Apple now less reliable than cheap Chinese computers

Apple IS a cheap Chinese computer. Other Apple products are the same, the newer iPods are not as well built as the older models.

*mwah* *chuckle* *guffaw*

Already know this fact from the day it announce to use x86.

I've been using x86 processors since 1989 and I've never had one fail.

Nah, the day Apple saw the writing on the wall and adopted a chip vendor that could deliver the goods (unlike Motorola or IBM) was the day Macs stopped being such underperforming suck-ass "supercomputers" (remember that market hype?) in pretty boxes. Apple is just proof that when you close a platform to competition, companies will abuse the customer.

Talk about troll bait!

Thank God rigorous statistical methods and logical thinking were used by the author to avoid idiotic conclusions. I'd hate to think that larger numbers of Macs coming into a repair shop was really due to Apple selling more computers than ever before... Oops.

So what you're saying is that in the past, the only reason people thought Apple were reliable is because nobody ever saw a broken one, as they had only sold 10?
A bit like saying Unicorns live forever, because nobody has ever seen a dead one?

Given the number of Asus (all the EEEs) and Lenovo (which includes ThinkPads) laptops on the planet, for them to appear less than Apple's is quite something.

(Posted from my 3 year old ThinkPad).

As soon as I saw the headline in the feed, I knew it was another article from the hand of Nick. Yawn.
And calling people 'fanboys' is really immature, didn't you know?

Boring, boring, boring

Is there a section on the Rescuecom website that shows the statistics that are in question? At least Nick could have linked that because I'm not seeing anything related to the validity in their claims.

Guys, guys... are you that desperate for drama? Or for any numbers that might tarnish Apple's stellar customer service and satisfaction record?

Check out the analysis of those so-called reliability numbers at roughlydrafted.com

I think Daniel also made some good points about online "journalism".

Personally, I always consider the source when looking at any sort of published statistic. Even the repair shop said that they were not conclusive.

The emperor is seen as truly having no clothes.

Apples are fine machines, but their failures rates are no better than other devices of the same ilk.

And given their high cost their value is low. Much lower than Windows machines. But we need those deluded few who keep buying Apple products to keep it up. You're pumping money into the various economies at a much greater rate per unit than the unwashed who insist on Windows or Linux.

I'm now helping out a latecomer to what appears to be the PowerPC iBook chipset-delamination game (wherein the solder bumps lift; luckily some companies are still offering rework)... unless, of course, upon opening it I'll find a melted power board or one of the other potential failure modes.

The "cheap" "Chinese" manufacturers benefit from industry best practices and diversity -- if one particular component has a common issue, chances are it only takes out 10% of their machines, and if one design starts blowing up, hopefully they learn and avoid that mistake in the next design. Apple has a bit of a not-invented-here problem (everything's "Designed by Apple in California," after all) coupled to a narrow product line and amplified by a user base that paid a premium for the hardware and demands it be serviced rather than quietly junking and replacing it (which won't show up in repair statistics).

People are going to places other than Apple for repairs because Apple wait times are too long. If Apple sold more products and didn't increase the staff/infrastructure needed to do repairs, they have failed to support their products.

From the article: Rescuecom President Josh Kaplan said the higher the score, the more reliable hardware and *better support* from the vendor.

Aahhh...things like this are what I live for.

Without bad Apple news, I wouldn't have a reason to get out of bed.

"Rescuecom generates its scores by comparing the percentage of each vendor's support calls with its US market share."

The basis of this is that Rescueme would have you believe their sample is both statistically valid and truly representative of what happens with the computers people buy.

So we are to believe people who are happy to pay the premium for an Apple are not prepared to pay for the Apple warranty assurance service ?

Furthermore, the Asus equipment comes with its own support & warranty extension services.

These are figured tossed about by a group dealing with people who are either too stupid to use their real warranty (and too often stupid user == broken computer) or bought their computer (and its problems) 2nd hand, and hence can't go through the normal channels.

Not a suprise after Apple started to use nVidia shitware in their pc's. Their chipsets has a 3 time higher rate of failure than Intel/AMD chipsets. Their gfx cards has to have their fans running at 100% just to survive 1 year without catching fire..(And nVidia blaming it on the users...SMART)

http://www.behardware.com/news/10121/returns-rates-for-motherboards.html

http://www.behardware.com/news/9581/motherboard-return-rates.html

I am dissapointed that TheInquirer would post an article without checking the validity of it's information. The company that posted this "data" is already in trouble for making such claims. See below:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/27/repair_company_promotes_misleading_mac_reliability_rating.html

You know who makes Macs, don't you?

ASUS, that's right. And so to compare the reliability of the two "manufacturers" (ASUS being the only one out of the two) is entirely futile.

The Mac hardware's fine, it's small, quiet and half decent if expensive. The OS relies on security through obscurity and a pretty but impractical interface.

[/flamebait]

@ the people using roughlydrafted.com and appleinsider.com as counterpoints...

You really think that using two sites who are extremely and obviously Apple-biased are going to have more-reliable statistics? It's in those two sites' best interest to gloss over anything neagtive about Apple to keep their reader base (read: Apple Evangelists) happy and satisfied that their preference is superior to everyone who doesn't use their chosen platform.

That's not saying that Rescuecom is a good source of statistics either, I would much rather a reputable 3rd-party do a study as to the failure rates received by several computer repair vendors. Unfortunately, that's likely not going to happen anytime soon.

HI, IM JOSH KAPLAN, ID LIKE YOU TO PUBLISH THIS MADE UP STORY SO I GET SOME FREE PUBLICITY. THANKS.

PSST Dont believe consumer associations from around the world, I know the truth, Mac = Crap.

I would not call Asus & Lenovo cheap chinese computers. Come on...Lenovo's are the high end laptops for corporate environments.

And asus makes quality products, and us builders know it. Calling them cheap is absurd.

When my 200 Dollar Eee-PC fails I'll trash it and be out for a new one.

this is really really true... im glad someone finally wrote an article on it! just the article sucked...

but i have had the following machines from apple...
1 x ibook G4 800MHz... worked amazing, never gave a single problem... cost £800
1 x Powerbook G4 1.67GHz DDR2 (last revision before the Intel thing)... this also worked amazing... still working amazing... not given a single problem...
1 x iMac Intel Core 2 Duo 20" cost £1160... absolute CRAP... the screen has lines down it now, and it's only 20 months old... the repair cost is over £500!!!
1 x Macbook Black Edition... ABSOLUTE CRAP... hasn't anyone opened their eyes when looking at the horrendous quality screen it has? its depressing that £350 entry level laptops from dell and whoever have better screens!
1 x iMac 24" (the newest one) absolutely sucks... the screen is rubbish...

never buying apple again... unless they sort this crap out... but i actually think HP have VERY good reliability... I have a couple of them and not 1 hardware fault... well that's a lie, my screen inverter went on my nw8000 Mobile Workstation and so the screen lamp wouldn't work (after 4 years rigorous use), but i replaced it for just under £30 and now it's brighter and going strong!

The Rescuecom survey is only valid this year in that people who were too cheap for Applecare last year are now flooding them in droves - confirming what I've experienced with crApples over the last few years.

The funny thing was that when Rescuecom released statistics saying that Apple was the most reliable brand just last year (most likely because no-one was coming to them... yet), Fanboys were unearthing it just about anywhere in order to 'prove' that they were better. I doubt that'll be happening this year eh, fanboys?

More than ever Apple computers are all form, no trousers. Utterly crap product engineering which comes from giving designers too much priority on the computers instead of engineers (or just crap engineers? who knows).

You end up with something that is undoubtedly beautiful and may work for the BS merchant, student, 'artist' or the style-conscious who knows jack **** about computers (which is, incidentally the primary user base of Apple products) with time to spare when, not if, they go wrong, but in the overall scheme of computers the actual build quality and the quality control just isn't there.

Only their pathologically forgiving fanbase - which includes large portions of the tech media - and the expert use of materials and design to reinforce a sense of solidity (at the expense of durability) retains the quality myth.

It’s also hilarious to see the comments in here shifting the blame on NVidia, Asus, etc. It’s the same as the iPhone – a terrible phone for actual phone calls and with flaky 3G to boot, but that blame is always passed to the network operator.

Flame away this article, fanboys – you’re proving just how dumb you are by forming an emotional attachment to superior marketing.

What I don't understand is why people are so obsessed by what's "under the hood". Personally I'd rather have an old battered basic spec G3 powerbook running Tiger than this brand new HP. I enjoy my OS X experience, I certainly can't say that of any Windows experience of mine (even pre-vista).

I'd been using PCs for years before I got my first MacBook and within an hour of using I was already doing things faster than I'd ever managed in Windows. Point being the Windows interface is crap. Doesn't matter if you have 4 extra processors under the hood if it takes the user twice the number of steps to get there.

I'm not a rich man but you couldn't pay me $1500 to put down my MacBook and pick up this HP. Sorry Microsoft, there's nothing wrong with the laptop but hell needs to freeze over before I favour your OS. Mac user out.