Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
On 20-06-09 17:46, Charles E Hardwidge wrote:

Personally, I'd favour third-party parts going through an independent and
none discriminatory quality assurance process. Chips could help verify
parts meet acceptable criterion and help push fake and potentially
damaging parts off the board. Everyone's a winner.

Which would drive up the price. There is no reason to be suspicious of
suppliers who put up all their data and who have a good rep.

I found a deal, looked up the supplier, spec, phoned the distributor and
checked out the batts before buying.

That's possible but fakes aren't cost free in terms of policing, employment
conditions, preserving trade marks, and consumer safety. Fake car brake pads
used to be a favourite. Now, I hear, memory on EBay is another.

There's a big ding-dong over banking regulation in the UK. The generic
arguments are similar. Loose regulation can work but it falls down when
banks are run by shysters. Then, you have the knee-jerk problem of too much
regulation which falls down when *sigh* banks are run by shysters.

Quality and trust are important so, yes, I agree that credible specs and a
good reputation are important. After last weeks fiasco, I'd like to see a
bit more of that in the hardware calibration industry. Reviews seem based
more on the colour of the box and what everyone else is doing rather than
giving hard meaningful numbers for calibrator and software accuracy.

This is tipping in to Zen (which I'm never more than half a step away from
talking about) but I find the aims and values of Peter F Drucker and David
Ogilvy on management and advertising, respectively, to be better than the
bull**** and balls path many have gone down over the past few years.

--
Charles E Hardwidge

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:34:57 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:
: Panasonic issues 'battery safety' firmware
:
: Panasonic has released firmware updates for its latest digital cameras
: including the GH1, G1, ZS3 and TS1. The new firmware can identify
: genuine Panasonic batteries and _prevents the use of any third party
: battery packs_. The company says it has taken this move to ensure safety
: of its users against possible injuries because of overcharging, internal
: heating or short circuit in third-party batteries.
:
: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0906/09...vicenotice.asp
:
: What a BS ploy. (And I hope this does not occur to Sony).

Surely you jest. Sony is the company that once sneaked operating system
changes into users' computers to prevent them from "stealing" content from
Sony CDs.

A few years ago laptop batteries sold by Dell and several other manufacturers
started exploding and starting fires. Some of the manufacturers had to issue
recalls. Who actually made the offending batteries for those manufacturers?
Sony.

I think it's fair to say that if there's a way to make an extra buck, it has
already occurred to Sony.

Bob

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...

Surely you jest. Sony is the company that once sneaked operating system
changes into users' computers to prevent them from "stealing" content from
Sony CDs.

A few years ago laptop batteries sold by Dell and several other
manufacturers started exploding and starting fires. Some of the
manufacturers had to issue recalls. Who actually made the offending
batteries for those manufacturers? Sony.

I think it's fair to say that if there's a way to make an extra buck, it
has already occurred to Sony.

You mean a US division of Sony used a faulty third party tool, and they
recalled the broken batteries without issue? The last time I checked Sony
were suing that third party, and scammers aren't known for making good on
warranties. Ragging on Sony for that is as dumb as if I carried a grudge
against Americans for George Bush.

--
Charles E Hardwidge

On 6/20/09 17:43 , Alan Browne wrote:

All this is is a ploy to force OEM battery purchases.

Sure, I accept there can be a forced OEM purchase angle as well as it
being
a way to head off iffy third-party sweatshop parts. Those are the
extremes
of control and greed, and you get it in the pharmaceutical, IT, and print
industries. It's dumb but there you go.


There may be other motives. One: Product liability. Third party
batteries may or may not be safe alternatives to OEM. Product liability
actions, whether or not justified, whether or not won, are expensive.
And in numbers, VERY expensive.

Forcing OEM batteries may limit potential product liablity actions by
limiting product to OEM spec batteries. If there is an issue with an OEM
battery, a free replacement may be offered, as Delphi did with some
portable XM receiver batteries, before cataclysmic results. In the event
of a failure resulting in damage or injury, such good faith efforts can
limit judgements.

If there is a third party battery incident, users holding Panasonic
liable can tie up the Legal department for years, resulting in hundreds
of thousands, if not millions, of dollars in costs and settlements, even
if it can be demonstrated that the third party battery manufacturer, not
Panasonic, is liable.

Anybody can sue for anything. Even a baseless suit requires a legal
response. That costs.

Forcing OEM battery use can limit, though not eliminate, product
liability costs.

That there is a second profit motive, spurring OEM sales, doesn't hurt.

Nakamichi, on it's portable cassette machine, a high drain device,
specifically recommended against SOME types of batteries on performance
grounds. Some batteries produced irregular variations in output voltage
under high drain, though constant conditions, compromising performance
of the device. Some batteries had too high an internal resistance, also
compromising performance of the device. Nakamichi approved batteries,
including, but not especially, Nakamichi branded batteries, produced
specific performance, with user perceivable differences in device
performance. Prompting complaints.

Complaints, like legal actions, require response. Response costs.

Nakamichi was quite specific that it would not honor, or even hear
complaints about the device if non approved batteries were used.

So it can be with Li-ion batteries in digital cameras, which are high
drain devices: there may be device performance effects with less well
manufactured batteries. This can produce performance issues that would
increased manufacturer warranty costs.

While corporate entities have certainly demonstrated, in recent
years, a history of being bad citizens, forcing OEM component use does
not, perforce, imply untoward motives.

"Charles E Hardwidge" wrote in message
om...
"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...

Surely you jest. Sony is the company that once sneaked operating system
changes into users' computers to prevent them from "stealing" content
from
Sony CDs.

A few years ago laptop batteries sold by Dell and several other
manufacturers started exploding and starting fires. Some of the
manufacturers had to issue recalls. Who actually made the offending
batteries for those manufacturers? Sony.

I think it's fair to say that if there's a way to make an extra buck, it
has already occurred to Sony.

You mean a US division of Sony used a faulty third party tool, and they
recalled the broken batteries without issue? The last time I checked Sony
were suing that third party, and scammers aren't known for making good on
warranties. Ragging on Sony for that is as dumb as if I carried a grudge
against Americans for George Bush.

So? I carry a grudge against Americans for George Bush, and I
**am** American.

Chris

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

Panasonic issues 'battery safety' firmware

Panasonic has released firmware updates for its latest digital cameras
including the GH1, G1, ZS3 and TS1. The new firmware can identify
genuine Panasonic batteries and _prevents the use of any third party
battery packs_. The company says it has taken this move to ensure safety
of its users against possible injuries because of overcharging, internal
heating or short circuit in third-party batteries.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0906/09...vicenotice.asp

What a BS ploy. (And I hope this does not occur to Sony).

Calling for a boycott is a bit strong. It's better to warn people and
let them them decide that Panasonic is full of crap on their own.

I just bought a Panasonic TV a few hours ago. This kind of BS would
make me cancel my order if I could.

Most companies are screwing customers in a way that's probably illegal.
PR departments will claim it's increased revenue to improve product
quality without charging a higher up-front fee. Those who have already
paid the up-front fee call it a scam.

--
I will not see your reply if you use Google.

Alan Browne wrote:
[]
NEVER! DO! I! OVERREACT!

If it is based on a challenge/response it is all but impossible to
backwards engineer this.

eg: The battery hands over a class code
The camera generates a challenge (random 16 bit (or so) number)
The battery, for its "class" has to generate a correct response for
that random number.
Incorrect reply - camera tries 2 more times - then shuts off.
Correct reply - camera tries 2 more random #'s, if pass, then all is
okay.

Such can easily be done in a tiny, cheap, low power consuming chip in
the battery (or in the power reporting chip already in place).

As you say - "if". Wait and see what 3rd parties come up with.

David

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:48:04 GMT, "Charles E Hardwidge"
wrote:

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
m...
Panasonic issues 'battery safety' firmware

Panasonic has released firmware updates for its latest digital cameras
including the GH1, G1, ZS3 and TS1. The new firmware can identify genuine
Panasonic batteries and _prevents the use of any third party battery
packs_. The company says it has taken this move to ensure safety of its
users against possible injuries because of overcharging, internal heating
or short circuit in third-party batteries.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0906/09...vicenotice.asp

What a BS ploy. (And I hope this does not occur to Sony).

Before screaming "boycott" like some 1970's shop steward you might like to
consider that fake batteries could be a problem.

You mean the same way that all MacBook batteries were totally safe to use
because they came right from credible, dependable, and elite fortress of
Apple? Or are you trying to say that 3rd-party batteries offer no more risk
than those right from Panasonic because Panasonic could have a MacBook
event at any time with their own "genuine"ly exploding batteries?

Do you know how to think for yourself? Or do just love being some pitiful
corporate shill and ass-kissing kowtowing puppet of theirs? You can't have
it both ways you know.

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:26:05 -0700, "Chris Pisarra" wrote:
:
: "Charles E Hardwidge" wrote in message
: om...
: "Robert Coe" wrote in message
: ...
:
: Surely you jest. Sony is the company that once sneaked operating system
: changes into users' computers to prevent them from "stealing" content
: from
: Sony CDs.
:
: A few years ago laptop batteries sold by Dell and several other
: manufacturers started exploding and starting fires. Some of the
: manufacturers had to issue recalls. Who actually made the offending
: batteries for those manufacturers? Sony.
:
: I think it's fair to say that if there's a way to make an extra buck, it
: has already occurred to Sony.
:
: You mean a US division of Sony used a faulty third party tool, and they
: recalled the broken batteries without issue? The last time I checked Sony
: were suing that third party, and scammers aren't known for making good on
: warranties. Ragging on Sony for that is as dumb as if I carried a grudge
: against Americans for George Bush.
:
: So? I carry a grudge against Americans for George Bush, and I
: **am** American.

Come to think of it, so do I. And I'm a Republican.

Bob

"ray" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:34:57 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

Panasonic issues 'battery safety' firmware

Panasonic has released firmware updates for its latest digital cameras
including the GH1, G1, ZS3 and TS1. The new firmware can identify
genuine Panasonic batteries and _prevents the use of any third party
battery packs_. The company says it has taken this move to ensure safety
of its users against possible injuries because of overcharging, internal
heating or short circuit in third-party batteries.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0906/09...vicenotice.asp

What a BS ploy. (And I hope this does not occur to Sony).

I doubt Sony would worry themselves over such an issue - after all many
of their cameras already require proprietary memory cards!

Well you can get them second market, but they are more expensive than the
equivalent SD.

The reason I won't buy Sony was that they included mal-ware on their CD's
and after they were caught and promised never to do it again - they did it
again...