Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-06-19 17:48, Chris wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-06-19 02:37, Chris wrote:
Successful companies are good at extracting money from people. Not the same
thing.
Successful companies also have to earn repeat sales - you don't do that >>>> by not giving good value for the money.
And yet many, many companies are well known to provide bad service and yet >>> still exist. Big companies serve their shareholders not customers.
Bleak attitude. Companies that treat their clients poorly disappear
when the competition does better.
Really? How come microsoft are still here?
Consumers long ago abandoned Microsoft because they have no
consumer-friendly products. Which explains why Apple is doing so
well in the consumer space.
Bob Campbell wrote:
Consumers long ago abandoned Microsoft because they have no
consumer-friendly products. Which explains why Apple is doing so
well in the consumer space.
Windows, Office, Azure.
Yeah, Microsoft is way behind Apple....
Not the point. Just because there are good examples doesn't mean that there aren't bad examples that need regulating.
Do you think the market brought the right to your money back or two years warranty?
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
Not the point. Just because there are good examples doesn't mean that there >> aren't bad examples that need regulating.
So Apple is a “bad example” that needs regulating?
Do you think the market brought the right to your money back or two years
warranty?
Probably not, but those are WAY different than governments dictating what kind of batteries and power cords companies should use. Warranties and
such give consumers legal rights. Batteries and power cords are not the
same thing at all. If most people wanted replaceable batteries then such phones would already be available from every company.
All phones have cameras and Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. No government needed to “regulate” any of those. No company was forced to include a texting app,
right?
Of course not. The MARKET took care of all of these. Which is how it
should be.
This is absurd over-regulation. I’m sure the EU bureaucrats think they are doing a good job. Actually all they are doing is being a ridiculous
pain in the ass, and becoming the joke of the world.
Successful companies (and products) do not need to be micro managed by politicians - of all people - who have no idea how to succeed at anything except getting elected.
What happens when USB-D comes along? What happens when batteries
routinely last 7 years? These silly “laws” are going to be outdated before they will have any useful effect on the things they are hoping to “regulate”.
Probably not, but those are WAY different than governments dictating what kind of batteries and power cords companies should use. Warranties and such give consumers legal rights. Batteries and power cords are not the same thing at all. If most people wanted replaceable batteries then such phones would already be available from every company.
All phones have cameras and Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. No government needed to regulate any of those. No company was forced to include a texting app, right?
Of course not. The MARKET took care of all of these. Which is how it should be.
The market is not a good arbiter of what should or shouldn't be available.
It enables what can be available.
Remember heroin used to be readily available in the market.
What happens when USB-D comes along? What happens when batteries routinely last 7 years? These silly laws are going to be outdated before they will have any useful effect on the things they are hoping to regulate.
The market is not a good arbiter of what should or shouldn't be available.
It enables what can be available.
Remember heroin used to be readily available in the market.
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
The market is not a good arbiter of what should or shouldn't be available. >> It enables what can be available.
But it IS a perfect indicator of what people want.
Something government
bureaucrats are totally clueless about.
Remember heroin used to be readily available in the market.
LOL, right. Heroin (and all “illegal drugs”) is always available, if you know where to look.
Bob Campbell <none@none.none> wrote:
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
The market is not a good arbiter of what should or shouldn't be available. >>> It enables what can be available.
But it IS a perfect indicator of what people want.
No it isn't. It's an indicator of what people will buy. What they want is often dictated by (clever) marketing.
> Something government
bureaucrats are totally clueless about.
Governments have a duty to protect citizens. Even from themselves.
They also have a duty to protect the planet and environment which is focus
of many new regulations.
Governments have a duty to protect citizens. Even from themselves.
So are aftermarket batteries that fail or catch fire.
Hence the need for regulation.
Bob Campbell wrote:
Consumers long ago abandoned Microsoft because they have no
consumer-friendly products. Which explains why Apple is doing so
well in the consumer space.
Windows, Office, Azure.
Yeah, Microsoft is way behind Apple....
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
Governments have a duty to protect citizens. Even from themselves.
Governments have a duty to do what they are told. I don’t need a nanny to “protect me from myself”.
On 2023-06-21 23:35, Chris wrote:
Bob Campbell <none@none.none> wrote:
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
The market is not a good arbiter of what should or shouldn't be available. >>>> It enables what can be available.
But it IS a perfect indicator of what people want.
No it isn't. It's an indicator of what people will buy. What they want is
often dictated by (clever) marketing.
Riiiiight.
Everyone's a gullible fool...
...except you!
Something government
bureaucrats are totally clueless about.
Governments have a duty to protect citizens. Even from themselves.
You really need to decide which side of that argument you want to stay on.
They also have a duty to protect the planet and environment which is focus >> of many new regulations.
How does this regulation protect the planet?
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-06-21 23:35, Chris wrote:
Bob Campbell <none@none.none> wrote:
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
The market is not a good arbiter of what should or shouldn't be available.
It enables what can be available.
But it IS a perfect indicator of what people want.
No it isn't. It's an indicator of what people will buy. What they want is >>> often dictated by (clever) marketing.
Riiiiight.
Everyone's a gullible fool...
You're extrapolating again.
...except you!
Something government
bureaucrats are totally clueless about.
Governments have a duty to protect citizens. Even from themselves.
You really need to decide which side of that argument you want to stay on.
Try and keep up.
They also have a duty to protect the planet and environment which is focus >>> of many new regulations.
How does this regulation protect the planet?
Now I know you're being intentionally dim.
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2023-06-21 23:35, Chris wrote:
They also have a duty to protect the planet and environment which is focus >>> of many new regulations.
How does this regulation protect the planet?
Now I know you're being intentionally dim.
Bob Campbell <none@none.none> wrote:
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
The market is not a good arbiter of what should or shouldn't be available. >>> It enables what can be available.
But it IS a perfect indicator of what people want.
No it isn't. It's an indicator of what people will buy. What they want is often dictated by (clever) marketing.
> Something government
bureaucrats are totally clueless about.
Governments have a duty to protect citizens. Even from themselves.
They also have a duty to protect the planet and environment which is focus
of many new regulations.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 89:53:58 |
| Calls: | 6,697 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 12,232 |
| Messages: | 5,348,434 |