Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Macintosh Reliability Rates

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Macintosh Reliability Rates



    31% failure rate for the 20" G5 iMac...wow. You really get what you pay for?

    Stunning engineering work, boys.
    "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
    Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

  • #2
    From your link: "Apple led all competitors in desktop computer quality with a failure rate of about 12% "needing a repair or having a serious problem". (Apple's laptops showed about a 16% failure rate.)"

    it's difficult to say what led means in this case. Anybody has a subscription to consumerreports.org?
    Besides Asher, you should always try to include the full data:
    Code:
    Original iMac G5 17" 	2778 	501 	18%
    Original iMac G5 20" 	1730 	533 	31%
    New iMac G5 17" 	812 	100 	12%
    New iMac G5 20" 	589 	62 	11%
    And maybe also mention the mac-mini:
    Code:
    Mac Mini 1.25GHz 	803 	26 	3%
    Mac Mini 1.42GHz 	902 	27 	3%
    It's good to see cheaper computers still having good quality.

    Comment


    • #3
      like i said, iMacs suck.
      B♭3

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Q Cubed
        like i said, iMacs suck.
        Did you even look at the facts that Atahualpa posted?

        Comment


        • #5
          Yep. And the Mac Minis, which I kinda like, are better.

          iMacs, on the other hand, still suck.
          B♭3

          Comment


          • #6
            Don't mind me, I'm just keeping this thread "dotted" for further lurking
            "I have been reading up on the universe and have come to the conclusion that the universe is a good thing." -- Dissident
            "I never had the need to have a boner." -- Dissident
            "I have never cut off my penis when I was upset over a girl." -- Dis

            Comment


            • #7
              V spiffor.
              urgh.NSFW

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Q Cubed
                Yep. And the Mac Minis, which I kinda like, are better.

                iMacs, on the other hand, still suck.
                Nah, the G5 20" is .

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Lord Nuclear
                  Nah, the G5 20" is .
                  The best part is, when the G5 iMacs were announced...geeks around the world (myself included) said it was a very dumb idea to put such a hot processor so close to the LCD.

                  Lo and behold, the reliability statistics for such a device are extremely bad.
                  "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
                  Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Lord Nuclear


                    Nah, the G5 20" is .
                    I disagree. Although the G5 iMacs are not as heinously ugly as the G4 and G3 series were, there's still the issue of its design philosophy being abominable, and the fact that there's a lot of blank whitespace on the bottom. Frankly, I find that whitespace to be uncomfortable and ugly, especially because it fails to jive with either my desire for elegant functionality, and because it fails to match my notions for what is aesthetically pleasing.

                    Mac Minis, on the other hand, and caseless G4 Cubes, I like.
                    B♭3

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X