Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 137 posts

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#81

Post by M95D »

dyauspitr wrote: post #14
causality0 wrote: post #11

One of the most user-hostile companies on earth. My John Deere lawnmower came with a fuel gauge that runs off a CR2032 that's embedded in epoxy. The battery runs out of charge in about six months and the gauge stops working. If you saw the gauge open and replace the battery it doesn't start working again. If you disconnect the gauge the lawnmower won't start. Replacement gauges are $60.

That’s wild.They had to go out of their way to not wire it to the 12V.

They had to go out of their way to make it not work after you replace the battery with a good one.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#82

Post by dmos62 »

elAhmo wrote: post #12
causality0 wrote: post #11

One of the most user-hostile companies on earth. My John Deere lawnmower came with a fuel gauge that runs off a CR2032 that's embedded in epoxy. The battery runs out of charge in about six months and the gauge stops working. If you saw the gauge open and replace the battery it doesn't start working again. If you disconnect the gauge the lawnmower won't start. Replacement gauges are $60.

[flagged]

What would you say if every manufacturer did this? Build your own? Further, you can't blame a person for not knowing that a machine has these planned obsolescence traps or repair-hostile traps: the manufacturer does not tell you the costs he has hidden. Further, this shouldn't be legal: it's little more than swindling.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#83

Post by M95D »

choilive wrote: post #69
snowe2010 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t comment if you don’t want to actually contribute. How are people supposed to know these things before buying the equipment. What if they’re the only provider in their region? There’s a billion reasons why your comment doesn’t contribute.

Well.. farming equipment are high 6 figures 7 pieces of business equipment (the lifetime operating costs are definitely in the 7 figures.) These are owned and operated by people who I would expect to do this type of research and critical thinking. These aren't normie consumers buying everyday appliances or electronics. However.. farmers are a weird bunch and they are blinded by brand loyalty or will only buy from an…

I'm no farmer, but brand loyalty might have practical reasons, such as compatibility with attached farming equipment (plows?).

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#84

Post by amelius »

datahack wrote: post #65

This is woefully inadequate as a remedy. The dollar amount is minuscule and the remedy time limited. Seems like they just got a license to continue business as usual.

Isn't there some kind of three-strikes approach which judges can use against repeat offenders?

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#85

Post by 9rx »

shiroiuma wrote: post #71
silexia wrote: post #68

Farmer here. We only run equipment made before 2000 and all of our tractors are from the 1980s. We badly need right to repair.

You should check out Kubota stuff.

I considered one for my last tractor purchase. The depreciation on them is hard to square. Units are selling or 1/3 of the original price with only a few hundred hours on them.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#86

Post by M95D »

laughing_man wrote: post #18
snowe2010 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t comment if you don’t want to actually contribute. How are people supposed to know these things before buying the equipment. What if they’re the only provider in their region? There’s a billion reasons why your comment doesn’t contribute.

"Don't buy their stuff" is exactly the right answer. You need to do your research before you buy big ticket items. It may not be true in every sector, but Deere has plenty of competition.

No, that's not the answer. It only applies to those people who have time and energy to spare to do that reasearch. I'm not talking just farming equipment, but ordinary items such as a vacuum cleaner or printer.

If you're low income, work 2 jobs, single parent, get home at 23:00 broken tired, want a meal but your fridge just broke down and everything is spoiled inside, you don't spend 2 more hours doing reasearch. You clean it, go to bed hungry, call repair in the morning (optional, if your hopes are high), and when they tell you it's not repairable, you get the first new fridge you can afford in a 10 min online search while on the bus/train/tram being late to work.

Reasearch, self-repair, is for wealthy people.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#87

Post by mschild »

Robdel12 wrote: post #42

Woah, childs play money for the amount of pain, lock in, and money they’ve cost farmers.

Fines like these are simply considered Cost of Doing Business. Part of the reason why I love the GDPR fine structure so much (percentage base).

It has to hurt.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#88

Post by mschild »

9rx wrote: post #85
shiroiuma wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should check out Kubota stuff.

I considered one for my last tractor purchase. The depreciation on them is hard to square. Units are selling or 1/3 of the original price with only a few hundred hours on them.

Why not purchase used then? 66% discount for a mint condition sounds like a steal.

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#89

Post by [deleted] »

mschild wrote: post #88
9rx wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I considered one for my last tractor purchase. The depreciation on them is hard to square. Units are selling or 1/3 of the original price with only a few hundred hours on them.

Why not purchase used then? 66% discount for a mint condition sounds like a steal.

[deleted]

Re: John Deere to pay $99M in right-to-repair settlement

#90

Post by 9rx »

mschild wrote: post #88
9rx wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I considered one for my last tractor purchase. The depreciation on them is hard to square. Units are selling or 1/3 of the original price with only a few hundred hours on them.

Why not purchase used then? 66% discount for a mint condition sounds like a steal.

That is what brought some interest, but at the same time there are no steals in farming. Although in the end it was largely technical. The M7 wasn't enough frame for my needs, but I didn't really need the HP of the M8 (which is actually a Versatile anyway). Other manufacturers offer models that more closely align with my requirements.
Post reply on HN