For those who missed out from recent sales, the price is not too bad if you are keen for one.
- Bonus Norton Mobile Security Subscription
Google Pixel 4a 5G 128GB Just Black $696 from Harvey Norman
390
webtherapist on 28/01/2021 - 00:35 harveynorman.com.au (1141 clicks)
Last edited 28/01/2021 - 10:10 by 1 other user
Last edited 28/01/2021 - 10:10 by 1 other user
Related Stores
closed Comments
ikr lol
My sister got
bulliedpersuaded into paying for Norton "Premium" Security for her new computer by HNI didn't know whether to laugh or cry š
lol
Personally, i'd get her to take it back. In my experience, HNs sales tactics are unethical.
I've had Harvey Norman try and persuade me to buy their "international" extended warranty on a camera. International meaning valid in New Zealand, Singapore and Ireland.
They lied about the manufacturers extended warranty, saying it wasn't possible to purchase later. It was, double checked in the spot and called them out on the lie.
The worst thing was they had 5 sales people on the other side of the desk including a younger sales person saying "omg, I can't believe he won't buy the extended warranty."Vote with your feet and buy nothing from Harvey Norman. Their founder bellyached about online stores for years.
Vote with your feet and buy nothing from Harvey Norman
This is the sort of behaviour that stops me going to a lot of big name bricks an mortar stores, they're all doing the hard up-sell now.
I went to Shaver Shop and the woman there put the hard sell on me to buy some oil to go with my clippers. When I mentioned that the clippers came with oil her reply was "oh that's mostly water" lol… That's the last time I'll ever go to that store again.
Personally, i'd get her to take it back.
While this is the goal, hasn't been the first time I've been shrugged off. Last time was not signing up to a 36 month contract..
Maybe if I let nature run its course she'll learn š¤
I've tried to get her to stop going to HN but "it's local".Yes, this is quite blatant brainwashing someone who has a lot of money to the extent they give them false confidence in their own purchase. What a shoddy tactic.
They persuaded my dad (who doesn't speak much English) to buy those $99 "premium" HDMI cables. Wish he could've told me before he bought them - could've bought him one on eBay or Amazon and get him a nice steak dinner with the change
its been ~650 a few times now since boxing day sales
I did the OzB thing and bought first, think later by ordering for $649 from officeworks last week. Its finally arrived in store.
However, I've since find a demo in another store and decided it's too big for my hand. Therefore, there'll be one in stock by tomorrow in Sydney cbd if I go in this afternoon and cancel the order without picking it up.
norton wf
Don't let that Norton crap near your phone!
Norton circa 1995.
Free bloatware.
Thank you OP I purchased 7Hardly normal if you reading this give something useful like a bonus case
Go to the store ask for bonus case instead and say Norton is useful as two boobies on a bull
And show the following
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/104827-android-antivirā¦Google and Facebook are fighting legislation that would force them to enter into negotiations with news media companies for payment for content
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/jan/22/google-threateā¦
stop buying google product?
Also, is it made in the Land of China?
Made in Vietnam
Accessories made in china.
For what reason exactly? The newspapers can already choose not to be indexed.
The newspapers are a very small issue here.
Sadly the Pixel 4a 5G is not yet supported with a privacy focused ROM like the Pixel 4a is — the Pixel 4a 5G is a very different phone to the Pixel 4a, so much so that GrapheneOS people say it shouldn't even be a "4a" phone.
Google is not your friend for privacy and personal freedom, they use their services to suck up data so that they can sell product to you and your data to others (potentially).
Oh and if a Google product fails in terms of "value" to Google themselves, it ends up in the Google graveyard and users get abandoned.
The number of people whom blindly use Google and/or Microsoft services is astonishing, given how bad they are for people.
The number of people whom blindly use Google and/or Microsoft services is astonishing, given how bad they are for people.
What alternative do you suggest? It's borderline impossible not to use Google/Microsoft stuff.
@Indomietable: Here's a lazy list of suggestions(most of them I only know of):
Phones - Apple to a degree, GrapheneOS or similar for Android Phones, Linux based phones(bit niche)
Browser - Firefox + extensions, Brave
Maps - DuckDuckGo Maps, Sygic, standalone GPS, OSM based option
Email - Protonmail, your ISP email
Search - duckduckgo, or a VPN(though beware of fingerprinting)
Tracking - Browser extension, Pi Hole maybe.
Office Suite - Libre Office
File Storage, photos - Host yourself, maybe Owncloud.. or encrypt content on a well-known provider@ihfree: It looks easy if you listed them individually but if you trace from the OS to the server its hard to avoid. If you are posting to this forums , you inadvertently used google service. The jquery & font library are served from google and its not blocked by most adblocker because its too destructive.
@Indomietable: Decentraleyes helps block tracking via centralised library distributions.
But you're right, it's hard to plug every leak so to speak. Even with FF nightly + ublock with added filter lists + umatrix in whitelist mode + decentraleyes (and in fact to some extend because of the measures I'm taking) I'm still pretty vulnerable to browser fingerprinting.
@snep: Oh wow .. glad decentraleye still around! I've stopped using them years ago because it makes sites looks ugly and breaking some sites. After a while it becomes a burden having to debug HTML elements. How did it go now?
@Indomietable: Yes, too many sheep developers of websites take the "easy" way out and outsource plenty to Google assets; it's a real pain, I do block plenty, but as you say, it's neigh on impossible to block everything.
Devs need to look outside the box and stop using services that compromise user privacy and security.
@affinity: I'm not sure if that goes commercially. First priority for any business is to make money and there is a lot of money in marketing. Site like ozbargain can survive because of marketing money.
I made my peace trading my privacy with having convenient of free access to ozbargain, youtube etc. I do however try my best at the most convenient way to block annoying ads/social media. I will not shy away from google/MS products if they benefit me and make my day more efficient. Im also grateful that there are privacy warrior out there.
The trade-off is worthwhile for many users. It follows the whole "if it's free, you're the product." I agree that it is problematic that users are blind to big data. The Social Dilemma on Netflix is probably an easily accessibly intro to the topic.
Graphene may not be entirely practical for all users as it requires a degree of technical knowledge to flash and may cause the loss of certain apps which depend on DRM.
Many of the products that Google have killed-off, are unsuccessful. That's how business works, unfortunately. When you use a product with an online component you are at the mercy of that company. If you look at other tech companies, you will see the same thing.
@ihfree: I looked into grapheneOS a bit recently and was slightly turned off by the history (acrimonious split with former co-founder) and the relatively small scale of the project (much of the work seems to have been done by the one guy), seemingly without much in the way of independent verification. I know it's open source but it's a complex project and relatively obscure, so just being open source doesn't give me a massive amount of confidence that it doesn't introduce it's own problems. Though maybe I'm being overly sceptical at that point…
Of course the more practical problem is that I don't have a pixel :p
@snep: Yes, I have to say that it bothers me too, GrapheneOS situation; we need some real clout behind it and much better if it properly supported many more mobile phone variants and brands. Being just Pixel is very limiting in itself, but there is also the question of continued support beyond the standard 3 years that Google provides; any and all updates stop then, perhaps an update /should/ be required for a chipset issue, like the old iPhones that were too old and now forever have a Broadcom vulnerability that even Apple won't fix.
It was a sad day when my Nexus 6P stopped getting updates, all that device really needed was a replacement battery and some more update love; otherwise the device was in excellent condition and well worth keeping in service. It didn't get the battery replacement because it was never going to get any more security or other updates from Google. :(
@affinity: It seems like a real flaw in android that seemingly most devices need manual patching to get kernel updates - it automatically puts every phone on a timeline to obsolescence. I guess it's a balance between standardisation of drivers/firmware (or at least standardised apis) and allowing device manufacturers freedom.
I think postmarketOS is very promising because they are aiming to avoid this issue by splitting device specific system images into modular packages that should be far easier to maintain.
I'm not a fan of either side and there's other reasons to not buy Google products but that's a pretty bad take on the situation. What's really happening is a shakedown of one successful multinational to prop up a dying multinational with a worse track record.
The code doesn't force Google to pay for content since Google don't even use it in the first place. Google links to news content where the news outlet makes money either off the paywalled content or ads. The code is forcing Google to pay for the 'privilege' of linking to news content, despite the fact that a website can opt out of being indexed in Google's results. It's the equivalent of forcing a billboard company to pay you for putting your ad up on their board. Google would be willing to pay news outlets if they were actually using their content, like what literally just happened in France.
But the more important thing that newspapers conveniently leave out of their articles about this situation is that the code would also force Google to reveal how their algorithm works to news companies and provide 14 days notice before the algorithm changes. That's probably not even technically possible because for all we know the algorithm is automated and changes frequently. But that's also unfair to every other business who is also competing for a spot on the first page of Google. Why should one business get insider knowledge of how to successfully get to the front page of Google?
Yes. Our terribly bad media have all their own problems, I say, just let them die. If they can't provide honest, fair and reasonable content, they don't deserve a voice anywhere.
I'm not a fan of either side and there's other reasons to not buy Google products but that's a pretty bad take on the situation. What's really happening is a shakedown of one successful multinational to prop up a dying multinational with a worse track record.
The problem as I see it is that Google are a monopoly and that is bad for everyone. I'm not sure how to fix that other than maybe a forced breakup which does have some legal precedence (Standard Oil, AT&T etc), but the current state of affairs is not good.
I'm not sure how to fix that other than maybe a forced breakup
Except breaking up tech companies wont work. In IT people tend to stick to whats common. For example not many people go linux desktop route.
Except breaking up tech companies wont work. In IT people tend to stick to whats common. For example not many people go linux desktop route.
That is not how a break-up works. Alphabet (Google parent) can be forced to split so that Android, Youtube, Search, Maps etc are all completely separate businesses. Once they split up, they have less power to squash competition.
@1st-Amendment: OK .. so you break up google search and youtube. How does that stop google from search monopoly?
100% agree that some regulation is needed to keep them in check, at the very least there needs to be more in place to prevent the rampant tax avoidance that they and others participate in. But the code we're talking about isn't the solution.
there needs to be more in place to prevent the rampant tax avoidance that they and others participate in
Globalism in action. Donald Trump tried to fix that but they all made sure he was taken care of.
- You don't know Donald Trump's full financial history. Profits and losses are transferrable across tax years. Cherry picking for yet another Trump hysteria headline is the very definition of fake news.
- No-one outside him, his accountant and the IRS does, so be careful about believing MSM stories at face value
@1st-Amendment: Actually it's the very opposite of fake news when there's actual documents and testimonies by his closest people to look at.
Testimony transcript from Michael Cohen:
When telling me in 2008 that he was cutting employeesā salaries in half ā including mine ā he showed me what he claimed was a $10 million IRS tax refund, and he said that he could not believe how stupid the government was for giving āsomeone like himā that much money back.
If you think Trump doesn't avoid tax like the every other big company you're kidding yourself.
His actual tax return for 1995
So you chose to ignore my comment "Profits and losses are transferrable across_tax_years". One year of returns is not enough to work out an accurate financial position.
If you think Trump doesn't avoid tax like the every other big company you're kidding yourself.
I don't think that, nor did I ever claim it. I own a business and everyone even at my level hires accountants to minimise tax too. Why would you voluntary give money to the government if you are not legally required to? Why not donate 100% of your salary to the government?
My claim, if you took the time to read it before hastily replying, was that the media version of events is unlikely to be accurate, so don't get all angry based on a headline. That is a trap for suckers.
Good, It's a stupid law. Google are in the right here.
This or the A71 6GB for $500 ish? Is this worth $200 more?
It's $699 on Google store already from last few days
FWIW, can you pay Google store with Play Store Gift Card credits? Not that I am buying at this time.
What's the benefits of 5G version in AU?
I think, not much, it is mostly hype except for future proofing your device as best you can.
Even 3G is okay, but as time goes by, that will go, then 4G and then 5G will be much more "useful", even necessary.
Back to $799 prices across the board it seems.
Who in their right mind would put Nortons on ANYTHING?!?!?!