On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 17:06:03 +0000 (UTC), Bertrand Sindri
wrote:

This just requires thinking like a "cost-cutting businessman".

Question: How can we reduce the manufacture cost of this product?

Answer: Eliminate some of the components.

Question: How can we do that?

Answer: Since it already has internet access to operate, we could
eliminate the local storage of settings, allowing us to eliminate a
flash chip of X amount, or a battery backup of X amount.

.... At the cost of setting up some sort of user account on the
internet for the customer, which also requires time and money to
implement. I don't see the saving - if any - is worth the extra
bother.

If my favourites are stored in the cloud rather than locally then
that's a major breach of trust Roberts has committed. And
confidentiality!

Indeed, but none of the above means they /did not/ commit this breach
for the purpose of cost cutting.

It's funny they seemed to know already what the problem was since
they quoted me 40 quid to fix it I'm just wondering if they don't
do anything to the radio but just renew my subscription or
something like that.

Why would you think this vs. the more typical option of the minimum
wage phone worker having a table of "customer quoted symptoms" vs.
"quoted repair cost" and the minimum wage worker just reading you off
the quote for the item that sounded most close to your description?

Look, I'm an old dude. I have no idea what goes on in these places
nowadays.

Again, think like a "cost cutting businessman". How do I reduce the
cost of my "support team"? Answer: Hire the cheapest workers possible
and give them a canned script to read from and follow (canned script is
so I don't have to pay them for 'smartness'). The very concept of
telephone support people having a "script" that they strictly follow
has been the subject of jokes and parodies for a good 30+ years.

Firstly, I don't believe it's feasible to 'project' (as it's called)
one's own thoughts and emotions over others. You can't get inside
other people's minds in this way whatever the subject matter may be.
And this wasn't some "support team" lacky but rather email replies
from someone who clearly understood the issue even though they were
only prepared to offer a solution which would benefit the company to
the tune of 40 quid.


In fact the only odd thing is that there are several 220uF caps
which are showing as anything between 1000uF and 1200uF on my Peak
ESR70 meter. I've never known caps so far out of tolerance before.

In circuit or out of circuit measurement?

In circuit. And they're not in parallel.

And you know this because you have the schematic or have reverse
engineered the schematic from the PCB?

If you have no schematic, you are again 'assuming' they are not in
parallel.

But YOU are also *assuming* that *I* am assuming that. The fact that I
am doesn't change the fact that you're still making an assumption
here. It just happens to be correct on this occasion.