| Products > Test Equipment |
| Keysight officially lost the plot - don't buy if you're a hobbyist |
| << < (74/118) > >> |
| SilverSolder:
--- Quote from: adauphin on February 22, 2022, 03:12:33 pm --- --- Quote from: SilverSolder on February 21, 2022, 02:27:51 pm --- Thinking about this... even some older time-honoured HP equipment come with notices that they are for professional use by competent people only. I dislike over-lawyering as much as the next guy, but perhaps it is simply the case that a product you sell to the average Joe Blow comes with more responsibilities than a product sold for professional / special use cases only? - e.g. remember when McDonald's got sued for their coffee being too hot, and a consumer got badly burned when spilling a cup in their lap. Imagine how much trouble a n00b can get into with test equipment. Some scumbag lawyer could launch a suit: "My client's house burned down because he was charging LiPos with your power supply. Nowhere in the instruction manual does it mention that this supply cannot be used for charging LiPos. Either the product is deficient, or your documentation - either way, you have to pay for a new house." All of these kinds of problems are reduced significantly if you sell to professionals / companies only. Now, your defense to the above lawsuit is simply "Your client is in breach of his contract with us, where he claimed he was a trained professional using our product in a professional environment. Any professional would know better than to try and charge LiPo chemistry unattended in this way. If you want to take this to court, we have a long list of professionals willing to attest to that. Don't waste your time and money." --- End quote --- Crazy how many multimeters there are for sale in every home improvement store, with test probes for probing high voltage. Has anyone seen how close those little fingers of a kid get to the metal prongs of an electrical cord when they plug something into an outlet? The fact any store sells plastic wire nuts for securing mains leads and even testers for hot mains is on another level. I can't believe a hair dryer cord is longer than 6" so it could reach the sink. Does anyone remove paper clips and any metal object from their home that could accidentally make it into a receptacle? Imagine the field day lawyers could have with every store and vendor imaginable. The point of my ramblings, this is complete BS regarding any user of test equipment not taking the responsibility to read the directions of their device. Since when did humanity have no freaking clue how to operate anything with no lick of common sense? Guess we have to make a blanket policy for everyone. I'm shocked there hasn't been lawsuits against chewing gum manufacturers since it impairs walking. We don't make any move to remove cell phones from the hands of people crossing the street with their head down. --- End quote --- Lawyers can and do have field days with every store and vendor imaginable. E.g.: https://www.iveyengineering.com/unbelievable-product-liability-lawsuits/ I especially loved the $15 million for shooting yourself in the foot! |
| SilverSolder:
Selling to the professional or business-to-business market doesn't actually make a manufacturer immune to product liability lawsuits. In order for a company to be able to defend itself against a product liability lawsuit, it must prove that they strived to achieve a design that is reasonably safe for its intended uses, including reasonably foreseeable alternate uses and even misuses. This is hard to do, because in court, the argument will typically devolve to asking for the product to be "the safest possible." Basically, the plaintiff's lawyers will try to hold the manufacturer responsible for "foreseeing" even completely crazy uses and misuses of its product that resulted in an injury. The goal of making any product the "safest possible" is obviously impossible - it would result in a product so dumbed down that it couldn't be used for its intended purpose. Instead, the courts look at how the company actually determined when to stop making the product safer. So, what is actually considered a "job well done" in terms of safety - that will stand up in court? Basically, the manufacturer must prove they became familiar with how the product is actually used... by contact with customers, data from field service visits, and other means. They must document and analyze the reasonably foreseeable uses and misuses - including analysis of the potential market for the product, the abilities of the expected users, understanding how the product would be used, and the environment to which the product will be subjected. Even factors like the life expectancy (and recyclability) of the product, and the frequency of repair and replacement of parts and the impact on safety, are important to demonstrate. Seen in this light, naturally, the work and analysis you would do for a consumer product being used at home is completely different to the one you would do for a product aimed at a professional environment - even if the product itself is exactly the same. The following is complete speculation, but it rings true: Keysight probably hasn't done the necessary homework to be able to sell their products directly to the consumer market without taking on excessive legal risk. They might have concluded that it is too expensive to do that for the additional sales they would get. |
| AVGresponding:
Whilst it may be a reality, the idea that any manufacturer should ever be held responsible for someone misusing one of their products is utterly ludicrous. Rather than trying to legislate Darwinism away we should embrace the removal of stupid people from the gene pool (as long as they are doing it to themselves, I'm not suggesting eugenics is in any way acceptable) as an improvement to the species as a whole. I'm a firm believer in the theory that people drive like fucking idiots these days because they feel invincible in their modern autos, weighed down as they are with more "safety" features than you can shake a multimeter probe at, safe in the knowledge that when (not if) their speed exceeds their talent, the car will either save them from a collision or protect them during it. |
| Grandchuck:
The illusion of safety could make drivers worse: https://www.thedrive.com/article/13378/driver-aids-may-create-worse-drivers-report-says https://www.wired.com/2011/07/active-safety-systems-could-create-passive-drivers/ |
| SilverSolder:
We all know where this is going to end - self driving cars that rarely, if ever, exceed 25mph! |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |