Bull Meachem said:
My understanding is that A/C manufacturers are starting to do the same thing as what Deere was doing. F' that.
Also, screw so much electronics in items now. Sure, it can be fun to have some of the features but the reliability is *****
vin1041 said:
No more 4020s
Kenneth_2003 said:
My understanding (not a farmer/Deere owner) is/was that it was even more draconian than EPA compliance.
Bolt on parts (think a replacement alternator) had to be digitally tied to the ECU via Deere specific and tightly controlled software. Anything that requires accessing the ECU was solely controlled by Deere. There was no such thing as a Deere authorized or trained mechanic or service tech. There were ONLY Deere owned service centers (at the dealer) and Deere mechanics (again at the dealer).
Annoying when your tractor breaks down while shredding a grazing pasture. Potentially catastrophic when you've got a harvest window and it now requires flatbedding or lowboying a permit load back to the dealership.
TxSquarebody said:
A global brand trying to support a network of dealers in a dying market. Easy to understand the strategy. As always, the problem was getting greedy. If the cost had been kept in check, very few would have been upset. Death rattle intensifies.
schmellba99 said:TxSquarebody said:
A global brand trying to support a network of dealers in a dying market. Easy to understand the strategy. As always, the problem was getting greedy. If the cost had been kept in check, very few would have been upset. Death rattle intensifies.
Disagree in this case. Cost was definitely a factor, but the fact that Deere made farming equipment that the farmer was unable to do even basic maintenance on themselves was the root cause of the complaints that led to this.
I know this comes as a huge shock to a great many people (not singling you out specifically), but a whole lot of people have no desire to take their vehicle, tractor, etc. to a dealer to do basic maintenance or to do repairs that should be easy to do in the barn or in the field. Changing the oil should not require a proprietary computer to reset the system. Changing a battery should not require a dealer service rep to come out to reset the computer so you can use your combine or tractor.
Your basic automotive maintenance tasks should be exactly that - basic automotive maintenance tasks that anybody with a few wrenches and the desire to do them themselves should be able to do without scheduling an appointment with a dealer so that you can use the equipment you have bought while performing routine PM or repair tasks.
Your average farmer, in general, is usually the type that will do that type of thing themselves. Especially when they can get it done and have their equipment back up and running weeks before a tech can be scheduled to work on it (which was also an issue - the time factor).
heavens11 said:
The "as a service" approach has permeated a lot of space it shouldn't have and absolutely has been exploited by manufacturers to create perverse revenue.
Someone mentioned productivity software earlier. Talk about an idea that has basically been used to extort the consumer. The bait was if we use this subscription model you will always get the latest goodness. The switch is now you essentially have to continually pay just to use the software when previously your initial "purchase" was a perpetual license. Most the new features add zero to marginal improvements. It's a net terrible model for consumers.
Trajan88 said:
Reminds of McDonald's constantly in need of repair ice cream machines.
Some 3rd party figured out how to efficiently repair the machines but McD (or the machine mfg.) took them to court... not sure if the case is ongoing. .
CaptTex said:
Are Deere and John Deere now the same entity? I understand it's probably almost no difference to start with, but I thought Deere was specific to their construction line and of course John Deere their ag interests. I really enjoy their 1920-1960 product lines but to hear people tell it, it's rough with these new diesels.
Hanrahan said:
JD didn't lose, they settled. And the $99 million will equal a pittance check to everyone affected by this well over the last decade and will be tens of millions to the lawyers. Plus, they only agreed to allow access and tools for 10 years, and nothing preventing them to going back to exactly the way it is now after 10 years.
Plus, they got the biggest ag representative coalition that was pushing this case and for right to repair laws to agree to not pursue or advocate for any right to repairs laws at a local state or federal level.
A "win" for farmers yes, but not the landmark vindication some are making it out to be, unfortunately.
