Cotty wrote:
>
> >*Sigh* I think some still miss the point. Electronic consumer goods (which
> >I originally brought up anyhow) are very suseptable to a variety of things.
> >Moisture damage, breaking when dropped, and malfunctioning. One can then
> >assume that a consumer digital camera or DSLR would also be that way,
> >because it's a consumer electronic good. The other point was that many of
> >these consumer goods are cheaper to replace than fix, and what would happen
> >to a DSLR after warranty is up. I posed the question, didn't give an
> >answer.
>
> This entirely depends on where you live. Here in the UK, we have laws
> that say that if trouble arises after the purchase of an item, then the
> buyer (and warranty holder) has an issue with the seller, not the
> manufacturer.
>
> In practice, this means if I buy a TV from a retailer and it breaks
> (which I did, and it did), then I take it back to the retailer and say
> 'My good man, this television device that you sold me is broken, now what
> are you going to do about it?'
>
> They are then under a legal obligation to repair or replace the item.
= snipped =
In many ways this is superior to U.S. laws. For one thing, it seems to
me retailers would pay a lot more attention to consumer groups or
reports of shoddy merchandise, and not offer the stuff that won't last.
Yes, it would cut out the new manufacturers, and that's not good, but
the way it is now, it's the rare store in the U.S. that goes out on a
limb and stands up for the customer's rights.
Once the warrantee runs out, you're strictly on your own.
> As for DSLR longevity, I would assume that it would be similar to other
> items of a similar nature. I'm typing this on a computer originally sold
> in 1999 and it is still going strong. My SO uses one from 1998, and my
> son one from 1995.
I've been buying computers, monitors and peripherals since 1986.
More often than not, by far, it's that those items become obsolete by
reason of their not support new technology. I had a very capable black
and white scanner that suited me just fine at the time, but my new
operating system would not support "old" equipment. Which really
means, the supplier of the "old" scanner chose to not upgrade it's
driver software to have the old scanner work with the new system!
I had to store the scanner (I couldn't bear to throw working equipment
away!) and buy a new one. If I wanted to scan anything I needed a new
machine. I wasn't ready for and didn't need color capability, and in
fact, rarely do today, but my old scanner was obsolete in reality,
thru no fault of it's own!
Software has it's own obsolescence problems. Before too long, most
software (yes, with exceptions ~ there are always exceptions...)
becomes unable to keep up with all the other constantly changing
aspects of manipulating a computer, and needs to be replaced. It isn't
always because the operator clamors for new, new, new...
> I know computers are *not" DSLRs, but I have no reason
> to doubt that a DSLR should expire any quicker...? I guess only time will
> tell.
>
> HTH
>
> Cotty
My 2�
keith whaley
