Apple Reliabiity reported real by Consumer Reports
Ping!
The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me
Posted on 12/11/2015 11:02:50 AM PST by Swordmaker
I ditched a Dell for an iMac in 2011.
No problems since.
The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me
Start by recognizing that the end user is the customer - NOT some bulk-buyer, nor someone paying big bucks to pre-load crapware. Build the best machine & software you can for the end users to use.
“You get what you pay for.” Why then are people surprised that a $500 computer sucks compared to a $1200 computer when both are built for the same usage?
Apple makes 95% profit on each Macbook ,they cost more
bump
“Apple makes 95% profit on each Macbook ,they cost more”
Do you have source for the 95% profit on each Macbook that is sold?
For me, Windows is the problem, and that's why I moved to Macs. As for the hardware, low quality hard drives on Windows machines have always been a problem. Experienced many hard drive failures on Windows boxes. On my Macs, none other than a sector failure here or there that got taken care of by the OS, keeping the Mac running. I got tired of swapping out failed hard drives on PC machines. Also had problems with failing power supplies on PCs, not only mine but in those of my friends and family. The only power supply failure I saw on a Mac was a neighbor's, which I fixed and it was because he broke the jack insert inside and pushed in another cord thereby shorting it out. Hardware on a Mac is rock solid for the most part.
Aside from the stupid hyperbole that Apple’s profit is “95%” (yeah, let’s see someone else build with the same cost base and make an Apple-slaying killing on a mere 5% profit)...
Apple HAS made enough profit that when comes time to significantly improve the technology, they can write a big check and build a factory capable of producing next-generation technology at near-commodity post-depreciation prices. Everybody was ready for “retina” displays, but nobody could afford the cost/risk of building the factory ... until Apple wrote a $1B check for a display maker to build a new flat-panel display factory capable of such resolutions, thereby instantly depreciating the cost so panels could be sold at commodity prices and Apple could reap roughly 50% profits on what competitors would spend twice as much to build.
fan failure/general overheat
Hard drive failure
Hinge failure
Screen/backlight failure
Keyboard failure
Power circuit failure
Port failure
DVD failure
Virus
OS craps out (hardware is still OK, but it's easier to buy a new computer than reinstall on the old)
Now compare the Mac vs PC on each and you can find the weak spots. Where is the Mac more reliable?
Wrong...their margins are around 30-35% No where near 95%.
Apple's after tax profit margin for the last quarter as reported in their financial filings was 21.60% for Sept. 30, 2015. Why exaggerate so outrageously?
Not the case when it comes to notebooks: Spec out a Dell or HP premium notebook (or even a Microsoft-manufactured SurfaceBook) that has comparatively similar specs as a MacBook Pro Retina and you may find that those machines are actually higher in price than the Apple product.
In the cases where the Apple is in fact more expensive, you're talking maybe $125 or so. Piddly.
Now that you're done with that, THEN look at reliability figures. That's only fair. Hmm... Seems a lot of people were really disappointed to tear a $5,000 bill in half to buy Microsoft's new premium SurfaceBook only to learn that it was a crash-tastic combobulation of parts. I did read that there've been some recent fixes to the SurfaceBook lately which have resolved some things... except for battery life which is in true practice about 15-20% less than the MacBook Pro Retina if not more.
To be fair, this is Microsoft's first real venture into taking on the mantle of being a hardware company and supporting a genuine market product that isn't software based. That's a long uphill climb they've begun. Best wishes for them on this endeavor. The SurfaceBook is a good machine, but anyone buying into one of them ought to understand that they're an early adopter and are bound for a little heartache.
My own advice to a PC user looking for a premium notebook to run Windows 10 is that they just get a rMBP and run Windows in a BootCamp partition. Make it the default startup disk and leave it that way so Windows always boots. If you ever get into a jam where Windows won't load, simply load the OSX partition and rescue yourself. I'd do that before I bought a high end Dell/HP/MSFT product. But that's just me.
No, he doesn't because the after tax profit margin for the last quarter is 21.60% for Sept. 30, 2015.
You left out “Willingness of cultists to actually admit reliability problems.”
Let's look at the new 2015 MacBook in reference to this list.
Ergo, KarlInOhio, there are far fewer points of failure in MacBooks. Add in that Apple provisions its equipment with components that are taken from the highest sigma, the top 5%, of reliability available from the suppliers, not commodity parts. I know that people who do not know claim Apple parts are "the same" as what is in the commodity PCs, but the simply are not. Apple is the "King Kong" in the room and can demand and get the best quality parts from the supplier. Drives, for example, are always tested for reliability.
Wester Digital for example makes drives in several tiers of reliability and the best are reserved for mission critical service such as servers or workstations. Look up Western Digital RED drives intended for high end desktops, RED Pro drives for Raids, and RE Gold drives for NAS purposes. Apple orders drives to their exacting specifications, and does NOT buy them off the shelf, and they are built with "Made for Apple" etched on them. They are tested to assure they meet those specifications. This was spoken about in an interview with Apple design and manufacturing executives a couple of months ago including Tim Cook, Jonny Ive, and Craig Federighi.
Apple designs many of their own chips. They design their own processors for the mobile processors. . . and these processors are better than any used in any other mobile phone or tablet on the market at this time, blowing others out of the water in independent bench mark tests even though the run at a lower clock speed (to keep heat down) and have fewer cores than the competition.
Apple frequently gets custom processors from Intel that are not available to other makers that have special features or cache sizes made to their specifications. Again, Apple gets the top 5% of the processor runs on standard processors.
Another delusionary comment from a Apple Hate Brigade member. . .
In other words, every single report of Apple reliability from Consumer Reports, to ZDNet, to PCWorld, to JD Power, is ALL fraud by Apple Cultist's fraud and conspiracy. WOW! Hundreds of millions of people are deluded into thinking their Apple devices keep on working when they are actually broken and not working. . . lying dead on their desks or in their pockets.
Which is it? Bolobaby is deluded or hundreds of millions of Apple users are unwilling to admit that their devices are broken and dead, deluding themselves? Occam's Razor seems to cut this only one way. Go to the barber and get shaved, Bolobaby.
Incidentally, IBM is weighing in on this. They are finding that they need only 1 tech person to provide support for 5,375 Apple device users. . . while they need 1 tech support person for every 70 Windows device users. That's quite a dichotomy.
IBM tech support also found that only 5% of the workforce using Apple Macs needed tech support while 40% of the Windows PC users need tech support during the same time frame. They also found that 98.7% of Mac issues could be handled on the first call, not so for for the PC calls.
IBM is rapidly deploying Macs at the rate of 1,900 - 2,000 a week.
Fletcher Previn, IBM VP of Workplace-as-a-Service said, "Every Mac that we buy is making and saving IBM money."
I am sure you have all kinds of data to back up your comment which indicates you believe that Macs are not as reliable as stated from a hardware perspective, but only seem that way because the data has been scrubbed clean.
How is it that Apple can scrub its data, but Dell or any number of laptop vendors can’t?
I am interested in hearing your views on this...you aren’t playing the part of a “Seagull Poster”, are you?
“I am sure you have all kinds of data to back up your comment which indicates you believe that Macs are not as reliable as stated from a hardware perspective...”
That’s not what I said at all. Would you deny that there is a difference between “reliability” and “perceived reliability?”
Remember that this article refers to a *survey of users.* Think about that as it pertains to hard facts. Obviously there is a difference. Now, Swordmaker can go dip into other sources all he wants to try and make his point - which he has done already - but that doesn’t address the critical flaw in CR’s methodology, which is that it is a *survey*.
Ever notice how when you *survey* Americans whether or not we should “throw all the bums out in Congress,” they strongly agree? But when elections roll around, incumbents keep winning? Surveys are inherently flawed, and sometimes bear little resemblance to reality.
So, KarlInOhio’s post was spot on. You need more data. Force your respondents to actually name specific problems that they did or did not encounter. Lots of people will complain about things but then can’t name any specific problems. For example, the next time a libtard starts squawking about Fox News’s bias, ask them for a specific example. Watch them flounder. I’ve tried - 90% can’t name one specific thing. They just go to generalities. “Well, Bill O’Reilly is biased!” Really? Tell me one thing he has said, specifically. “Oh, I don’t watch him!” Aha.
Then, as to not compare Apples to oranges, you should also ensure that you are only asking about machines in the same price range. You should also have parity of hardware. Are Windows users experiencing failures in their DVD ROMs, something most Apples don’t even have? Finally, what are the users DOING with the machines? Are Apple users installing the same kinds of productivity software? Are they installing more complex software, or less? How many applications per device on Apple that could potentially interact in a faulty manner compared to Windows? Are the Windows users doing hardcore gaming on their machines (Fallout 4, anyone?) and overheating GPUs by cranking the settings too high whereas only a small percentage of Apple users ever game on their machines?
So, you see, I don’t need to provide “all kinds of data” to back up my criticism of this faulty survey because there’s no data in it to contradict. It’s akin to asking people “which news channel is most biased” but then proving no hardcore data to show actual bias. What Swordmaker originally posted is a bunch of survey bunk, with mostly editorial comments. There’s one small bit of data about notebook prices, *but only for one specific BRAND and TWO models*. Gee, I wonder why they didn’t do a cross-brand/model price parity comment? Maybe it didn’t support the conclusion that the author wanted? We’ll never know, because the amount of data provided is so limited.
So, yeah - garbage in, garbage out. Same as the AGW crowd’s BS. It’s extremely helpful to be able to spot this kind of junk.
Love my Mac (17”) but it still has Snow Leopard as the browser. Is it possible to upgrade to current Safari browser?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.