iRex - Misleading Advertising - Page 7

Riocaz · 03-15-2007, 08:40 AM

No answer about full refunds for UK users though.

Sorry just re-read that and realised it sounds really self centered. But if the UK people are entitled to a refund then it will make it harder for iRex to refuse one for anyone else.

Riocaz · 03-15-2007, 01:05 PM

And now they are trying to weasel out of it:

So to protect against it being removed and me having to look this up again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by karel

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riocaz

And Karel: Any word on the specific question of refunds for UK buyers.
also how does registering for the battery upgrade effect this. I am still undecided as to what I would go for. And don't want to sign up now only to come to the decision that in fact I should have had the refund.

For refund I suggest to check our return policy for the conditions to return your products for a refund here: https://www.irexshop.com/return_policy.php

It doesn't, if you signup you are eligible for a free battery replacement when they become available and you will receive a follow up email with instructions on how to proceed.

Erm, no. You are mis-understanding my question.

Your returns policy is part and parcel of the overall contract with the end customer. As you have broken the contract by supplying a product which does not and never can match your companies technical specs the purchaser is entitled to a full refund outside of your standard returns policy under UK and EU law.

We are not required to accept exchange or repair. And anyway the battery replacement still will not provide the "operating time of therechargeable battery is more than a week without recharging, based on an average use of three hours reading a day" stated.

Allow me to refer you too:

http://www.dti.gov.uk/consumers/fact...page24700.html

Specifically:

Quote:

Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale).

And:

Q1. What is an inherent fault?
A fault present at the time of purchase. Examples are:
• an error in design so that a product is manufactured incorrectly
• an error in manufacturing where a faulty component was inserted.
The "fault" may not become apparent immediately but it was there at the time of sale and so the product was not of satisfactory standard.

You have admitted that this is an error of design and that the product will never "conform to contract".

And before you claim "thats a UK law it doesn't apply to us". It transposes an EU directive (1999/44/EC specifically) and as I understand it your laws should either say the same thing or something very similar.

Also:

http://www.euroconsumer.org.uk/index...d_internet.htm

Specifically:

Quote:

Criminal offences

It is a criminal offence for a trader to sell you goods which are unsafe, which do not match their description, or which have been advertised at a misleading price. This is not the case, however, if you bought the goods from a private individual.

As I have said, I am still undecided (though what appears to be iRex blatantly trying to wriggle out of their legal obligations is fast making my mind up for me.

ali · 03-15-2007, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riocaz

And now they are trying to weasel out of it:

So to protect against it being removed and me having to look this up again.

Hm. It looked to me like they are not trying to weasel out of it. I read this as you could get a full refund, minus shipping, upon returning your device. This is essentially undoing the contract, which is AFAIK the correct way to deal with such a situation.

However, I might be misreading it. I think iRex needs to be much clearer about what they offer. (Does it mean I return my device, get a full refund, then use that money to buy the 2007 model and get a renewed 2 year warranty with new (i.e., not dimmed out) display?)

Riocaz · 03-15-2007, 01:47 PM

The way I read Karel's comment is that you were only entitled to a refund if you met the terms of their returns policy (e.g. only within 7 days of receipt of the iLiad).

As you and I got ours 6 months ago. We can't meet this and thus are not entitled to a refund.

Not to mention that it still wouldn't be a full refund as they will take a 5% fee off the refund price. And I would have to pay for the shipping back to them.

Riocaz · 03-15-2007, 02:44 PM

I do note that I did misread Karel's 2nd paragraph though. He's not stating that my iLiad doesn't match their returns policy. He's saying that accepting the battery upgrade now doesn't effect requesting a refund under the returns policy.

But that doesn't actually answer the question that was asked.

nekokami · 03-15-2007, 02:50 PM

It looked to me like the 5% was if you were returning the item unopened (a restocking fee), rather than returning for cause.

The existing refund policy does say 7 days, which I have always thought was absurdly short. Even in the US, most vendors give you 30 days. In this case, however, the vendor has been making undelivered/undeliverable promises since before shipment, which I think ought to extend the refund period automatically. Someone more familiar with UK/EU law would need to look at this, though.

Does UK/EU law provide for the vendor paying your shipping? This seems like a gray area to me. Maybe a compromise would be to provide the full refund (less wear and tear, if necessary), ask the customer to pay shipping, but offer a credit for shipping costs toward any future purchase at iRex, e.g. a new model that meets specs. I know this may not seem completely fair to the customers, but I don't think iRex intended to ship a model that would make customers unhappy, either. They might go for this sort of solution to try to encourage some of their first generation buyers to give them another chance later.

Riocaz · 03-15-2007, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nekokami

It looked to me like the 5% was if you were returning the item unopened (a restocking fee), rather than returning for cause.

But they havn't said it would be waived. So unless they do you have to assume it will be charged.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nekokami

The existing refund policy does say 7 days, which I have always thought was absurdly short. Even in the US, most vendors give you 30 days. In this case, however, the vendor has been making undelivered/undeliverable promises since before shipment, which I think ought to extend the refund period automatically. Someone more familiar with UK/EU law would need to look at this, though.

Thats EU law on distance selling. You get 7 days. It's actually part and parcel of the sale of goods act which is the crux of my argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nekokami

Does UK/EU law provide for the vendor paying your shipping? This seems like a gray area to me. Maybe a compromise would be to provide the full refund (less wear and tear, if necessary), ask the customer to pay shipping, but offer a credit for shipping costs toward any future purchase at iRex, e.g. a new model that meets specs. I know this may not seem completely fair to the customers, but I don't think iRex intended to ship a model that would make customers unhappy, either. They might go for this sort of solution to try to encourage some of their first generation buyers to give them another chance later.

As far as I am aware "The full purchase price" includes shipping. But I could be wrong on that point. which is why I havn't said anything about it.

It could be argued that they owe compensation for the inconvienience (which is covered in the euroconsumer pages) but I don't want to start talking about that. I don't want this to go as far as having to pursue legal avenues. Which requesting compensation. I would just like iRex to accept their obligations.

pdam · 03-16-2007, 11:23 AM

Have you written to them formally or is this all through the iRex forums? If you have written formally it'd be interesting to know the response ...

In terms of starting a president for a full refund - this would likely put them out of business if taken up by a majority. You may be legally correct - but have you really had so little value out of your device that you would jeopardize other users' (whom are more happy with their devices) ongoing viability for their devices???

Personally - I think the battery upgrade (and possibly throw in a cover) would be good for me. I do want the unbrick capability - especially now code is available ... but I'm sure this will come.

There isn't another open source (OK there have been problems in this area) device out there with the features - for those that want to experiment with a device - if the company are out of business, there isn't an alternative ...

Would it be worth meditating a little more and thinking about a more selfless route to gain appeasement?

CommanderROR · 03-16-2007, 11:46 AM

@pdam

I am not going to take legal action myself, but I can understand those who will very well.
I would like iRex to succeed, but I can't see it on the horizon anymore.

The only hope I still had was that the new model would be better than the old one and that we would all get a chance for an upgrade and/or replacement.
The battery-upgrade is a farce in my opinon. No self-respecting customer should be happy with this, especially since the advertised gain with this battery is minimal. The little powersaving script k2r provided offers a better solution...
iRex should either withdraw completely from the consumer market and go play ball with their b2b customers...whoever that might be...or offer a proper solution to the current problems.

Honestly...which century are we living in? A device that is advertised as "low-power" has the processor and RAM running full speed all the time, a year after it is first launched. The neccessary software is there, the hardware to support it is there, but somehow it never gets implemented. Even with this "standard" powersaving option it should be possible to reach the advertised battery life. Suspend is not possible, I am very unhappy about this, but I know part of the reason (can't disclose, sorry) for this hardware error so I had a bit of sympathy. However, now we have the Iliad Model 2007, new battery and a few changes to the casing. If you are doing a redesign anyway, why not fix the most blatant mistake of all? Why not make use of one of the two main benefits of eink?

I must admit that I have finally given up on the Iliad and the company behind it. I had hoped that something could be done, some workaround, but it appears all is indeed lost, at least from my perspective. Mistakes can happen, but to consistently not fix them is just plain stupidity. No more, no less!
I sent a "goodbye" message to Angel Ancin yesterday and in the course of that also officially said "no thank you" to the still standing offer of "some form of compensation" for my efforts in "organizing" the first "beta-testers" for iRex. They had offered content or accessories (once either became available), but I don't really see the point anymore. They'll need every cent they can get for the troubles ahead.
I wish them the best of course, but I'm not sure they'll be going much further than this without a change in management...

Riocaz · 03-16-2007, 11:58 AM

@pdam

It's Jaed all over again. Just because you are happy the others should suffer? Your arguement works as well the other way.

Personally I want iRex to acknoledge their legal obligations rather than the half<censored>ed approach they are currently taking and trying to avoid doing so.

I havn't decided if I would take the refund. I like my iLiad. But as it stands it won't ever do what I brought it for. The point is they are not making it clear to their customers that they are entitled to one.

Oh and to add to CommanderRor comments:

They have 1 b2b customer atm. The eflybook...

Given this is a _very_ expensive product and is aimed at people with a very lucrative job or very expensive hobby in one of if not the most litagous country on the planet. Do you see them standing for this?

And what will happen if those customers do sue their Arinc? Will they have any option other than to take action against their errant supplier?

Do you see where I am going with this?

Does that scare me? Hell yes.

But the iLiad does have a significant number of plus sides too...

The User Community for one: Adam B's FBReader port is certainly going to make it very difficult to leave the platform.

But we are still missing that user reflash option which would decide it.

jayk · 03-17-2007, 07:34 PM

Ok.

So, let's do the summary.

1) IRex's product literature had numbers / features that are not actually possible with the device they advertised.

2) IRex mentioned in their literature that not all features would be available immediately.

3) Some people have had their ILiads for many months and are upset that it still doesn't support those features / numbers.

4) For those who feel wronged, the law is on the customer's side and legally IRex must address this. You can take this up with them by emailing their info@irextechnologies.com address.

No need to really discuss those points further, I think. We've all got the point.

I want some of the features that were advertised as well and I am not happy that they are not available (decent HTML reading is one). I'd also like some improvements - faster startup time for example. But that said, I am pretty tired of hearing people whine about how awful the device is and how crappy IRex has been.

The fact of the matter is that the majority of the features DO work and most of them work well. In the areas where they don't IRex has been pretty forthcoming about. The information about the ILiad's battery life and it's future capabilities was not 'discovered', IRex told us, and told us why. They have told us what things they think will work to rectify / improve the situation and which ones they are working on internally, and they are the ones who said 'Yep, looks like we won't hit that 21 hour mark' At all the points where there was information to share, it seems to me that IRex has done so, including giving estimates of when SDK and other things would be released, and being pretty forthcoming about what has been going on internally with regard to features.

This is a good thing, and we have a lot of information and details from the people who build this device. It seems to me the real issue that folks are really pissed off about is that IRex isn't moving fast enough to make things nicer than they are. I can understand that completely, I really want faster boot time and the ability to unbrick the device myself if I decide to hack on it and screw up (Hint Hint)

But let's face it, folks. They don't have to do any of it. There are numerous other companies out there using Linux as their core and giving no support whatsoever. Most companies taking advantage of linux do the bare minimum by releasing the relevant public code changes in some hidden corner of their website. Many don't even do that until they are 'caught' and called out. (Linksys is a good example of both of these.)

So, some additional facts:

5) IRex does not have to provide any developer tools whatsoever.

6) IRex does not have to accept your device back to reflash it if you mess it up.

7) They don't have to tell you anything about how to write software effectively for your ILiad, or how to improve it's performance in any way.

8) They don't have to have a public forum for the users of their product, nor do they have to participate in any forum.

9) They don't have to accept / incorporate any community developer ideas into their software.

10) They do all of these things. (5-9)

So what we have actually is a company who is being very positive and compliant with the spirit of open source by being involved and helpful where they can, rather than just complying with the letter of law by using linux and releasing only their required changes.

And what we have is a user community whose most vocal posts are about how, on the whole, the company stinks, lies to their customers, and fails to live up to their legal obligations. These claims don't match up with the reality, which is that we have a great device, and a company who is actually putting some paid-for resources into working with the community.

Yes, I know the battery life is not what they said. But you know what, in engineering, especially in battery usage, folks make mistakes and sometimes fall short of the mark. It happens... It also happens that marketing folks claim as much as they think they can get away with regardless of what engineering says. IRex has come forward and offered a battery replacement for those who want it. Once again, showing their good faith. And for those for whom that is not good enough, have provided the address to direct further discussion to.

So I think we need to take a moment before we lambaste them, yet again, and realize what we do have. I also think we need to remember that the community effort they are putting in is not required in any way and that if they decide that it is not worth it, they can withdraw it at any time.

We have a great device. It gets better monthly. We get information, we get feedback on our ideas and our tinkering. We get info on what's coming and what isn't, and where our time would overlap what they are doing internally. We get a lot.

IRex is a business, this means they do work for money, and hopefully bring in more money than they spend producing things. Building a community and harnessing the interest and tinker-lust of interested individuals can be beneficial to the company and the community, but it costs money and time and it's a tricky thing to manage. So much so that most companies don't even try. I think IRex deserves kudos for doing so, and for being as helpful and forthcoming as they have been.

I, for one, hope IRex does continue to do so in spite of the negativity that seems to continually be thrown their way. I think it's a great device now and will continue to improve, and I think the pace of those improvements will increase dramatically once people can tinker without fear of bricking their Iliad and being unable to use it for weeks while it gets fixed. (Hint, User unbricking, Hint)

JayK

Riocaz · 03-19-2007, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayk

The fact of the matter is that the majority of the features DO work and most of them work well. In the areas where they don't IRex has been pretty forthcoming about.

Do they?

HTML is still pretty much unusable.
MP3 is non-existant
The wacom touchpad is still uncalibrated and doesn't provide the pressure sensitive functions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayk

The information about the ILiad's battery life and it's future capabilities was not 'discovered', IRex told us, and told us why. They have told us what things they think will work to rectify / improve the situation and which ones they are working on internally, and they are the ones who said 'Yep, looks like we won't hit that 21 hour mark'

After they accidentally put up a webpage stating the specs of the V2 which stated 15. Then when questioned stated that this was only possible with a larger battery.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayk

At all the points where there was information to share, it seems to me that IRex has done so, including giving estimates of when SDK and other things would be released, and being pretty forthcoming about what has been going on internally with regard to features.

Err when? Sorry but thats just not the case iRex have still not mentioned when they will provide the promised mp3 support, wacom calibration, etc etc.

Yes the iLiad is a great device. And has huge potential. But iRex's performance as a company has been pretty cruddy.

What has bugged many of the early user's off most is the "This will be done soon" statements which we have been hearing for 6 months or more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayk

5) IRex does not have to provide any developer tools whatsoever.

Err they announced this prior to the sales of the iLiad. So yes they do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayk

6) IRex does not have to accept your device back to reflash it if you mess it up.

They don't they make it a chargable service.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayk

7) They don't have to tell you anything about how to write software effectively for your ILiad, or how to improve it's performance in any way.

This is true. And their help to the developers is always appreciated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayk

8) They don't have to have a public forum for the users of their product, nor do they have to participate in any forum.

They only did this after the community complained repeatedly about their previous official policy (which came from the very top we were told) which meant that there was no interaction from iRex other than their announcements.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayk

9) They don't have to accept / incorporate any community developer ideas into their software.

Again they promised early on that community projects would be wither be added into their official releases or made so that individual users should choose them for automatic dowload.

Also they would be bloody stupid not to accept free help in developing their device. Thats like someone refusing a handful of free money.

Drops · 03-19-2007, 10:30 AM

Quote:

The wacom touchpad is still uncalibrated and doesn't provide the pressure sensitive functions.

You are so right! It's a pain to write like this, my pen is off so much that it is unusable.

jayk · 03-19-2007, 11:57 PM

So - Riocaz - I only have one question for you. Have you actually volunteered to send your device back and asked for a refund?

I'm not going to fight you point by point. When I buy a product, I make sure it does what I want before I purchase it. I don't spend my money until it actually does what I am looking for. Maybe it's a question of when you purchased, and what you read prior. Personally, I knew exactly what I was getting when I placed my order. I was not disappointed.

There are things I wish worked better, but I have faith that they will in time. If they don't, I may be annoyed, but I realize that's part of that whole 'being a grown up' thing. You know, understanding that maybe I have some responsibility in the situation by jumping before I knew everything. This is why I read as much as I possibly can before I part with a large amount of money for a device and why I almost never buy a product before I've read the comments of those who actually had their hands on the device.

In any case, I have a different view, and that is that we have a device that is one of the best ebook readers out there right now, as is and one of the few that is not actively crippled by insisting on proprietary and DRM ridden formats that mean I can't read whatever I want on it.

That is what I bought, a good, easy to read, DRM-free, standard format capable E-book reader. Not an mp3 player, and not a sketchpad - I find the input works well enough for making notes on the pages, which is what I expected.

AND it's still being actively developed, with a fair amount of information as to what is coming provided by the company.

We also have a company who is active with the community and willing to help and share much more information than most companies do. Just look at how many products have Linux inside but have no information at all about that fact on their website... and will only grudgingly give a link to the GPL code if somebody figures it out and calls them on it.

The ILiad doesn't suck... and IRex isn't a bad company. I'm sorry you feel cheated. I suggest that you contact them and let them know you want to return your ILiad and get your money back - it was already established that legally you can do so.

For the other folks who are looking at / considering an ILiad, I suggest you do what was recommended to me, and what I did. Read up on what it can do, what it can't do, and then decide if it's worth it to you to get the features it has right now, because there is never any guarantee that any product will advance any further once you have it. Personally, I think if you are looking for a good ebook reader, it is worth it, but do the research yourself and then decide.

JayK

NatCh · 03-20-2007, 12:43 AM

First off, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I'm a Sony Reader owner, and I'm quite happy with my acquisition.

Frankly, I'd probably be fairly happy with the iLiad for my own purposes, too (except the battery life), but that doesn't make it all right to deliver less than is advertised, and still charge full price.

You see, the problem, JayK, is that a lot of folks purchased an iLiad expecting it to do more than it actually does, not because they didn't research it beforehand, but because they took iRex's word on what the device would do eventually, which iRex has since admitted isn't physically possible, given the hardware choices they made. It's not that iRex said it might do such and such, it's that iRex said it would do particular things and it doesn't. Further, iRex repeatedly insisted that it would do those things, in, as you say, time, and it has not come to pass.

In fact, the things you point to as laudable that they've done, have been largely a result of pressure from the MobileRead community.

It's entirely possible that iRex honestly believed they would be able to achieve what they were advertising (I for one, believe that they did so believe), but they simply haven't. Given that circumstance, I don't think that it's just a matter of a buyer denying his responsibility in an immature fashion, there's plenty of responsibility on the part of the seller. The default doesn't have to be deliberate to be a default, it just has to be a default.

Riocaz has been active here since May of last year, at the time, MobileRead was the best (almost only) source of information on these devices (still is, arguably), and we counted among our number someone who had his hands on an evaluation unit. It is very wise to wait for the comments of those who've had their hands on a unit, and to get all the information available before buying, however, generally speaking, somebody has to buy the device without any such comments, or there never are any such comments.

I'm glad that you have a device that does what you want, that's a big goal of MobileRead, to get folks information so that they can get what they'll be happy with. But it's not always an option to know everything (or even most everything) before making a decision, and that's part of MobileRead too: to pass on the experiences of the brave souls who jump in first, so that others can know what the water is like.

If this were a situation of a device that did what it said it would but just not in the way the buyer expected it to, or not in a way that he liked or wanted it done, that would be one thing, and the "grown up" thing would be to just accept that he should have looked more before leaping. But this is, instead, a situation where a device was specifically advertised to do functions A through L and it only does B, D, and G through H, and some of those only sort of.

That's not a matter of not researching enough to know what to reasonably expect, it's a situation of a device being significantly different than what it was represented to be, and that's just not right, even if it wasn't deliberate, and even though some folks are happy with getting only a fraction of the features they paid for.

You know, the ironic thing is, the last time I saw Riocaz get upset (and a good deal more upset that time) it was in defense of iRex and the iLiad.

03-15-2007, 08:40 AM	#91
Riocaz Fulfilled but not by iRex Posts: 932 Karma: 286846 Join Date: May 2006 Location: London Device: Far too many	No answer about full refunds for UK users though. Sorry just re-read that and realised it sounds really self centered. But if the UK people are entitled to a refund then it will make it harder for iRex to refuse one for anyone else. Last edited by Riocaz; 03-15-2007 at 08:45 AM.

03-15-2007, 01:47 PM	#94
Riocaz Fulfilled but not by iRex Posts: 932 Karma: 286846 Join Date: May 2006 Location: London Device: Far too many	The way I read Karel's comment is that you were only entitled to a refund if you met the terms of their returns policy (e.g. only within 7 days of receipt of the iLiad). As you and I got ours 6 months ago. We can't meet this and thus are not entitled to a refund. Not to mention that it still wouldn't be a full refund as they will take a 5% fee off the refund price. And I would have to pay for the shipping back to them. Last edited by Riocaz; 03-15-2007 at 01:53 PM. Reason: removed the words " and then only if unopened" as that only applies to software

03-16-2007, 11:58 AM	#100
Riocaz Fulfilled but not by iRex Posts: 932 Karma: 286846 Join Date: May 2006 Location: London Device: Far too many	@pdam It's Jaed all over again. Just because you are happy the others should suffer? Your arguement works as well the other way. Personally I want iRex to acknoledge their legal obligations rather than the half<censored>ed approach they are currently taking and trying to avoid doing so. I havn't decided if I would take the refund. I like my iLiad. But as it stands it won't ever do what I brought it for. The point is they are not making it clear to their customers that they are entitled to one. Oh and to add to CommanderRor comments: They have 1 b2b customer atm. The eflybook... Given this is a _very_ expensive product and is aimed at people with a very lucrative job or very expensive hobby in one of if not the most litagous country on the planet. Do you see them standing for this? And what will happen if those customers do sue their Arinc? Will they have any option other than to take action against their errant supplier? Do you see where I am going with this? Does that scare me? Hell yes. But the iLiad does have a significant number of plus sides too... The User Community for one: Adam B's FBReader port is certainly going to make it very difficult to leave the platform. But we are still missing that user reflash option which would decide it. Last edited by Riocaz; 03-16-2007 at 04:00 PM.

03-17-2007, 07:34 PM	#101
jayk Enthusiast Posts: 26 Karma: 201 Join Date: Mar 2007 Device: Iliad	enough. Ok. So, let's do the summary. 1) IRex's product literature had numbers / features that are not actually possible with the device they advertised. 2) IRex mentioned in their literature that not all features would be available immediately. 3) Some people have had their ILiads for many months and are upset that it still doesn't support those features / numbers. 4) For those who feel wronged, the law is on the customer's side and legally IRex must address this. You can take this up with them by emailing their info@irextechnologies.com address. No need to really discuss those points further, I think. We've all got the point. I want some of the features that were advertised as well and I am not happy that they are not available (decent HTML reading is one). I'd also like some improvements - faster startup time for example. But that said, I am pretty tired of hearing people whine about how awful the device is and how crappy IRex has been. The fact of the matter is that the majority of the features DO work and most of them work well. In the areas where they don't IRex has been pretty forthcoming about. The information about the ILiad's battery life and it's future capabilities was not 'discovered', IRex told us, and told us why. They have told us what things they think will work to rectify / improve the situation and which ones they are working on internally, and they are the ones who said 'Yep, looks like we won't hit that 21 hour mark' At all the points where there was information to share, it seems to me that IRex has done so, including giving estimates of when SDK and other things would be released, and being pretty forthcoming about what has been going on internally with regard to features. This is a good thing, and we have a lot of information and details from the people who build this device. It seems to me the real issue that folks are really pissed off about is that IRex isn't moving fast enough to make things nicer than they are. I can understand that completely, I really want faster boot time and the ability to unbrick the device myself if I decide to hack on it and screw up (Hint Hint) But let's face it, folks. They don't have to do any of it. There are numerous other companies out there using Linux as their core and giving no support whatsoever. Most companies taking advantage of linux do the bare minimum by releasing the relevant public code changes in some hidden corner of their website. Many don't even do that until they are 'caught' and called out. (Linksys is a good example of both of these.) So, some additional facts: 5) IRex does not have to provide any developer tools whatsoever. 6) IRex does not have to accept your device back to reflash it if you mess it up. 7) They don't have to tell you anything about how to write software effectively for your ILiad, or how to improve it's performance in any way. 8) They don't have to have a public forum for the users of their product, nor do they have to participate in any forum. 9) They don't have to accept / incorporate any community developer ideas into their software. 10) They do all of these things. (5-9) So what we have actually is a company who is being very positive and compliant with the spirit of open source by being involved and helpful where they can, rather than just complying with the letter of law by using linux and releasing only their required changes. And what we have is a user community whose most vocal posts are about how, on the whole, the company stinks, lies to their customers, and fails to live up to their legal obligations. These claims don't match up with the reality, which is that we have a great device, and a company who is actually putting some paid-for resources into working with the community. Yes, I know the battery life is not what they said. But you know what, in engineering, especially in battery usage, folks make mistakes and sometimes fall short of the mark. It happens... It also happens that marketing folks claim as much as they think they can get away with regardless of what engineering says. IRex has come forward and offered a battery replacement for those who want it. Once again, showing their good faith. And for those for whom that is not good enough, have provided the address to direct further discussion to. So I think we need to take a moment before we lambaste them, yet again, and realize what we do have. I also think we need to remember that the community effort they are putting in is not required in any way and that if they decide that it is not worth it, they can withdraw it at any time. We have a great device. It gets better monthly. We get information, we get feedback on our ideas and our tinkering. We get info on what's coming and what isn't, and where our time would overlap what they are doing internally. We get a lot. IRex is a business, this means they do work for money, and hopefully bring in more money than they spend producing things. Building a community and harnessing the interest and tinker-lust of interested individuals can be beneficial to the company and the community, but it costs money and time and it's a tricky thing to manage. So much so that most companies don't even try. I think IRex deserves kudos for doing so, and for being as helpful and forthcoming as they have been. I, for one, hope IRex does continue to do so in spite of the negativity that seems to continually be thrown their way. I think it's a great device now and will continue to improve, and I think the pace of those improvements will increase dramatically once people can tinker without fear of bricking their Iliad and being unable to use it for weeks while it gets fixed. (Hint, User unbricking, Hint) JayK

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Advertising in eBooks	jhempel24	General Discussions	52	08-30-2010 05:27 AM
Advertising in Books	Robin O'Neill	Writers' Corner	15	08-22-2010 02:15 PM
Chicago Public Library Figured Out How to Prevent Hacking! (Misleading)	Sydney's Mom	Amazon Kindle	8	06-13-2010 03:54 PM
eBook Advertising	paulckennedy	News	114	02-22-2010 03:37 PM
Misleading Battery Indicator Fix	Fitzwaryn	Sony Reader	2	04-12-2007 08:03 AM

03-15-2007, 02:44 PM	#95
Riocaz Fulfilled but not by iRex Posts: 932 Karma: 286846 Join Date: May 2006 Location: London Device: Far too many	I do note that I did misread Karel's 2nd paragraph though. He's not stating that my iLiad doesn't match their returns policy. He's saying that accepting the battery upgrade now doesn't effect requesting a refund under the returns policy. But that doesn't actually answer the question that was asked.

03-15-2007, 02:50 PM	#96
nekokami fruminous edugeek Posts: 6,745 Karma: 551260 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Northeast US Device: iPad, eBw 1150	It looked to me like the 5% was if you were returning the item unopened (a restocking fee), rather than returning for cause. The existing refund policy does say 7 days, which I have always thought was absurdly short. Even in the US, most vendors give you 30 days. In this case, however, the vendor has been making undelivered/undeliverable promises since before shipment, which I think ought to extend the refund period automatically. Someone more familiar with UK/EU law would need to look at this, though. Does UK/EU law provide for the vendor paying your shipping? This seems like a gray area to me. Maybe a compromise would be to provide the full refund (less wear and tear, if necessary), ask the customer to pay shipping, but offer a credit for shipping costs toward any future purchase at iRex, e.g. a new model that meets specs. I know this may not seem completely fair to the customers, but I don't think iRex intended to ship a model that would make customers unhappy, either. They might go for this sort of solution to try to encourage some of their first generation buyers to give them another chance later.

03-16-2007, 11:23 AM	#98
pdam Groupie Posts: 199 Karma: 100 Join Date: Aug 2006 Device: iLiad, iPaq, Psion5&7, Blackberry	Have you written to them formally or is this all through the iRex forums? If you have written formally it'd be interesting to know the response ... In terms of starting a president for a full refund - this would likely put them out of business if taken up by a majority. You may be legally correct - but have you really had so little value out of your device that you would jeopardize other users' (whom are more happy with their devices) ongoing viability for their devices??? Personally - I think the battery upgrade (and possibly throw in a cover) would be good for me. I do want the unbrick capability - especially now code is available ... but I'm sure this will come. There isn't another open source (OK there have been problems in this area) device out there with the features - for those that want to experiment with a device - if the company are out of business, there isn't an alternative ... Would it be worth meditating a little more and thinking about a more selfless route to gain appeasement?

03-16-2007, 11:46 AM	#99
CommanderROR eink fanatic Posts: 2,022 Karma: 4924 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Germany Device: STAReBOOK, iRex Iliad, Sony 505, Kindle 2	@pdam I am not going to take legal action myself, but I can understand those who will very well. I would like iRex to succeed, but I can't see it on the horizon anymore. The only hope I still had was that the new model would be better than the old one and that we would all get a chance for an upgrade and/or replacement. The battery-upgrade is a farce in my opinon. No self-respecting customer should be happy with this, especially since the advertised gain with this battery is minimal. The little powersaving script k2r provided offers a better solution... iRex should either withdraw completely from the consumer market and go play ball with their b2b customers...whoever that might be...or offer a proper solution to the current problems. Honestly...which century are we living in? A device that is advertised as "low-power" has the processor and RAM running full speed all the time, a year after it is first launched. The neccessary software is there, the hardware to support it is there, but somehow it never gets implemented. Even with this "standard" powersaving option it should be possible to reach the advertised battery life. Suspend is not possible, I am very unhappy about this, but I know part of the reason (can't disclose, sorry) for this hardware error so I had a bit of sympathy. However, now we have the Iliad Model 2007, new battery and a few changes to the casing. If you are doing a redesign anyway, why not fix the most blatant mistake of all? Why not make use of one of the two main benefits of eink? I must admit that I have finally given up on the Iliad and the company behind it. I had hoped that something could be done, some workaround, but it appears all is indeed lost, at least from my perspective. Mistakes can happen, but to consistently not fix them is just plain stupidity. No more, no less! I sent a "goodbye" message to Angel Ancin yesterday and in the course of that also officially said "no thank you" to the still standing offer of "some form of compensation" for my efforts in "organizing" the first "beta-testers" for iRex. They had offered content or accessories (once either became available), but I don't really see the point anymore. They'll need every cent they can get for the troubles ahead. I wish them the best of course, but I'm not sure they'll be going much further than this without a change in management...

03-19-2007, 11:57 PM	#104
jayk Enthusiast Posts: 26 Karma: 201 Join Date: Mar 2007 Device: Iliad	So - Riocaz - I only have one question for you. Have you actually volunteered to send your device back and asked for a refund? I'm not going to fight you point by point. When I buy a product, I make sure it does what I want before I purchase it. I don't spend my money until it actually does what I am looking for. Maybe it's a question of when you purchased, and what you read prior. Personally, I knew exactly what I was getting when I placed my order. I was not disappointed. There are things I wish worked better, but I have faith that they will in time. If they don't, I may be annoyed, but I realize that's part of that whole 'being a grown up' thing. You know, understanding that maybe I have some responsibility in the situation by jumping before I knew everything. This is why I read as much as I possibly can before I part with a large amount of money for a device and why I almost never buy a product before I've read the comments of those who actually had their hands on the device. In any case, I have a different view, and that is that we have a device that is one of the best ebook readers out there right now, as is and one of the few that is not actively crippled by insisting on proprietary and DRM ridden formats that mean I can't read whatever I want on it. That is what I bought, a good, easy to read, DRM-free, standard format capable E-book reader. Not an mp3 player, and not a sketchpad - I find the input works well enough for making notes on the pages, which is what I expected. AND it's still being actively developed, with a fair amount of information as to what is coming provided by the company. We also have a company who is active with the community and willing to help and share much more information than most companies do. Just look at how many products have Linux inside but have no information at all about that fact on their website... and will only grudgingly give a link to the GPL code if somebody figures it out and calls them on it. The ILiad doesn't suck... and IRex isn't a bad company. I'm sorry you feel cheated. I suggest that you contact them and let them know you want to return your ILiad and get your money back - it was already established that legally you can do so. For the other folks who are looking at / considering an ILiad, I suggest you do what was recommended to me, and what I did. Read up on what it can do, what it can't do, and then decide if it's worth it to you to get the features it has right now, because there is never any guarantee that any product will advance any further once you have it. Personally, I think if you are looking for a good ebook reader, it is worth it, but do the research yourself and then decide. JayK

03-20-2007, 12:43 AM	#105
NatCh Gizmologist Posts: 11,615 Karma: 929550 Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3	First off, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I'm a Sony Reader owner, and I'm quite happy with my acquisition. Frankly, I'd probably be fairly happy with the iLiad for my own purposes, too (except the battery life), but that doesn't make it all right to deliver less than is advertised, and still charge full price. You see, the problem, JayK, is that a lot of folks purchased an iLiad expecting it to do more than it actually does, not because they didn't research it beforehand, but because they took iRex's word on what the device would do eventually, which iRex has since admitted isn't physically possible, given the hardware choices they made. It's not that iRex said it might do such and such, it's that iRex said it would do particular things and it doesn't. Further, iRex repeatedly insisted that it would do those things, in, as you say, time, and it has not come to pass. In fact, the things you point to as laudable that they've done, have been largely a result of pressure from the MobileRead community. It's entirely possible that iRex honestly believed they would be able to achieve what they were advertising (I for one, believe that they did so believe), but they simply haven't. Given that circumstance, I don't think that it's just a matter of a buyer denying his responsibility in an immature fashion, there's plenty of responsibility on the part of the seller. The default doesn't have to be deliberate to be a default, it just has to be a default. Riocaz has been active here since May of last year, at the time, MobileRead was the best (almost only) source of information on these devices (still is, arguably), and we counted among our number someone who had his hands on an evaluation unit. It is very wise to wait for the comments of those who've had their hands on a unit, and to get all the information available before buying, however, generally speaking, somebody has to buy the device without any such comments, or there never are any such comments. I'm glad that you have a device that does what you want, that's a big goal of MobileRead, to get folks information so that they can get what they'll be happy with. But it's not always an option to know everything (or even most everything) before making a decision, and that's part of MobileRead too: to pass on the experiences of the brave souls who jump in first, so that others can know what the water is like. If this were a situation of a device that did what it said it would but just not in the way the buyer expected it to, or not in a way that he liked or wanted it done, that would be one thing, and the "grown up" thing would be to just accept that he should have looked more before leaping. But this is, instead, a situation where a device was specifically advertised to do functions A through L and it only does B, D, and G through H, and some of those only sort of. That's not a matter of not researching enough to know what to reasonably expect, it's a situation of a device being significantly different than what it was represented to be, and that's just not right, even if it wasn't deliberate, and even though some folks are happy with getting only a fraction of the features they paid for. You know, the ironic thing is, the last time I saw Riocaz get upset (and a good deal more upset that time) it was in defense of iRex and the iLiad.

Advert

Advert