Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Would you pay more for a better made Mac?
- Thread starter hajime
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Breathe, man, breathe!
The days of well designed electronics are about gone. Outsourcing eliminates the possibility of the design engineers from having any involvement in quality control. So problems aren't recognized and subsequently ignored. Product ships, and consumer gets junk.
Sucks.
We shouldn't have to pay additionally for proper products, but if that is the only way things will improve, so be it.
Sesshi,
Why do you buy Macs then?
If you don't really like the Mac hardware, then why not just make a Hackintosh on a machine that's up to your standards?
Mindless fanboys also bore me at times. It's just a manufacturer you know, not a religion or a social group...
... hmmm, I dunno about the latter, I guess for some it is.
Breathe, man, breathe!
The days of well designed electronics are about gone. Outsourcing eliminates the possibility of the design engineers from having any involvement in quality control. So problems aren't recognized and subsequently ignored. Product ships, and consumer gets junk.
Sucks.
We shouldn't have to pay additionally for proper products, but if that is the only way things will improve, so be it.
No - that's not the sole issue. Good QC is possible, but my impression is that Apple's design engineers spend too much time designing and not enough time engineering. The design that they churn out are in many ways more requiring of tighter QC to be executed properly (sometimes unnecessarily so I think) and anyone worth their salt will be aware of this. That being obvious, they could have the appropriate QC in place, but either they can't, or they can't be bothered to. I dunno.
if there was any guarantee that the machine is more reliable, more robust and more durable over the years i would pay 20% more.
i would not pay more to have the same machine without defects delivered to me. that should be a given (yes, in rare cases a defect in a new machine is acceptable).
however i see little chance that apple can make more reliable machines because they use the same electronics as everybody else and that has unfortunately a certain failure rate.
more robust would be possible but means larger and more heavy notebooks (i only buy notebooks). maybe they can use more high quality material.
more durable over time would be possible by using higher quality components like hinges, fans, switches and keys.
i have the impression that the old powerbooks were more reliable and more robust than the macbooks or MBP's these days. but then a powerbook at that time was $5000 or so. but the same is true for the IBM thinkpads. but it seems the entire industry plans a 3 year lifetime for notebooks. i however would prefer to have a notebook for 6 years like those old ibm thinkpads. i guess we can only hope that apple tries to separate themselfs from the competition by quality because in terms of features all hardware is almost identical. and windows is not that bad. so people might need another incentive besides os x to buy apple hardware.
i would not pay more to have the same machine without defects delivered to me. that should be a given (yes, in rare cases a defect in a new machine is acceptable).
however i see little chance that apple can make more reliable machines because they use the same electronics as everybody else and that has unfortunately a certain failure rate.
more robust would be possible but means larger and more heavy notebooks (i only buy notebooks). maybe they can use more high quality material.
more durable over time would be possible by using higher quality components like hinges, fans, switches and keys.
i have the impression that the old powerbooks were more reliable and more robust than the macbooks or MBP's these days. but then a powerbook at that time was $5000 or so. but the same is true for the IBM thinkpads. but it seems the entire industry plans a 3 year lifetime for notebooks. i however would prefer to have a notebook for 6 years like those old ibm thinkpads. i guess we can only hope that apple tries to separate themselfs from the competition by quality because in terms of features all hardware is almost identical. and windows is not that bad. so people might need another incentive besides os x to buy apple hardware.
You pay for anything that is better made. The thought here is if it is made better you will have to replace it/fix less often. I gladly paid the etra money for my 15" mbp. Just comparing it to my wife's 15" Dell it is like night and day. Both are similar in builds, yet you can just tell how much better the mac is made.
If you go to a Ford lot and close some doors on cars, then go to a Lexus dealer and close some doors there, you will again notice the difference.
Now, like anything else, this theory has exceptions.
If you go to a Ford lot and close some doors on cars, then go to a Lexus dealer and close some doors there, you will again notice the difference.
Now, like anything else, this theory has exceptions.
Taking the car analogy, the Apple / Dell comparison is in many ways like a Cadillac / Skoda (or many other non-premium brands) comparison. The former may be flashier and at first glance may look better made, but the fundamental quality of build and engineering is no different from much lesser brands - and as such, a manufacturer with access to the same build quality who designs and engineers down to that quality level actually ends up turning out much more reliable, if less glamorous, products.
Pricing
You also have to remember that 8-10 years ago (around the time the first iMac) that Apple Computers were also 4X more expensive that the PC's of that time.
When I bought my first Apple Powerbook G3/292MHz it's nearly cost me $12,000 NZD when you could get a PC laptop for about $3,000 NZD.
As the years have gone on the price has come down to be competitive so has the build quality if you want to pay $12,000 for a laptop again I certainly don't!
You also have to remember that 8-10 years ago (around the time the first iMac) that Apple Computers were also 4X more expensive that the PC's of that time.
When I bought my first Apple Powerbook G3/292MHz it's nearly cost me $12,000 NZD when you could get a PC laptop for about $3,000 NZD.
As the years have gone on the price has come down to be competitive so has the build quality if you want to pay $12,000 for a laptop again I certainly don't!
Attachments
No, it isn't the sole issue. I was trying to keep it simple.
Actually, there are an incredible number of factors that can affect end product quality.
When I said designers, I meant the systems engineers who actually create the circuits themselves. Not industrial designers, who handle the visual aspects (packaging that houses the circuits).
So lets say the systems people churn out a proper design that does what it's supposed to. Now that design will be sent overseas to an OEM. Facilities neither owned ,operated or overseen by the product developer.
The OEM starts changing things around. Some of it may be board layout to fit the packaging or make it easier for manufacturing. But the biggest changes usually occur as changed parts to save money. Capacitor values get lowered (under-rated), temp ratings are lowered, resistor tolerances may be loosened, heat sinks changed for smaller units, and IC's swapped out for less expensive parts. Testing doesn't usually involve the original systems personnel, and tends to be short and incomplete. Deadlines set by management to ship forces additional bad compromises, allowing defects to creep in. Then you reach the production QC. Quick visual and electrical test, as in "did it turn on" level, and it ships.
The above is just one scenario. It's still short, but hopefully just enough detail.
Maybe this will help.
great
Hey, thanks for hijacking the thread in an attempt to turn it into a mac vs pc debate. Why are people like you on this forum?
Hey, thanks for hijacking the thread in an attempt to turn it into a mac vs pc debate. Why are people like you on this forum?
No, it isn't the sole issue. I was trying to keep it simple.
Actually, there are an incredible number of factors that can affect end product quality.
When I said designers, I meant the systems engineers who actually create the circuits themselves. Not industrial designers, who handle the visual aspects (packaging that houses the circuits).
So lets say the systems people churn out a proper design that does what it's supposed to. Now that design will be sent overseas to an OEM. Facilities neither owned ,operated or overseen by the product developer.
The OEM starts changing things around. Some of it may be board layout to fit the packaging or make it easier for manufacturing. But the biggest changes usually occur as changed parts to save money. Capacitor values get lowered (under-rated), temp ratings are lowered, resistor tolerances may be loosened, heat sinks changed for smaller units, and IC's swapped out for less expensive parts. Testing doesn't usually involve the original systems personnel, and tends to be short and incomplete. Deadlines set by management to ship forces additional bad compromises, allowing defects to creep in. Then you reach the production QC. Quick visual and electrical test, as in "did it turn on" level, and it ships.
The above is just one scenario. It's still short, but hopefully just enough detail.
Maybe this will help.
True, but the "manufacturer" can have oversight over this process. Apple's issues come from not caring enough (in terms of lack of manpower for this, or the design engineers not managing this process properly) about these and related matters. At the end, we're talking about machines priced at the premium end of each category - and what appears just isn't good enough and not on a par with similarly priced gear - and other manufacturers of far cheaper machines do as well or in some cases better by dint of perhaps better communications with OEM's, or knowing the OEM's capabilities better and designing for it as I said.
I don't disagree here at all.
My example was intentionally limited towards causality rather than business practices. And yes, bad business practices are a major root cause. Always the time and money argument from management.
I don't work for Apple and though I may suspect it, I didn't want to just assume the worst.
Your assumptions are very likely correct about Apple.
It could lie in the agreements between Apple and the OEM, or just be the result of Apple using bad practices in the name of greed. BTW, OEM's despise oversight and resist it tooth and nail. Again, greed in action. But it can be done.
And has with other companies.
In the end, Apple is asking premium prices for products with lack luster quality. They can do better.
Will they is the real question.
Is Apple doing bad business practice?
When I went to the Apple store in Japan to buy the 17" High definition MBP, I told the sales that I would like her to open the box and checked that the MBP was in good condition before I paid. She refused. She said that I had to pay first before she opened the box. The store was closing and she told me that there should not be any problems. So, I left without checking. When I went home, I found that there were problems with the LCD screen.
I went back to the Apple store on the next day. The Genius did not want to exchange it for me. Her reason was that another one could have similar or other problems. She did not want to open another box as doing so, they could not sell those computers as brand new. I yelled loudly so that customers on the floor could hear me. Then, the Genius made "a deal" with me. She said that she would open a new box. However, if the new computer also has the same or worst problems, I have to take that computer and leave the store. When she opened the box, we found that the machine had the same problem. Even worst, it vibrated. I asked her to open another box. She said that I had to take this worse-than-before computer and go home. I refused. As I continued to waste my time to argue with her, the screen problem of the original computer got worst (garbage all over the screen). I again yelled loudly and asked other customers to see how badly this supposed to be brand new computer behaved. Another Genius came and they agreed that it was a "hardware problem with the motherboard". So, they exchanged a new standard non-high definition MBP for me.
Few months later, I got problems with the LCD screen. As I was living in another country, I asked them about 2 weeks in advance to order the new screen so that they could exchange it for me during my short visit to Japan. The sales told me that he would do that and it would take only a few hours to swap the screens. When I arrived, the Genius told me that they did not have the screen in stock. I had to wait for another week. He told me that there is an "express service". If I paid extra, they could get it done earlier. I complained as I went to Japan to get my computer fixed. They did not have the screen ready. Moreover, they asked me to pay extra for the express service. After wasting time there arguing with the Genius, another person came and told me that they would get it done in two days. At the end,
they exchanged the screen for me but there are dark corners. They refused to replace it with a problem-free screen. They agreed that there are dark corners but the Genius told me that although it is not a perfect screen due to manufacturing process, it is "within tolerance". She did not want to replace the screen again. The manager just listened to her and told me to go ahead and complain to Apple Japan if I wish.
I wonder if Apple is using refurbished parts when they repair computers?
As the problems appeared within few months of use, I expected that they gave me a brand new, problem free LCD screen. Also, they should not make a deal with the customer that if they opened a new box and the machine had similar or other/worse problems, the customer had to take that machine and go home. Furthermore, as they did not order the screen in advance of my arrival, they should not ask me to pay extra for the so-called express service.
When I went to the Apple store in Japan to buy the 17" High definition MBP, I told the sales that I would like her to open the box and checked that the MBP was in good condition before I paid. She refused. She said that I had to pay first before she opened the box. The store was closing and she told me that there should not be any problems. So, I left without checking. When I went home, I found that there were problems with the LCD screen.
I went back to the Apple store on the next day. The Genius did not want to exchange it for me. Her reason was that another one could have similar or other problems. She did not want to open another box as doing so, they could not sell those computers as brand new. I yelled loudly so that customers on the floor could hear me. Then, the Genius made "a deal" with me. She said that she would open a new box. However, if the new computer also has the same or worst problems, I have to take that computer and leave the store. When she opened the box, we found that the machine had the same problem. Even worst, it vibrated. I asked her to open another box. She said that I had to take this worse-than-before computer and go home. I refused. As I continued to waste my time to argue with her, the screen problem of the original computer got worst (garbage all over the screen). I again yelled loudly and asked other customers to see how badly this supposed to be brand new computer behaved. Another Genius came and they agreed that it was a "hardware problem with the motherboard". So, they exchanged a new standard non-high definition MBP for me.
Few months later, I got problems with the LCD screen. As I was living in another country, I asked them about 2 weeks in advance to order the new screen so that they could exchange it for me during my short visit to Japan. The sales told me that he would do that and it would take only a few hours to swap the screens. When I arrived, the Genius told me that they did not have the screen in stock. I had to wait for another week. He told me that there is an "express service". If I paid extra, they could get it done earlier. I complained as I went to Japan to get my computer fixed. They did not have the screen ready. Moreover, they asked me to pay extra for the express service. After wasting time there arguing with the Genius, another person came and told me that they would get it done in two days. At the end,
they exchanged the screen for me but there are dark corners. They refused to replace it with a problem-free screen. They agreed that there are dark corners but the Genius told me that although it is not a perfect screen due to manufacturing process, it is "within tolerance". She did not want to replace the screen again. The manager just listened to her and told me to go ahead and complain to Apple Japan if I wish.
I wonder if Apple is using refurbished parts when they repair computers?
As the problems appeared within few months of use, I expected that they gave me a brand new, problem free LCD screen. Also, they should not make a deal with the customer that if they opened a new box and the machine had similar or other/worse problems, the customer had to take that machine and go home. Furthermore, as they did not order the screen in advance of my arrival, they should not ask me to pay extra for the so-called express service.
Yes.
Sorry, but you're paying more to be able to use the OS. If the OS was able to be used on other hardware it would cost more and Apple would sell a lot less hardware.
Hmm, I keep hearing this argument, but in actual personal use and speaking with people I know in person Apple's hardware quality comes off significantly worse than generic PCs.
I believe they specifically reserve the right to in their T&C.
i think the answer to the question is we shouldn't have to pay more for a better built mac. i know its abit of an argument in its own right, but mac users do pay abit of a premium so you'd expect them to be very well built. not getting cracks in the trackpad.... o.. look at that
I would happiy pay less for a machine thats not going to last as long. Id rather pay $2000 for a machine thats gonna last 2 years than $5000 for a machine that will last 10. Simple fact is, I don't want the same computer for the next 10 years. Why buy Mac? I just like it, thats all. Not because its supposed to last longer. Why don't I want a long lasting computer? I like new things, chances are my laptop wont be able to handle the hardware upgrades I will need in 10 years time (MacBooks cant fit 100TB of RAM ), I will just buy a new one that will last me another 2 years.
As for the cracking shell, I have this problem, but I emailed the apple peeps and its fully covered under warantee, just waiting for the part to arrive. Of course, its a design fault, so it will happen again, but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.
), I will just buy a new one that will last me another 2 years.As for the cracking shell, I have this problem, but I emailed the apple peeps and its fully covered under warantee, just waiting for the part to arrive. Of course, its a design fault, so it will happen again, but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.
I'm sure you get a much better-engineered piece of equipment with a Mac than you would with an equivalent PC - even today.
Based on the new machines we have at work, which are only a year old (if that), and my late 2006 iMac which is still externally (and mostly internally) solid. Only my mouse has slight wear.
I was just adding to the conversation from what other PC's I've used, you sounded a bit argumentative in tone... sorry if I got the wrong impression.
I was just adding to the conversation from what other PC's I've used, you sounded a bit argumentative in tone... sorry if I got the wrong impression.
Apple regards itself as a premium brand and therefore I expect great build quality indicative of the prices I pay. If Apple was selling ~$700 notebooks at Best Buy like Dell or Toshiba, that'd be a different story but Apple's cheapest laptop is still more expensive that a comparable Dell component wise. If I'm going to pay more for a better made OS I expect the same of the hardware that's running it. I shouldn't have to pay even more for quality that should be already included in the initial price.
Their profits continue to rise. They had a 41% rise year-on-year in units shipped.
Costs have increased and yet they're still raking in more profits quarter after quarter. This isn't "oh our costs have skyrocketed so our profit margin has shrunk and we're forced to lower quality control". Their profits skyrocket despite demand. That means that they are willfully adopting lower quality measure despite the fact that they wouldn't be in dire economic straights had they not. It's greed. Different situation altogether.
Dell was the big fish in the little pond until suddenly dozens of upstarts started challening their throne as the best Windows hardware reseller. Competition drove prices to the ground and to keep up with competition, they had to lower quality and pump out more units.
Apple has no competitor in OSX (don't even bother joking about Psystar). And using them as a Windows box is a secondary use, icing on the cake. There will be no sudden creation of a dozen OSX startups that challenged Apple in the marketplace due to the fact that Apple owns the OS.
No, it's not. Transportation costs have quadrupled in the last 8 years due to skyrocketing oil prices, forcing some vendors to move assembly back to the US or at least to countries closer to home. What used to be a "buy all the parts in various countries, ship it to China for assembly and then to the US market" has become, "buy the parts in various countries (or even here) and assemble them here.
I'm not saying this will suddenly apply to Apple, but it's a stupid blanket statement. Unless the costs to transport those materials and then final goods drops substantially, the money saved by paying illiterate Chinese $0.25 a day to build your products will be lost and you might as well build them here.
That's a joke right? Ask anyone who's been building computers for 10 years and they'll cringe at the stability of motherboards back then compared to today.
Your statement probably comes from anecdotal experience with the green screen Apples. If you think all computers from 10 years ago had great reliability and there weren't models that failed after a year, you'd be dead wrong. Packard Bell. I mean really?! You want to claim that one of those bombed out glorified calculators would still run great today? They had phenominal failure rates.
And the first computers were incredibly simple in comparison to today. To compare a computer from 1980 with a modern dual processor 8-core 45 nm fabbed workstation is impossible. The complexity doesn't even compare.
I'm, sorry but that's a ridiculous statement. It has to do with production cost. The industry size and resources available to it today as compared to 10 years ago? You're seriously trying to avoid taking that into consideration? And you expect anyone to take the idea of "quality is ensured by higher cost" seriously? Alienware. There's a company who offers insanely priced computers. Prices that you wouldn't have seen in the 1980's, yet they fail left and right.
It's the difference between PRODUCTION costs and RESALE prices with a little quality control mixed in. If a $700 computer today that cost $2000 ten years ago had a lower failure rate back then it was due to higher quality control or production costs. There's a set range that people are willing to pay for goods in a specific industry. And typically the closer you get to the high end, the more your profit margin shrinks. For example, there are boats that sell for $1 M, that cost $300,000 to build. But the boats that cost $30 M, cost $25 M to build. You make more money, but your margin percentage decreases.
This isn't like the computer cost $500 to produce today and $500 to produce back then, and they were simply charging you more. They actually cost more to produce.
It also raises the question of why the hell would you want to use a 10 year old computer? You're buying a computer whose hardware is static and won't be able to handle new operating systems and programs 5, let alone 10 years down the line. You don't see (normal, sane) people walking around with newtons with Pentium 2 computers still running in their households.
The reason we see this shelf life is because the area wherein these devices operate also changes to quickly. Internet speeds, the size of documents, computational power requirements, screen sizes, etc. are all continually growing. Automobiles bought 40 years ago work just as well today since the traffic moves at relatively the same speed. The infrastructure wherein those goods operate has not had a rapid growth and change in requirements.
The difference has to do with companies who price their products according to their production costs, want to make a profit and still honor their consumer and companies who adopt what I've deemed the Asshat Philosophy.
It goes as follows:
- Build an item using the same components as your competitor, but use lower quality manufacturers who charge much less.
- Put the items in a shinier package and associate words like "XTREME" or "SUPER" or "PROFESSIONAL" with it, and slap on a cheap paintjob that gives a false sense of superior build quality. (the equivalent of painting a bombed out rust bucket car)
- Use the marketing wizzes to find out what some random poor schmuck consumer would pay for such a FABULOUS product. Apply pricing scheme accordingly.
No they're not. But when you charge a large premium on your product, claiming it's due to build quality (when identical components are sold in all laptops) and then deliver a product whose sturdiness is barely more than the competition, you're either cheating your customer or offering something that no one needs.
The problem in the new manufacturers is that the reputation that Apple had built up and encouraged of "better build quality" and "durability" has carried over despite the switch in manufacturers. The average consumer doesn't know the computers are all being built by different labor, they just think it'll be of the same quality as their last one. And when it isn't, they feel a little more jilted than usual, because they weren't aware that Apple switched manufacturers.
Exactly. Which is why the market for "luxury" computers hasn't really taken off.
I am now in the market of buying a large HDTV. I went to a store and found two identical TVs being displayed side by side. However, there is a price different. When I asked the sales, he told me that they are the same product but one was made in Japan and the other was made in China. Perhaps Apple should do similar things.