That's not the only problem.
First of all, even giving Randall the benefit of the doubt as the "new guy" at Autel Robotics, his company's reputation for long-term product support is less-than-wonderful. Read through the fora for X-Star Premium and EVO I if you don't know what I mean.
We're talking about devices that cost more than twice what I paid for some cars I've owned. Yet in the case of X-Star Premium (with EVO I close behind), they've become expensive paperweights due to AR's refusal to provide ongoing support.
AR's refusal to provide batteries is particularly offensive both because it's the only part whose lifetime is known to be limited under normal use, and because there exists a relatively easy solution: Either license the logic tech to Some Other Company so they can make aftermarket battery clones, or just open-source it altogether and let anyone make them.
AR's refusal to use either option to support their product and customers is reprehensible. In view of a history of that sort of recent-past product non-support, how much credibility should I, as an
EVO II owner, give to Randall's vague assurances regarding
EVO II?
I can't even rightly call his assurances "promises" because Randall has a gift for using many words to say nothing. My impression thus far is that he's more suited for a career in politics than as CEO of a tech company, where specificity is everything.
Randall could, of course, change my mind. All he has to do is start manufacturing batteries for past AR drone models (or enable other companies to manufacture aftermarket ones). If he refuses to do so, or if he lacks the authority to do so, then please explain why I should view his vague assurances regarding
EVO II as having any credibility whatsoever?
The other problem has to do with reasonable expectations: and this may be where Autel Robotics suffers more than damage to their reputation.
People who purchased the
EVO II with the assumption, based on the company's own marketing materials, that the Smart Controller was "coming soon," had a reasonable expectation that the product would actually exist in sufficient quantities for anyone who wanted one to obtain one. If that turns out to be false, it constitutes a material misrepresentation in AR's marketing.
One might excuse that as unintentional were it not for the fact that AR's official site is
still marketing both the
EVO II and the SC, with no mention of the future incompatibilities, nor any mention that the SC is basically vaporware as far as new
EVO II buyers are concerned, and with the promise that future aircraft will also be supported by the SC.
The only Autel Robotics official store, which sells the most advanced camera drones and accessories to consumers, we committed to design and provide best drone to each consumer and bringing our customers unparalleled technology and support at affordable prices. Learn about our drones:
EVO II...
auteldrones.com
Autel Smart Controller Overview Specifications Image Transmission *Working Frequency 902-928 MHz;2.400-2.4835 GHz;5.725-5.850 GHz Max Signal Transmission Distance (No interference, No obstacles) FCC:13km;CE:7km Transmitter Power (EIRP) 902-928 MHz FCC:≤30dBm 2.400-2.4835 GHz FCC:≤30dBm CE:≤20dBm...
auteldrones.com
I hate to say it, but I'm starting to think a class-action suit is inevitable. The company is still materially misrepresenting its products and making promises that even Randall admits they can't keep. Customers who buy an
EVO II today based on information on AR's own Web site are being defrauded, plain and simple.
Randall may not be authorized to start building batteries for older drones, but one would think he can authorize a change of wording on a Web site to remove a material misrepresentation.
So please forgive me if I hesitate to place my faith in Randal's many words and scant substance. I do hope he proves my hesitancy to be unwarranted, but that hope is waning.