4 ms·

At least in that case they only make changes in a new model year. In the electronics industry substitutions are often made while retaining the the exact same SK

by magila 12y ago

At least in that case they only make changes in a new model year. In the electronics industry substitutions are often made while retaining the the exact same SKU. So even savvy consumers have no way of knowing exactly what they are going to get. For example sellers of blank optical media will sometimes switch to a different supplier and the only way to tell is to check the MID after you have purchased them. Hard drive manufactures will will also switch to a totally different "cost reduced" design while retaining the same model number. Then there's the infamous panel lottery when buying a monitor from certain unscrupulous companies. I'm mildly surprised there hasn't been a high profile class action lawsuit over these practices.

magila 12y ago
I also forgot about consumer routers which sometimes ship totally different hardware under the same model number.
- kentonv 12y ago
  Samsung has been known to ship Android tablets containing completely different SoCs under the same model. For example, the new Galaxy Tab S might contain an Exynos SoC or a Qualcomm SoC. They're essentially two completely different tablets with the same name and exterior. Though, my understanding is that in their case it's not so much a bait-and-switch as a supply chain issue: they actually want to sell more units than any one SoC provider can deliver. Big pain for developers, though, when they're trying to track down a user-reported bug on one of these things.
  - tartuffe78 12y ago
    Another reason is 4G, for awhile (still maybe?) Samsung wasn't building any Exynos Chipsets with 4G radios, so markets where that mattered (US, etc.) they used Qualcomm
  - dagw 12y ago
    My understanding is that it's due to the Exynos SoC not supporting 4G, while the Qualcomm does. If you buy the 4G version you'll always get the Qualcomm version, and if you buy the wifi version you always get the Exynos version. So it's not like it's completely random what SoC you end up with.
    - kentonv 12y ago
      Ah, that makes sense too. I've heard (from Android engineers I know) that supply chain issues have been the reason in the past, but I honestly don't know if that's the case for this particular device.
    - testrun 12y ago
      You are right, and they have different SKU numbers.
  - MikusR 12y ago
    Except Samsung has different model numbers for different SOC's (Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 in N9005/Exynos 5420 in N9000) and those are in comparable speed.
- wtallis 12y ago
  It's extremely common to swap out major components without changing the name and number the router is advertised under, but in every instance I'm aware of there was a version number that was incremented on the packaging, eg. WRT54G v4.0 to v5.0 halved the memory (and v7.0 switched from Broadcom to Atheros and v7.2 switched back). It doesn't really help if you're buying online, but if you're buying from a brick-and-mortar store you can pretty much always know what you're getting if you read the fine print.
driverdan 12y ago
> Then there's the infamous panel lottery when buying a monitor from certain unscrupulous companies You mean like Apple using two different LCDs in retina MacBook Pros, with the LG model being junk?
- tomp 12y ago
  I can't tell if this is sarcasm (in which case it deserves a downvote, plus it's a bad sarcasm), or if it's true (in which case you should've included a source/explanation.
  - dopamean 12y ago
    There was a situation not long ago with some Macbook monitors going bad and it turned out Apple was getting the panels from Samsung and LG and it was the LG ones going bad. I'm not sure if there was much scandal around it though.
    - nnnnni 12y ago
      Plus, the colors/gamma were weird on one of them... You have to install a special color profile or else the contrast would be really screwy.
  - jychang 12y ago
    It's true, but it doesn't apply in this case. Here's the backstory: When Apple released the retina MBP in 2012, they had 2 suppliers for the 15 inch retina screen: Samsung and LG. To be fair with Apple, isn't gaming the system by giving earlier review models better quality screens. More likely, this is to ensure that instead of relying on one supplier, they can diversify their screen manufacturing so they don't get screwed if one manufacturer has production difficulties. At the time, I had purchased a retina MBP with the LG screen that summer. (You don't know what screen you will get when you buy it). The LG screen, as it turned out, had very bad burn-in problems. After complaining to the Apple store a few times, they finally relented and switched it out for me to the better Samsung screen. The customer service at the time wasn't the best, since Apple should have gone "This is a real issue, if you can show proof of screen burn in on your LG screen, we'll immediately replace it for you" rather than try to brush it under the rug. However, it wasn't a malicious case of screwing over customers after sending better units to reviewers.
tzs 12y ago
What would be the grounds for a class action suit? In all the examples you give, they sell you a good that meets the advertised specs. If someone is advertising generic blank DVDs, for instance, and they happen to sell you TDK media one day, I don't see how you can make a legal case that this binds them to only selling you TDK media. If you want TDK media, you should be buying from someone who advertises TDK media.

by magila 12y ago

magila 12y ago

I also forgot about consumer routers which sometimes ship totally different hardware under the same model number.

kentonv 12y ago
Samsung has been known to ship Android tablets containing completely different SoCs under the same model. For example, the new Galaxy Tab S might contain an Exynos SoC or a Qualcomm SoC. They're essentially two completely different tablets with the same name and exterior. Though, my understanding is that in their case it's not so much a bait-and-switch as a supply chain issue: they actually want to sell more units than any one SoC provider can deliver. Big pain for developers, though, when they're trying to track down a user-reported bug on one of these things.
- tartuffe78 12y ago
  Another reason is 4G, for awhile (still maybe?) Samsung wasn't building any Exynos Chipsets with 4G radios, so markets where that mattered (US, etc.) they used Qualcomm
- dagw 12y ago
  My understanding is that it's due to the Exynos SoC not supporting 4G, while the Qualcomm does. If you buy the 4G version you'll always get the Qualcomm version, and if you buy the wifi version you always get the Exynos version. So it's not like it's completely random what SoC you end up with.
  - kentonv 12y ago
    Ah, that makes sense too. I've heard (from Android engineers I know) that supply chain issues have been the reason in the past, but I honestly don't know if that's the case for this particular device.
  - testrun 12y ago
    You are right, and they have different SKU numbers.
- MikusR 12y ago
  Except Samsung has different model numbers for different SOC's (Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 in N9005/Exynos 5420 in N9000) and those are in comparable speed.
wtallis 12y ago
It's extremely common to swap out major components without changing the name and number the router is advertised under, but in every instance I'm aware of there was a version number that was incremented on the packaging, eg. WRT54G v4.0 to v5.0 halved the memory (and v7.0 switched from Broadcom to Atheros and v7.2 switched back). It doesn't really help if you're buying online, but if you're buying from a brick-and-mortar store you can pretty much always know what you're getting if you read the fine print.

driverdan 12y ago

> Then there's the infamous panel lottery when buying a monitor from certain unscrupulous companies You mean like Apple using two different LCDs in retina MacBook Pros, with the LG model being junk?

tomp 12y ago
I can't tell if this is sarcasm (in which case it deserves a downvote, plus it's a bad sarcasm), or if it's true (in which case you should've included a source/explanation.
- dopamean 12y ago
  There was a situation not long ago with some Macbook monitors going bad and it turned out Apple was getting the panels from Samsung and LG and it was the LG ones going bad. I'm not sure if there was much scandal around it though.
  - nnnnni 12y ago
    Plus, the colors/gamma were weird on one of them... You have to install a special color profile or else the contrast would be really screwy.
- jychang 12y ago
  It's true, but it doesn't apply in this case. Here's the backstory: When Apple released the retina MBP in 2012, they had 2 suppliers for the 15 inch retina screen: Samsung and LG. To be fair with Apple, isn't gaming the system by giving earlier review models better quality screens. More likely, this is to ensure that instead of relying on one supplier, they can diversify their screen manufacturing so they don't get screwed if one manufacturer has production difficulties. At the time, I had purchased a retina MBP with the LG screen that summer. (You don't know what screen you will get when you buy it). The LG screen, as it turned out, had very bad burn-in problems. After complaining to the Apple store a few times, they finally relented and switched it out for me to the better Samsung screen. The customer service at the time wasn't the best, since Apple should have gone "This is a real issue, if you can show proof of screen burn in on your LG screen, we'll immediately replace it for you" rather than try to brush it under the rug. However, it wasn't a malicious case of screwing over customers after sending better units to reviewers.

tzs 12y ago

What would be the grounds for a class action suit? In all the examples you give, they sell you a good that meets the advertised specs. If someone is advertising generic blank DVDs, for instance, and they happen to sell you TDK media one day, I don't see how you can make a legal case that this binds them to only selling you TDK media. If you want TDK media, you should be buying from someone who advertises TDK media.