Hacking Question Nintendo applying ipatches when repairing a switch

[Yamathedestroyer]

Well could Nintendo apply the Fusee-Gelee blocking ipatches to the console if i send it in for Repair?

 

[WiiHomebrew+Snes]

Assumably no, unless they transfer all your data to a new switch or something.

 

[luca1]

No, bootrom firm is READ-ONLY, it can only be written once and this is done at the factory. The only way they could prevent you from exploiting it is replacing your entire console

 

[FAST6191]

You do also want to ask the question when sending it in is it worth them sorting a new base unit?

You or I might spend parts of a weekend transferring all components we can salvage and consider it a prudent use of money but if Nintendo also faces X hours of repair job then it starts to make sense for "replace it" to almost be the default practice for anything more exotic than "battery needs swapping".

 

[fragged]

You do also want to ask the question when sending it in is it worth them sorting a new base unit?

You or I might spend parts of a weekend transferring all components we can salvage and consider it a prudent use of money but if Nintendo also faces X hours of repair job then it starts to make sense for "replace it" to almost be the default practice for anything more exotic than "battery needs swapping".

Given how moduler the Switch is if they can swap out an SD card reader, game Cart reader, eMMC, side rails without touching the main board to fix most units it wouldn't make financial sense to fix the exploit in most repairs.

 

[FAST6191]

Sure it is modular (for others playing along at home https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Nintendo+Switch+Teardown/78263 ) but most repair work/failures we are seeing now would warrant replacement. I am sure they will try to recycle things but as far as "the one they send back to you" thing goes I am less inclined to bet on you getting back "yours".

 

[Glyptofane]

Sure it is modular (for others playing along at home https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Nintendo+Switch+Teardown/78263 ) but most repair work/failures we are seeing now would warrant replacement. I am sure they will try to recycle things but as far as "the one they send back to you" thing goes I am less inclined to bet on you getting back "yours".

It's been common practice for quite some time for Nintendo to flash your data to a refurb and send that back to you instead of whatever you originally sent in for repair. Many people lost their limited edition 3DS this way as they would ask if you wanted a red or black one sent back to you.

 

[Erol]

Stupid title.

 

[FAST6191]

Stupid title.

How so? It conveys what the thread is going to ask. That is pretty much all we ask from titles around here.

 

[Slimmmmmm]

The usual routine when you send something to Nintendo.

It arrives, waits in a queue.
They get a new unit, transfer data and ship it back out.

The old one is more or less binned, but in rare cases might be used in a project to give them to charities or other organisations as refurbished units.

There are many reasons for this but the main one is cost and logistics.
Data can be sent to other places without much cost, any other faults that were developing but not noticed will be fixed too, they can get breaks and incentives for donating the used units to certain places.

This is just speculation of course as I don't work for any of they departments at Nintendo.

So you are best to assume this to be true and consider it a "worst case scenario" or a best case scenario with the understanding that it is brand new and will last much longer.

*EDIT*
The topic title is not put as a question but rather as a statement so the title is a little click bait like, maybe not intentional.

 

[a9lh-1user]

Stupid title.

It is not a title it is a suggestion! (But i dont like it either!)

Anyway i'am from germany so if i send my "Special Edititon" to the repair service to Nintendo and i dont get it back (My Special Edition or a similar refurbished one) i will sue them.
And gues why i wrote i'am from germany .... i will win

 

[Deleted User]

And gues why i wrote i'am from germany .... i will win

I guess you didn't pay any attention in history class.

 

[a9lh-1user]

I guess you didn't pay any attention in history class.

Do you think it is OK if you send any kind of HW you bought to a company for repairing it and they can send you back something equal but different as the one you send to them?
Here in Germany the consumer is protected by the law. Thats is not so everywhere in the world.
So if Nintendo sned me back a "Blue" or "Red" one instead of my "Special Edition" i can sue them an i will win.

Everything else you are refering to doesn't belong into this thread! (And i din't even mean it that way....if it looks like that way i'am sorry!)

 

[FAST6191]

Do you think it is OK if you send any kind of HW you bought to a company for repairing it and they can send you back something equal but different as the one you send to them?
Here in Germany the consumer is protected by the law. Thats is not so everywhere in the world.
So if Nintendo sned me back a "Blue" or "Red" one instead of my "Special Edition" i can sue them an i will win.

Nintendo would surely just claim it is beyond economical repair (and a couple of hours of diagnostic electrical engineer time is not a cheap thing) and that the limited edition option was indeed limited edition and thus not in stock. They then provided a functional equivalent.

I am sure you could have asked for the original back or you might have had to have been offered a cash alternative (not sure here).

 

[gamesquest1]

I'm sure their T&C's you agree to when sending the console in for repair covers their decision to just bin your system, as @FAST6191 has said, its a toss up between hiring an engineer at £x an hour and hiring the cheapest possible local labour to just initiate a transfer to another console then ship the old units back to china or somewhere where they can hire a engineers at a fraction of the cost

 

[a9lh-1user]

Nintendo would surely just claim it is beyond economical repair (and a couple of hours of diagnostic electrical engineer time is not a cheap thing) and that the limited edition option was indeed limited edition and thus not in stock. They then provided a functional equivalent.

I am sure you could have asked for the original back or you might have had to have been offered a cash alternative (not sure here).

If i'am asked for it would be another think. I then can tell them i need id back even if it couldn't be repaired.
But it sounds like i don't have any opinion in the decision. So i wrote how it is handled in Germany.
Again not everywhere in the world the customer has so many rights against the industry! And i like it that way

 

[FAST6191]

Most EU countries have similar consumer rights laws (in the UK it would the consumer rights act and prior to that the Sale of Goods Act, also if you buy things with a credit card above a certain amount they typically provide a warranty which is handy in the event the seller goes bust) and I am not aware of any with stuff seriously above and beyond anywhere else. Compared to the sorts of things I see in the US I agree it is considerably nicer to be a consumer in said European countries (though at the same time it is probably also at least partly why things are that much more expensive) but that is besides the point.

Had it been like the PS3 where they removed otherOS and you did some warranty stuff you might have had something. Here though they don't owe you a hackable device back as it was never sold by them as such and I doubt it would be considered reasonable for them to have to provide such a thing.

Similarly I am not sure they would be compelled to offer your original device back as part of the contact they have with you. It then being the sort of thing you have to state.

Speaking of stating things then amusingly I imagine you could make a case if you told Nintendo at the outset that your plan/requirements were a hackable device: in the UK version http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/10 -- "Subsection (3) applies to a contract to supply goods if before the contract is made the consumer makes known to the trader (expressly or by implication) any particular purpose for which the consumer is contracting for the goods." and said subsection 3 "The contract is to be treated as including a term that the goods are reasonably fit for that purpose, whether or not that is a purpose for which goods of that kind are usually supplied.". Though again that would have to be stated in your interactions beforehand.

 

[tbb043]

How so? It conveys what the thread is going to ask. That is pretty much all we ask from titles around here.

No, putting a question mark at the end woulds convey it's asking something rather than "the sky is falling" type hyperbole and panic conveyed by a statement how it currently reads. You don't get [question] tags showing up on the front page recent list, so why not use a simple ? like people have done for hundreds? Thousands? of years?

 

[FAST6191]

No, putting a question mark at the end woulds convey it's asking something rather than "the sky is falling" type hyperbole and panic conveyed by a statement how it currently reads. You don't get [question] tags showing up on the front page recent list, so why not use a simple ? like people have done for hundreds? Thousands? of years?

Low post count member makes a good faith effort to title things properly and misses due to quirk of the board software... hardly their fault.