linus is the biggest hypocrite on earth

[Jarsky]

9 hours ago, Caroline said:

Get a product, use it for 15 days then return it bc you don't like it

 

I'm not talking about that, there are most certainly loopholes to doing this, and in some countries like Canada you dont need to specify a reason

My comment was in regards to this comment below. It costs Apple far more than $10-20 because doing the below is illegal in many countries to sell it as new. It would be sold refurbished which would be at a significant discount to be able to move it. 

 

On 12/24/2019 at 3:31 AM, spartaman64 said:

and its not like its going to make apple go bankrupt it would maybe cost them like 10-20 dollars to pay an employee to check and rebox it

 

[biggieweeb]

On 12/21/2019 at 5:26 PM, WereCatf said:

Or maybe you should get your head out of your rear-end and realize that maybe, just maybe, he doesn't have any use for a $20K Mac Pro.

Exactly, he already has a multi million dollar server, why tf would he need a 20k mac pro?

[Curious Pineapple]

8 hours ago, Jarsky said:

 

I'm not talking about that, there are most certainly loopholes to doing this, and in some countries like Canada you dont need to specify a reason

My comment was in regards to this comment below. It costs Apple far more than $10-20 because doing the below is illegal in many countries to sell it as new. It would be sold refurbished which would be at a significant discount to be able to move it. 

 

 

They make a few grand on these machines, knocking off a few hundred is no biggie for them. Could always use it as a display model, then sell as ex-display later on.

[spartaman64]

15 hours ago, Jarsky said:

 

I'm not talking about that, there are most certainly loopholes to doing this, and in some countries like Canada you dont need to specify a reason

My comment was in regards to this comment below. It costs Apple far more than $10-20 because doing the below is illegal in many countries to sell it as new. It would be sold refurbished which would be at a significant discount to be able to move it. 

 

 

idk i dont see any refurbished mac pros on their refurbish selling site so maybe thats just for macbooks and iphones also those products probably were returned much later than 15 days or through their exchange program. also i dont see how this is a loophole this is exactly what the return policy is for people who are dissatisfied with the product

[Jarsky]

7 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

idk i dont see any refurbished mac pros on their refurbish selling site so maybe thats just for macbooks and iphones also those products probably were returned much later than 15 days or through their exchange program. also i dont see how this is a loophole this is exactly what the return policy is for people who are dissatisfied with the product

Big companies like Samsung, Apple, Lenovo, etc...do deals with smaller companies who sell their refurbished products, and they often have private sites for selling to companies. Working in ICT we have a company we work with that gets phones, notebooks, tablets, etc....where we can buy a lot of this stuff privately including Apple iPhones, iPads, Mac's, etc....

 

P.S I used to term loophole, because Linus isn't actually 'disatisfied' with the product. He bought it to make content with the intent of returning it so that he makes a profit on the content. Pretty standard tactic with reviewers and more expensive items when they dont get review samples supplied to them. 

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Jarsky said:

Big companies like Samsung, Apple, Lenovo, etc...do deals with smaller companies who sell their refurbished products, and they often have private sites for selling to companies. Working in ICT we have a company we work with that gets phones, notebooks, tablets, etc....where we can buy a lot of this stuff privately including Apple iPhones, iPads, Mac's, etc....

 

P.S I used to term loophole, because Linus isn't actually 'disatisfied' with the product. He bought it to make content with the intent of returning it so that he makes a profit on the content. Pretty standard tactic with reviewers and more expensive items when they dont get review samples supplied to them. 

well if he was satisfied then he would keep it and since hes not satisfied then thats called being dissatisfied 

[Jarsky]

Just now, spartaman64 said:

well if he was satisfied then he would keep it and since hes not satisfied then thats called being dissatisfied 

It's called being impartial. Just because im not happy, doesn't mean im sad.

Don't conflate the 2 terms. 

 

Apples 15 day return policy in Canada is specific in if you are "dissatisfied".  Meaning not content or happy with something. 

Linus' opinion of it is a moot point here. He bought it with the intention of returning it, it was never going to be part of their workflow because its not suitable and it makes the content he purchased it for pretty much dead income. LTT is a business, and he needs those videos to make net profit. He's using the dissatisfied clause as a loophole to reduce the overhead cost of the production. 

 

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Jarsky said:

It's called being impartial. Just because im not happy, doesn't mean im sad.

Don't conflate the 2 terms. 

 

Apples 15 day return policy in Canada is specific in if you are "dissatisfied".  Meaning not content or happy with something. 

Linus' opinion of it is a moot point here. He bought it with the intention of returning it, it was never going to be part of their workflow because its not suitable and it makes the content he purchased it for pretty much dead income. LTT is a business, and he needs those videos to make net profit. He's using the dissatisfied clause as a loophole to reduce the overhead cost of the production. 

 

if hes content with it then he would keep it so its basically a return for any reason within blank time policy as long as the product isnt damaged

[Jarsky]

Just now, spartaman64 said:

if hes content with it then he would keep it so its basically a return for any reason within blank time policy as long as the product isnt damaged

*sigh*

[Curious Pineapple]

I do enjoy living in this "nanny state" country as it is often called.

 

14 days statutory right to return a product for any reason and the retailer can't refuse (with a few exceptions that are not relevant here). As long as it's undamaged and in original packaging.

 

I could even buy a car and return it after a week because I've changed my mind.

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Jarsky said:

*sigh*

and like i said if apple is concerned about that then they wouldnt have that policy and even the refurbished products probably still sells for a significant profit margin and the people buying them wouldnt be buying new anyways either

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Curious Pineapple said:

I do enjoy living in this "nanny state" country as it is often called.

 

14 days statutory right to return a product for any reason and the retailer can't refuse (with a few exceptions that are not relevant here). As long as it's undamaged and in original packaging.

 

I could even buy a car and return it after a week because I've changed my mind.

ok so apple didnt choose to have that policy and they are forced to? then that changes my option somewhat. sure its shity in that case but linus still isnt costing them that much. if someone yoinks a dime from me i wont be too sad or mad at them

[Curious Pineapple]

4 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

ok so apple didnt choose to have that policy and they are forced to? then that changes my option somewhat. sure its shity in that case but linus still isnt costing them that much. if someone yoinks a dime from me i wont be too sad or mad at them

I'm not in Canada

[Donut417]

5 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

ok so apple didnt choose to have that policy and they are forced to? then that changes my option somewhat. sure its shity in that case but linus still isnt costing them that much. if someone yoinks a dime from me i wont be too sad or mad at them

While not required under US Federal Law, most retiailers in the states have the same polciy. Its because its good for business. This is the 21st Century. Having bad PR on social media and in the news can severely damange a companies image. Im sure its about the same in Canada. Companies do it because its kinda the standard practice. 

 

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Curious Pineapple said:

I'm not in Canada

 

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

While not required under US Federal Law, most retiailers in the states have the same polciy. Its because its good for business. This is the 21st Century. Having bad PR on social media and in the news can severely damange a companies image. Im sure its about the same in Canada. Companies do it because its kinda the standard practice. 

 

ok im a bit confused but yeah if apple is forced to have the policy then im a bit more sympathetic and think linus is in the wrong for this but if apple chose to have the policy then its on them

[LinusTech]

On 12/21/2019 at 6:21 AM, Twilight said:

In the latest WAN show he says that spending $20K on a Mac Pro makes him extremely uncomfortable, and that he's trying to make as much content as possible in a short period of time so he can return it. 

 

now tell me this, when linus makes a 10 gamers 1 cpu machine, does that make him uncomfortable? or a 6 editors 1 pc system? is it just because apple refuses to send you a machine that you feel uncomfortable?

 

because it seems that way to me. you work with much much much more expensive stuff all the time, but only apple's system makes you feel uncomfortable while it costs less than the 2 systems i just listed, by a long shot. 

 

please stop being a hypocrite and treat apple computers just like any other computer you cover, thank you. 

No one, including me, is actually selling 6WS 1CPU as a real solution. 

 

It's stupid, and I say as much. 

 

The thing that makes it cool is that it works at all thanks to virtualization (the thing I am actually educating the viewer about. The hardware is just a vehicle for the real learning objective). 

 

The Mac is just... a computer. One computer. 

 

One computer that after testing it, isn't worth the $20k it cost me because it doesn't meaningfully contribute to my business, so I wish to return it when I'm done my video. 

[SenKa]

Was waiting for linus to reply to this. did not disappoint. 

[straight_stewie]

A consideration that hasn't been brought up yet is cost amortization. I guess I should explain:

 

If you build a $100,000 machine for use in a series of six (I think) videos, your initial cost per video is $16,666.66. Because it's a PC, you get to reuse the components, including all peripherals, the case, and the cables, in other builds. This yields a per video cost of 16,666.66 * (1 / sum(componentCost / numVideosUsedIn)). We already know that Linus warehouses all of the components that he can, and we know that he has reused at least some between videos.

 

On the other hand, if you spend $20,000 on a machine for a single video, then you have a per video cost of $20,000. If you use it in multiple videos, you have a per video cost of 20,000 / numVideosUsedIn. Notice how this number shrinks significantly slower than the previous example. This is an important financial distinction between the two: The Mac cannot be separated into it's components so that the cost can be amortized across a wider array of videos.

 

The Mac can only ever be used in videos about the Mac. A PC machine can be parted out and used in a very wide array of videos. Therefore, the only reason Linus could ever have to keep it after the production of the planned videos is if he intends to use it personally or in his line-of-business activities.

 

Given Linus' above post:

25 minutes ago, LinusTech said:

One computer that after testing it, isn't worth the $20k it cost me because it doesn't meaningfully contribute to my business, so I wish to return it when I'm done my video. 

We can assume that his personal and line-of-business machines are either higher performance or more well-suited to the task at hand than the Mac, and therefore, he has no incentive to keep it.

[LogicalDrm]

On 12/26/2019 at 6:30 AM, Erik Sieghart said:

Imagine a business making smart business decisions...

 

Weird.

Imagine that it's not charity, but indeed, a business.

[RonnieOP]

On 12/24/2019 at 9:29 PM, Jarsky said:

 

I'm not talking about that, there are most certainly loopholes to doing this, and in some countries like Canada you dont need to specify a reason

My comment was in regards to this comment below. It costs Apple far more than $10-20 because doing the below is illegal in many countries to sell it as new. It would be sold refurbished which would be at a significant discount to be able to move it. 

 

 

It would be sold as new. Happens all the time. Its tested, repackaged, and sold as new with nobody the wiser.

 

Hell when you buy something at a retail store like walmart or best buy as "new" theres a chance that its a repackaged return. 

 

The laws on that im not up to date on. I have no issue believing its against the law though. But that doesnt mean they dont do it anyway.

 

 

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, LogicalDrm said:

Imagine that it's not charity, but indeed, a business.

you're saying that linus doesnt want to give money to apple by buying and keeping stuff he wont use? crazy