Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That's why, at this point, I only buy mobile devices that meet milspec or are otherwise ruggedized. A mobile device that doesn't look like it would be right at home on a battlefield or a construction site is just not for me.

Why is "shininess" an attribute at all that people are willing to trade off for the hassle of dealing with mechanical failure? Probably because, at the time when they make their purchasing decision, they are too willing to take it on faith that a manufacturer makes sane choices around tradeoffs between looks and likeliness of mechanical failure.

Well: They don't. Stories like the above just show how easy it is for manufacturers to extricate themselves from liability. I had that experience some 15 years ago, when I was dealing with a phone that came down with a bad case of cracked-screen after two weeks of normal use. They just made a blanket statement that a cracked screen is always the customer's fault. And when I say they, I don't even mean a repair technician tasked with making those sorts of determinations all day long, but the process seemingly was just a pimply-faced kid in a retail outlet just saying that to any customer who came in with a cracked screen.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: