Sure, but I almost never care about backing up saves anyway. It would be nice for it to be a thing, but it’s really not something I personally care about.
Ideally, Switch’s software would be FOSS so I could do whatever I please with it, such as developing my own games, turning it into a media server, etc. But it provides enough value that I own one and some games to play with my wife and kids. I also own a Steam Deck which does have a FOSS OS, so it’s awesome that both exist.
Ok, but giving consumers control of THEIR data shouldn’t be optional. Same way car manufacturers shouldn’t get to decide who gets know about what happens inside YOUR car no matter how proprietary and unrepairable their internal systems get.
I’m a lot less happy about “both ‘options’ existing” when one is literally pushing for practices that should not be.Period.
I don’t care whether you personally care about your game saves. The fact remains that you, or any given person, might, and that those cases shouldn’t be an avenue to extort.
The main reason Nintendo gets away with it is that since you don’t care, and since they are only mistreating a minority of their users, there is no big backlash.
I don’t care whether you personally care about your game saves
Exactly, nor should you. I’m just stating that I personally don’t care, so I’m not going to boycott Nintendo or something over it.
That said, I very much do believe individuals should actually own the hardware they buy, and I’m fully supportive of efforts to root their devices. I believe strongly in Right to Repair, and I believe customers should, at minimum, get documentation about how to repair their devices (i.e. board level schematics, part lists, etc), as well as no blocks from the vendor for manufacturers to sell parts. There’s a good chance that this type of information could help people root their devices, but as long as the vendor is commercially supporting their platform, I don’t think they should be obligated to provide source-level details (I’m buying the hardware here, not the software). But once they stop supporting it, they should be obligated to provide information about how to load alternative software onto the device so customers can continue supporting their own hardware.
Nintendo gets away with it because the laws protect them, and even obligate them to aggressively protect their brand. Those laws should certainly change. However, as long as they provide a product that provides value to me, I’ll get it. I’ll do what I can to mitigate issues though (e.g. I’m shopping for a new car, and I intend to remove/disable the chip that communicates w/ the manufacturer).
Sure, but I almost never care about backing up saves anyway. It would be nice for it to be a thing, but it’s really not something I personally care about.
Ideally, Switch’s software would be FOSS so I could do whatever I please with it, such as developing my own games, turning it into a media server, etc. But it provides enough value that I own one and some games to play with my wife and kids. I also own a Steam Deck which does have a FOSS OS, so it’s awesome that both exist.
Ok, but giving consumers control of THEIR data shouldn’t be optional. Same way car manufacturers shouldn’t get to decide who gets know about what happens inside YOUR car no matter how proprietary and unrepairable their internal systems get.
I’m a lot less happy about “both ‘options’ existing” when one is literally pushing for practices that should not be. Period.
I don’t care whether you personally care about your game saves. The fact remains that you, or any given person, might, and that those cases shouldn’t be an avenue to extort.
The main reason Nintendo gets away with it is that since you don’t care, and since they are only mistreating a minority of their users, there is no big backlash.
Exactly, nor should you. I’m just stating that I personally don’t care, so I’m not going to boycott Nintendo or something over it.
That said, I very much do believe individuals should actually own the hardware they buy, and I’m fully supportive of efforts to root their devices. I believe strongly in Right to Repair, and I believe customers should, at minimum, get documentation about how to repair their devices (i.e. board level schematics, part lists, etc), as well as no blocks from the vendor for manufacturers to sell parts. There’s a good chance that this type of information could help people root their devices, but as long as the vendor is commercially supporting their platform, I don’t think they should be obligated to provide source-level details (I’m buying the hardware here, not the software). But once they stop supporting it, they should be obligated to provide information about how to load alternative software onto the device so customers can continue supporting their own hardware.
Nintendo gets away with it because the laws protect them, and even obligate them to aggressively protect their brand. Those laws should certainly change. However, as long as they provide a product that provides value to me, I’ll get it. I’ll do what I can to mitigate issues though (e.g. I’m shopping for a new car, and I intend to remove/disable the chip that communicates w/ the manufacturer).