Session 17

Warranties

820:240

Environment, Technology, and Society

Exercise: Warranting Performance of Software

Goals

1. To understand better the relationship between a technological product and its users, especially their expectations about its performance.

Tasks

Work in teams of three or four people based on the number in the upper right hand corner of this page.

Background: You've all used software before. Many of you have bought software, from the operating system that came installed on your computer, to productivity software such as a word processor, to games. Have you ever been dissatisfied with a software product? Have you ever been so dissatisfied that you wanted a refund? Have you ever read the license agreement for a software package? You might be surprised.

1. Make a list of the features for which a software producer can reasonably offer a warranty on product performance. Why can the producer offer a warranty on each feature, and why should the producer offer a warranty on each feature?

2. For each feature on your list, identify (1) actions that the producer can take to ensure that the software meets the warranty and (2) remedies that the producer should provide if the feature fails.

3. What features should a software producer not warrant in its product? Why not?

At the End

1. You argue your case in class.
2. Your group submits its write-up.

Summary from Exercise

A few years ago, the Waterloo/Cedar Falls Courier ran a series of articles about a case that came to mind when I prepared for today. You can read about the case on-line. A quick summary: an Iowa couple was charged with tax fraud, and a major part of their defense was that they relied on Quicken, a tax software package, and got confused. The jury was apparently unmoved by this argument, in light of the size of the error (five or six figures...). The result was jail time.

This case wasn't about warranties, per se, but about usability (or just plain criminal behavior). But it does highlight that some software is hard to use, perhaps so hard as to prevent its successful use. Making warranty on how a user uses a tool seems pretty risky, beyond saying that within prescribed bounds of use the tool will function correctly.

(Oh, and never underestimate the "fool" in "foolproof". While thinking about this session, I was also reminded of a legal case we covered in one of my undergraduate Business Law courses. Two guys used a lawn mower as a hedge trimmer! They lifted the mower up by its shell and walked, one on each side of the hedge, holding the mower at the top of the plant. Sadly, one of the guys slipped and lost all of his fingers when they met the blade. In the suit, these men claimed that the manufacturer did not expressly disclaim this use and that therefore they should be held liable for the "failure". They won the case! I would have laughed if this case didn't say something so sad about the intelligence of some consumers and the state of our civil justice system!)

Could a software producer -- or the producer of any complex technological device -- ever offer a warranty on the use of its product?

Well, of course. A car is a "complex technological device", and auto makers offer quite detailed warranties on their products. Hosts of other complex products come with warranties. These range from cutting-edge technologies to cut-and-dried technologies.

What is the purpose of a warranty? A warranty is not a claim that the product will not break. For systems of any reasonable complexity, such a claim is unreasonable. As some of you pointed out, a warranty is more about customer satisfaction. It says, "Even if this product fails, we want you to be happy. So we will bear the cost of failure (or some part thereof) for some period of time." Now we are in a realm where software warranties make sense.

Many of you made the claim that software is different from other products, which is true, and that, as a result, software warranties are unreasonable. If your intent in making the warranty is to claim that the software will not break, you are right. If you take the broader view of warranties as a means to curry customer favor, then not offering a warranty of some sort is unreasonable.

Keep in mind that computers and software are increasingly used by non-technical people who are not fazed by claims that software is "different". My dad made cars for a living. at one of those auto makers, and to him giving a warranty is just a part of doing business. It will take more than our strident claim that advanced technologies are different to convince people like him that software developers shouldn't be doing more to ensure our customers' satisfaction.

So, developers of software and other advanced devices face a couple of challenges:

• They must help users understand why software is different. But, in order to do this, wewill have to think hard ourselves to answer this question.

• They must come up with ways to ensure customer satisfaction with their products, perhaps through warranties that shift reasonable costs of dissatisfaction to the developer. What is reasonable, and how can the developer bear them?

Some of the ideas that you offered in class as to how software is different: the environment in which software operates is complex, increasingly varied, and increasingly autonomous; the potential complexity (which means things we might not anticipate when developing the software) is much greater than for many systems. (But keep the lawn mower guys in mind!)

I overhead one group say, "Well, a program should do what it promises to do." What does a word processor, for example, promise to do? How do we know when it has delivered?

Students Summaries

• Prior to handing out the activity the class discussed intellectual property, mainly cameras versus software. It was also discovered that the software industry is far bigger than the music industry.

  In group activity my group came up with the following answers to the questions that were asked.

  1. Features that software producers can offer a warranty: guarantee to work with the operating system, grammar checks should distinguish between homonyms, equipment for games and programs should interchange with the system or computer.

     We said that a producer can offer a warranty because they made the product, so they can do whatever they want with it.

     We said that a producer should offer a warranty to ensure customer satisfaction and confidence.

  2. For actions for each feature on our list we said that for work with the operating system to try it on different operating systems and line up a customer service department for feedback. For the grammar check we said to test all grammar problems. For the games to interchange with all systems we said to test and retest so it would be compatible with all systems.

     For remedies for each we said (In the same order as the preceeding question) provide patches and updates to keep the program running smooth, have the software be sensitive to how a word is used in a sentence or paragraph, and for the games to replace equipment or give it back.

  3. We said that a producer should not put a warranty on a product if it is intentionally ruined.

  When the class came together for a discussion we mentioned many things. Among them were that there are many products with a warrant and that some people think that if a product has no warranty it is not a good product. We also said that warranties will include if a product is defective. Another thing that was brought up was that warranties should have limitations such as how long they will last and what a company will do. Warranties show that a company is confident in a product, but if it does malfunction they will take steps to correct the problem. We summed up class by saying that warranties should say how you should use a product, and the warranty should include an agreement between the user and the manufacturer.

• Class was started with a discussion of intellectual property based on the conference Prof. Wallingford attended last week. He mentioned how there had been a debate when cameras and film were first developed over whether the picture taken was that person's property and whether a photographer or anyone needed permission before taking a person's property. This was then related to the use of software and how use of it is or is not regulated after it has been downloaded and such. This discussion led to the topic for the day: warranties on products. The class discussed whether or not software producers could and should provide warranties on their products. They discussed which features should have warranties and which should not. It was decided that warranties are in place to guarantee satisfaction, not to guarantee that the product will work perfectly all the time. The purpose is to let customers know that if something goes wrong, the company will help to rectify the problem, and if necessary, bear some of the cost. However, there must be limitations to this because some people will find ways to take advantage of it. Basically, warranties show that the companies understand that their product is not perfect and that they are willing to do something about it if something goes wrong.

• The class activity for Tuesday included thinking about warranties on software. My group and I tried to think of aspects of software that should include a warranty, why and how the warranty should be dealt with. I thought it was very difficult to think of warranties on software. When you are talking about something like a microwave, it is easy to tell what the warranty is for. If a part of the microwave is under warranty and it breaks, the warranty covers it. However, with software, there are often intangible aspects that are hard to conceptualize. There is also a problem with warranties in software because often times it is the user's fault when something goes wrong. During our class discussion, we learned that software doesn't have a normal warranty. Instead, it often has a disclaimer which says that if something happens outside of 90 days of buying it - tough. Consumers agree to these warranties when they open the package or install it on their computer.

• Today's class was about warranties and how companies issue them. The Class started off with a discussion about copyright. We discussed that there are four different catorgories of copyright;commercial purpose created, nonprofit commercial created, commercial purpose transform, and nonprofit purpose transform. The main discussion of the class was whether or not software producers should provide a waranty. Some argued that it is not economically feasible to provide a warranty on software. Someone said that if a company tested and made a program error proof that would take too much time and the product would not be released. The first question on our handout was what kind of features can a software producer offer a warranty. My group decide that the producer should provide a warranty cover the interference with other programs and that the program be downloadable. In the closing discussion we discussed that Apple has a short warranty on it's media but programs do not have to work. The last point that was mentioned that caught my ear was the many types of virus software can actually delete some documents and programs off the hard drive. With this information I concluded that software producers would have a hard time warranting their product. For some people this is a difficult concept to understand because why would they buy a product the company is not willing to warrant or stand behind.