[crazygringo]

> I don't think this reasoning makes any sense. The company can just declare that replacing or altering the firmware voids the warranty.

It's still a cost, though. People are still going to file tickets for warranty replacements, it won't be until the company receives the broken item that they'll detect the firmware replacement (if they even can, what if the hardware damage broke the ability to check?), people return items to the store they bought them from where they can't even check...

It's honestly a whole mess that will absolutely wind up costing the company money in support and returns. You can argue that it's still worth the cost, but just declaring that altering the firmware voids the warranty doesn't stop people from trying, which costs money.

[JohnFen]

Yes, it is a cost. I would argue that it's a reasonable cost of doing business, personally, but it is a cost.