from Amazon to use if a 'sorry, I changed my mind, give it back and solve your task some other way, I am out of here!' is hanging over the head.

999900000999 2y ago
They could of also supported it for another 2 or 3 months, to get to a full year( most electronics are only warrantied for a year), and then bricked them without a refund. It's the risk of buying experimental tech. If you don't want this to happen you can wait until it's an established product.

colechristensen 2y ago

It’s not “all good”. Businesses have to invest in change, employee time is expensive, refunding equipment doesn’t refund the cost of resources put into the project and resources required to change after the plug is pulled.

kccqzy 2y ago

I mean Google refunded all Stadia customers and yet many people (including many friends of mine) were still mad at them for canceling it.

chillfox 2y ago
Well, yeah, those people now need to find a new solution and they lost their data (save files).
- kelvie 2y ago
  The save files were available on Google Takeout, I successfully transferred my save into steam for Into the Breach, for example.
  - chillfox 2y ago
    sure, but the Google Takeout process is too complicated for the average gamer. These days with most platforms managing cloud saves for you most people have lost the skill of handling actual save files if they ever learned it to begin with.

password4321 2y ago

I miss my Amazon Glow and would love an SDK. It was clearly sold as a trial run and refunded but I haven't found a replacement that works as seamlessly.