Hacker News Reader

Comment by prepend | Hacker News Reader

I don’t accept this line of reasoning but appreciate you sticking up for your employer.

I’ve noticed this tactic more and more. Price a product as if it’s yours, but then disown it when inconvenient.

I can’t imagine Apple saying something like “that’s a Samsung issue, take it up with them” because of a component.

As a customer, I don’t want to have a decoder ring for how to get support for my product. If it says google and is sold by google then google should fix it. Maybe they sub it out to HTC or Huawei or whatever, but don’t make me know about it.

If google makes bad supply chain decisions then own up to it. Not doing so just makes Google seem incompetent at management as I don’t care or have any value in them directly for manufacturing.

View on HN

> As a customer, I don’t want to have a decoder ring for how to get support for my product.

As an Australian this is so weird to hear. I have a business relationship with the person I gave money to, not some third party factory or manufacturer that I never met. The law requires the merchant to take the return and make it right, after that it's their problem. Most likely they have a better idea about the next step than I would as a random customer.

As European same here.

For some strange reason Google supporters never consider that had Google actually cared, there would be support contracts in place with its providers.

Apparently that is something that doesn't exist in US, the hardware maker is the only one to blame.

It's not a US thing, it's mainly a Google thing. They appear to have decided that they can reduce costs by saying "it's not our problem" in response to customer complaints about defective products. They do this for defects that may not even be rooted in the hardware itself.

My general impression is that most companies are quick to take responsibility for consumer products sold in the US, unless product failure results in liability for a major safety risk (think McDonald's coffee scalds or Ford Explorer rollover accidents).

If the engine computer fails in a BMW due to a widespread defect, the BMW dealer doesn't send the customer to Bosch on a wild goose chase. If a Macbook Pro SSD fails due to a widespread defect, Apple doesn't tell the customer to call Samsung. They either take ownership of the problem and make the customer happy (with the expectation that a brand-loyal customer's next purchase will pay the cost of solving the current problem), or they make an effort to offer some kind of solution at the customer's cost.

I think I'm talking about something a little different, which is my mistake. The parent was discussing a manufacturer disowning components within items, as you noted.

I'm taking it a step further and saying we don't even talk to the manufacturer, just the store - it doesn't matter what Apple thinks (unless you bought it directly from them). There's a legal concept of whether or not the item is fit for purpose or defective (generally, if you knew X would happen before you bought it, would you still have bought it?) which shuts down excuses.

I don’t think this is a US thing, it’s just a google thing. The normal thing to expect is what you’ve explained.

To be fair Nexus series was not priced as it was theirs. I remember buying Nexus 4 for $300 while the comparable Samsung was almost twice that.

Pixel is a different story.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com