this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
1331 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

59314 readers
4948 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] unscholarly_source@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If you pay to add a feature to a product that was previously not available, sure, that makes sense. But in this case, at the point of the transaction, and they hand over the keys, the ownership of the product is now 100% transferred to the customer. They should and can do whatever they want with their property. A manufacturer equipping a feature because it's cheaper is frankly not the customer's problem.

Imagine buying a house but you only get access to certain rooms. They set the price, the customer just pays for it. If they want to cover the cost of adding the heated seats feature, then add it to the starting price.

[–] nikt@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Imagine buying a house but you have not get access to certain rooms.

A bit off topic but that’s kind of how condos work btw. You don’t actually own the apartment or townhouse, you just own shares in a corporation that gives you the right to live in that space, with some severe restrictions.

Often you don’t have the right to mow your own lawn, you can’t keep certain things on your balcony, you can’t have a dog over a certain size, etc. It’s kind of nuts tbh. They give you the illusion of owning the space, but it’s a very restrictive form of ownership.

[–] Pantsofmagic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The automotive equivalent of that would be a lease rather than a purchase though, as I see it.

[–] nikt@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Well no, a lease is literally a lease. People do lease houses too you know. When people “buy” a condo, that’s not a lease.

The point I’m making here is that the housing analogy doesn’t work (“Imagine buying a house and not being allowed to X”) because people literally “buy” houses and are not allowed to do basic things that you’d assume come with house ownership.

I’m not defending that this is ok. For me buying a condo would be as ridiculous as buying a DRMed Tesla.