Comment by gruez
4 years ago
>Like, any product revision that could potentially produce a different behavior must have a discernable revision number published as part of the model number.
AFAIK samsung does this, but it doesn't really help anyone except enthusiasts because the packaging still says "980 PRO" in big bold letters, and the actual model number is something indecipherable like "MZ-V8P1T0B/AM". If this was a law they might even change the model number randomly for CYA/malicious compliance reasons. eg. firmware updated? new model number. DRAM changed, but it's the same spec? new model number. changed the supplier for the SMD capacitors? new model number. PCB etchant changed? new model number.
"If this was a law they might even change the model number randomly for CYA/malicious compliance reasons. eg. firmware updated? new model number."
Judges are a bit smarter than linters, they can tell when someone is fucking with them
That's why the examples I listed are plausible reasons for changing the model number. For firmware, it's plausible that it warrants changing the model number because firmware can and do affect performance, as other comments has mentioned.
Also I really don't see this being something that judges will stop. You see other CYA behavior that has persisted for decades, eg. drug side effects (every possible symptom under the sun), or prop 65 warnings.
Doubtful. That already happens with the "known to the state of California to cause cancer" labelling on products sold in California. Some companies just put that on everything when they have no idea if it contains those chemicals or not.
The model should be required to be “most prominently displayed.”
Okay, suppose the packaging looks like:
No fine prints. The first line is the same font size as the second line. You think that's going to help the average joe figure whether it's been component swapped or not? Oh, by the way, "MZ-V8P6T0B/AM" isn't the model number from the last comment. I swapped one digit. Did you catch that? If you were already on the lookout for this sort of stuff, you'd be already be checking the fine print at the back. This at best saves you 3 seconds of time. It also does nothing for the "randomly changing model numbers for trivial changes" problem mentioned earlier. In short, the proposed legislation would save 1% of enthusiasts 3 seconds when making a purchase.
Actually yea, a random joe will be able to see that 980 isn't the whole deal, and if he does care, might dig in. Most people dont even realise that this is a possibility
1 reply →