View Single Post
Posts: 515 | Thanked: 259 times | Joined on Jan 2010
#271
Originally Posted by Crashdamage View Post
Point is, Nokia has supported the N900 with updates for a year, about what I expected when I got it. That's about as long as my old G1 Android phone was supported. With things changing so fast and devices obsolete in not years or months, but weeks, it's probably no longer realistic to expect companies to support such devices much more than a year.
If you as a consumer begin to expect a product to EOSL one year after release then you're rewarding Nokia's bad behavior. Just because you have disposable income doesn't everyone can or even wants to buy a new phone that quickly.

When it comes to support, it is not unreasonable to have a company continue to provide adequate support at least ONE year AFTER the the follow-on product has released. Yes, this may seem strange and unreasonable to you, but it is normal for companies to continue to provide support for products even after the follow-on has released. NEVER have I heard it to be standard practice to EOSL a product before its follow-on has arrived. Now, you can argue the one year after, but at minimum you move into sustaining level support the day the follow-on arrives.

YES, this is NORMAL.

The assumption you also have is that the N900 was "feature complete" when it released and we know that it was beta at release. That's fine, but that doesn't mean you don't finish what you start. The fact that you would suggest that Nokia's behavior of moving quickly to sustaining level support at PR 1.3 with no more support updates 1 year after release has more to do with your desire to buy a new toy than most who desire to receive adequate support for the life of the product.

So let's say you don't like my sustaining level support after the follow-on (In this case the N9) releases. Let's take another example. Most cellphone plans are two years.

What does that mean? Carriers and manufactures expect a consumer to keep a phone for AT LEAST 2 years.

Now, some plans are one and some are three, but I think two years is a good median. If consumers are expected to be on contract with a phone for 2 years, it is not unreasonable for the handset manufacturer to continue to bring updates to products in that two year window as well. This is an industry standard.

The fact of the matter is that you can't move into "sustaining level support" until you STOP selling a product, then starts the final 2 year that a consumer is EXPECTED to be on contract and the handset is ALSO expected to continue to provide support.

One year to support a device is simply wrong. I hope you don't work for Nokia. Nokia needs consumer advocates that want the best for the customer and not those that try to squeeze the bottom line when its convenient for them to be lazy.

Last edited by geohsia; 2010-12-12 at 09:48.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to geohsia For This Useful Post: