[jimktrains2]

I shouldn't have to buy special hardware when I have perfectly fine hardware at my house. Vendor lock in is dangerous and nonsensical.

How is their excuse valid? A certified stock machine ceases to be certified when unverified hardware is used. However all WiFi cards must pass FCC certification separately, that is not Lenovo's responsibility.

[SamReidHughes]

What is the danger and how is it irresponsible?

[jimktrains2]

The danger is this exact situation, I am now no longer free to work on my machine. I must bend to their will and buy replacement hardware that they sanction, which may or may not or may in the future be hard to source and/or high in price. The danger is a working piece of hardware could be rendered non functional for want of a simple and otherwise easily sourced replacement if a company goes put of business.

I said nonsensical not irresponsible. I say nonsensical because the situation I described in my last paragraph shouldn't be my worry as the owner of hardware that otherwise would be compatible.

[SamReidHughes]

Oh I guess I misread. It's still not dangerous at all. You aren't going to die or suffer injury from the wifi card or lack thereof, even if Lenovo goes out of business. You're choosing words that falsely amplify your point.

[jimktrains2]

Something does not have to cause mortal harm to be dangerous. Denying free speech is a dangerous thing to do, but it poses no mortal harm.

Not owning what I buy is a disturbing trend that I believe is dangerous to our society.

[SamReidHughes]

You have not lost your ability to replace your wifi card. The difference here is only monetary and the entire cost to you would be negated if the initial price was $100 cheaper. A year or two after your purchase, the price of laptops will have fallen enough that the cost of a laptop + an extra official wifi card is less than the cost of a laptop today. So I find your theory of harm quite dubious.

[jimktrains2]

Yes, I have lost the ability to freely change the card.