There’s plenty of competition; the problem isn’t the proprietary firmware, it’s the expensive parts. You can still fix 99% of a machine yourself, you might have to get a tech out to put a CANbus ID into the computer so a new part that you put on works.
But it still comes down to the fact that the competition don’t make as good/productive of a machine, and parts availability, even if they are expensive, is key. I’ve paid $1000 for a part I could make myself on a mill, but it would take me a day and I’d lose $100,000 of lost production on that machine because rain is coming.
I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that right-to-repair replaces repair options from the OEM, but it’s a critical option to have in a functional product support ecosystem and Deer’s trying to cut it out entirely.
This is probably the first time I’ve made a comment like this on a thread about Deere that hasn’t been downvoted into the basement. People don’t want to hear about what the ground truth of this situation is, they want to hate a company that they haven’t ever actually dealt with.
Don’t get me wrong, I would like to see Deere stop some of their practices, particularly using opensource software like Linux to power their devices and then selling them at steep prices to farmers that sometimes barely have enough money to fix a tire on one of these machines. But the “unrepairability” of Deere equipement is massively misunderstood by most of these armchair warriors, including Rossman.
On the plus side, the uproar has given us the ability to go buy a diagnostic computer from Deere now for the low, low prices of $26,000. It takes a lot of $100 tech visits to make that pay.
That’s fair, there’s definitely more to it than just having the capability when you’re also dealing with weather and other factors that impact your deadlines. I’m not a fan of equipment manufacturers who exploit their stranglehold on their customers even though I see why it happens.
There’s plenty of competition; the problem isn’t the proprietary firmware, it’s the expensive parts. You can still fix 99% of a machine yourself, you might have to get a tech out to put a CANbus ID into the computer so a new part that you put on works.
But it still comes down to the fact that the competition don’t make as good/productive of a machine, and parts availability, even if they are expensive, is key. I’ve paid $1000 for a part I could make myself on a mill, but it would take me a day and I’d lose $100,000 of lost production on that machine because rain is coming.
I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that right-to-repair replaces repair options from the OEM, but it’s a critical option to have in a functional product support ecosystem and Deer’s trying to cut it out entirely.
Very interesting to hear a user’s perspective.
This is probably the first time I’ve made a comment like this on a thread about Deere that hasn’t been downvoted into the basement. People don’t want to hear about what the ground truth of this situation is, they want to hate a company that they haven’t ever actually dealt with.
Don’t get me wrong, I would like to see Deere stop some of their practices, particularly using opensource software like Linux to power their devices and then selling them at steep prices to farmers that sometimes barely have enough money to fix a tire on one of these machines. But the “unrepairability” of Deere equipement is massively misunderstood by most of these armchair warriors, including Rossman.
On the plus side, the uproar has given us the ability to go buy a diagnostic computer from Deere now for the low, low prices of $26,000. It takes a lot of $100 tech visits to make that pay.
That’s fair, there’s definitely more to it than just having the capability when you’re also dealing with weather and other factors that impact your deadlines. I’m not a fan of equipment manufacturers who exploit their stranglehold on their customers even though I see why it happens.