Nirav from Framework is similar, he speaks openly about compromises they make with their designs and why they make them.
replyWhen leaders are both technical and open about these sorts of things it makes me feel like I can trust that they are invested in supporting and improving their products.
The failure rate waving is quite a stretch though. If you take into account reporting rates and time (since most people do not have the watch for long) I'm quite concerned. And I own a PT2. The "look big number, it's not a problem" does not translate to actual sensible failure rates.
replyTo be clear: 51 broken screens in less than two months results in a yearly failure rate of over 1% which is find quite high for a watch.
The fact that he's putting his money where his mouth is (replacing all broken screen PT2s for the foreseeable future) is what gives me confidence that the rate is very low, even if his number is not quite right for the reasons you indicate.
replySome people just break screens
replyWhat would your acceptable failure rate be?
replyLess than 1% yoy combined. This is far over that when you combine all failures. Battery degradation is of course excluded.
reply