Have you voted for a No above then? If not, please do so.
Yes I did.
I also looked at the firmware, which seems to be an eCos based OS, with very basic compression (BCL LZ77). For anyone that knows IDA there are strings such as hide_logo and show_show which comparing between the 2 firmwares should offer a solution to get rid of the logo in one way or another. Just make sure you know what you're doing or can at least return a bricked device
Tempted to buy one just to reverse the firmware and give people some choice back.
I don't even have one of these and am still annoyed just by the principle of it
Not a big deal to some that's fine but when people are downgrading to inferior versions of firmware to avoid it then you have a problem.
I worked in IT for 20 years so in fairness to the software dev team I have sympathy for them as it will have just come down from a meeting in which some marketing idiot pushed it on them. Optional logo is fine, but surely the model name hardcoded in the info line (which is already bad enough if not optional) would meet the purposes of letting people know on social media what camera you are using (which should be your choice anyway).
Not to mention the obtrusive logo is in a place that could obscure required video (think a close road sign only readable at that position, or a face on the near side). Crazy.
I also note on the official product page
https://www.nextbase.co.uk/dash-cams/412gw-dash-cam/ there is no logo shown. Nor of course in the original product review videos/articles done before the firmware enforced it which is also pretty misleading to prospective customers. Grrr.
I think judging by my reaction to this if I actually had one of these I would have exploded lol. Now I have to find a different product. No use looking at Nextbase even if the particular model doesn't have this issue as you can bet it will be forced on all in time.
OK cup of tea, and will look at an alternative product to buy.....
edit: sorry said encryption meant compression