[Mogul, XV6800 General] bakntyme:
OK, so you admit that you were very satisfied with the performance until someone said "Hey, I think they OWE US something MORE than what we got, let's SUE THEM for it?" If the device met your needs when you tested it, then you have no complaint. If it did not, you should have returned it in the 30 day return period.

As I asked you way back in this thread, but you have not yet addressed, (nor any of the other points in my previous post), "have you actually seen an advertisement that stated that the devices came with this functionality, or did you just assume that because it was advertised as having this chipset, and the chipset has this capability, that the functionality would be included?...If you actually researched the chipset so thoroughly for this issue prior to purchasing the device, why did you not notice in the first 30 days that it was not included, and return the device?"

None of these analogies is perfect...one big flaw in yours is that you hypothesized "If you were to buy a car that was advertised with a special computer chip in it that can control a supercharger," then switched to the car actually having a supercharger advertised: "Wouldn't you expect that if it was advertised as having this chip and a supercharger". Another is that the supercharger's existence is open and apparent to someone who looks under the hood, without requiring any research or disassembly of the vehicle. Another is that in chip manufacturing, it is usually more efficient to produce a batch of chips with all the capabilities, then use the ones you want in each device, as opposed to redesigning the chip package and retooling the production run for each combination of features desired in each application. No one could reasonably say that it was more efficient to produce a factory run of cars with all possible mechanical features (such as the supercharger in your example) included, and then only connect and use the ones desired for that model. However, auto manufacturers also sometimes utilize parts and sub-assemblies in a particular model without enabling or utilizing all of that component's capabilities, when doing so is more efficient.

Since you like automotive analogies, I will use one without resorting to calling anyone "a bit retarded": suppose that Ford announced that all 2010 Mustangs would use the new computer chip from Super Tuner Corporation, "because of its wonderful and powerful new capabilities," with no details as to what particular features would be made available. Your research into the chip on Super Tuner's website revealed that it supported superchargers, turbochargers, four-wheel drive, four-wheel steering, and nitrous fuel systems. You went in to a Ford dealer and test-drove the top-of-the-line 2010 Mustang, were impressed by its performance, and bought it. Six months later, someone pointed out that you had received none of those performance items listed above. You did not know why, but it was because Ford had internally determined pre-production that the suspension and frame would not be sufficient to provide those performance items in any model Mustang, and they did not want to re-engineer the support structure. They made no announcement about these features not being available, as they had never made any announcement about including those features. Would you join the MustangClassAction.org group? Now suppose that you had done no research prior to the purchase, and six months later discovered the information on Super Tuner's website after someone pointed out the lack to you...even less valid a complaint then, isn't it?

And further suppose that at the same time, someone else says, "I took the interior of my Mustang apart, and it has mounts for 8 speakers, and they only provided it with 4 speakers. Ford has to install 4 more speakers in every Mustang, because it has the capability of holding them!"

And another owner pulls out his factory radio, notices the output jack on the back for a subwoofer..."Where is my subwoofer? It obviously was supposed to come with my car, or they would not have included a radio that could support one and put a jack on the back of the radio to plug one in!!"

Meanwhile, another owner says "I was testing the electronic trip computer included in my Mustang, the same one included in all 2010 Mustangs, and it has the ability to calculate and display up to 55 MPG, but my Mustang only gets 23 MPG. Obviously, Ford was advertising a Mustang that would get 55 MPG and must give us that!"

Enough analogies? Would you get angrier, and call Ford arrogant, when they say, "Thank you for your business, customers, but we never said the Mustang had those capabilities, and we have no intention of retrofitting them, but we will take your opinions into account in designing our next vehicle?"

Analogies by their nature will never replicate the Titan/Mogul/6800 situation. However, we can discuss the 6800 situation itself, and I am waiting for your answer about the HTC advertisement and your not discovering the lack in the first 30 days of your device ownership.