Really, I’m not against this model if it were simply a low monthly fee to rent hardware and have it perpetually fixed and maintained. For a mouse I couldn’t imagine more than $1-2. I would feel good paying that knowing that the mouse wouldn’t go onto the trash heap when it stopped working well.
But of course that’s not what they are thinking. They are thinking you still pay an exorbitant up front cost, plus you pay an exorbitant subscription on top of that.
Yes the idea of fixing is less compelling for a mouse than other technologies. But I would still feel better if I knew they did fix just the part that was broken rather than chucking the whole thing out.
i can see the appeal, but it’s also a mouse, so i would rather it just not be built like shit from the get go, but that’s me.
That or be built and designed to be repairable, that way i can fix it, or someone near me could fix it for me, something like that is also acceptable. I’d be curious whether the shipping and man hours prior to and post to fixing the mouse would actually incur more cost and waste than just, deleting it from existence.
it would need to be a damn low monthly fee, I paid like 20$ for my razer deathaddr on sale(I know not Logitech), and it’s going on year 7 or 8 with daily use no issues, I expect I’ll have to replace it soon but, in my eyes even 1-2$ monthly is too expensive for a mouse and only would really be good if you tend to go through a mouse a year. but any of the more expensive mice will outlast what you’re paying on a sub
ofc that’s assuming it’s not like you stated in your last line
Yeah, even my $50-$60 logitechs will probably last me at least 5-10 years so even $1 would be steep but would be nice for example just to get a new case as the rubbery stuff starts wearing off which is something I’d probably just put up with otherwise.
Really, I’m not against this model if it were simply a low monthly fee to rent hardware and have it perpetually fixed and maintained. For a mouse I couldn’t imagine more than $1-2. I would feel good paying that knowing that the mouse wouldn’t go onto the trash heap when it stopped working well.
But of course that’s not what they are thinking. They are thinking you still pay an exorbitant up front cost, plus you pay an exorbitant subscription on top of that.
plus if it ever breaks they’re 100% just swapping a new one in and deleting the old one, it’s not cost effective to repair a fucking mouse lmao.
Yes the idea of fixing is less compelling for a mouse than other technologies. But I would still feel better if I knew they did fix just the part that was broken rather than chucking the whole thing out.
i can see the appeal, but it’s also a mouse, so i would rather it just not be built like shit from the get go, but that’s me.
That or be built and designed to be repairable, that way i can fix it, or someone near me could fix it for me, something like that is also acceptable. I’d be curious whether the shipping and man hours prior to and post to fixing the mouse would actually incur more cost and waste than just, deleting it from existence.
it would need to be a damn low monthly fee, I paid like 20$ for my razer deathaddr on sale(I know not Logitech), and it’s going on year 7 or 8 with daily use no issues, I expect I’ll have to replace it soon but, in my eyes even 1-2$ monthly is too expensive for a mouse and only would really be good if you tend to go through a mouse a year. but any of the more expensive mice will outlast what you’re paying on a sub
ofc that’s assuming it’s not like you stated in your last line
Yeah, even my $50-$60 logitechs will probably last me at least 5-10 years so even $1 would be steep but would be nice for example just to get a new case as the rubbery stuff starts wearing off which is something I’d probably just put up with otherwise.