Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Distinguished Bibliophile
bobstro
Posts: 4,075
Registered: ‎01-01-2012
0 Kudos

Re: Nook future plans article

Wulfraed: AIDE is a development environment run entirely on an Android device. I've only done a Hello World app, but it works with no off-device dependencies. Is that what you're after?
Distinguished Bibliophile
bobstro
Posts: 4,075
Registered: ‎01-01-2012

When is a car not a car?

DeanGibson wrote:
[...] However, 3rd parties have made available for my model car (1998 Audi) a replacement ROM for the automatic transmission computer, that gives better acceleration than the factory ROM (and non-optimal EPA fuel consumption).
A Chevy Impala makes a fine off-road vehicle the moment you rent it from National. Don't forget the LDW though!
 
Inspired Bibliophile
deesy58
Posts: 2,486
Registered: ‎01-22-2012
0 Kudos

Re: Nook future plans article


Wulfraed wrote:

deesy58 wrote:

 

I believe that you are mistaken.  Tablets are, indeed, computers.  Just like notebooks and laptops are computers, even though we refer to them by different names.

The reason why your calculator is not a computer is that it does not allow for the storage of programs that change the functions it performs. 

Look up the history of the development of the stored-program computer and you will realize that all tablets are computers. 


And by your definition, the last five calculators I've purchased are "computers". Though the HP25 was a bit tedious as it lost the program if you turned it off. I had to reprogram it to do factorials each day for statistics class.

 

My HP41cx had an option to support HPIL interfaces, and near the end of it's production may have gained GPIB interface capability. I do have the magnetic card reader and a bar code reader wand for it, along with one memory expansion and printer interface.

 

The HP28 natively supported the printer but lacked memory expansion. The printer interface could also be used as a bidirectional infrared serial port.

 

The HP48sx expanded on the capability with a custom memory slot and wired serial port.

 

The HP50 uses USB and microSD for expansion, and supports programming in: user RPL, SYSRPL (direct calls to the functions bypassing the error checking done with user RPL), SATURN assembly language (the processor family used by most HP calculators), and ARM assembly (the HP50 uses an ARM processor running at quarter speed to save battery, and runs a SATURN emulator on which the RPL system is executed).

 

I still call them calculators based on form factor -- handheld with a physical keypad taking up most of the top surface.

 

As for "Tablet" vs "computer"... if it can't host a development system for it's own OS, it isn't a general purpose computer! (The HP50 has the assemblers that run on the device). Let me know when a full Android deveopment environment shows up in the shop and can be run from SD card since we don't want it to be permanently resident.


I think your definition might be a bit too narrow.  Cross compilers and cross assemblers have been around for a very long time, and the code they produced was intended to (and did) run on other computers.  Those other computers were clearly not calculators -- they were, in every sense, general purpose computers. 

 

One example that runs counter to your definition is Java.  One need not be able to develop Java programs on a target machine in order to be able to run Java code. 

 

If the "calculators" you own have the capability to store and execute programs (von Neumann model), and if they have the capability to perform both arithmetic and logical operations, then they probably meet the definition of being computers.  The $4.95 calculators that we can purchase at the dollar store are not.  I don't think form-factor means anything anymore.  If it did, then the only devices we could legitimately call computers would fill entire rooms. 

 

My point in this discussion is the assertion that a NOOK Tablet is a computer, as is an iPad, a smartphone, a laptop/notebook, a desktop, or a supercomputer running more than 32,000 cores.  The vendors of such devices have, and have always had, a responsibility to correct software bugs.  Why anybody would believe that a manufacturer's responsibility for the proper function of a complex digital computer-based product might end at the point of sale is incomprehensible. 

Inspired Bibliophile
deesy58
Posts: 2,486
Registered: ‎01-22-2012
0 Kudos

Re: The ODB-II network


DeanGibson wrote:

deesy58 wrote:


In a very real sense, every computer that we use on a personal basis, including smart phones and tablets, is a personal computer.  The use of the term Personal Computer (PC) has become corrupted over time and there is no longer a lot of general agreement over its meaning.


 

True.  However, because we use "Personal Computer/PC" to refer to the computer that we connect other devices to (eg, tablets), I use the term only to refer to a desktop-like computer (IBM/clone, Apple Mac) running a desktop OS (DOS, Windows, iOS, a full Linux installation) with general purpose ports (serial, parallel, or USB) to which I can connect other devices.

 

A laptop is a PC, except that the display and keyboard are integrated.  Otherwise, it is a desktop computer (including a laptop connected to a docking station with an external display and/or keyboard).

 

Embedded computing devices (eg, the e-Ink Nooks) are not general purpose computers, although sometimes they can be made so.

 

I find those distinctions useful.


I'm not sure that your definition, while useful, isn't a bit too narrow.  It seems to me that "general purpose" and "special purpose" are both categories of computers, making members of both subsets members of the set of "computers."  I believe that the device that controls the power train of my automobile is a computer.  I don't believe that it is relay or solid-state ladder logic. 

 

In an earlier post, I described microcomputers that we embedded into one of our products. They were devices that were marketed by the manufacturer (General Instruments) as a type of computer, and we certainly considered them to be full-blown computers on a single chip. 

 

I have noticed over the years that there is a very great deal of confusion in the fields of Computer Science and Information Technology because of the differences in the opinions of various individuals, groups and corporations over the meanings of terminology in the professions.  Unlike Law and Medicine, there is a great deal of controversy over what terms mean.  I first observed this in relation to the big three mainframe manufacturer (IBM, UNIVAC and Burroughs).  It became even more confusing when Microsoft decided to develop its own computing vocabulary.  It hasn't improved at all since then.

 

ANSI (now NIST) has not appeared to do anything at all to lessen the confusion, nor has the IEEE.  Who else could develop standardized definitions for the computing professions?  Why is it that lawyers and physicians do not appear to have similar problems?     

DeanGibson
Posts: 2,230
Topics: 93
Kudos: 2,310
Solutions: 18
Registered: ‎04-12-2011

Loyalty lost

[ Edited ]

deesy58 wrote:

I'm not sure that your definition, while useful, isn't a bit too narrow.  It seems to me that "general purpose" and "special purpose" are both categories of computers, making members of both subsets members of the set of "computers." ...  Who else could develop standardized definitions for the computing professions?  Why is it that lawyers and physicians do not appear to have similar problems?     


As to your first point:  I agree (you may have misunderstood what I meant in my post).

 

As to your second point:  We have an industry that can't even spell hexadecimal correctly, and thinks "standards" means, "I'm consistent within my own project (most of the time)."

 

As for:

 


deesy58 wrote:

  Why anybody would believe that a manufacturer's responsibility for the proper function of a complex digital computer-based product might end at the point of sale is incomprehensible. 

While Amazon and Apple had a role in the decline of the Nook, the seeds of that decline were sown in exactly your point.  I never minded B&N ignorance on this subject;  what bothered me about it, was their apparent arrogance about it.  It's as though listening to customer issues was a crime.

Nooks: 2 Touch (one Ltd. Ed.): B&N 1.2.1 rooted; 1stEd/3G: B&N 1.7.0 rooted;
    2 HD+/16GB: B&N 2.2.0 (Android 4.0.4) rooted (one for sale)
Dell Venue 8 Pro: Windows 8.1; Samsung Galaxy Tab2 7.0": Android 4.2.2 rooted
LG G3 & G Pad 8.3 Android 4.4.2 rooted; Acer Iconia A500: Android 4.0.3 rooted
Customer loyalty is earned, not commanded or deserved, and easily lost.
Never suspect intent where incompetence will do.
Inspired Bibliophile
deesy58
Posts: 2,486
Registered: ‎01-22-2012
0 Kudos

Re: Loyalty lost

:smileylol:

 

:smileyfrustrated:

Distinguished Bibliophile
bobstro
Posts: 4,075
Registered: ‎01-01-2012

Calculators, computers and tablets and what really matters

[ Edited ]

I think we're drilling down into specifics whereas Keri's original point was that the term "tablet" and "computer" connotate different things as generally used today. Go into Best Buy and ask to see, or search on Amazon using the term "computers" or search the term on Amazon, and you'll be directed to various HP and Apple desktop computers. Ask to see or search on "tablets", and you'll be directed to tables of iPads, Samsung Galaxy Tabs and similar devices. Lo and behold, a search on "calculators" turns up what we'd expect.

 

Sure, to a computer scientist or techie, the common usage might be grating, but ... so what? Not every computer is a tablet, and a tablet is certainly not going to be called a calculator, so there is a distinction. That is what matters to the vast majority of the user population.

 

Continuing on then, the average usable life cycle of a tablet tends to be somewhat less than a desktop computer, or even a laptop. Lack of user-replaceable parts drives this, as well as planned obsolescence and raw consumerism. I use a desktop computer that's over 6 years old (give or take the occasional brain transplant). My server chassis goes back some 10 years. The oldest tablet I use daily is less than 2 years old. The is a difference. Tablets and phones tend to be "effectively disposable" if you prefer. 

 

So yes, various gadgets of various vintage around my house might deserve to be called "computers" based on a variety of technical characteristics, but if I'm asking someone to hand me one of them, I'll call it by what it's recognized as, whether or not the device can execute a program. Computer, as with so many terms, has changed to include a variety of subtle meanings, depending on who is using it and when.

 

Now applying this to updates, I expect a device to be updated within it's sales lifecycle to maintain the features promised in the advertisements, and for a short period thereafter to correct any bugs. This is not, however, and indefinite period. It also does not include adding functionality added to newer devices in the meantime. I expected B&N to fix bugs in the NC software, but did not expect them to add Google Play Store functionality to it.

 

B&N has definitely fallen short of my wishes, considering what I paid for the device originally, but they're not the worst of the lot either. As far as my loyalty (or brand preference, if you prefer), B&N lost that based on their attitudes as much as anything they did or did not update on my devices. Updating too often, or for suspect reasons (e.g. some of Microsoft's ploys) can be as frustrating as not often enough.

Inspired Bibliophile
deesy58
Posts: 2,486
Registered: ‎01-22-2012
0 Kudos

Re: Calculators, computers and tablets and what really matters

bobstro wrote: 


I think we're drilling down into specifics whereas Keri's original point was that the term "tablet" and "computer" connotate different things as generally used today. Go into Best Buy and ask to see, or search on Amazon using the term "computers" or search the term on Amazon, and you'll be directed to various HP and Apple desktop computers. Ask to see or search on "tablets", and you'll be directed to tables of iPads, Samsung Galaxy Tabs and similar devices. Lo and behold, a search on "calculators" turns up what we'd expect.


I believe that your examples might be, to a great extent, subjective.  A Ford is a vehicle.  So is a Hyundai.  Just because Costco advertises Hyundais, but not Fords, does not mean that Fords are not vehicles.  Just because Best Buy or Amazon chooses to make a distinction between what they choose to call a "tablet" and what they call a "computer" does not actually create a difference.  It is a distinction without a difference, IMO.  A tablet computer is still a computer.


Sure, to a computer scientist or techie, the common usage might be grating, but ... so what? Not every computer is a tablet, and a tablet is certainly not going to be called a calculator, so there is a distinction. That is what matters to the vast majority of the user population.


Hmm.  The vast majority of users, no matter how many, do not get to change facts.  They might be entitled to their opinions, but not to their own facts.  Would you agree, for example, that the fact that the vast majority of people in the world believe that global warming is real, therefore that, alone, makes it is real?  No.  It takes more than opinion to establish a fact.  Scientific evidence is required. 

Common usage aside, the manufacturer (B&N) has sold a type of computer (NOOK Tablet) that has a defect.  The defect consists of a bug(s) in the product's software.  B&N has (so far) declined to repair that defect.  The assertion was made in this thread that a tablet is not a computer, even though it meets all of the requirements for any similar device to be called a computer.  I maintain my position that a NOOK Tablet is a computer, and that the software bugs should be fixed by the supplier (B&N). 


Continuing on then, the average usable life cycle of a tablet tends to be somewhat less than a desktop computer, or even a laptop. Lack of user-replaceable parts drives this, as well as planned obsolescence and raw consumerism. I use a desktop computer that's over 6 years old (give or take the occasional brain transplant). My server chassis goes back some 10 years. The oldest tablet I use daily is less than 2 years old. The is a difference. Tablets and phones tend to be "effectively disposable" if you prefer.


Using this same logic, how many laptop and notebook computers contain user-replaceable parts (other than batteries)?  I remember my first transistor radio.  I couldn't change the parts without a soldering iron and considerable skill, but it was still a radio.  Can the average user change any of the soldered-in components on a motherboard or daughterboard?  I have two desktop computers on my desk.  One is ten years old and the other is seven.  If an IC or a passive component craps out, I will replace the entire motherboard, PSU, GPU, RAM, CPU, cooler, etc., or even the entire computer, monitor and keyboard.  If I had to pay as much for a tablet as I paid for my desktop machines, I would insist on a minimum level of reparability or replaceability. 

Do you believe that your tablet computers will not last for ten years (or even five)?  Why not?  Have they been built of much lower-quality components?  Are they less expensive because they are flimsy, or are they less expensive because they have less capability?  Price is not always a good measure of quality, as we all know, but the fact that tablets (generally) cost less than desktops does not, necessarily, mean that they will not last as long. 


So yes, various gadgets of various vintage around my house might deserve to be called "computers" based on a variety of technical characteristics, but if I'm asking someone to hand me one of them, I'll call it by what it's recognized as, whether or not the device can execute a program. Computer, as with so many terms, has changed to include a variety of subtle meanings, depending on who is using it and when.


Hmm.  Following that logic, I told my daughter and son-in-law to use my car when theirs was in the shop.  Does that mean that my vehicle is not a car, like a train car?  (It is a 4-door sedan.)  They both drive SUVs.  Technically, those are trucks.  We all commonly refer to them as cars.  I do not agree that the public has the right to change a scientifically-established definition just for the sake of convenience, or sloppiness in the use of language.  Computers have certain capabilities that other devices do not have.  I suppose I could call my desktop computer a calculator, and I have known some people who did so, but that wouldn't really change anything.  It is certainly acceptable for people to commonly refer to acetylsalicylic acid as aspirin, but that doesn't mean that the medication is no longer acetylsalicylic acid.

 

Now applying this to updates, I expect a device to be updated within it's sales lifecycle to maintain the features promised in the advertisements, and for a short period thereafter to correct any bugs. This is not, however, and indefinite period. It also does not include adding functionality added to newer devices in the meantime. I expected B&N to fix bugs in the NC software, but did not expect them to add Google Play Store functionality to it.


We do not agree on this aspect of the discussion.  I believe that a couple of auto manufacturers just recalled vehicles that were made more than ten years ago for warranty repairs.  For how long did Microsoft continue to support Windows XP after it was replaced by Vista, Windows 7, and now, Windows 8?  Software is an integral part of computer products.  Without software, the devices are only useful as doorstops and, if sufficiently heavy, boat anchors.  If the software portion of the product is defective, it should be repaired by the manufacturer.  Barnes and Noble was made aware of the bugs in the e-reader used in its tablet NOOK devices a few months after introduction.  There is no valid excuse why these bugs weren't fixed.

I used to work for a company that expected its customers to pay for corrections to defects and software bugs in its computer-based products.  Not surprisingly, that company no longer exists, even after a long history of innovation and quality product development. 

A sales lifecycle is not the same as a product lifecycle, and products should be supported for a longer period than just their sales lifecycle, IMO.

 

B&N has definitely fallen short of my wishes, considering what I paid for the device originally, but they're not the worst of the lot either. As far as my loyalty (or brand preference, if you prefer), B&N lost that based on their attitudes as much as anything they did or did not update on my devices. Updating too often, or for suspect reasons (e.g. some of Microsoft's ploys) can be as frustrating as not often enough.

I'm not completely clear about your position, here.  You aren't using the words "update" and "upgrade" interchangeably, are you?  I do not expect to receive new capabilities for free from a computer vendor.  I do, however, expect defects to be corrected -- especially when making such corrections does not involve having to take the product back to a store for physical examination and repair.  When I bought my car, I did not expect that the manufacturer would offer me free upgrades to my OnStar system, install an in-dash GPS, implement tire pressure monitors, add Bluetooth cell phone capability, or any number of other enhancements that are available in the same make and model of automobile if I were to purchase it brand-new today.  I knew what I was getting when I bought it.  I had every reason to expect what I purchased to work properly, and no more.

Distinguished Bibliophile
bobstro
Posts: 4,075
Registered: ‎01-01-2012

Re: Calculators, computers and tablets and what really matters

[ Edited ]
deesy58 wrote:

I believe that your examples might be, to a great extent, subjective. 

 

Yes, that was the point. In everyday usage, the distinction depends as much as on context (am I asking a clerk at Best Buy where to look at a tablet, or am I discussing device specifics in a forum).

 

[...] Hmm.  The vast majority of users, no matter how many, do not get to change facts. 

 

No, but society at large assigns meaning to words, and those meanings change over time, and to a certain degree, context (see above). The term "hacker" once meant something very different than the meaning it's commonly given today. In the 1970's, "Personal Computer" meant something different to the average person (if they were aware of them) than in the post-IBM PC era.

 

They might be entitled to their opinions, but not to their own facts. 

 

Language is not based on facts. It is not immutable and unchanging. Meaning changes over time. If you used the term "wireless" in the 1980's, it sounded quaint. Now it's mainstream again. Yes, technically, both technologies being referenced might have been "wireless", but people don't expect to see Marconi radios stuck in their laptops.

 

[...] Common usage aside, the manufacturer (B&N) has sold a type of computer (NOOK Tablet) that has a defect.  The defect consists of a bug(s) in the product's software.  B&N has (so far) declined to repair that defect. 

 

I'm not sure which bug you're specifically referring to, but yes, the NOOK family has a number of shortcomings that could be readily fixed with software updates. I've said this many times already.

 

The assertion was made in this thread that a tablet is not a computer, even though it meets all of the requirements for any similar device to be called a computer.  I maintain my position that a NOOK Tablet is a computer, and that the software bugs should be fixed by the supplier (B&N). 

 

The actual post made a distinction between "computer" and "tablet" as commonly used today and included a footnote explaining exactly what you're objecting to. The point is that tablets and phones don't have expected lifecycles as long as typical desktop computer products. 

 

Don't worry, though. This does nothing to take away from your point that B&N should fix long-standing problems. The two aren't linked in any way. I'm not sure why you're so determined to link them.


Using this same logic, how many laptop and notebook computers contain user-replaceable parts (other than batteries)? 

 

I routinely upgrade drives and memory on my Dell laptops, even if we only lease them for 2 years at a pop. Search on laptop battery, memory or hard disk and you'll find plenty. I could replace a broken screen or keyboard if so inclined. The chassis opens up easily with common tools.

 

[...]  If I had to pay as much for a tablet as I paid for my desktop machines, I would insist on a minimum level of reparability or replaceability. 

 

There you have it. That was the distinction being made. You didn't pay as much. While it's reasonable to expect problems to be fixed, the manufacturer isn't obligated to provide perpetual support.

Do you believe that your tablet computers will not last for ten years (or even five)? 

 

The fact that the device remains usable doesn't mean the manufacturer is responsible for updates any longer. Most products ship with a warranty that details specific terms of support. My old Apple ][+ still works just fine, but I won't bother Apple about problems or bugs it had back when it was new. Ditto for my Sharp Zaurus.

 

Why not?  Have they been built of much lower-quality components?  Are they less expensive because they are flimsy, or are they less expensive because they have less capability?  Price is not always a good measure of quality, as we all know, but the fact that tablets (generally) cost less than desktops does not, necessarily, mean that they will not last as long. 

 

All of which has nothing to do with manufacturer obligations for support. Every product you buy comes with a manfuacturer warranty against defects which details specific terms. You can read it if you like. You may be able to buy an extended warranty. They are not obligated to provide more. 

 

That said, again, it does suck that B&N hasn't addressed long-standing problems. They may not be legally obligated, but their inattention hasn't exactly swayed me towards their products for my next purchase (nor my last two).


Hmm.  Following that logic, I told my daughter and son-in-law to use my car when theirs was in the shop. 

 

I own a car and an SUV. If my son wants to borrow one, he may ask for a car, but if he asks for the SUV, I know which one he wants. Similarly, if he wants a new computer for Christmas, I'll probably buy him a desktop. If he wants a new tablet for Christmas, he'll get an Android tablet. Or, more likely, tell him to save up for one.

 

Does that mean that my vehicle is not a car, like a train car? 

 

You get what you bought. If you bought a tablet, it gets support according to what the manufacturer agrees to provide for that tablet device. If you bought a desktop PC, you may get their terms for that product. You're arguing that a train car and an automobile are the same thing. One one level, they may be. To the general public, if you say you drive a car and pull up in a box car, I think you'll get funny looks.

 

(It is a 4-door sedan.)  They both drive SUVs.  Technically, those are trucks.  We all commonly refer to them as cars.  I do not agree that the public has the right to change a scientifically-established definition just for the sake of convenience, or sloppiness in the use of language. 

 

I seriously doubt the public cares what you think. At some point, we have to communicate. If you ask knowledgeable people whether you should buy a tablet or a computer, you'll probably start a conversation about the differences between desktop devices and handheld slate devices. You don't ask if you should buy a computer or a computer. Or a computer that sits on the floor and has an external keyboard, mouse and monitor versus a computer that contains all input and output in a single handheld device weighing less than 2 pounds. Or maybe you do. Nobody really cares.

 

Computers have certain capabilities that other devices do not have.  I suppose I could call my desktop computer a calculator, and I have known some people who did so, but that wouldn't really change anything. 

 

You are now agreeing with Keri: That although devices may share technical characteristics at a technical level, we call them different things to highlight the differences. Your calculator may well be a small computer, but you probably still call it a calculator. ... Although seeing you ask somebody to pass you their computer at the office might be amusing.

 

[...] We do not agree on this aspect of the discussion.  I believe that a couple of auto manufacturers just recalled vehicles that were made more than ten years ago for warranty repairs. 

 

I believe they are under legal obligation to do recalls for safety reasons, yes. These fall outside of the terms of manufacturer warranty as well, if I'm not mistaken. Again, I'm no lawyer. Also, they suffer in the PR department if their products kill people. They won't usually recall vehicles for a $200 radio defect once they go out of warranty. 

 

For how long did Microsoft continue to support Windows XP after it was replaced by Vista, Windows 7, and now, Windows 8? 

 

They actually dropped it far earlier, but their large corporate customers with ongoing software support contracts took them to task for it. I seriously doubt it was consumer outrage. Look how long support for Microsoft Bob was maintained.

 

Software is an integral part of computer products.  Without software, the devices are only useful as doorstops and, if sufficiently heavy, boat anchors.  If the software portion of the product is defective, it should be repaired by the manufacturer.  Barnes and Noble was made aware of the bugs in the e-reader used in its tablet NOOK devices a few months after introduction.  There is no valid excuse why these bugs weren't fixed.

 

Again, you have not specified which bugs, but I definitely found my NC had bugs and annoyances that B&N could easily have fixed. You seem to be convinced that pointing out that expectations between consumer electronics and motor vehicles somehow diminishes the validity of your complaint. They don't.

[...] A sales lifecycle is not the same as a product lifecycle, and products should be supported for a longer period than just their sales lifecycle, IMO.

 

To reiterate: Every product ships with warranty information that details the terms of support and your remedies. They vary, but essentially, within the warranty period, if these bugs were so egregious, you could probably have pushed for and gotten a refund (after exhausting the usual "try this" solutions). That is usually the limit of their actual legal obligation.

 

Going beyond that limit is a very cool thing to do, and some manufacturers do this, and garner considerable consumer praise for doing so -- back to our "loyalty" discussion.

B&N has definitely fallen short of my wishes, considering what I paid for the device originally, but they're not the worst of the lot either. As far as my loyalty (or brand preference, if you prefer), B&N lost that based on their attitudes as much as anything they did or did not update on my devices. Updating too often, or for suspect reasons (e.g. some of Microsoft's ploys) can be as frustrating as not often enough.

I'm not completely clear about your position, here.  You aren't using the words "update" and "upgrade" interchangeably, are you? 

 

I did not use the term "upgrade" in that paragraph.

 

[...] I had every reason to expect what I purchased to work properly, and no more.

 

I suspect you'll find that you can get some things on your car fixed under warranty only, and others possibly for longer periods. If you take the product back while under warranty and demand a fix, the manufacturer is usually obligated to either fix the device, replace it with a functional equivalent, or refund your purchase price. If you choose to hold on to the device and continue using it past the warranty period, they typically are don't owe you anything more. Did you take yours back? Are these bugs keeping you from using the device?

 

Again, B&N should have fixed many of the long-standing problems. It would be nice if they'd quit introducing new problems with every software update as well. Their failure to do so will affect my future purchase decisions, and those of many others I suspect. I think we agree on this, and I'm really not sure what you think we're arguing about at this point, or why the usage of the term "computer" versus "tablet" affects any of this.

 

 

Distinguished Bibliophile
patgolfneb
Posts: 1,762
Registered: ‎09-10-2011

Re: Nook future plans article

Help the arp's have taken over. :smileysurprised: