Britch, from your last post, I don't think we are on the same thread as to the issues on which I have been posting. One of us is really off somewhere, IMO.
First, I am unaware of who or what OP is, as my latest response was directed to SamWong, as far as I can tell. Perhaps OP is shorthand for something I am not familiar with, and if so, I'm sorry. And my prior posts on the same issue, about getting the most current firmware, were directed to EyesWideOpen. But assuming you are correct in your designation, I will proceed to respond to your post, although I will assume Sam is the person we are actually initially discussing. And I didn't think his question related to getting a new machine, as you indicate, but the possibility of updating a machine he acquired last January. And he doesn't have a loaner - none of the inquiring people to whom I responded did, AFAIK, they all had their own machines, but... Anyway... Moving on...
(05-03-2012 05:44 PM)Rritch Wrote: I have to agree with HeadGear on this one. I realize that the OP has another machine to use while he tries to find a machine with the latest greatest firmware, but look at the time and effort involved with that.
As stated above, I don't think he has a "loaner". That said, I see little difference in a "loaner" machine and an identical one actually owned, other than some possible pride of ownership which might somehow be derived by some individuals. And that to me seems a rather nebulous reason to want to acquire an older version of anything while paying the price of a new and current version. And using a "loaner" does NOT delay treatment, although I confess that for me I don't see the same urgency that a week or two at max, if any delay at all, might make to someone having had untreated sleep apnea for years, as I did. But lets not go down that path - that is NOT the case here, and NOT what is being discussed.
As to time and effort expended, that would be the choice of the person seeking the latest firmware and expending either of those. Not a decision to make for someone else, seems to me. If you don't care if its not updated, then get it. Simple enough. But you don't know what updates are included in the newest firmware - ResMed won't say. You only know there are updates, which includes new features and/or bug fixes, or there wouldn't be a new firmware number.
(05-03-2012 05:44 PM)Rritch Wrote: It seems that even the manufacturer is not sure what is the latest.
I was unaware that the manufacturer wasn't sure about its firmware - I absolutely think there is a difference between not disclosing and not knowing something. And surely you are not equating what tech support might say and what management might know? And as far as I know, no outsider knows what the ResMed's internal policies are, or what they do or don't know about their firmware. If you do, you have an inner line to ResMed denied to most. And we do know that they feel it is improved, or they wouldn't issue it with a new number.
(05-03-2012 05:44 PM)Rritch Wrote: Obviously there are thousands of people using the machines effectively using the older versions.
And using years old machines, as well, I agree. Sort of "it seems to work OK, why try anything newer"? After all, x-rays worked fine, why would we want CT scans (x-rays on steroids with computers)? Seems to me like a head in the sand approach, and a rather backward view, IMO. I thought we settled that issue, at least as a country, in the Industrial Revolution.
(05-03-2012 05:44 PM)Rritch Wrote: If the older versions were not effective...they would be recalled.
You apparently believe that somebody will "recall" the firmware if there are new features or bug fixes not previously disclosed. Why you believe that I don't know, but unless there was a serious failure of the equipment caused
by the firmware, something never part of this or any earlier discussion
, I strongly doubt that there would be a recall of any kind, and whatever occurred, if anything, would be a long time coming. BUT we have always been talking about new features and bug fixes, not issues with perfomance, which is something entirely different and unrelated. Personally, I have little faith that ANYONE is better equipped to look after me than I am, and I correspondingly have a deep lack of faith that the government is truly here to help me, including by a recall if I don't get the latest fixes/updates. And I strongly believe I should get what I pay for - which in this case would be the latest firmware.
(05-03-2012 05:44 PM)Rritch Wrote: I just would not want to see anyone delay treatment while trying to get the latest greatest.
Never EVER been an issue in any of my posts. EyesWideOpen (the original poster) has had a machine for a considerable period of time, and SamWong (the most recent poster to whom I responded) acquired his back in January. Doesn't seem relevant to mention delay in treatment when that is, and I will say again, never been an issue. I also have expressed my view on possible delay elsewhere in this post, but whether or not there even is delay is dependent on the DME and where you live.
(05-03-2012 05:44 PM)Rritch Wrote: Another thing to consider is IF you do manage to finally track down a machine with the latest greatest firmware, what are you going to do if they release a new firmware the next day?
Since we don't know what the future will bring, why would we worry about it? You do the best with what you know and can control. If they come out with something better in the future, be it tomorrow or next year, and if you want it and can afford it, buy it. But don't cry about it or worry about it now. And if you took that approach, you would never buy a new car.
But all said and done, the issue to which I addressed my latest post, and to which you apparently responded, is whether or not the latest firmware can or should be updated (or should be acquired if purchasing a new machine, as asked by a prior poster). The former was the question asked by SamWong, as far as I can tell from re-reading his post, and to which I answered. Is getting firmware which may or may not contain new features, and if not, at least bug fixes, worth waiting a short time, if any, to get particularly when the cost is the same as the old and non-updated version? And I believe it unquestionably is, and that it is foolish to pay the same price for old and outdated firmware when I can get newest and latest, PARTICULARLY for each of the two individuals ALREADY receiving xPAP. I further support your right to believe, as does HG, that it is unreasonable to get the latest, and that since older machines work well, to just stick with those. But I believe that choice is best made by the person getting the machine. After all, they are paying for it.
But what it all boils down to, as I have said many times, is I cannot imagine getting older firmware (or anything else) for the same price as newer and better. But, obviously, you and HG disagree, which is, as I said, your right. And before you disagree with my phrase "newer and better", recognize that ResMed would not create a newer/updated firmware unless they thought it was newer and better. And that's all any of us can go on.