 FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium
join:2005-03-19
 ·Comcast
 ·T-Mobile US
 ·AT&T U-Verse
1 edit | i'm still lost as to how people think google needs to support the device.
they just sell it.
I buy a dishwasher from home depot, i don't exactly expect them to service it. I expect the manufacturer to do that. How do people not get that this is an HTC phone and therefore HTC should be the ones doing all the service?
or am I wrong all together? I haven't seen the warranty/manual
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps |
|
AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | That's like saying Foxconn should provide support for the Apple iMac because they built and assembled the iMac. The Nexus One is a Google product, Google needs to support it - retail can be a bitch some times... |
|
1 edit | reply to FBGuy
It's a nice idea, but the cellphone industry hasn't worked that way. When you have a problem with a phone you bought from Verizon, even tho it's made by HTC, who do you call? Verizon. Same should apply here.
If Google wants to put their name on the phone and tout the thing, then they should be ready to fully support it. Otherwise take their name off it and let HTC support it AND take the glory of having this fancy new phone available. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to FBGuy
said by FBGuy:as to how people think google needs to support the device. they just sell it. It's Google's name. Google has a huge vested interest in maintaining the viability/reliability of its brand. If your dishwasher doesn't work when you get it home and plug it in, you most definitely go back to Home Depot. Home Depot will replace it or swap it out for warranty work. Plus, Home Depot will most likely even deliver the dishwasher to your house and set it up for you. If Google wants to play with the big boys, they'll need to step up IMO. |
|
|
|
| reply to Chuck_IV
said by Chuck_IV:If Google wants to put their name on the phone and tout the thing, then they should be ready to fully support it. Otherwise take their name off it and let HTC support it AND take the glory of having this fancy new phone available. I think you're correct, but only insofar as the OS is concerned. Offering solid support for Android should be a no-brainer in my opinion. When it comes to the hardware, I can understand the argument that HTC should be the ones responsible for providing support. Truth be told though, I have a feeling that 90% of the support issues brought up are going to be software related because people either don't RTFM or just plain don't "get it".
- Tate
--
It's time to let go of TDM people. If it's not IP-based, it's crap! |
|
| Average customers are neither going to make nor appreciate that distinction (between OS and hardware), when it comes to who is supposed to support it. |
|
| reply to FBGuy
said by FBGuy:as to how people think google needs to support the device. they just sell it. I buy a dishwasher from home depot, i don't exactly expect them to service it. I expect the manufacturer to do that. How do people not get that this is an HTC phone and therefore HTC should be the ones doing all the service? or am I wrong all together? I haven't seen the warranty/manual They put their name on it so they should either support it or make sure someone does or their name goes down with the complaints.
If Home Depot sells me a bad dishwasher, I return it to them, not to the manufacturer (if it is within a 30 day period.) |
|
 jsz0Premium
join:2008-01-23
Jewett City, CT | reply to FBGuy
Probably depends if you bought it unlocked or not. If you went with the unlocked model the carrier has no obligation to support it. If you got it with a contract they do. This is probably why we're hearing conflicting reports and people getting bounced around between companies. |
|
FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium
join:2005-03-19 | reply to Chuck_IV
I can understand verizon. they usually cripleware their phones.
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps |
|
FBGuyyippee ki yayPremium
join:2005-03-19 Reviews:
·Comcast
·T-Mobile US
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to jsz0
said by jsz0:Probably depends if you bought it unlocked or not. If you went with the unlocked model the carrier has no obligation to support it. If you got it with a contract they do. This is probably why we're hearing conflicting reports and people getting bounced around between companies. valid point.
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps |
|
| reply to Chuck_IV
said by Chuck_IV:If Google wants to put their name on the phone and tout the thing, then they should be ready to fully support it. Especially since it is their OS and most smartphone problems are NOT hardware problems, but software ones. And the next level down of problems will be the carrier. The phone mfg would be last in line.
So the call should go to Google 1st and the carrier 2nd. But promising 3 day email support just doesn't cut it. That will be the biggest problem people will encounter with Google and why I would avoid buying a phone from them until they can support their product with live phone support.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
|
|
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
| very true. Especially since i have the option to purchase the phone directly from Google. Why does TM have to provide support for the device if I bought it from Google directly?
By the way doesn't TM still have the clause that states if the device isn't purchased directly from their website, phone sales or retail stores, they don't have to support it?
--
www.two-pugs.com www.twopugsbrand.com |
|
| reply to jsz0
that depends on if TM still has the old clause in their contracts or not.
--
www.two-pugs.com www.twopugsbrand.com |
|
chuckkk
join:2001-11-10
Warner Robins, GA Reviews:
·Cox HSI
| reply to FBGuy
The phone service provider is the usual source for support on/with the provider network. It's unusual for the phone Mfr to need to get involved, unless there is an obvious defect in the phone model.
I had a somewhat similar situation years ago with a Nokia phone and Cingular. Seems that Cingular loaded modified "firmware" that Nokia did not support, since Cingular did not document the changes and give them to Nokia. Part of the changes prevented the phone user from manually (from a menu) selecting available alternate service when the primary GSM service was unavailable or malfunctioning. Other changes prevented the phone from properly switching to analog roaming providers, including Cingular analog service when GSM was not available. The phone was originally designed and sold to be both GSM and analog capable. (GAIT phone) |
|
