←back to thread

114 points pompidoo | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.418s | source

I developed a device that turns an Airtag on and off at specific intervals. Current Airtags are detectable right away and cannot be used to track stolen property. That device allows you to hide an Airtag in your car, for example, and someone that steals your car will not be able to use some app to detect it. The Airtag will also not warn the thief of its presence. After some hours, the Airtag turns on again and you can find out its location. It’s not foolproof, as the timing has to be right, but still useful.

What do you think?

Show context
cmeacham98 ◴[] No.43997346[source]
> Events outside our control, such as Apple updating the firmware in the future to prevent the device from working, will not qualify for a refund.

I fully understand why you would want to do this, but as a consumer I would never buy this product with this clause.

replies(2): >>43997456 #>>43997835 #
dudeinjapan ◴[] No.43997456[source]
A reasonable solution would be to get to buy the newer model half-off if this happens. Obviously the maker can’t just have his entire biz nuked with refunds if Apple happens to update firmware.
replies(1): >>43997824 #
mulmen ◴[] No.43997824[source]
I think you have your priorities wrong. Why should an unsustainable business be prioritized over consumer benefit?

Nobody has a right to a successful business but when consumers can trust their purchases they are more likely to make additional purchases.

replies(2): >>43998117 #>>43998845 #
1. pompidoo ◴[] No.43998845[source]
I felt like adding that disclaimer was a nice thing to do, informing the customer and letting them make their own decision. It makes almost no difference to remove that disclaimer (well, it would increase sales). it is not to protect myself. The price is very low and margin is very thin, what happens if Apple bricks the device? There would be very little money left to refund the customers, and most of the refunds would be eaten by transaction fees. Is it worth it for the customers to receive a few cents back? And that's assuming I keep all the money in the company and don't pay myself.
replies(1): >>44000077 #
2. mulmen ◴[] No.44000077[source]
Agree that the transparency is nice but the limitation it mentions disqualifies the product for me.