Our Rights!!!

[cipher6]

I'm making a case for a simple user-capable system to lock down or remove bloatware without rooting that could be vendor supported by changing an existing flag in the apks in question back to normal - they are not system files, that's what's set that is locking them down.

In many cases, those apks can have a negative effect on users that do not want them. My idea makes everyone's life easier in the long run - less rooting, less support, fewer complaints, fewer people shopping elsewhere for their second choice.

I agree with that 100% Great ideas and would love to see them implemented. But the phone companies have done the calculus and seem to think the amount of customers it makes angry and possibly bail to another carrier or phone doesn't out weight the revenue they generate from them. Maybe one day, if people make a big enough stink they will reevaluate that, I hope so.

They - the carrier/maker combo, who can be sure - have taken an action profitable in their eyes that is causing consumer issues. I still believe it's abusive to paint some people into a corner where their only choices are another phone, maybe another carrier, or void their warranty - over something as easily remedied as bloatware. There's no _reasonable_ way that _reasonable_ consumers can foresee the consequences of some bloatware, no matter how good shoppers they are or how much fine print they read ahead of time. It's for that reason that I find this an abuse of consumer rights.

@$$hole? Yeah. Bad business practice? Probably. I just don't think its an abuse. I think you fix it with free market stuff, like moving to different companies that don't do that.

And what issues does bloatware cause, besides annoyance? Like I said before, its only technically inclined people that I've ever heard complain about this stuff.

I agree with all you've said, except the abuse of rights. There are many products I'm not 100% satisfied with.

 

[EarlyMon]

And what issues does bloatware cause, besides annoyance? Like I said before, its only technically inclined people that I've ever heard complain about this stuff.

Ah, no prob, will clarify.

In a perfect world, they sit dormantly, doing nothing. Often, that's not the case because once an app gets an intent set to run it (the mechanism by which one Android app gets in cahoots with another to wake up and run) there's nothing the casual user can do about it. Taking info from across a spectrum of our forums, I'll cite two general examples as classes:

• Amazon MP3 Store goes into a mode where it constantly babbles on the network - network use goes up, phone sleep time goes down, battery life significantly impacted. I've seen this complaint levied against any number of bloatwares. Clearing the app's cache/data offered no relief.
• A new trial version of a game came along, it popped up somehow, maybe by choice, maybe automagically, I don't recall - the user fat-fingered the quit and instead launched the game. That case went from sucking up a few MB to about 200 MB, as the rest of game downloaded uncontrollably, on a phone where memory resources were critical.

I agree with all you've said, except the abuse of rights. There are many products I'm not 100% satisfied with.

Per the examples mentioned above - users are having their data plans used in ways they cannot control and may have other resources hogged. This can happen well after any grace period where the options to move to another product are draconian. If within the same carrier, that same bloatware will come with the next device. Switching carriers involves a significant penalty fee. If the second class occurs in such a way as to force a customer to get a better phone (more resources) just to maintain original functionality - or if the first class occurs for customers with limited data plans - then in both cases, the customer is being financially penalized for things that common sense dictates ought be easily controlled.

The next step for the weary is a task killer (there are cases of carriers actually recommending this or store personnel insisting on installing them) and then when that introduces instabilities (that the buyer doesn't yet know to associate with the task killers), then the buyer is left believing his device or his service or Android is at fault, and will take those financially penalizing remedies, just to get back to as-purchased day-one capability.

I don't know how else to think of that as other than an abuse of the consumer.

Bait and switch is considered consumer abuse and we have laws against it. If the path I've described for many isn't bait and switch, then I submit it's a close relative.

 

[cipher6]

I'll say, your starting to convince me a bit about the bloatware thing. Warranty no. But I guess there is room for maybe a class action lawsuit.

You would first have to show some damages from it. Like increased uncontrollable data usage and charges. Then show the things causing it really aren't system apks, like the example you sited, where its installed as a system apk but available in the market as a user apk. You'd also have to prove there was no way of a customer knowing addition apps might be installed in the future as "OS updates," which I'm guessing is stated somewhere in the contracts you sign.

The Phone companies are going to argue they are updated OS features that for some BS reason have to be included at the system instead of user level... Even then, I think they would have a good case that they simply include them as "new features" in their OS, and they are well within their rights to modify the OS and include enhanced features to benefit their customers.

I think the bloatware issues pushes close to a possible class action lawsuit, and we might see one in the future as smart phones get more and more popular... But I still think it would be a hard one to win.

 

[EarlyMon]

Well, I hate class action stuff and I hate lawsuits in general.

If I can figure out the right petition for this, I may try that.

Better the market to govern itself, but when that fails, perhaps some consumer advocacy groups and then the lawmakers ought be brought to bear if all else fails.

I think we're on the same side on the warranty thing, so I'm not sure if you're covering bases there or if you're confused on my position.

And - while incorrectly credited to me, I've thought about it and now like the idea that other roms might be vended under warranty. That day is a _long_ way off, if ever, in my opinion tho.

Myself, I'm a handy fool with access to parts, so I root away and am happy with my warranty-breaking choice.

 

[cipher6]

that's what the courts are for. I guess I'm just the opposite, I'd go to lawmakers last. Petitions could make phone companies see it bugs a lot of people, and might work if big enough.

 

[SamuraiBigEd]

Magnuson-Moss does not specify exactly what can or cannot be covered in any prticular product. It only sets clear guidelines of can be considered a warranty (full or limited) how to diclosure said warranties and what remedies are available. Now states may have different regulations that must be met.

By the way, adding any aftermarket part can void a warranty. Anything that allows it to operate any different from what the manufacturer intended can void a warranty. That applies to any product; cars, toasters, or phones.

Actually, it does cover this. You are confused as to what "aftermarket" refers to, it is not a performance only market, there are aftermarket companies that produce engine components, suspension components, a/c, electrical, body parts, glass, just about everything in a vehicle that are designed to be a direct replacement, it is these items to which I refer. A manufacturer can't say "Your warranty is void because you used a Moog ball joint instead of a GM ball joint (which, by the way is likely made by Moog, the manufacturers really don't manufacture the components in their vehicles).

And the provision about aftermarket chips is in Magnuson-Moss, if it is EPA approved they can't void your warranty (of which there have been maybe a handful in the past 25 years).

 

[lordofthereef]

I think the reason is simple. There are approved oils for your car on the market. There are no approved OS updates for your phone. Why? Because it not profitable for a company to release this software. Sure, it is released by enthusiasts, but what if it damages your system ("brick") or it is a security risk. Who is to blame here? FWIW, if you have hardware defects, I am not sure companies won't honor your warranty.

 

[lordofthereef]

Actually, it does cover this. You are confused as to what "aftermarket" refers to, it is not a performance only market, there are aftermarket companies that produce engine components, suspension components, a/c, electrical, body parts, glass, just about everything in a vehicle that are designed to be a direct replacement, it is these items to which I refer. A manufacturer can't say "Your warranty is void because you used a Moog ball joint instead of a GM ball joint (which, by the way is likely made by Moog, the manufacturers really don't manufacture the components in their vehicles).

And the provision about aftermarket chips is in Magnuson-Moss, if it is EPA approved they can't void your warranty (of which there have been maybe a handful in the past 25 years).

I think the point here is that if the aftermarket item damaged your vehicle, that damage is not covered under the warranty. As I said, most places will honor your warranty even if you have "rooted" so long as it is clear it is a hardware defect.

Let me give a scenario: Guy roots/mods (software) his phone. It doesn't turn on. It is LIKELY a software issue. Should the phone company be required to honor this warranty as a manufacturer defect because some idiot scrwed his phone up?

 

[EarlyMon]

Let me give a scenario: Guy roots/mods (software) his phone. It doesn't turn on. It is LIKELY a software issue. Should the phone company be required to honor this warranty as a manufacturer defect because some idiot scrwed his phone up?

Taking a step back and playing Devil's Avocado and applying Occam's Razor, if it was rooted and it won't turn on, then it may take work to determine the likely cause.

If the truthful analysis reveals it was user screw-up after all, then they've done the work ahead of time and might not be compensated for that effort.

I _think_ that's on firm footing, not sure.

 

[lordofthereef]

Taking a step back and playing Devil's Avocado and applying Occam's Razor, if it was rooted and it won't turn on, then it may take work to determine the likely cause.

If the truthful analysis reveals it was user screw-up after all, then they've done the work ahead of time and might not be compensated for that effort.

I _think_ that's on firm footing, not sure.

For sure. Let's say it is the user's fault. So what then?

FWIW, as I have said, even with a root, if it's clear you have a hardware defect, they could care less about the root.

I do understand the issue here. The way things are written, they claim to be within their rights to not honor hardware defects if you did root. Warranty is a warranty and TECHNICALLY speaking rooting has voided that, even if the nice repair guy is willing to overlook it.

 

[EarlyMon]

Yes, and given the existence of kernels and s/w mods that can damage hardware, that all makes perfect sense to me.

A warranty station ought not be held liable for forensics.

 

[lordofthereef]

Agreed. So then the issue here is how does the company protect itself without making the owner of their product feel like it is a violation of their rights?

 

[SamuraiBigEd]

Been away for a few days and trying to catch up.

To summarize my position, I do not advocate free run rooting and rom'ing while maintaining warranty coverage. I do support a manufacturer/carrier based approval system which would include the ability to flash a rom that contained the proper "approval key".

Early's position is well within what I would call an acceptable compromise, since one of the main issues I am addressing is bloatware. Give us more control over our system, much like a desktop computer, even so far as to change the clock color as I believe Cipher uses as example. However, there still remains the fact that many of us root and rom our phones for the sole purposes of fixing what's broke, as in my case where battery life went form merely acceptable to totally horrendous regardless of what steps I took within the system, the decrease almost to a tee followed the system updates. I am now happy with the battery life I get, while not stellar, this is basically a small netbook and will never give you 2-3 days of regular use without a remote battery belt pack, I think we are lucky at 12-16 hours (6-10 for us heavy users).

I did use the term "Rights", which I agree was a bit heavy handed, but it was intended to get people fired up on the subject, and it succeeded. The whole idea of my op was to get people involved, thanks to all of you who have, to see where we can find some common ground and a consensus on what would be appropriate to go forward with. To this end, knowing the legal field from first and second hand experience (whole family of lawyers, and worked in the family firm as a clerk when I was younger) I know that you ask for the moon and get a nice orbit instead.

Once again, thanks to everyone who has contributed, especially Early and Cipher, I love people who know how to discuss without devolving into useless argument. To that end, I ask that we keep all examples directly related, even though I started the generalization theme there is hindsight, and I am having some of it now. While it is relevant to a point, after reading my last post we are getting too far from the main idea of this thread.

I would love to see this get to a point where we have enough to move forward with a petition to present to all the carriers and manufacturers, maybe we can get them to give an inch, maybe they say no, or just maybe we get lucky and they see the revenue potential in my proposal. If that fails and we have a massive amount of people behind this, then and only then should we consider putting it in the hands of the lawmakers or lawyers.

 

[lordofthereef]

I would love to see this get to a point where we have enough to move forward with a petition to present to all the carriers and manufacturers, maybe we can get them to give an inch, maybe they say no, or just maybe we get lucky and they see the revenue potential in my proposal. If that fails and we have a massive amount of people behind this, then and only then should we consider putting it in the hands of the lawmakers or lawyers.

As would I. I certainly do not think that the warranty positions are set there to screw the customer over but rather to protect the manufacturer. Perhaps my thoughts are a bit too pie in the sky. I do like how you had said that you aren't necessarily promiting free rooting everything and running anything and allowing the manufacturer to pay the potential consequences. I am not sure of what sort of solution we could have though. Your solution would give us more choices, but our choices would still be from a list of preapproved ROMs, etc. I think that to most of the people who are CURRENTLY speaking up against this voiding of warranties, this wouldn't be enough, so really there would be change, but not what people want.

At the end of the day, I think we can agree that MOST people just want the garbage bloatware to be removable; to be able to take whatever HTC or Motorola, or Samsung etc. has done to change Android and remove the features we don't want would be wonderful. This is, essentially a different discussion in and of itself though. We are no longer talking about custom roms, etc. What we actually want is to be able to delete the preloaded stuff that we are locked into. THAT, I think we can make happen in far less time.

 

[Member243850]

Know look i know i have lost my cool before on these forums when i shouldn't have and since I have very different thoughts about this I will try be as diplomatic as possible... and I will try be on my best behaviour and sorry if i sound like a jerk in advance.

Yes, and given the existence of kernels and s/w mods that can damage hardware, that all makes perfect sense to me.

A warranty station ought not be held liable for forensics.

Hmm okay EarlyMon buddy... I am sorry but i 120% totally disagree.

Then why do computer / cellphone / mobile-computer manufacturers do not make the components of a cellphone interchangeable as well as universal.

What i mean is why don't cell phone manufacturers make RAM modules CPU'S removable? And why not make EPROMS / ROMS removable???? Why not make everything removable and swappable and universal???? It's like that for PC's and as the educated know Cellphones are just mobile Computers...so why????

The answer is very simple..... it's only Because they force or more technically... really want you to upgrade ur cellphone again for the 1 billionth time. So they can milk you for every cent you "owe" or more correctly steal from you.

Computers are a type of cellphones.... period.

I HATE human rights violations.

but this is just plain wrong when basically every cellphone manufacturer is cartelling together to make Aerials inside a cell phone and stop you replacing the aerial by urself... there is something very wrong with this equation...this never used to be an issue ever...

I know everyone is going to tell me it's not a human rights violation... then what the hell is it?

Sorry if i am rude i have a sharp / forked tongue sometimes

I can be slightly offensive and apologies but i do try not to be

 

[EarlyMon]

Don't apologize until you do something wrong.

Actually, a few years back some bright guys came up with the idea of open phone hardware and a special Linux system with Python programming to go with it.

I was all for it and some days still can't stand that it didn't really pan out.

When Android came along many of questioned what this was all about because we already had a project to do a better Linux phone and open hardware to boot.

That project lost, Android won.

The name of the project is OpenMoko - Open Mobile Communication - and they're still plugging away at the idea:

Openmoko, Inc.

Openmoko, Inc. | FreeRunner

Main Page - Openmoko

 

[Member243850]

Don't apologize until you do something wrong.

Actually, a few years back some bright guys came up with the idea of open phone hardware and a special Linux system with Python programming to go with it.

I was all for it and some days still can't stand that it didn't really pan out.

When Android came along many of questioned what this was all about because we already had a project to do a better Linux phone and open hardware to boot.

That project lost, Android won.

The name of the project is OpenMoko - Open Mobile Communication - and they're still plugging away at the idea:

Openmoko, Inc.

Openmoko, Inc. | FreeRunner

Main Page - Openmoko

Hahah lol thanx EarlyMon dude!

But i Don't see that this phone's hardware has interchangable with RAM modules? Are the RAM modules the universal standard now? Can yuo swop out the CPU??

Thanx for sharing but the whole world other than this 1 company has done this... this is completely wrong i am sorry to say...and that's what human rights are all about... what is right NOT what is wrong.

The so called "great" law is very different to what's right... like laws differ / change between countries... human rights do not change between countries or they are at least not supposed to...

They are locking you into the hardware so you are screwed and forced to buy a new one 2 years or so down the line.

I hate human rights violations they make want to scream.

I don't think the hardware is swappable.... let me show you what i am tlaking about here:

taken from wikipedia:

Openmoko hardware aspires to the term open source hardware although in various areas the availability of cell phone components and law requirements prevent full conformance to this term.

 

[lordofthereef]

Then why do computer / cellphone / mobile-computer manufacturers do not make the components of a cellphone interchangeable as well as universal.

What i mean is why don't cell phone manufacturers make RAM modules CPU'S removable? And why not make EPROMS / ROMS removable????

Every time you make something removable, it adds bulk. We are in a day and age that we don't want bulk. We want thin, sleek, and sexy (and I am using the universal "we", as in the majority, and not 'us", the minority) Take a look at Apple with their "air" (netbook) models. They have soldered everything to the motherboard in the interest of saving space (minus maybe the SSD). In many laptops, far more things are actually soldered to the board than are in desktops (cpu, gpu) and these things are the acceptable norm. Again, this is all in the interest of saving space. If we saw removable hardware, the device would either be bulky, or a couple generations behind the "all in one" units.

 

[SamuraiBigEd]

Know look i know i have lost my cool before on these forums when i shouldn't have and since I have very different thoughts about this I will try be as diplomatic as possible... and I will try be on my best behaviour and sorry if i sound like a jerk in advance.

No problem Stinky, we have come to expect this from you!

j/k

 

[EarlyMon]

They aren't modular and therefore swappable because of pricing reasons.

The thing about legal requirements is best explained like this - in the US for example, our FCC must first approve any devices that will go on the air. They approve the whole kit, and only in the submitted configuration. You do all sorts of things to use the airwaves and build your own stuff - but that's in realm of ham and requires a license.

If you dig back through the OpenMoko powerpoint slides from when the project leaders were just getting out of college, they had an architecture that would let any maker quickly assemble a phone that would be OpenMoko compatible.

And they started the whole project themselves and got it kinda off the ground - proving what dedicated young people can do when motivated - they didn't the full target but they did make waves sticking it to the man. Gotta give 'em props for that.

 

[lordofthereef]

They aren't modular and therefore swappable because of pricing reasons.

There is, of course, this too.

 

[Member243850]

I know what it's all about so at least i am not worried... i am not the one concerned here at all.
I really can't understand this crazy world sometimes.

i am starting to lose my cool now... sadly ...damn.

Living in SA human rights are abused every second and it gets to me more than anything else in the whole world. I try so hard. It is the one thing that really i have a hard time controlling... i have no / low tolerance for it. And i think i should go now.

i should just leave before i lose it completely.

I am sorry for any rude behaviour.

 

[SamuraiBigEd]

I know what it's all about so at least i am not worried... i am not the one concerned here at all.
I really can't understand this crazy world sometimes.

i am starting to lose my cool now... sadly ...damn.

Living in SA human rights are abused every second and it gets to me more than anything else in the whole world. I try so hard. It is the one thing that really i have a hard time controlling... i have no / low tolerance for it. And i think i should go now.

i should just leave before i lose it completely.

I am sorry for any rude behaviour.

Sorry Stinky, it was a joke. There was nothing wrong with your post and any input is appreciated.

 

[Dark Jedi]

Warranty work is a very tricky subject. When it comes down to it its your word vs. Theirs. How many owners can say they are experts in their item they want warranty work done on? I look at it this way. If you mod anything from its stock beginnings. It ceases to be the item the warranty covers.

People complains about consumer rights but what about manufacturer rights? Why should they foot the bill for someone that fries their phone from oc it? What ever happen to I take responsibility for our actions? When we play with our toys hard don't they break in the end sooner than the manufacturing says? .

Root your phone that's fine, mod your car that's fine. But when it wears out from your tinkering you are the one that should foot the bill.

 

[copestag]

I guess some people take things to the extreme........ I think we can all agree that we would prefer they didnt install what we call 'bloatware' as system apps..... but to say theyre violating our rights?..... or even more to the extreme our human rights? come on.....seriously?

I wear hiking type boots a lot of the time when Im out on a tractor or something.... I prefer my boots to be a certain height and to have a certain number and type of grommet..... so if I buy a pair of boots that have too many grommets does this mean the shoe company violated my human rights? or should I just buy a different shoe? isnt this the same thing youre saying? are they really violating your human rights by adding bloatware to a product that YOU are making the decision to purchase?

and to play devils advocate myself for a moment...... lets take a look from a different perspective......I'll use an example Im familiar with... the Eris... which was my first android phone before the dInc..... granted this example isnt as applicable to newer phones with much larger space.... but it relates the point none the less

the Eris has 512Mb of total ram...... as anyone who has had an Eris knows thats not how much is available to you..... if memory serves me correct (could be off but doesnt matter for the example)... you started off with about 128Mb of ram available before you installed anything..... this is because part of that ram was taken up by system files and YES some bloatware and even some empty space was allocated untouchable system space..... the reason for this was they allowed themselves plenty of room for future OS updates...... lets say for instance the original OS (1.5) minus their bloatware only took up (no clue on actual #) 256Mb...... then you would argue they should have made the other 256Mb available to you..... now heres the problem... what if 1.6 or 2.1 or whatever you went to next was 300Mb and you had already used up all the 256Mb they gave you........ would you then whine because it deleted some of your apps when the update applied? so this is why they allocated a large amount of free space as system..... so they could use it in the future.... now Im not arguing in favor of bloatware.... but if theyre gonna ship the phone with it..... it may as well take up some of the unused space on the phone... the space you cant install anything to anyhow

now of course one could argue why not just take their 384Mb and put the bloatware on my 128Mb ... then Ill decide if I want to get rid of the bloatware or not........ well heres the problem with that........ YOU ARE A VERY SMALL MINORITY..... most people would never remove stock apps from their phone .... even if they could without rooting....... because most people just dont care or dont know how or even realize they can...... but I can tell you what they do care about....... give me a phone that says 512Mb, then I find out I actually only have 128Mb for user apps, then I find out that I really only have about 60Mb because the rest is already taken up by bloatware, Im gonna be an upset customer and never buy another Android phone..... bearing in mind that MOST users would never bother to uninstall the apps even if they could

having said that ... I HATE BLOATWARE.... and yes I do wish they would leave it off... but it wouldnt stop me from rooting even if bloatware didnt exist... and even though I have removed most of the apps that orignally came with my phones.... there are a lot of people who actually like those apps and even some who bought their specific phone because it was advertised as having those apps....... take a look through the market and see how many downloads these apps have.... Im talking downloads not pre-installed....... so just remember that for every one of us who hate AmazonMP3 theres probably 10 other people who wish their phone had it....... and over 250K (thats the highest the market will show) of them have downloaded it to put it on their phone