Laptop reliability (Will this have a bearing on what is expectedunder the CGA?)

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Sailor Sam, Nov 19, 2009.

  1. Sailor Sam

    Sailor Sam Guest

    Sailor Sam, Nov 19, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Sailor Sam

    Mary Hanna Guest

    Mary Hanna, Nov 19, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Sailor Sam

    Sailor Sam Guest

    Sailor Sam, Nov 19, 2009
    #3
  4. Sailor Sam

    impossible Guest

    Re: Laptop reliability (Will this have a bearing on what is expected under the CGA?)

    "whoisthis" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <he2ei4$ivg$-september.org>,
    > Sailor Sam <> wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/apple-laptops-fourth-in-reliabili
    >> ty-study-20091118-im8t.html
    >>
    >> Hrm, the smh cannot be big fans of Apple :)
    >>
    >> The actual report is labelled "1 in 3 Laptops fail over 3 years"

    >
    > Hmm well my 5 laptops (all Macs) vary from 10 years to 4 years and all
    > going strong. I have seen on die within 12 months, but it was "rolled
    > bowled and arseholed" and was so dented that no thought was given about
    > warranty...


    The source for this "study" is an outfit called SquareTrade, which sells
    extended warranties for notebooks and netbooks. That pretty much tells you
    all you need to know, since SquareTrade has a strong vested interest in
    generating demand for the purchase of insurance against computer failure.
    Hence the viral marketing of their report which hypes malfuntion rates well
    beyond the experience of most users.

    Their data consists entirely of SquareTrade warranty returns, so items that
    never malfunction within the 3-year warranty period are never counted. That
    completely taints the results.

    http://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_laptop_reliability_1109.pdf
    impossible, Nov 19, 2009
    #4
  5. Sailor Sam

    Sailor Sam Guest

    whoisthis wrote:
    > In article <O2bNm.136783$5n1.48411@attbi_s21>,
    > "impossible" <> wrote:
    >
    >> "whoisthis" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> In article <he2ei4$ivg$-september.org>,
    >>> Sailor Sam <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/apple-laptops-fourth-in-reliab
    >>>> ili
    >>>> ty-study-20091118-im8t.html
    >>>>
    >>>> Hrm, the smh cannot be big fans of Apple :)
    >>>>
    >>>> The actual report is labelled "1 in 3 Laptops fail over 3 years"
    >>> Hmm well my 5 laptops (all Macs) vary from 10 years to 4 years and all
    >>> going strong. I have seen on die within 12 months, but it was "rolled
    >>> bowled and arseholed" and was so dented that no thought was given about
    >>> warranty...

    >> The source for this "study" is an outfit called SquareTrade, which sells
    >> extended warranties for notebooks and netbooks. That pretty much tells you
    >> all you need to know,


    That the data is limited to people who buy extended warranties through
    SquareTrade.

    Any other conclusion you draw is pure speculation.


    >> since SquareTrade has a strong vested interest in
    >> generating demand for the purchase of insurance against computer failure.


    This may have motivated the release of the report/data, but it does not
    change the report/data.

    >> Hence the viral marketing of their report which hypes malfuntion rates well
    >> beyond the experience of most users.
    >>


    For example, the 30,000 users whose data was used in the study.

    >> Their data consists entirely of SquareTrade warranty returns, so items that
    >> never malfunction within the 3-year warranty period are never counted. That
    >> completely taints the results.
    >>


    Wrong.
    30,000 laptops are sold, with SquareTrade warrenties, and of that set
    the figures show how many returns were made.

    >> http://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_laptop_reliability_1109.pdf

    >
    > My point was that the death of a laptop was often because of USER
    > activity. My MacBook G4 was been backpacking around the world with me,
    > and has been used by my step daughter for the last 4 years but has been
    > treated well, however a person I worked with... well his laptop looked
    > as though it had been in a head on collision, one of the hinges was
    > almost broken and it was just over 12 months old. Some information about
    > the kinds/levels of damage would be useful.


    I do wish people would read.

    From the report
    "This analysis examines customer reported failure data from a sample of
    over 30,000 new laptops purchased by SquareTrade customers over the past
    three years (see Appendix for sample details). SquareTrade offers
    warranty plans that cover accidental damage as well as standard hardware
    failures, and we consider malfunctions from normal usage
    (“malfunctions”) separate from accidents (“accidents”) in our analysis."


    and

    "Only malfunctions reported directly to SquareTrade are included in the
    data. Other malfunctions, including software issues handled directly by
    the retailer, problems associated with product recalls, and those fixed
    by software/firmware updates, may not be represented in this data"
    Sailor Sam, Nov 19, 2009
    #5
  6. Sailor Sam

    Mary Hanna Guest

    Re: Laptop reliability Here is the Full Article

    On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:59:20 +1300, Sailor Sam <> wrote:

    >Mary Hanna wrote:
    >> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:37:41 +1300, Sailor Sam <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/...ourth-in-reliability-study-20091118-im8t.html
    >>>
    >>> Hrm, the smh cannot be big fans of Apple :)
    >>>
    >>> The actual report is labelled "1 in 3 Laptops fail over 3 years"

    >>
    >> http://gizmodo.com/5406415/laptop-reliability-study-asus-and-toshiba-come-out-on-top

    >
    >Is there a reason you posted a different link to the same study?




    it was not the same link at all as it covered all the brands..
    Mary Hanna, Nov 20, 2009
    #6
  7. Sailor Sam

    Sailor Sam Guest

    Re: Laptop reliability Here is the Full Article

    Mary Hanna wrote:
    > On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:59:20 +1300, Sailor Sam <> wrote:
    >
    >> Mary Hanna wrote:
    >>> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:37:41 +1300, Sailor Sam <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/...ourth-in-reliability-study-20091118-im8t.html
    >>>>
    >>>> Hrm, the smh cannot be big fans of Apple :)
    >>>>
    >>>> The actual report is labelled "1 in 3 Laptops fail over 3 years"
    >>> http://gizmodo.com/5406415/laptop-reliability-study-asus-and-toshiba-come-out-on-top

    >> Is there a reason you posted a different link to the same study?

    >
    >
    >
    > it was not the same link at all as it covered all the brands..
    >
    >


    It's the same study.
    Sailor Sam, Nov 20, 2009
    #7
  8. Sailor Sam

    Roger_Nickel Guest

    Re: Laptop reliability (Will this have a bearing on what isexpected under the CGA?)

    On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:51:36 +1300, Sailor Sam wrote:

    > whoisthis wrote:
    >> In article <O2bNm.136783$5n1.48411@attbi_s21>,
    >> "impossible" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> "whoisthis" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> In article <he2ei4$ivg$-september.org>, Sailor Sam
    >>>> <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/apple-laptops-fourth-

    in-reliab
    >>>>> ili
    >>>>> ty-study-20091118-im8t.html
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Hrm, the smh cannot be big fans of Apple :)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The actual report is labelled "1 in 3 Laptops fail over 3 years"
    >>>> Hmm well my 5 laptops (all Macs) vary from 10 years to 4 years and
    >>>> all going strong. I have seen on die within 12 months, but it was
    >>>> "rolled bowled and arseholed" and was so dented that no thought was
    >>>> given about warranty...
    >>> The source for this "study" is an outfit called SquareTrade, which
    >>> sells extended warranties for notebooks and netbooks. That pretty much
    >>> tells you all you need to know,

    >
    > That the data is limited to people who buy extended warranties through
    > SquareTrade.
    >
    > Any other conclusion you draw is pure speculation.
    >
    >
    >>> since SquareTrade has a strong vested interest in generating demand
    >>> for the purchase of insurance against computer failure.

    >
    > This may have motivated the release of the report/data, but it does not
    > change the report/data.
    >
    >>> Hence the viral marketing of their report which hypes malfuntion rates
    >>> well beyond the experience of most users.
    >>>
    >>>

    > For example, the 30,000 users whose data was used in the study.
    >
    >>> Their data consists entirely of SquareTrade warranty returns, so items
    >>> that never malfunction within the 3-year warranty period are never
    >>> counted. That completely taints the results.
    >>>
    >>>

    > Wrong.
    > 30,000 laptops are sold, with SquareTrade warrenties, and of that set
    > the figures show how many returns were made.
    >
    >>> http://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/

    SquareTrade_laptop_reliability_1109.pdf
    >>
    >> My point was that the death of a laptop was often because of USER
    >> activity. My MacBook G4 was been backpacking around the world with me,
    >> and has been used by my step daughter for the last 4 years but has been
    >> treated well, however a person I worked with... well his laptop looked
    >> as though it had been in a head on collision, one of the hinges was
    >> almost broken and it was just over 12 months old. Some information
    >> about the kinds/levels of damage would be useful.

    >
    > I do wish people would read.
    >
    > From the report
    > "This analysis examines customer reported failure data from a sample of
    > over 30,000 new laptops purchased by SquareTrade customers over the past
    > three years (see Appendix for sample details). SquareTrade offers
    > warranty plans that cover accidental damage as well as standard hardware
    > failures, and we consider malfunctions from normal usage
    > (“malfunctionsâ€) separate from accidents (“accidentsâ€) in our analysis."
    >
    >
    > and
    >
    > "Only malfunctions reported directly to SquareTrade are included in the
    > data. Other malfunctions, including software issues handled directly by
    > the retailer, problems associated with product recalls, and those fixed
    > by software/firmware updates, may not be represented in this data"


    I wonder how many of these failures listed as hardware failures are
    actually dry joints, disk failure, overheating etc. related to the way
    the machines are used. Vibration, heat and dust kill electronics. Would
    be interesting to see how the expensive ruggedised machines compare to
    the ordinary models and how reliable the diskless netbooks are. "Netbook"
    is defined in the PDF as - cheap laptop. Not much in it between Apple,
    Asus, Toshiba and Sony. HP is noticeably worse. That whirring noise is
    the sound of Bill Hewlett spinning in his grave.
    Roger_Nickel, Nov 21, 2009
    #8
  9. Sailor Sam

    victor Guest

    Roger_Nickel wrote:
    > On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:51:36 +1300, Sailor Sam wrote:


    >> "Only malfunctions reported directly to SquareTrade are included in the
    >> data. Other malfunctions, including software issues handled directly by
    >> the retailer, problems associated with product recalls, and those fixed
    >> by software/firmware updates, may not be represented in this data"

    >
    > I wonder how many of these failures listed as hardware failures are
    > actually dry joints, disk failure, overheating etc. related to the way
    > the machines are used. Vibration, heat and dust kill electronics. Would
    > be interesting to see how the expensive ruggedised machines compare to
    > the ordinary models and how reliable the diskless netbooks are. "Netbook"
    > is defined in the PDF as - cheap laptop. Not much in it between Apple,
    > Asus, Toshiba and Sony. HP is noticeably worse. That whirring noise is
    > the sound of Bill Hewlett spinning in his grave.


    I'm quite surprised, I expected Apple to do much better given that they
    only have a small number of models and their design is supposed to be
    top-notch.
    These brands don't make their own stuff, and different ranges are made
    by different OEMs

    http://www.displaysearch.com/cps/rde/xchg/displaysearch/hs.xsl/062608_QNB_PR.asp

    Is there any correlation between the OEMs and the failures reported by
    Squaretrade ?

    http://www.displaysearch.com/cps/rde/xchg/displaysearch/hs.xsl/062608_QNB_PR.asp

    (Pegatron is part of ASUS as in PegASUS apparently)
    victor, Nov 22, 2009
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jp Senior
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    709
    Andy Foster
    Sep 15, 2003
  2. cybuerke

    Geeks bearing gifts.

    cybuerke, Dec 7, 2006, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    437
    Herman
    Dec 11, 2006
  3. SCR

    Laptop Reliability

    SCR, Feb 12, 2006, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    411
  4. thingy

    The CGA and returning goods

    thingy, Jul 5, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    820
    Bruce Sinclair
    Jul 9, 2007
  5. PeeCee
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    719
    Hot-Text
    Dec 4, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page