I fully agree to this. While saw stop is a step into the right direction it would be better if the feature would be destruction free to both limbs and the saw.
The reasoning behind that is simple: the knowledge that tripping the feature equals to this days pay (or more) being gone (plus having to carry spares for the blade and mechanism) gives incentive to employ the 'cost saving' method of disabling the mechanism... which completely defeats the whole idea.
I have yet to come across any SawStop owners who disable their finger-saving technology in order to save costs. To disable the safety feature to cut metals or wet wood, yes, but to do so to avoid triggering the safety technology in a normal operaton is news to me. A better way to save costs is to sell the SawStop and get any other cabinet saw.
If someone is an employee and disables the safety feature (for not activating the SawStop and not for cutting wet wood or metal) without management approval, they could be violating their company safety policy or regulations that could lead to disciplinary measures including termination. I know at least one woodworking company that clearly states that failure to comply with the company safety regulations is a valid cause for instant dismissal.
I started using the SawStop around 2006 and have become an owner myself since 2014. I have not had one single close or remote call with any tablesaw during my whole hobby life of woodworking that began in the 90s. I am planning to keep that track record till the end.
Now, I hope Festool will develop the SawStop technology for its Kapex one day.
I think you missed some context, this was in the context of if "hot dog protection" was mandated on all saws. You have no choice but to buy a saw with it. In that situation people will certainly keep it off all the time. No different than clamping lawn mower engine stops, latching seat belts and sitting on them, pulling fuses on airbags, oversizing fuses in electric panel, etc.
Also it's not that people don't appreciate spending 250bucks to no loose a finger. If it goes off when it was needed, that's great and people will be glad it did. But when it goes off when it shouldn't, that becomes a big issue. When people get concerned of a false trip so they turn it off for a lot of situation that it will be fine now it's becomes in-effective. And sadly a not that small sub-set of the population purposely defeats safety features simply because they are anti-safety features.
People want such a safety system, they also don't want to be out a lot of money when it goes off un-needed. This is the heart of why ever manufacture hasn't gone with such a system without being forced too by law. They don't want to loose sales and have them go to vendors without it because folks decide they are safe users and do not want a false trip. It's often bad business to be an odd ball even if realistically what you offer is better. Back to cars, no basic family hauler needs over 150hp. Yet now most cars are well over 200 and large number of them into 300hp. Car makes could make a high mileage car simply by dropping a cheap, solid, well made 120hp engine in a car. It would be great for folks. It would also tank massively on the market because all the cars it competes with are 240hp and no one wants to buy the "under powered" car. Sure, there will be a subset that will buy the car because of what it is, maybe even pay more for it. But just like "saw stop" type saws, while there is a market for them for some, it's also something that possibly the majority of the population would refuse to buy, cost be damned, they don't want it.