by "Telumektar" (telumektar)
Published 03/22/2017 at 09:01
by "Telumektar" (telumektar)
Published 03/22/2017 at 09:01
No Tags
STARS: 2
I know little about farming equipment, but this seems relevant enough for just about any kind of transportation, or all production machines for the matter.
This article gives some insight on what’s happening, after sale, with most new farming machines, not only John Deere’s.
In my opinion, if you buy something that you know how to maintain then you should be able to do so, the manufacturer shouldn’t have a post-sales maintenance monopoly. In this case, adding insult to injury, they are forcing people to use their service without considering their operation’s context, doesn’t matter if there are better, cheaper, closer options to the company’s service network.
"TorqueToYield" (torquetoyield)
03/22/2017 at 09:06, STARS: 1
That’s some despicable behavior from John Deere. Why would farmers even buy those tractors? Are there no other options? Or do other tractor companies have the same policies?
Also, I’d be really curious to see if those license agreements hold up in court. You can have people sign whatever - doesn’t mean the contract is legal.
"vondon302" (vondon302)
03/22/2017 at 09:12, STARS: 0
That’s nuts.
"Dave the car guy , still here" (a3dave)
03/22/2017 at 09:15, STARS: 2
That must mean the FTC only enforces the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act in respect to cars and trucks, not other types of machinery. That is a load of BS.
"Chinny Raccoon" (chinnyraccoon)
03/22/2017 at 09:47, STARS: 0
Brand loyalty in a lot of cases, particularly for John Deeres. Lot of famers won’t have anything else, even though they aren’t really any better than the competition, and more expensive. Think Chevy/Ford.
Also that using the branded dealer is fairly normal, especially now equipment has got incredibly complex.
I think it’s probably illegal in the EU- I’ve not heard of anything like that being tried here, not from the brands we’ve dealt with (Not JD).
"uofime-2" (uofime-2)
03/22/2017 at 10:03, STARS: 0
really long article that doesn’t actually say what problems require the software to be used. They act like it’s regular maintenance stuff, but the only direct example is replacing a transmission and that is certainly not something most farmers are going to undertake themselves.
"Justin Hughes" (justinhughes54)
03/22/2017 at 10:11, STARS: 1
It makes me thankful that car and motorcycle enthusiasts have enough pull to prevent manufacturers from locking us out of our own vehicles as well. Though I’m sure some would like to if they could.
"ateamfan42" (ateamfan42)
03/22/2017 at 10:37, STARS: 0
Brand loyalty in a lot of cases, particularly for John Deeres. Lot of
famers won’t have anything else, even though they aren’t really any
better than the competition, and more expensive.
John Deere brand loyalty is a real thing in the farming world. Some of that loyalty was well placed, because much (but not all) of the OLD equipment was very good. I grew up operating tractors and accessories of a wide variety of brands, and the green-and-yellow ones were always the favorite.
Keep in mind I’m talking about machines made between the 1940s and early 1970s, back when products were overbuilt, over designed, and over engineered for reliability and durability. (Which is why those classic machines still work as well today as they did 60 years ago.)
I can’t speak to the quality of modern John Deere equipment, but I would expect the bean counters and shareholders have likely trimmed down the costs to where the equipment probably is no better than the competition. The modern equipment is also VASTLY more complicated to run and maintain (and repair).
"Chinny Raccoon" (chinnyraccoon)
03/22/2017 at 11:16, STARS: 0
Current JD reliability seems to be no better than the competition. We’ve had a lot of trouble with Valtras a couple of years old, compared to the 14 year old model of the same size. Gearbox issues on one which was traded in quickly and the most recent one is just falling to pieces after 4 years. We treat them better than most too.
"The Powershift in Steve's '12 Ford Focus killed it's TCM (under warranty!)" (steve-still-hasnt-wrecked-the-powershift-in-his-12-ford-focus)
03/22/2017 at 11:17, STARS: 0
So, I get both sides of the issue but it’s still really shitty of John Deere to do. I get that they don’t want someone to use their software to modify the functionality of their tractors in illegal ways (such as modifying the ECM for power or disabling emissions controls), since they would be liable. However, I know plenty of modern computer controlled machinery requires activation or calibration of components before they work. Limiting access to that software is a money grab for their dealers because, as the article says, you need to pay a fortune for a dealer rep to show up just to plug in the software. If JD was smart, they’d sell the calibration software for a very modest fee (or make it a subscription) and keep the software required to modify the regulated equipment (like the ECM) out of private hands to shield themselves from liability.
"Telumektar" (telumektar)
03/22/2017 at 13:20, STARS: 1
I agree
"Telumektar" (telumektar)
03/22/2017 at 13:24, STARS: 0
Supposedly regular maintenance that requires a tech is forced to be done at JD’s network. Maybe not an oil change, but this kind of systems tend to record lots of data, which the ECU/hardware software itself could use to lock the machine in case of any unwanted event, until a JD tech runs the specific software, previous payment.
"Telumektar" (telumektar)
03/22/2017 at 13:25, STARS: 0
The article mentions that this practice is being adopted by other companies as well. I think it’s a good way to lose customers in the long run, in exchange for some dollars now.
"gmporschenut also a fan of hondas" (gmporschenut)
03/22/2017 at 20:56, STARS: 1
I’d guess alfalfa