Dead/Defective Batteries

Yes, you have. Over and over. And now the question is, will saying it 10 more times somehow change DJI's behavior? I don't believe that it will. It obviously bothers you, so roll back your firmware, use your batteries in good health, and enjoy your quad. Life is way too short. Or, sell you quad and invest in another brand that hopefully has better customer relation skills and that treats its customers better. Ultimately we speak with our wallets if we want any real change and truly believe in our cause. If not, we are just tilting at windmills.

Why does it bother you and some others that I find time to reply to this thread? I had a point at the beginning. My point remains valid. People come along and question it and I respond. It's not taking away from my flying time or my enjoyment of life. I'm not calling for change. I think that if DJI continues treating their customers poorly - eventually, people will leave - myself included - but not before there is a viable alternative.

Is it so hard to believe that I continue to do business with a company that has poor customer service? I don't think so - especially when they have such a good product! But just because I choose to continue doing business with them does not mean I give up the right to be critical of some of their policies and/or decisions.

I would think it would be easy to ignore this thread if something in it offends or irritates you...or if its mere existence is somehow irritating. I'm enjoying life. I'm replying to people who post on this thread as time permits - but certainly not ignoring other things to do so.

If you want this thread to die - perhaps you should direct your comments to the other people that find it and add their 2 cents. Suggest to them that everything has been covered and they should just move along without posting. If nobody else adds anything - this will be my last post on the topic - but if you or someone else adds to it and challenges anything I've said or posts misinformation, I'm not going to ignore it. I'm going to reply.
 
The point that I was trying to make is simply that you have made your point, multiple times. Some agree with you (actually, I'm one of them in that camp), others not so much. I think DJI mishandled this, as I think they mishandle every firmware release with their incomplete change listings and somewhat poor quality control record. I think in general, their customer service is below par, especially considering their size, earnings, etc. But they have a product that I want, with features that beat the competition in the areas that are important to me. Therefore I bought a P3P and love it. I also bought a 3rd party repair contract, because I don't want to have to deal with their wait times and the "will they pay, won't they pay" BS. And their documentation generally sucks, has numerous inconsistencies, etc. I could go on with things that I don't like about DJI, but like I said, Their product has what I want, period.

All that being said, anyone that reads this forum for more than 30 minutes (or others forums like this one, including DJI's), should quickly get an idea of what type of company DJI is, and should not be surprised with their way of doing business. To then feign outrage when they continue with their already well established lack of customer focus, is, frankly a waste of breath.
 
The point that I was trying to make is simply that you have made your point, multiple times. Some agree with you (actually, I'm one of them in that camp), others not so much. I think DJI mishandled this, as I think they mishandle every firmware release with their incomplete change listings and somewhat poor quality control record. I think in general, their customer service is below par, especially considering their size, earnings, etc. But they have a product that I want, with features that beat the competition in the areas that are important to me. Therefore I bought a P3P and love it. I also bought a 3rd party repair contract, because I don't want to have to deal with their wait times and the "will they pay, won't they pay" BS. And their documentation generally sucks, has numerous inconsistencies, etc. I could go on with things that I don't like about DJI, but like I said, Their product has what I want, period.

All that being said, anyone that reads this forum for more than 30 minutes (or others forums like this one, including DJI's), should quickly get an idea of what type of company DJI is, and should not be surprised with their way of doing business. To then feign outrage when they continue with their already well established lack of customer focus, is, frankly a waste of breath.

Fair enough - and all good points - but what it boils down to is that it's my breath to waste. I agree that I've said pretty much everything that needs saying - at least 3 times - but when someone new comes along and adds a posts to the end which either challenges me - or adds falsehoods, lies or other misinformation, I'm not going to let it stand as one is the last messages in the chain. That could give the impression that I either agreed or that I didn't have an answer and it would leave a falsehood as the final entry.

Not everyone that finds this thread now or in the future is going to read through the entire thread and see that a rebuttal has already been posted (multiple times). They are probably going to jump to the last page or two and see how it ended. That's the logic behind the reason that I keep replying to the falsehoods every time they are posted.

Do I have the power to close the thread (because I started it) or does that have to be done by a moderator? If I could do so - I would - but I'm not going to let the final entry be one that contains misinformation or unanswered challenges.
 
Every manufacturer discourages the use of non-OEM parts. They don't all prohibit it. Is someone new to the hobby expected, or obligated to research previous models? Or participate in forums?

Even if one were aware of what they did with the Phantom 2 - prohibiting flight with after market batteries attached - the fact that the Phantom 3 was released without such a restriction in place could be taken as an indication that it was no longer prohibited - else why wouldn't they have just prohibited it from the start? They obviously already had the code to do it.

The only reference to not using OEM batteries was in the safety guidelines. It *should* have been in the owners manual and it should have clearly stated that use of aftermarket batteries is prohibited. As it was - it was a recommendation.

And as I've said over and over - it's not the fact that they've done it. It's the way that they did it. It was rude and disrespectful to their existing customers - most of whom did not know they were doing anything wrong. There is much DJI could have done - and should have done - to prevent these customers from incurring a financial loss. A recommendation in the safety guidelines is not enough to say "you should have known". A firm statement in the owners manual advising that it is PROHIBITED - would have covered things nicely.

So if they already had a restriction in place for the Phantom 2 - why do you think they waited so long to introduce the same restriction for the Phantom 3?
It happened the same way with the PS2, in the beginning they worked, then they didn't. Maybe they found problems with people using aftermarket from the repair returns and that's what prompted the change. Or maybe they just want more profit. We will never really know. So if you want to use them you already know your options... Use OEM, roll back and use third party, buy a different brand UAV or build your own from scratch as I have done.
 
It happened the same way with the PS2, in the beginning they worked, then they didn't. Maybe they found problems with people using aftermarket from the repair returns and that's what prompted the change. Or maybe they just want more profit. We will never really know. So if you want to use them you already know your options... Use OEM, roll back and use third party, buy a different brand UAV or build your own from scratch as I have done.

Certainly - and to round out the options - one could also use their aftermarket batteries in the following additional ways:

- transplant the aftermarket cells to an official DJI battery that has reached the end of its useful life

- disassemble the aftermarket batteries and use its cells in one of the extended flight battery mods

- use the aftermarket battery as the secondary battery in one of the dual-battery mods advertised on the internet

I have not confirmed that any of the above uses will work - but I don't see any reason why they wouldn't and I will be trying one or more of them out when I get around to it.

Using your aftermarket batteries in one of the above ways would actually make it more difficult (if not impossible) for DJI to know that aftermarket batteries were in use. With the latter 2, they could tell that you had a battery mod in place, but not that the secondary cells were non-DJI. However, it would be dishonest and probably illegal (fraudulent) to try to obtain warranty services if you had an accident THAT WAS CAUSED by a battery fault with one of these mods in place.

Don't do that. Accept the responsibility for your decision and if an incident occurs - tell DJI what you've done. If your incident was not caused by a power-related issue - you should still be covered. If not - then of course you are on the hook for the repair. You accepted that when you decided to use aftermarket parts. Don't commit fraud just because you think you can get away with it.
 
DJI did this wrong. I know exactly why they did it. First it's about money it always is.. Second they don't want issues popping up from 3rd party batteries. It is very apparent that they do not value customers. Seriously, they are selling past products new at huge discount which ruins resale value. They want you to sped money on their batteries which is a huge money-maker and they want you to buy their new products.

One is coming I guarantee it. AUTEL and YUNEEC have birds that are pretty close to DJI top birds. Which is why the Inspire is on sale. They will release a new product soon that surpasses everything out... And we will buy it. Wash, rinse .... Repeat.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app
 
DJI did this wrong. I know exactly why they did it. First it's about money it always is.. Second they don't want issues popping up from 3rd party batteries. It is very apparent that they do not value customers. Seriously, they are selling past products new at huge discount which ruins resale value. They want you to sped money on their batteries which is a huge money-maker and they want you to buy their new products.

One is coming I guarantee it. AUTEL and YUNEEC have birds that are pretty close to DJI top birds. Which is why the Inspire is on sale. They will release a new product soon that surpasses everything out... And we will buy it. Wash, rinse .... Repeat.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

Ha ha.... I believe every word of what you wrote.

Never hear of Autel though. Will look them up. It's the LightBridge range that will be hard to match without stepping on patents, won't it?

What's your guess on the DJI cost price to manufacture one P3P battery? I'm guessing 400% markup - but really just a guess. Would not be at all surprised to find out it's more. Forget about including the amortization of developing the technology (which is a valid expense) - I'm just curious how much it would cost them (or a third party) to actually produce one.
 
What they have done is illegal it's market monopoly by law they can't do this, and those people saying is dji right to do this are mad, if your car was sold new to you running shell fuel and you used a different brand and it would t run what would you he say?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tenly
What they have done is illegal it's market monopoly by law they can't do this, and those people saying is dji right to do this are mad, if your car was sold new to you running shell fuel and you used a different brand and it would t run what would you he say?
Due to the fact that battery has firmware in it, and that makes it an integral part of the aircraft, I believe they are totally within their right to do this. Look at HP, and their chipped ink cartridges. HUGE markup there. Hell, they practically give away the printer, because the profit is in the ink. Not saying they are giving away the P3, but its part of the ecosystem. When you are pricing the P3/P4, you should also consider the cost of enough batteries to meet your needs. If its too much for your wallet, walk away. But I believe they are well within their right to do this. How they did it, as Tenly points out, was crappy. But this is significantly different than a battery for your phone or your point and shoot.
 
Due to the fact that battery has firmware in it, and that makes it an integral part of the aircraft, I believe they are totally within their right to do this. Look at HP, and their chipped ink cartridges. HUGE markup there. Hell, they practically give away the printer, because the profit is in the ink. Not saying they are giving away the P3, but its part of the ecosystem. When you are pricing the P3/P4, you should also consider the cost of enough batteries to meet your needs. If its too much for your wallet, walk away. But I believe they are well within their right to do this. How they did it, as Tenly points out, was crappy. But this is significantly different than a battery for your phone or your point and shoot.

Well, I am pretty sure you're right about it being legal - as far as insisting on DJI batteries for all new Phantoms being sold. I didn't however think it was legal for them to make significant changes to a product someone had already purchased (although it sure appears that they can). The logic being that if you made your purchasing decision based on the way a product operated, spent your money and then all of a sudden, they changed the way the product operated - it may no longer meet your needs and had you known that, you never would have purchased it to begin with... It's like a bait and switch.

I'm not saying that's the case with the batteries - but didn't they also do something with maximum altitude after it was originally released?

And what if the next thing they change is the range? They advertise up to 5km - what if they decide that's too far and enforce a 1km limit? Would all you people defending the battery decision also defend the range decision? They could easily argue that it's safer. And then all those people who spent money on boosters and amps would have wasted their money!

Anyhow - I don't know if it's legal or not. If it were illegal, I would think they would have been challenged by now - so it must be legal. But I don't think it should be. I don't think they should be able to make significant changes to the way a product operates for existing owners of the product.

If it's legal - and I was a slimy, greedy manufacturer, I would turn back the LightBridge range on the Phantom 3 to 1km and leave the Phantom 4 with the 5km range and just tell people they have to upgrade to the Phantom 4 if they want the longer range...and seeing how DJI operates - it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to pull some stunt like that. When they do - I wonder if all the same people will post their support for the way DJI handles it....
 
Which is why I stopped upgrading months ago. I don't like DJI as a company. Thing is, DJI never said 3rd party batteries were OK, then said they were not. Customers assumed they where, and bought them. DJI simply decided to enforce what they probably thought they had, control over the entire ecosystem, but that they lost once 3rd party batteries showed up on the scene.

As to distance restrictions, I would not doubt that they are coming. Probably at the FAA's behest. Again, yet another reason I don't upgrade. Everything works just fine the way it is. Not going to let them take away what I have.
 
Which is why I stopped upgrading months ago. I don't like DJI as a company. Thing is, DJI never said 3rd party batteries were OK, then said they were not. Customers assumed they where, and bought them. DJI simply decided to enforce what they probably thought they had, control over the entire ecosystem, but that they lost once 3rd party batteries showed up on the scene.

As to distance restrictions, I would not doubt that they are coming. Probably at the FAA's behest. Again, yet another reason I don't upgrade. Everything works just fine the way it is. Not going to let them take away what I have.

Through my lengthy experience with electronics of all types, firmware updates have been a good thing. Sure - occasionally there was a problem which caused some short term grief - but overall, firmware upgrades either fixed bugs or added new features and capabilities! The phantom is the first product I've owned where firmware updates are used to make the device less capable and more restrictive.

I think we need a new law that protects consumers from having capabilities removed post-purchase whether they were advertised or not. At a minimum, consumers should be able to take a snapshot of their devices configuration at purchase time and be free to roll back to that state whenever they like. And this foes for all electronics - not just Phantoms - but our laptops, iPhones, etc...

I don't expect the best of both worlds where I'm entitled to all the updates with none of the restrictions....but if I made my purchasing decision based on the way a product operated at a specific point in time - and then subsequent firmware updates changed the feature set of the device - I should always be able to revert back to the way it was configured on the say I purchase it. If I am *forced* to update to a more restrictive configuration at any point and the device no longer meets my needs because of that - I should be entitled to a refund.. (Unrealistic, but reinforces the point that nobody should be FORCED to update).

So - to apply that to my phantom situation - if I were able to revert back to the capabilities that existed when I purchased it - I'd be able to use aftermarket batteries - but I wouldn't have the waypoints, POI or Follow capabilities...so there would still be trade offs...but those extra features did not exist when I made my initial purchase so I couldn't complain about them....

I guess my only point is that a manufacturer should never be able to remove features that were in place at the time of purchase without being prepared to offer refunds to the users that no longer wanted the device because it no longer meets their needs. Safety-related or not - if I choose - and possibly even pay extra for - a specific product because it has specific features - and then the manufacturer changes their mind and decides to revoke some of those features - it's KH fair that we as consumers be permitted to rethink out purchasing decision.

That seems completely fair, doesn't it ? I don't know why it's not already a law...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reed L
The phantom is the first product I've owned where firmware updates are used to make the device less capable and more restrictive.
(Unrealistic, but reinforces the point that nobody should be FORCED to update).
I guess my only point is that a manufacturer should never be able to remove features that were in place at the time of purchase without being prepared to offer refunds to the users that no longer wanted the device because it no longer meets their needs.

That seems completely fair, doesn't it ? I don't know why it's not already a law...

We've all been dealing with this since before the turn of the century... The difference being - then you could roll back updates or refuse them. Different versions of windows were purposely updated until they no longer worked by microsluft, even Cyberlink does this with their Power Director series. When these companies want you to buy new, they just update the older versions until they freeze or no longer work. I had my old Photosuite 5, a 10 year old+ program that I used for years, work with Windows 10 until an update that took out both my Photosuite and Microsoft Office 97 that all worked great until that update. I still have the option to go back to Windows 7 but, they make money by forcing you to buy new products that work no differently then the old ones. Yea they have a prettier face but the core hasn't changed much on many of them. I stuck with Windows 10 basically because their new Windows photo editor does it all now and I was able to download a free app - Open Office 4.2, that does everything that I needed out of my old Office 97 program.
So you've been having it go on around you whether you realized it or not. That's why I don't update my P3A from 1.3.002. One of these days when they want you to buy a new P4 or whatever, the birds will start dropping from the sky, just like with what the 1.5.01 fw update did. Was it an accident that so many P3's fell from the sky?
If companies can make money by destroying their old equipment while forcing people to buy new... They not only will... They do and have done this for many years. I shut off my updates on Windows 10 - and they made that impossible for average users... I agree, we definitely need some new laws against this.
 

Recent Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,352
Members
104,933
Latest member
mactechnic