27" Core i7 iMacs Arriving DOA or With Cracked Screens?

[PinkyMacGodess]

If the boxes are arriving unharmed in anyway than this has to be a packaging problem. Seems obvious.

The question is how is the damage being caused. Is it in the process of boxing the systems or in is it happening before that point. Either way, if the boxes are unharmed/undamaged then it has to be a quality control issue because you would think that they would sample a few systems off the packaging line to see that the system of building and packaging and shipping was working and people wouldn't have this level of crap happening. This is embarrassing and doesn't bode well for whomever builds these things. Yeah, sure, quality control goes down for companies that have stuff built overseas but there are ways to verify that the products you ship with your name on it will have minimal problems when it crosses the customers door.

But, one thought that I had was that as the screens get larger, is the glass in the screen cover tempered? It would be stronger and could be the reason why the 27's are showing up cracked. The packaging could be fantastic and yet if it contacts the right spot at the right amount of pressure and *CRACK* you are left with a broken screen.

Have the screens gotten large enough to require the expense of using tempered glass? (Unless they already do that now)

 

[MorphingDragon]

If the boxes are arriving unharmed in anyway than this has to be a packaging problem. Seems obvious.

The question is how is the damage being caused. Is it in the process of boxing the systems or in is it happening before that point. Either way, if the boxes are unharmed/undamaged then it has to be a quality control issue because you would think that they would sample a few systems off the packaging line to see that the system of building and packaging and shipping was working and people wouldn't have this level of crap happening. This is embarrassing and doesn't bode well for whomever builds these things. Yeah, sure, quality control goes down for companies that have stuff built overseas but there are ways to verify that the products you ship with your name on it will have minimal problems when it crosses the customers door.

But, one thought that I had was that as the screens get larger, is the glass in the screen cover tempered? It would be stronger and could be the reason why the 27's are showing up cracked. The packaging could be fantastic and yet if it contacts the right spot at the right amount of pressure and *CRACK* you are left with a broken screen.

Have the screens gotten large enough to require the expense of using tempered glass? (Unless they already do that now)

Thats not tempered glass. You can tell by the crack formations. Tempered would have lots of little ones, Not a single prominent large one.

 

[Dozer_Zaibatsu]

After reading the iMac delivery thread, it seems that a small percentage of iMacs are defective.

It doesn't seem to be the packaging. It seems more likely that the die-cast frames have a flaw in the left hand corner which is causing the glass to fracture where it is sitting on an uneven plane.

Considering that this is a board frequented by mac loyalists and early adopters, the sampling of defects in this segment (look at all the posts!) makes me very reluctant to trust an all-in-one machine. I want that beautiful IPS screen, but these stories make me think it's not worth it.

 

[ma2ha3]

apple enginner have made a big mistake, to copy the looks of new plasma, single plate of glass, they design it, but did not improve the packaging.
Now, look at all the wasted resource, china have to burn more sand to make more glass panels.
all the shipments from china to customer in USA, then customer back to USA apple, maybe ship back to china for refurishment, then ship back to USA to sell as refurished.

So, much more green house gases created by just one imac.

who said apple is a green company?

the packaging for imac 27 is a disgrace and harming the world.

 

[*LTD*]

apple enginner have made a big mistake, to copy the looks of new plasma, single plate of glass, they design it, but did not improve the packaging.
Now, look at all the wasted resource, china have to burn more sand to make more glass panels.
all the shipments from china to customer in USA, then customer back to USA apple, maybe ship back to china for refurishment, then ship back to USA to sell as refurished.

So, much more green house gases created by just one imac.

who said apple is a green company?

the packaging for imac 27 is a disgrace and harming the world.

What are you talking about??

 

[doctor-don]

My 23-inch ACD has an aluminum frame, protecting the display, which is not glass. On the new iMac where the display is behind glass that has no frame, the glass has no protection. Perhaps the boxes of iMacs were stacked on a pallet for shipment. In the process of being loaded on a vehicle for transport, the pallet of many iMacs will have greater momentum - and greater force - if it bumps/is bumped. And perhaps the ones that sustained damage were the ones on one corner of the pallet. As close as anyone can come to determining whether the damaged iMac were on one of these pallets is just that: you may be able to tell which pallet; but I doubt anyone knows which ones were on the corner. It might be interesting to learn whether the cracked corner iMacs can be traced to one (or two) pallets.

 

[kdarling]

QC standards are specified by Apple, not China. If Apple wanted to set higher QC standards, they would have to pay China more to manufacture them. It has nothing to do with the country of manufacture, and everything to do with Apple's profit margin.

Exactly. Apple is very smart.

First they save millions on factory QC.

Then they immediately replace the defective units when the customer uses up their own time to bring them back. This makes the customer feel grateful and they gush about how easily it was replaced.

The bad unit goes on to become a refurb or parts for refurbs.

It's a win-win setup for Apple.

However, this case sounds more like bad packaging and/or a bad internal design.

 

[Yaboze]

The "bad" news is spreading quickly to other sites about this launch.

There are You Tube videos showing the screen going bonkers, horizontal bands of distortion appearing quickly at various intervals or the whole screen doing it.

Then there's the DOA reports.

Apple needs to get on this, this is buying time, the holiday season.

I'm interested in one of these, but I'm gonna wait a few months. It seems all new Apple models have issues at first. It's the minor revision and tweaked versions months later that are the most solid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjOxlxVz5Os

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20v3vUfDrFE

 

[ChazUK]

Damn Yaboze, they do look bad.

As has been posted before, I just hope anyone who buys an iMac with the intention of giving it as a Christmas gift check them over before wrapping them. A dead, damaged or faulty new iMac is sure to ruin somebody's Christmas!

 

[twoodcc]

not good. hopefully apple has already addressed this issue. i'm still considering buying one of these for christmas

 

[techcafe]

SMASHED screen

same thing happened to me.

i ordered a 27" Quad Core iMac on Nov 5 from Apple Online
it was shipped from Shanghai on Nov 16
arrived at my door on Nov 25 (3 weeks after i placed the order).

i was stoked... until i took it out of the box... the screen was SMASHED (cracked on the lower left side), presumably while in-transit.

it was evident from the black scuff marks on outside box, that the system had been transported either face-down or face-up (not upright, as it should have been), so the couriers are laying the box on its side and piling other (heavy?) boxes ON TOP of the iMac.

i called UPS and Apple, about the 27" iMacs being mishandled by UPS, but neither one of them were at all interested in resolving the situation. UPS says the boxes should be clearly labelled as 'Fragile'... but an Apple rep i spoke with claims that there isn't a problem, with how the 27" iMacs are being labelled/shipped/handled, nor any issues with cracked screens.

if you ask me, both UPS and Apple are culpable here. Apple for not packing the box properly... a HEAVY machine with a 27" screen NEEDS extra padding/protection if it's going to be shippped from China to Canada, the shipping box should be thick/strong (it wasn't), and ought to be properly labelled (Fragile, Keep Upright, etc), but it was just a plain cardboard box (apple box inside). and as we all know, UPS routinely mishandles/damages packages (ime)... so i practically begged Apple to NOT ship my replacement iMac with UPS. i even offered to pay $100 more if they'd ship the iMac to me via FedEx, instead of UPS... but no joy, apparently it's beyond their control. in other words, i take my chances again... and hope that the next iMac does not show up DOA. it's ridiculous, Apple pretends there isn't a problem... meanwhile, iMacs are showing up with broken screens (presumably because of mishandling during transit). the iMacs didn't leave the factory in that condition, obviously, so it must be happening while in-transit.

btw, this was to be my first Mac (i'm a pc user)...
Apple and I are off to a bit of a rough start, i'd say :~{

 

[Freeþinker]

I'll stick with my "low-performing" desktop (Mac Pro)

For those of you who've got their hands on a problem-free iMac, I'm happy for you! I only wish my first iMac experience had been positive. Hearing about the DOAs and the cracked screens has reminded me about the headaches I had with my Rev. B iMac. Yes, I know that was made long ago, but I think it shares something in common with the newest iMac. It was built following the mantra of new for the sake of new. I remember having to put up with a optical drive loading door that you had to pull out and push back in by hand, and I also remember its hideous, loud grinding noise it made all the time. I contacted Apple about this, but they just had me download some firmware upgrade, which didn't improve anything at all. My first Mac desktop experience was far more positive by comparison. So when it came time for me to replace my G4 desktop due to its inevitable obsolescence, it took little time for me to choose the desktop over any more of Apple's more experimental models. Desktop users won't put up with crap because they're more likely to be seasoned Mac users who've come to expect higher standards of reliability. The average iMac buyer is more likely to be a PC convert who is--let's face it--accustomed to using crap. I look forward to spending another decade with my current desktop. If you're happy with your iMac, I hope you can keep it running as long as you can. If you have had experiences similar to mine with your iMac, though, you have my sympathies.

 

[*LTD*]

yeah true, but with apple you dont get any of those options

Where'd these come from, then?

2006, 2007, 2008, 2009.

If you're going to troll, at least ensure that it has some basis in reality.


http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10019711-37.html

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...tisfaction-up-despite-struggling-industry.ars

http://digg.com/apple/Apple_leads_2009_customer_satisfaction_survey

http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/08/16/apple.no..1.on.csi/

http://theappleblog.com/2009/05/06/apple-customer-satisfaction-its-the-experience/

http://blackfriarsinc.com/blog/2007/04/behind-scenes-why-apples-customerbase

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ByteOfTheApple/blog/archives/2008/08/mac_customer_sa.html

http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-posts-highest-score-ever-on-customer-satisfaction-index/2553

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/22467/

http://bindapple.com/apple-satisfaction-2009-report/

http://www.macnn.com/news/25971

https://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/14/iphone-3gs-trumps-palm-pre-in-satisfaction-survey/

http://www.ipodobserver.com/ipo/article/iPhone_Satisfaction_Off_The_Charts/

http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/08/14/iphone-3gs-99-pure-satisfaction/

http://www.mactivist.com/2009/06/iphone-macs-ipod-sweep-2008-customer-satisfaction-rankings-in-japan

http://www.9to5mac.com/jobs-satisfation-rate-high

http://www.jdpower.com/Business/ratings/smartphone-ratings

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3/news/2248040/apple-keeps-top-billing

http://www.eweek.com/prestitial.php...ustomer-Satisfaction-Study-Finds-453807/&ref=

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352796,00.asp

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2006/08/5002.ars

http://www.osnews.com/story/15553

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1689554/posts

https://forums.macrumors.com/archive/index.php/t-224872.html

 

[RumorzGuy]

This Post On The Apple Website Says It All

Hi folks...

I just read the following post on the Apple website by some guy named Warren, and I have to say that I agree with it 100%. It's really past time that Apple makes a public statement/apology about all of this.

Here it is:

----------

I really wish that Apple would publicly address the various issues that dedicated Macintosh users have been experiencing over the past few weeks with their new iMacs: the black screens, the flickering, the cracked glass, the failure to fully boot, etc.

I didn't even become aware of these problems until a few days ago, and like many of you, upon discovering this negative news that is now spread all across the Internet, it has made me extremely nervous about my order -- 27" 2.8 GHz Quad Core i7 with 2 TB HD and 8 GB of RAM -- and I am now questioning whether I jumped the gun, and should have waited a few more months until all of the technical kinks were worked out of the Rev A's. Sadly, it is now too late for that, as my order is not only a BTO like many of you, but I also had to make a 50% deposit before our AAR would even place the order.

Apple obviously realizes how damaging these developments are to its image and reputation, particularly because these incidents of broken or malfunctioning iMacs are apparently happening all over the place, and are not just a few isolated incidents.

If I were Steve Jobs, I would be out there front and center, real quick, offering a clear explanation of what went wrong with these machines, and humbly offering a sincere apology to dedicated Mac users worldwide. Doing this might not fix the broken machines, but it would go a long way towards restoring the shattered confidence of many disheartened, disappointed, frustrated, angry Mac users.

The silence and news blackout from Apple regarding these various issues is only making the situation a lot worse, and is further eroding confidence in Apple products.

Mr. Jobs, are you listening? If you would take this bold, honest step, we would admire your leadership abilities all the more.

----------

I couldn't have said it better myself!

 

[OldCorpse]

same thing happened to me.

i ordered a 27" Quad Core iMac on Nov 5 from Apple Online
it was shipped from Shanghai on Nov 16
arrived at my door on Nov 25 (3 weeks after i placed the order).

i was stoked... until i took it out of the box... the screen was SMASHED (cracked on the lower left side), presumably while in-transit.

it was evident from the black scuff marks on outside box, that the system had been transported either face-down or face-up (not upright, as it should have been), so the couriers are laying the box on its side and piling other (heavy?) boxes ON TOP of the iMac.

i called UPS and Apple, about the 27" iMacs being mishandled by UPS, but neither one of them were at all interested in resolving the situation. UPS says the boxes should be clearly labelled as 'Fragile'... but an Apple rep i spoke with claims that there isn't a problem, with how the 27" iMacs are being labelled/shipped/handled, nor any issues with cracked screens.

if you ask me, both UPS and Apple are culpable here. Apple for not packing the box properly... a HEAVY machine with a 27" screen NEEDS extra padding/protection if it's going to be shippped from China to Canada, the shipping box should be thick/strong (it wasn't), and ought to be properly labelled (Fragile, Keep Upright, etc), but it was just a plain cardboard box (apple box inside). and as we all know, UPS routinely mishandles/damages packages (ime)... so i practically begged Apple to NOT ship my replacement iMac with UPS. i even offered to pay $100 more if they'd ship the iMac to me via FedEx, instead of UPS... but no joy, apparently it's beyond their control. in other words, i take my chances again... and hope that the next iMac does not show up DOA. it's ridiculous, Apple pretends there isn't a problem... meanwhile, iMacs are showing up with broken screens (presumably because of mishandling during transit). the iMacs didn't leave the factory in that condition, obviously, so it must be happening while in-transit.

btw, this was to be my first Mac (i'm a pc user)...
Apple and I are off to a bit of a rough start, i'd say :~{

Here's what I find odd: obviously, it's a bummer to get an iMac that's smashed. But, you know, the resolution is pretty simple - immediately have them send a replacement. Yes, bummer, yes, loss of time, but at least it's immediate reaction - and you can tell from the get-go what is wrong.


Here's what does worry me: the stuff I cannot see immediately. The screen that will start flickering or artifacting after 3 day's use. The hard drive that suddenly becomes noisy after a week of use. The inability to act as an external monitor - and you don't discover that that part is dead, until months later when you finally hook up a monitor. That's the stuff that keeps me up at night. The stuff you cannot see. But the complaint about broken screens... pft... that's child's play. I'm freakin' happy to have such a simple problem - at least you can take care of it immediately. But the hidden problems that only spring on you much later... ouch - that bites!

 

[MorphingDragon]

I've come to a semi-educated conclusion, that has been repeated over and over and over.

---

The packaging on the new iMacs do not distribute the pressure over a large area like the old packaging did. - The new packaging has 4 polystyrene corners which put ALL the pressure into its corners. Because the COM is in the centre of the screen, the cracks would form towards the centre, as indeed they have.

 

[*LTD*]

Hi folks...

I just read the following post on the Apple website by some guy named Warren, and I have to say that I agree with it 100%. It's really past time that Apple makes a public statement/apology about all of this.

Here it is:

----------

I really wish that Apple would publicly address the various issues that dedicated Macintosh users have been experiencing over the past few weeks with their new iMacs: the black screens, the flickering, the cracked glass, the failure to fully boot, etc.

Consider both sides.

It's an admission of guilt and potentially quite bad for PR. It really depends on how many units are affected. If it's only a particular batch or below a certain cut-off point, then Apple would be better off dealing with them on a case-by-case basis. As a company, Apple needs to weigh the costs-vs-benefits of a public admission vs. letting the matter die out on its own. It depends how far the issue has penetrated into the public consciousness and/or what steps the affected parties have taken against Apple.

As long as the affected parties are somehow satisfied or compensated, a public apology or official statement is unnecessary and would only do more harm than good. As a consumer, you have mechanisms available to address these issues, which are more important in terms of directly addressing your problem than demanding something that may or may not apply globally.

 

[OllyW]

Consider both sides.

It's an admission of guilt and potentially quite bad for PR. It really depends on how many units are affected. If it's only a particular batch or below a certain cut-off point, then Apple would be better off dealing with them on a case-by-case basis. As a company, Apple needs to weigh the costs-vs-benefits of a public admission vs. letting the matter die out on its own. It depends how far the issue has penetrated into the public consciousness and/or what steps the affected parties have taken against Apple.

As long as the affected parties are somehow satisfied or compensated, a public apology or official statement is unnecessary and would only do more harm than good.

One of my main criticisms of Apple is they often refuse to acknowledge there are problems with their products. There was the "coma" issue with the iPhone 3G and the 3.1 update back in September, which was met with a deafening silence from Apple.

All they needed to was say they were aware of the problem and working on an update to fix it but we got nothing. Even when the 3.1.2 update was released a month later which fixed the problem there was nothing in the release notes referring to it.

 

[Dozer_Zaibatsu]

I'm an old mac user (since mac plus) and a semi-pro imaging and desktop publisher. My last box was a PC running XP because i needed a stable platform for Quark, but OSX.1 booting back to OS9 caused lost minute after minute with crashing.

I was looking forward to going back to Mac with that simplified ISP beauty, (I love the idea of getting rid of cables) but this gives me pause. Even with good customer service, I have to consider these QC problems as part of what Apple tolerates. This is obviously a selling point for AppleCare, and the model of replacing a computer every three years. But I don't want to pay a premium on top of a premium. I'm savvy enough to build my own PC, and these problems tend to make me consider the modular option. A Samsung XL2370 may be in my future instead.

 

[Dozer_Zaibatsu]

.... As a company, Apple needs to weigh the costs-vs-benefits of a public admission vs. letting the matter die out on its own. It depends how far the issue has penetrated into the public consciousness and/or what steps the affected parties have taken against Apple.

Rather than just do the right thing and change QC? Sadly, I think you are spot on.

 

[CQd44]

I'm an old mac user (since mac plus) and a semi-pro imaging and desktop publisher. My last box was a PC running XP because i needed a stable platform for Quark, but OSX.1 booting back to OS9 caused lost minute after minute with crashing.

I was looking forward to going back to Mac with that simplified ISP beauty, (I love the idea of getting rid of cables) but this gives me pause. Even with good customer service, I have to consider these QC problems as part of what Apple tolerates. This is obviously a selling point for AppleCare, and the model of replacing a computer every three years. But I don't want to pay a premium on top of a premium. I'm savvy enough to build my own PC, and these problems tend to make me consider the modular option. A Samsung XL2370 may be in my future instead.

I like modular myself.

A couple of years ago I built a PC with a dual core and a modest graphics card. Fairly recently I upgraded to a quad core and an ATI 4890 rather than purchasing a whole new machine.

It's nifty

 

[LagunaSol]

I like modular myself.

A couple of years ago I built a PC with a dual core and a modest graphics card. Fairly recently I upgraded to a quad core and an ATI 4890 rather than purchasing a whole new machine.

It's nifty

Sometimes this works, other times all you can reuse is your case and power supply as everything else has jumped a generation - new processor requires new mobo, new mobo requires new RAM and new graphics card, new HD tech is out (eSATA, for example), so you gotta get one of those, etc.

The last time I built my own PC I ran into this dilemma when it came time to upgrade. I said screw it - this is no longer worth my time or energy. Last PC I ever built (and I don't miss those days much).

 

[LagunaSol]

Exactly. Apple is very smart.

First they save millions on factory QC.

Then they immediately replace the defective units when the customer uses up their own time to bring them back. This makes the customer feel grateful and they gush about how easily it was replaced.

The bad unit goes on to become a refurb or parts for refurbs.

It's a win-win setup for Apple.

However, this case sounds more like bad packaging and/or a bad internal design.

Another disingenuous attempt to paint Apple as "The Evil Ones." Newsflash: this is standard business practice for many companies/manufacturers. Sorry to ruin your illusion...

 

[CQd44]

Sometimes this works, other times all you can reuse is your case and power supply as everything else has jumped a generation - new processor requires new mobo, new mobo requires new RAM and new graphics card, new HD tech is out (eSATA, for example), so you gotta get one of those, etc.

The last time I built my own PC I ran into this dilemma when it came time to upgrade. I said screw it - this is no longer worth my time or energy. Last PC I ever built (and I don't miss those days much).

Yeah, the socket 775 generation is what allowed the jump from dual core to quad core for me. On the AMD side they have processors that are backwards compatible with older sockets.

I'd still rather build my own computers, but you're completely right about eventually needing to upgrade everything. I remember my jump from socket 478 to 775 ;]

 

[Eidorian]

Yeah, the socket 775 generation is what allowed the jump from dual core to quad core for me. On the AMD side they have processors that are backwards compatible with older sockets.

I'd still rather build my own computers, but you're completely right about eventually needing to upgrade everything. I remember my jump from socket 478 to 775 ;]

P965 and P35 were the godly LGA 775 sockets. Both have Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad support. If you're willing to stick with it there's no reason to upgrade for 3-4 years on a good board with the CPU drop in support. SATA II is still king for now and PCIe 1.0/1.1 with x16 lanes isn't a killer for a single GPU.

AMD's AM3 processors go well into 2011.