Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!gfx
From: GFX@PSUVM.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Apple's Horrible Product Quality
Message-ID: <89156.130832GFX@PSUVM>
Date: 5 Jun 89 17:08:32 GMT
References: <13743@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <2694@portia.Stanford.EDU> <13786@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU>
Organization: Penn State University - Center for Academic Computing
Lines: 36

In article <13786@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU>, xerox@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (James Osborne) says:
>Apple's product quality shouldn't be condemned, but I think that everyone would
>agree that at least THEY should show confidence in their product by giving it
>a longer warranty.  I've heard the absurd argument that BECAUSE Apple is
>confident in their product they give a short warranty, but they are the only
>company who uses this logic.  I'm sure that the number of people who would
>buy Apple's products because they have long warranties (former fence-sitters
>most likely) will make up for any sales that Apple loses with decreased Apple-
>Care purchases, and service fees.

Warranty is valuable iff the cost of repair represents a large fraction of
the total loss you incur.  We acquired a Mac II recently.  The machine
crashed two days before an important conference for which a few hundred pages
of exhibits/documents had yet to be completed.  We couldn't care less about
the cost of repairs.  In my opinion, the dealers can be much more effective
than a warranty if they can provide back-up support to users faced with such
problems (lending replacements for free, etc.).  I don't know what is the
situation in the private sector today.  A few years back, support was
excellent.  In the academic sector, though, repair turnaround is good but
you are on your own in the meantime.  And that is no fun at all.

I would like to re-emphasize the idea that the coverage provided by a warranty
is only a small fraction of the overall quality management policy of a firm.
In the automobile market extensive warranty coverage is sometimes less
expensive and always faster to implement than quality production is to achieve.
As it turns out, quality and coverage are now inversely correlated.

I would also like to re-emphasize that we were totally pissed-off by our
Mac II failure, for which the source of the problem has not been diagnosed
with certainty.  While this runs counter to my general experience with
Apple products (I found them to be reliable), it is when these machines
die in front of you that you realize how your language can become
colorful.  I don't mind a short-term warranty.  But I will not use a machine
that may fail for unknown reasons.  It is in the interest of Apple to
tighten it's quality control.  Or we'll switch to oranges. (actually keep
using oranges...)