Did I spend twice as much over a Windows Notebook on a disposable piece of eye candy?

[RainCityMacFan]

I definitely feel you. My MBP 2011 15" died yesterday. This is the 2nd logic board repair and it's out of AppleCare (the first was in warranty).

I bought a $2300 machine. I was a sophomore in high school who earned a bit of money tutoring and had generous parents. It was moronic for me to buy this laptop knowing that in 3 years (after AppleCare), all bets are off as I would no longer have a guaranteed support for the product. Furthermore, all that power in such a small space, I should've seen it coming. So lesson learned, my next laptop will be a cheap Macbook Air. If I was a professional making money off video editing/photography (etc) I would not hesitate to buy a rMBP 15" and throw it away after 3-4 years or if fate is good, keep it for longer.

Nonetheless, from what I've read, this particular issue regarding the GPU is pretty widespread on the early 2011 models. I'm pissed that Apple won't at least do a recall or waive the repair fee. But hey, $310 is a good deal for a flat out repair compared to a $700 part/labor fee. As the genius suggested me, do the repair, pay, then sell the Macbook and buy something else. It's the most economical and reliable solution. I do understand the feeling of not getting your money's worth, but it's a flawed way of thinking.

As a long shot though, I've emailed Apple support and Tim Cook to see if there was any solution we could work out. I recommend you do the same, it won't hurt to try. But expect to pay the $310 and either pay to reball the GPU or buy a new Mac. In the end, I highly doubt you'll go back to Windows because let's be honest, it's still a damn fine machine.

 

[SHNXX]

Apple products are not necessarily great because of their hardware, most of which they get from other companies.

It's the software.

Why don't you try having it fixed?

 

[leman]

I'm asking this sincerely, because I'm curious. What does it have that make it so practical for that tasks? (teaching, IT administration and software development)

As I mentioned before, its the combination of power, mobility and convenience features. The machine is light, very mobile, has a great battery life — which is important when you need to switch sites often or work while traveling. It has an amazing display and keyboard, which makes working with text easy and convenient. At the same time it is blazingly fast — you can play latest games on it and run performance-demanding simulations. Its literally a Swiss army knife. And of course there is the software — a Unix OS, great and intuitive interface, tons of automation, Spotlight, Quicklook etc.

I agree that for every single application, there is a better, more specialised computer out there. But if you want a flexible tool, a MacBook Pro is second to none.

 

[leman]

There is a guy who is trying to document as many cases as he can, looks like he has a fairly sizeable list so far: http://www.mbp2011.com

There is also change.org petition for the 2011 MBP GPU failure.

Look for example on this report: http://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_laptop_reliability_1109.pdf

They show that laptops will fail by the third year with probability of 20% This is the industry average. There is virtually no difference between cheap and expense laptops (as expected). The 1% or so of 2011 MBP users which experience GPU failures are well within the statistical fluctuation.

 

[cypriot]

I am still using my 08 macbook without any issues ever. My HP top-of-the-line notebook was broken 7 times in its first year and i took great care while using it. My macbook is being tortured and still solid. Its a matter of luck i guess.

 

[alphaod]

My ThinkPad X1 Carbon cost more than a MacBook Air, so not all Windows computers are cheap

 

[tripleh3lix]

When I first bought my MacBook Pro back in February of 2011 I had heard wonders of Apples service and the way they were different to other computer manufacturers. I was straight off the boat of buying my iPhone 4 and fell in love with the way things just worked in the Apple ecosystem. It was different to anything else I had used before. Being very interested in video editing and audio production I jumped ship after playing in the Apple store for a few weeks and bought a fully loaded 17” MacBook Pro with all the extras. I loved this computer and it served me well. Until it didn’t. My purchase that day in the Apple store set me back over $4000. In contrast, the computer I am writing this rant on cost under $700 and is nearly two years older. This Asus laptop has been through tumbles, severe falls, and bits of it have fallen off and are no longer with us. It still works as good as the day my partner purchased it though.

My 5 times as expensive MacBook Pro on the other hand, was treated with much more care. It has received one minor bump in it’s lifespan and has always been kept inside a secure case. I feel like my partner’s Asus laptop is still serving us faithfully after it’s years of torment. My MacBook Pro just checked out without so much as a see you later a few months after its apple care expired and left us with a large repair bill.

After spending this tremendous amount of money on what was meant to be a dream workhorse, a luxury machine, my repair bill is larger than the cost of this Windows laptop which has lasted longer. Even if my Windows PC DOES fail ,and no one can deny that Apple has better build quality, I can replace it multiple times over without even approaching the cost of an Apple notebook, by the end of it I’ll have a much newer machine too!

I feel quite taken advantage of to be honest. All this money on a top of the line machine with extra product care and I’m far worse off than if I’d purchased a $700 notebook. Or two of them. Maybe one for under the fridge as well.

Why should I continue to be a loyal Apple Customer? Sure, it was lovely while it lasted. A Windows machine would have been too, and I’d still be able to use it or it’s replacement now. Did I spend twice as much money on a disposable piece of eye candy?

Do I expect Apple to just replace my machine months after the warranty has expired? No, I don’t think so. But this is a manufacturing issue. The video card dying in 2011 MacBook Pro is a well documented issue, one that Apple has thus far ignored. I thought that I might be better taken care of in person, instead it was suggested that maybe I buy a new machine. We have financing options to reduce the impact of the cost. I suppose that’ll help when I have to get it repaired in three years too.

I understand people become snippy to posts like this, but I would be pissed too! That's only 3 years. You'd expect spending that kind of money on something that's advertised as "great and almighty", that it would work at least 4-5 years. If it was a few days after applecare, they may have replaced it for you to the person who posted about that. They've been really good about that for me, specially with my iPods and iPhones. I don't see why a macbook would be any different.

I just got a new rMBP 13" and hope I don't experience any of the OP's woes. That would suck.

 

[5to1]

Look for example on this report: http://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_laptop_reliability_1109.pdf

They show that laptops will fail by the third year with probability of 20% This is the industry average. There is virtually no difference between cheap and expense laptops (as expected). The 1% or so of 2011 MBP users which experience GPU failures are well within the statistical fluctuation.

Thats an interesting paper, however I do have some qualms about the possible conflict of interest, when a company which offers indemnification conducts a study on reliability. Its in their interests to portray failure rates as high, so I'd really like to see more information on how they conducted the study and further consideration to possible alternative hypothesis for the higher then average failure rate (compared to other electronics) then simply postulating higher usage is the answer.

For example they've stated they used "customer reported failure", but did they verify failure, did they pay out, etc. Were there any confounding variables that may indicate other reasons customers may be reporting failure, i.e. warranty coming to an end, new model coming out, etc. I'd also postulate the sample was taken from a group that may be more likely to report failure, or more harsh on their machines, since they were prepared to pay to indemnify their laptops against failure.

Some other confusing idiosyncracies are that they show reports for first year failure, wouldn't all these machines be covered by the manufacturer in the first year (as they are new). Why would someone report failure to the insurer in this instance.

While they don't show a substantial difference in reliability between "expensive" and "cheap" laptops, they do show some significant variation between "budget" and premium brands. Again since we don't know the details of the sample or population from which it was taken, its hard to tell if these are sound observations. For example they may overwhelmingly indemnify expensive Asus laptops and cheap HP's.

 

[ryanfuse]

where in the marketing material that boast's mac lasting 5 to 10 years?

Is it hidden in the Terms and conditions? Is it hidden in AppleCare? Has Apple done a commercial stating their machine will last 10 years?

Apple claim nothing of the sort.

You expect Mac to last longer because you paid "premium"? Sorry, other PC manufacturer has shown that they're not cheaper if they produced a laptop with the same built quality and spec. And it's not even the same built quality. The price other manufacturer has is on par or sometimes more expensive than a Mac.

Also, an honest question, is Apple service better than other manufacturer? in terms of replacing broken parts.
I had a problem with my retina macbook's screen a while ago, and they replaced the whole lid.

I'm happy with their service. But with Windows, I never bothered to contact Dell etc. Because I had the impression they won't do anything with it.

And at one time, my 3k USD Sony Vaio battery was shot. And the customer service simply told me that this is a very old machine and they didn't have the battery. (It was a 3 year old machine costing 3K USD, for god's sake its not old THAT old)

Getting dismissed by the rep like that, I would never buy a sony laptop anymore.

 

[barkmonster]

The point isn't that the $700 laptop would fulfill my needs, it wouldn't. But it's lasted longer with more punishing use and is now having to fulfill my needs.

In Australia, by law, a product can be expected to last longer when it is advertised or implied to be of higher quality and is of a higher price than the competition. This should be the case for anything. And, in Australia, it is expected to be. I have contacted the relevant authorities to be advised about what exactly my rights are, I am not a lawyer and do need to have these things explained to me. I'm not saying 'OMG I'M SUING APPLE!' I'm not, and I'd be an idiot to try. I just want to make sure I'm being treated fairly. I will report back with what the results are, positive or negative on my part.

When I purchased my laptop, I know there were cheaper machines with better specs. The understanding was that the quality of the machine, specs aside, would be better in an Apple product. Maybe prices are different in other parts of the world and maybe things have now changed. That's fairly irrelevant to me now.

I have no idea what you people are going on about. I DO expect an extremely expensive laptop to have adequate cooling, higher build quality and components and survive longer than a $700 budget laptop. It's not an apples to apples comparison, I'm just vaguely making my point and venting my angst. I know the $700 notebook will not fulfill my editing needs. But it shouldn't be more sturdy than a $4000 machine. If the netbook hasn't been adequately tested, eh, I got what I paid for. I haven't gotten everything I paid for with the MBP.

These 2011 MacBook Pros failing is a documented issue, they were not adequately tested and were not produced to a standard befitting their price tag. I believe Apple should issue a recall, and I believe they probably will. Until then, I'm pretty miffed and am temporarily holding off on future purchases of Apple products.

3 years is not an acceptable lifespan for a product such as this. Maybe in America it is, but in Australia and many parts of Europe, this is not the case. For my part, this is the first notebook I, or any of my family have experienced within 4 years of purchase. We have old Pentium 4 machines that are still kicking apart from being achingly slow. A few problems is fine, it's to be expected. But my whole machine has been bricked because of a manufacturing fault, and so have a lot of other peoples.

I have a 2002 G4 that still works.
I currently use a 2009 Mac Mini and it's faultless.

You bought a lemon. It can happen with any manufacturer.

You mention you use it for editing. That implies it was bought for specs you understand and have use for, not for the logo.

Till you mentioned that, it sounded like the typical rant of an entitled credit card millionaire who bought a Mac of a way higher spec than they need just to put cat photos on facebook and store a few Gb of music in iTunes and thought it was Apple's fault they didn't research their purchase first.

If this model does have well-documented issues and it is a case Apple should have issued a recall, isn't there a way you could have a modern eqivalent in it's place as part of your Applecare? A 15" Retina for example?

 

[Felasco]

Anyways. Electronics have a tendency to last or not to last.

My recently diseased stereo receiver lasted over 25 years.

This time it didn't. Which is a shame. But I guess you are clever boy and were aware of this when you bought your 4000$ laptop.

Whatever the problem is, it's always the user's fault. Almost every thread of this type is crammed with that basic sentiment.

Apple makes great products but they aren't wizards. They can't guarantee that if you buy a 4000$ laptop it will last at least 15 years.

Um, they could if they wanted to. 15 is a lot, so let's cut that in half, because most folks will replace their Mac by then anyway. There's absolutely nothing stopping Apple from making AppleCare free and extending it's coverage to 7 seven years. Well, except maybe for all the apple fan boys who would argue vigorously against their own interest.

The main reason that Apple products have reliability issues is that a significant percentage of the Mac community just can't wait to rationalize every step Apple takes deeper in to the land of mediocrity.

 

[ryanfuse]

Um, they could if they wanted to. 15 is a lot, so let's cut that in half, because most folks will replace their Mac by then anyway. There's absolutely nothing stopping Apple from making AppleCare free and extending it's coverage to 7 seven years. Well, except maybe for all the apple fan boys who would argue vigorously against their own interest

Seriously? I obviously have no idea how a company work? There's a ton stopping Apple from offering FREE Applecare for 7 years. Apple is not a charity. It has legal responsibilities to shareholder. And that's making a profit.

Yes, they have a lot of money but there's no justification for losing money on Macs. Which is competitively priced.

Sure, they offer lots of stuff for free and it's justifiable to increase sales indirectly. Applecare for 7 years can be justified, just barely. (to shareholders)

 

[Felasco]

Apple makes roughly a billion dollars in net profit every ten days.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/23/5...fit-on-45-6b-in-revenue-announces-stock-split

So there is clearly room for Apple to enhance the reliability, or at least the warranty, for their products.

The change doesn't have to come entirely at stockholder's expense, a price rise might be part of the package too. However it might happen, I remain adamantly opposed to the idea that Apple can't significantly improve the reliability and/or warranty for their products.

It's not even clear that doing so would hurt stockholders, as a solid seven year warranty would be a huge benefit which could be repeatedly proclaimed in Apple marketing, most likely leading to an increase in sales.

What Windows users are trying to explain to us is that there's really no point to the Mac unless it is really is a higher quality product. If Macs are going to be just more hyped up unreliable mediocre machines, Windows users might as well stay in the PC market.

Conducting a relentless holy war jihad against mediocrity is in the interests of both Apple stockholders and users.

 

[ryanfuse]

Apple makes roughly a billion dollars in net profit every ten days.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/23/5...fit-on-45-6b-in-revenue-announces-stock-split

So there is clearly room for Apple to enhance the reliability, or at least the warranty, for their products.

The change doesn't have to come entirely at stockholder's expense, a price rise might be part of the package too. However it might happen, I remain adamantly opposed to the idea that Apple can't significantly improve the reliability and/or warranty for their products.

It's not even clear that doing so would hurt stockholders, as a solid seven year warranty would be a huge benefit which could be repeatedly proclaimed in Apple marketing, most likely leading to an increase in sales.

What Windows users are trying to explain to us is that there's really no point to the Mac unless it is really is a higher quality product. If Macs are going to be just more hyped up unreliable mediocre machines, Windows users might as well stay in the PC market.

Conducting a relentless holy war jihad against mediocrity is in the interests of both Apple stockholders and users.

I definitely get what you mean. 7 years is ridiculous though because Apple will lose money on one of it's main product. Yes, it's a main product even thought the profit share of macs are not significant to Apple.

A price increase is even worse. Apple is already perceived as expensive.

Maybe a 5 year warranty without a price increase to Applecare i guess would be okay. They still need to do some calculation on that. Remember, macs are one of Apple main product and if the margin is too low then it won't be worth it for Apple to do it.

 

[leman]

For example they've stated they used "customer reported failure", but did they verify failure, did they pay out, etc. Were there any confounding variables that may indicate other reasons customers may be reporting failure, i.e. warranty coming to an end, new model coming out, etc. I'd also postulate the sample was taken from a group that may be more likely to report failure, or more harsh on their machines, since they were prepared to pay to indemnify their laptops against failure.

Some other confusing idiosyncracies are that they show reports for first year failure, wouldn't all these machines be covered by the manufacturer in the first year (as they are new). Why would someone report failure to the insurer in this instance.

I completely agree with you here — the methodology is not very clear and questionable in certain areas. Still, this is the best source that seems to be in open access. I do not believe that the bias is substantial in this case. As to your last question, I think that many people would call the insurance simply because its easier for them than going to the manufacturer and/or store. And besides that, even if we assume that some of the people contact the manufacturer directly, this would only mean that the failure rates shown in the document are conservative estimates and the real rates are actually higher.

Bottomline: I am not sure about how reliable these numbers are, but I think that the overall trend which they display is true. In the end, the conclusion is that laptops fail more frequently than many would assume. And that reflects my experience as well.

While they don't show a substantial difference in reliability between "expensive" and "cheap" laptops, they do show some significant variation between "budget" and premium brands. Again since we don't know the details of the sample or population from which it was taken, its hard to tell if these are sound observations. For example they may overwhelmingly indemnify expensive Asus laptops and cheap HP's.

While the means of failure rates appear to be significantly different between budget and premium brands, I don't think we can draw that much from it. First of all, we don't have any data about the variance within the groups, which would be required to access the difference statistically. Second, even if the difference is indeed significant, I don't believe that the 5% higher chance of failure plays a role for the end customer, especially if we are talking about a private person here. Whether my laptop is estimated to fail within the first year with probability of 15% or 20% does not matter that much to me, because in practice, both of them are rather high.

 

[leman]

So there is clearly room for Apple to enhance the reliability, or at least the warranty, for their products.

The change doesn't have to come entirely at stockholder's expense, a price rise might be part of the package too. However it might happen, I remain adamantly opposed to the idea that Apple can't significantly improve the reliability and/or warranty for their products.

Increasing warranty to 7 years would mean increasing the price of the product by at least 50-70%

Why? Because most of the computers will fail within that time frame. Which means that they will essentially need to give a majority of customers a replacement machine for free. I am certainly not ready to pay such a premium for the computer. Could Apple do it for free? Raising warranty to 7 years would costs them somewhere between $300 and $1000 per Mac sold, a very conservative estimate would be in the region of 2 billions loss per quarter. And it would also mean that their production lines will work for making replacements parts instead of parts they can sell. That would be a really stupid move which would probably kill the Mac business whatsoever.

 

[Felasco]

I definitely get what you mean. 7 years is ridiculous though because Apple will lose money on one of it's main product.

I have more faith in Apple than that. I believe they can figure out how to make a profit on a product that is guaranteed for seven years if they so choose to.

What always happens in these conversation is that everybody tends to focus on the obstacles instead of the upside.

Let's try to imagine the marketing campaign where Tim Cook tells the world that Macs are guaranteed for seven years. Imagine him looking in to the camera promising to replace any Mac that dies within that period. Imagine him endlessly reminding the market that if you buy a Mac, you don't have to worry about a thing, for seven years.

Everybody is always complaining that Apple is losing it's innovation. And then when an innovative almost revolutionary idea like guaranteed reliability is proposed, almost everybody argues against it.

That's the obstacle that has to be overcome.

If you want guaranteed reliability, you can have it.

But you have to argue for it, and not against it. That's the price tag.

 

[reco2011]

And how old are PPC?

How old they are today is of no relevance to the problems they had when they were current.

----------

As I mentioned before, its the combination of power, mobility and convenience features. The machine is light, very mobile, has a great battery life — which is important when you need to switch sites often or work while traveling. It has an amazing display and keyboard, which makes working with text easy and convenient. At the same time it is blazingly fast — you can play latest games on it and run performance-demanding simulations. Its literally a Swiss army knife. And of course there is the software — a Unix OS, great and intuitive interface, tons of automation, Spotlight, Quicklook etc.

I agree that for every single application, there is a better, more specialised computer out there. But if you want a flexible tool, a MacBook Pro is second to none.

IMO this didn't really answer the question. There are all kinds of laptops / ultrabooks which can fulfill these requirements.

----------

I'm happy with their service. But with Windows, I never bothered to contact Dell etc. Because I had the impression they won't do anything with it.

Why would you not even try?

 

[leman]

IMO this didn't really answer the question. There are all kinds of laptops / ultrabooks which can fulfill these requirements.

Well, I haven't found any. An ultrabook does not work for me because of the ULV CPUs. Let us, for the sake of the argument, ignore the Windows vs. OS X debate. Then you would have laptops like the M3800, but the battery life is usually abysmal compared to the MBP, and the trackpad is not nearly as responsive. Its all about the compromise. And, at least for my usage case, the MBP makes the right compromises.

 

[reco2011]

Well, I haven't found any. An ultrabook does not work for me because of the ULV CPUs. Let us, for the sake of the argument, ignore the Windows vs. OS X debate. Then you would have laptops like the M3800, but the battery life is usually abysmal compared to the MBP, and the trackpad is not nearly as responsive. Its all about the compromise. And, at least for my usage case, the MBP makes the right compromises.

The trackpad is one thing I wished out manufacturers would copy from Apple. It's first rate and using anything else is an exercise in frustration.

 

[demure84]

I will tell you my story. I originally purchased a 17" MBP back in 2006 with no Apple care and it's been solid for the most part other than the warped battery that they replaced free of cost. I've used it for roughly 6 years until it became slow enough and I could no longer bare it. I've recently upgraded to MBP retina and I will continue to purchase future Apple products with no hesitation. Had series of iPhones, iPads, Apple TV's purchased used and they still performed flawlessly. Sorry about your experience.

 

[capathy21]

I have more faith in Apple than that. I believe they can figure out how to make a profit on a product that is guaranteed for seven years if they so choose to.

What always happens in these conversation is that everybody tends to focus on the obstacles instead of the upside.

Let's try to imagine the marketing campaign where Tim Cook tells the world that Macs are guaranteed for seven years. Imagine him looking in to the camera promising to replace any Mac that dies within that period. Imagine him endlessly reminding the market that if you buy a Mac, you don't have to worry about a thing, for seven years.

Everybody is always complaining that Apple is losing it's innovation. And then when an innovative almost revolutionary idea like guaranteed reliability is proposed, almost everybody argues against it.

That's the obstacle that has to be overcome.

If you want guaranteed reliability, you can have it.

But you have to argue for it, and not against it. That's the price tag.

There's nothing innovative about offering a 7 year warranty. It's a terrible business model that no business(especially in the field of technology) would adopt. Let's just say they did though.

One of two things would happen because lets just be honest, Apple isn't in the business of giving away profits. They'd make that money back somehow.

If the 7 year guarantee was included in each Mac purchase, the upfront cost of Mac's would most likely double which would have a massive negative affect on sales since Mac's are already perceived as overpriced.

If they made Apple Care a 7 year coverage plan, it would most likely double or even triple in cost, causing far less users to purchase Apple Care up front. This would cause a decrease in company revenue from Apple Care since even though they'd be charging more, they would have a fraction of the current amount of users who purchase Apple Care.

I would love a 7 years coverage plan as much as any consumer. But the fact of the matter is, it's not realistic from a business prospective.

 

[romesk90]

I feel for OP.

More people like OP need to step forward.

It appears as if in recent years Apple quality has gone down hill. They need to step it back up.

Spending 30 minutes googling all the issues with Apple (macbook...mac, pro, retina, etc) and you will find way too many issues. They hide the issues well too. There was an update a few months ago that fixed FPS in games with a certain model of Macbook. Now, you cannot find a trace of it on the apple site (you can on third party sites though).

Tl;dr: I agree with OP.

 

[Skylitfly]

My recently diseased stereo receiver lasted over 25 years.

As I already said. Electronics have tendency to last or not to last. Your stereo has lasted, your MacBook didn't. Which is a shame as I already mentioned.

Whatever the problem is, it's always the user's fault. Almost every thread of this type is crammed with that basic sentiment.

I never said it's your fault. I just said that you should have been aware of that electronics may fail when you bought a 4000$ laptop. Money won't guarantee that your electronics will last forever. It's more of a matter of luck to be honest. Well made products like Mac's have capabilities to last long but no one can guarantee it.

Um, they could if they wanted to. 15 is a lot, so let's cut that in half, because most folks will replace their Mac by then anyway. There's absolutely nothing stopping Apple from making AppleCare free and extending it's coverage to 7 seven years. Well, except maybe for all the apple fan boys who would argue vigorously against their own interest.

I'm not arguing against my own interest. I'm just aware of facts. I'm aware of that live and things in my life doesn't always go as I planned. And give me one proper reason why should Apple make AppleCare free? Because they won't.

The main reason that Apple products have reliability issues is that a significant percentage of the Mac community just can't wait to rationalize every step Apple takes deeper in to the land of mediocrity.

Apple products reliability issues? So you're generalizing because you happened to have faulty model, or because 2011 model Mac's happened to have problems.

Honestly, your ranting is useless and waste of time. You weren't aware of your actions, and it didn't end up like you planned and now you're angry. I do understand why, but it doesn't change the fact that your rant is still pointless.

 

[Felasco]

As I already said. Electronics have tendency to last or not to last. Your stereo has lasted, your MacBook didn't. Which is a shame as I already mentioned.

I'm not the original poster, just so you know.

I never said it's your fault. I just said that you should have been aware of that electronics may fail when you bought a 4000$ laptop.

Yes, this is the sentiment that is endlessly repeated almost every time somebody reports a disappointment with an Apple product. A mob assembles to try to shift the blame back on the user. They should have done this, they should have done that, it couldn't possibly be Apple's fault etc.

Well made products like Mac's have capabilities to last long but no one can guarantee it.

As has already been explained, Apple already guarantees it for a year, and there's nothing stopping them from expanding that guarantee.

I'm not arguing against my own interest.

Yes, you are arguing for a culture of mediocrity, and you don't even realize you are doing it.

And give me one proper reason why should Apple make AppleCare free? Because they won't.

If they don't ever offer you AppleCare for free, it will likely be because people like yourself make a career out of arguing against your own interest.

Apple products reliability issues? So you're generalizing because you happened to have faulty model, or because 2011 model Mac's happened to have problems.

Again, you don't even know who you're talking to, so why are we listening? Ok, you got me there, I am debunked.