> But the point about new tech being risky, is entirely fair. If something's still exciting, it's probably a good idea for the risk-averse to avoid it.

Seems like you're saying a person who bought a thousand euro phone and couldn't get it repaired under warranty after a month of mild use is "risk-averse" if they dislike that experience.

Would a truly non-risk-averse person be overjoyed by this experience or see no problem with it? Would they accept it as the price they pay for being an early adopter and see no reason to complain? I'm confused.