Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple - Think Twice

thenbells.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 407 posts

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#361

Post by whatusername »

astrodust wrote: post #230
Tipzntrix wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For laptops, there's Dell, Lenovo, ASUS, Sony, and more...a lot of them don't cost as much as Apple, but their benchmarks match up at a cheaper cost.

You're missing the point. It's not about benchmarks. That's like buying a car based on horsepower or quarter mile times. It doesn't matter as much as you'd think. It's about build quality. About vendor support. About durability. I can't be the only one disappointed that there aren't many options if those are the things you value.

When it comes to cars -- the Macbooks are like BMW's. Look good, drive fast, even the door makes a solid thud when you close it. You can tell it's been well engineered.

The T-Series thinkpads -- more like a Toyota Hilux.

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#362

Post by sbuk »

sbuk wrote: post #300
Breakthrough wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have absolutely no concept of the difference between "leverage" and "extortion", the latter of which is exactly what you described. Last I checked, not only is extorting your customers bad for business, it's probably illegal. That being said, I'm going to dare throw an anti-Apple comment in here: after all the BS Apple's pulled in the past few years, I'm sure most people in the world wouldn't blink twice if Samsu…

The BS? Samsung copied their work...

I'm sorry, but down opting this doesn't change the facts. Neither does portraying Samsung as an entirely innocent and hard-done-by party. They screwed their own pooch.

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#363

Post by sbuk »

minimax wrote: post #93
msy wrote: post #10

Revision A Apple projects have had issues for as long as Apple has been making products. Second gen Macbook Air's had Logic board issues, 2007 era RevA Macbook Pros had video card issues, dodgy graphics cards on the early Mac Pros, the iPhone4 antenna, the list is endless. Often it's taken years for the issues to be resolved and Apple to pay for repairs, if at all. It's simple, if you want the shiniest tech, buy what…

I don't think calling Apple out on selling a faulty $3000 laptop and refusing to repair it counts as histrionics or spam.

No, but the tone and ensuing vitriol does. I'd hasten to add that this happen with other manufacturers with startling regularity too. I've been given the run around by HP on a similar spec'ed and similarly priced month old EliteBook, that is faulty to point of unsuitability for any practical use. This is replacing a Thinkpad whose screen came away from it hinges after less than 6 months use. Had I written a scathing blog post about either and linked to it here, I doubt that it would have even raised a comment, let alone a single up-vote. And rightly so because just like the OP, it's ANECDOTAL.

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#364

Post by sbuk »

rwhitman wrote: post #166
msy wrote: post #10

Revision A Apple projects have had issues for as long as Apple has been making products. Second gen Macbook Air's had Logic board issues, 2007 era RevA Macbook Pros had video card issues, dodgy graphics cards on the early Mac Pros, the iPhone4 antenna, the list is endless. Often it's taken years for the issues to be resolved and Apple to pay for repairs, if at all. It's simple, if you want the shiniest tech, buy what…

I don't see it as spam, I see it as a necessary part of getting the kinks worked out ahead of when we middle-adopters buy the 2nd or 3rd gen products. The more bloggers gripe about these problems the more likely Apple will have prioritized fixing them before the next generation comes out.

So we grade Apple on a curve? We let other manufacturers get away with it because they are not Apple? Because that is what is happening. Apple aren't the only company that positions themselves as premium and they sure as heck aren't the only company that sells $3000 dollar laptops that may (or may not, mainly may not) develop faults. HP and Lenovo for instance...

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#365

Post by CamperBob2 »

meaty wrote: post #69
michael_miller wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you had some bad experiences, but do you really think that Apple makes products with "no engineering applied past experience"? Surely Apple's products have had faults, and it sounds like you've been bitten more than once. I don't blame you for not liking the company or its products. However, there are lots of satisfied customers, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who believed that their…

Yes I do - they are shit, so is their engineering and I'm not afraid to go against the grain and say it. I've never heard of a satisfied long term customer i.e. most of the praise comes from new users with shiny toys. My father has just been screwed by his 1st gen iPad because some of the apps will no longer install and IOS6 is not available (to the trash it goes), his white iPhone 4S has proximity sensor issues to t…

IOS6 is not available (to the trash it goes)

It's important to dispose of iPads in an environmentally friendly manner. There are lots of toxic materials and metals in the PCB and other components, and the batteries can start fires or emit noxious gases. Rather than throwing it away in the trash, I recommend sending it to me for proper disposal.

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#366

Post by karolist »

astrodust wrote: post #41
meaty wrote: post #24

I wouldn't buy another Apple product either. Between a MacBook Pro which caught fire, an AirPort which melted, an iMac which the backlight went on and a MacBook which had to go back 4 times (!) due to logic board problems, it scares the shit out of me parting with that sort of cash and actually depending on it. The muppets at the "genius bar" (retard shelf as we call it now) aren't exactly helpful and usher you away…

Although you might have requirements that aren't met by Apple's products, such as wanting a removable battery, to call them "expensive trinkets" with "no engineering" is absurd. Apple's work on the unibody case is but one example of how they're pushing manufacturing technology as far as it can go today. Other vendors are content to stamp out the same old plastic clamshell, to fit in the same old motherboard and optic…

I have Lenovo T420 as work laptop, it costs nearly as much as my unibody 13" MBP did in 2010, except it has a shitty trackpad, keyboard (which isn't backlit, instead they have this useless lamp at the top of the screen), the screen doesn't have auto-brightness which I consider a must now and it overall has this cheap, plastic feel to it. The top border of the display separated from it's backing after a couple months (and I'm usually gentle with my tech), the optical drive eject button is positioned in such a way that you always accidentally trigger the open action - everyone at my job has this problem, I think it's because the eject button is the right most object on the side and very easily pushed.

If I paid that much of my own money I'd be very pissed. Given my experience, I will not be buying Lenovo machines. Dell however was quite a nice workhorse, still not in the same category as MBPs though.

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#367

Post by moostapha »

baddox wrote: post #250
kevinalexbrown wrote: post #150

My perspective here is in no way Apple-specific, but I was reminded of something quite interesting in this story: if you pass a test and you still have problems, it probably means the test isn't good enough. Worse, passing a test doesn't magically change the state of the world and make these problems disappear. Turning to the customer and explaining, "there is no problem because you passed the test" does not alter th…

I don't think anyone at Apple would claim that the test magically changes the state of the world. They probably wouldn't even deny that there is a ghosting problem on your machine. It's clear that the test is meant to determine whether the particular machine's ghosting problem is within Apple's acceptable limits. It's just like the dead pixel guarantees you sometimes see on monitors, whereby you get a replacement if…

Am I weird for returning a monitor to best buy for 2 dead (glowing green) pixels?

It's not like it was a high end display. It's was a $130 1920x1080 LG that kept it's black-friday pricing for at least a week, probably because it's old.

I mean…they didn't bat an eye, they just gave me a new one. It's almost like they want their customers to be happy with their purchases.

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#368

Post by moostapha »

jtheory wrote: post #357
joonix wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My advice is to use what the government has set out for people to use: the courts. Sue them in small claims court. Apple has sold something that is not suitable for its intended purpose, and has breached warranties required by law such as warranty of merchantability. Even a place like Texas has the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Under this act a consumer can sue for breach of these warranties and receive damages, AND…

I can't imagine it's that clearcut. What's the "intended purpose" for a general-purpose laptop? Editing text, watching video, playing music, etc.., plus the long tail of more unusual things that may be possible depending on what software you install. Are there any relatively common tasks that will actually be prevented by this level of ghosting? I don't mean "it's a bit annoying", I mean "this task is no longer feasi…

>Are there any relatively common tasks that will actually be prevented by this level of ghosting? I don't mean "it's a bit annoying", I mean "this task is no longer feasible".

Apple bills their computers as "the computers you do stuff with". They have a long history in the professional media/content creation business, and their marketing campaigns and advertizements for the last several years were based on bringing those capabilities to the mainstream.

If nothing else, iPhoto, iMovie, and GarageBand come with every Mac.

With those issues, two of the potential uses for the computer–which comes bundled with Apple software to do them–become infeasible for anyone who cares if they exist at all.

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#369

Post by cmccabe »

mistermann wrote: post #293
baddox wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I agree, but there's still a tone in your and OP's words that makes it sound like you're appealing to some objective measure of a "high quality product." Obviously, there is no such thing, and different problems will frustrate different people. It's quite possible that 99% of MBP buyers would never even notice that ghosting problem. Does that still make the MBP a "low quality product," and are Apple's policie…

> I think I agree, but there's still a tone in your and OP's words that makes it sound like you're appealing to some objective measure of a "high quality product." > It's quite possible that 99% of MBP buyers would never even notice that ghosting problem. Here's my takeaway from this incident. This problem doesn't affect 99% of users. If Apple needed to ensure this particular problem (almost) never occurs, it would c…

1. The guy who posted TFA is not a "professional"-- at least, not a professional graphics designer, professional photographer, or any other profession where ghosting would be an issue.

2. Apple has always been a consumer-focused company, not a company focused on businesses or professionals.

3. For as long as Apple has existed, there have been "Apple has jumped the shark this year because of X" posts. Always. They're almost as common as the Mac vs. PC posts, and almost as boring.

oh, and:

4. Do the words "passive matrix LCD" mean anything to you? I used to have an Apple laptop where the screen ghosted so much, even moving the pointer was like playing a game of "snake." And this was the way it was designed. Kids today really have nothing to complain about, except paying too much for something they didn't need in the first place.

Re: Apple - Think Twice

#370

Post by DannyBee »

mturmon wrote: post #354
DannyBee wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A great example of "no engineering applied past appearance": The strain reliefs on every power adapter they make start out horrible, they fray, they get a lawsuit, then they fix them to look "uglier" but actually work. Then they release a new power adapter that looks good but sucks again and the cycle continues. I'm having trouble finding the lawsuit over the old powerbook connectors, so let's start with magsafe 1 Or…

But: many people have had no problem with any of these Magsafe designs, despite frequent use. Weird, huh?

It's not weird. Plenty of people have not had problems with aluminum wiring in their houses, even when screwed to copper fixtures. Others have had house fires.

The lack of a 100% instantaneous failure rate does not mean there was a good engineering design, or even any engineering design past appearance.

In the case of magsafe, the incidence and number of claims of fraying, actual wire melting, etc, was so high that it was very clearly "bad engineering". (You are talking about at least tens of thousands of adapters that were actually replaced after actual signs of failure)

The case was settled through ADR 6 months after ADR starterd, and included apple agreeing to replace all adapters that showed any signs of strain relief failure for up to three years from the date of the initial settlement.

Post reply on HN