I surly made a mistake in trusting you’d deliver working software before I came back from Christmas vacation.
I won’t repeat the mistake of trusting you.
And yes, I have tested that release intensively, as my posts in response to that post will attest.
And those tests have revealed that the current state of the beta is unusable, quite independently of how much hardware you throw at it: not even an RTX 4090 will do.
I bought a package that consists of various pieces of hardware and software. The hardware came in two deliveries, the working software part is still missing.
So in my book the delivery is not complete and the 30 day return window has not even openened.
But your “return policy” isn’t the governing law on this sale.
Your support staff has gotten cute and argues a) that no Windows support was ever promised and b) that a beta delivery doesn’t imply that there will ever be a working product.
If I distribute those mails, I’m sure that won’t be good advertisement for your company.
These glasses were evidently designed as mixed reality devices and originally named so. There is plenty of evidency on this forum for this “renaming”.
Now mixed reality is very vaguely defined and can mean pretty much anything. So had you stuck with that term in the marketing materials, you wouldn’t have raised false expectations, I’d have never bought the glasses and everything would be fine.
But you did introduce augemented reality and virtual reality as features and part of the product.
Those have very clear minimal criteria, which these glasses do not meet.
They fail on augmented, because the reality isn’t transparent enough even for sit-down work, let alone for walking around without killing yourself.
And they fail on virtual reality, because there is no working software on Windows and MacOS.
Those terms are not up to you or your sales people to define at will, they have established semantics, “disruptive dialectics” cease being “smart” when courts find them misleading.
And that is quite simply false advertising, because you do not deliver on both ends.
And it’s breach of contract, because you never delivered the full product yet refuse the return.
Products sold from your German web site to EU consumers fall under EU and German consumer protection law. That law overrides whatever vendors might put into “sales contracts” when it violates unalienable consumer rights.
And an incomplete delivery is a breach of contract, that any “30 day return policy” cannot overrride.
The unconditional return obligation is only 14 days in the EU, but that only applies after a full delivery has been received.
Your liability for damages in case of a partial delivery and your obligation for a full refund are six months.
Judging by the rate of progress in the software, you won’t be ready will fully functioning software by May 2024 and the damages are mounting.
You have to have a representative to sell products in Europe, please name that representative so I can sue you if you continue to refuse a full refund. If you do not comply, the extra legal effort for identifying and pursuing that person will be added to your liability.
If you sell in the EU, you have to respect EU law, it’s that simple.
Just like people who sell in China have to respect Chinese law.
If you violate that, you’re not only risking having to pay eventually. You’re risking having any future at all in a market that seems to have been important enough to invest into (unfortunately rather misleading) local advertisement and a distribution channel.
Consumer protection in the US seems rather weak in comparison. But that market does not tolerate misleading products, either. And if you ever want to be big, what you’re doing here would surely result in a class action suit or two.
Just imagine Apple doing what you’re doing and take the proper path.