Yeah but things just seem to last 13 months in my house.
Then I strongly recommend that you get the electrical system in your house looked into, as that kind of thing is most certainly not normal at all.
I never said work outside warranty didnt exist but most people cant afford that or its a minor problem or they dont trust the manufacturer to repair it.
Most people?
Sorry but how exactly are you sure that most people fall into these categories?
And why would a consumer not trust the company that built an item to repair it? That last one flies in the face of known patterns of customer behaviour.
I never disagreed with that, What my point was is the fact PS3's are failing after warranty and there are people with PS3's that do nothing but gather dust.
You have told us we shouldnt believe any 'internet users' - why shouldnt I?
Why would thousands of people sign up to a forum just to lie about their broken PS3 which they cant get fixed unless they pay hundreds of pounds as its outside the warranty period?
I've never disagreed that PS3's will fail outside warranty (or inside warranty for that matter), that is not the point at all. Its
if the amount failing (as a percentage of units sold) starts to exceed what is a generally agreed level of acceptable failure.
I'm also quite surprised that you are naive enough to think that people would not lie when posting on boards and forums.
Also what is the forum that has thousands of people who have posted about PS3 failures?
Its also not hundreds of pounds to get a PS3 fixed outside warranty, its £150, a fixed value and still less than a replacement machine. Either that or the Continuous Protection scheme costs a fiver a month.
I already explained in my previous post that people were not paying to get their expensive paperweight fixed as it costs too much money.
You keep banging on about these acceptable failure rates, yes they exist but they are not accurate.
Go on and show me a 2009 PS3 failure rate percentage.
And the only proof I have that there is an issue is that there seem to be thousands of people who have not acted upon their PS3 breaking and they are all talking about it and its mostly the Blu Ray disc drive failing.
Show me these thousands of people, and it would have to be in excess of 60,000 people in the UK alone to go over a 3% failure rate.
The most recent figures for PS3 failure rates are from 2008, and are from an independent warranty company (and as such I see no reason why they are not an accurate representation - certainly they are a damn site more accurate that your figures which have quite clearly been pulled out of the air). I have already provided a link to them, but here we go again.....
http://news.filefront.com/xbox-360-failure-rates-at-16-according-to-squaretrade/
....now you ask why no figures yet for 2009.
Well lets look at the two possibilities.
A - They haven't changed in any significant way and as such its not news worthy
B - Sony have somehow managed to muzzle all independent warranty and repair outlets to fake a low failure rate
Occam's Razor shows that option A is the far more likely of these two.
Just to give an example of just how accurate internet forum opinion can be I give you this.....
http://uk.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26433074
...look its a forum based poll that clearly shows that of the people who replied 14% of them had a problem with a Wii breaking. Holy hell that must mean that the Wii has a totally unacceptable failure rate and Nintendo must be covering it up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now do you believe that the Wii is an inherently faulty machine, or is it simply more likely that people who have a problem are more likely to publicly complain about it than those who do not have a problem.
I only ask because that is exactly what you have done in regard to the PS3.
Try personal experience, fed up working on the damn things, almost every fault down to electric failures.
I've had two Clio's personally(both central locking systems failed, both was a complete sensor/reciever failure - then the latter had an immobiliser issue that i had to beg the car to start just to get me to work as it would be very random when it would fail - not to mention it was the Fuel injector check light that was showing and oxygen sensor when hooked up to a diagnostics machine. Leaking sunroofs, wheel bearings and CV boots galore.
Mum still has one (needed a brand new gearbox about two weeks from new, fingers crossed nothing else has went wrong).
More than one friend has had a Megane (constant window wiring loom failure, windows would either stay up or stay down and refused to work. (also happened to a collegue at work).
You don't need to talk to me about Renault and the issues they have had with them, I spent two years in dealership and then two years working in customer service with them (when you get to deal with all the problems the dealers can't/don't want to handle come out) I know exactly what can effect them. I also know that they are still far from the worst around.
The point behind it was that I have never had a problem with a single Renault I owned or drove, which quite clearly demonstrates how useless personal experience is in terms of looking at product and/or brand wide failure trends.
You stated:
Scaff
To believe that a device should never fail at all (which is exactly what you have just claimed) quite frankly shocks me, that is a totally unrealistic view to hold. Let me ask, are you 100% infallible in everything you do?
I took from that, that you expect everything you buy to fail 'at some point'. Theres nothing unclear about it actually. So if you believe everything will fail 'at some point' your assuming everything should fail 'at some point'.
This was my opinion on your statement.
You've just done it again!
"To believe that a device should never fail at all"
Is not the same as assuming
"everything should fail 'at some point'"
My post clearly states that items are capable of failure and you will never get 100% reliability in a mass produced item; anything mass produced will have a failure rate (hell even low batch number hand built items will not be 100% reliable - some will not work/fail).
You have then taken that and claimed that what I actually meant to say was that everything will fail.
Thanks but I know both what I said and exactly what I meant by it, I don't need you to assume for me.
Why dont I turn this around and ask you to show me proof that only 660,000 / 3% have failed?
I have yet to see any current figures.
Already shown you the most recent figures, but I guess you fall into category B and think that Sony are somehow stopping independent companies from reporting on this.
How do you think the RROD problem of the 360 got heard? Through people complaining about it. Other good thing about RROD (if you could call it that) is it almost nearly every time happened during the warranty period.
People were complaining about it on forums yes, but in addition to that retailers were also up in arms about it, warranty companies were also reporting it.
So it would seem that (based on your arguments here) that Sony are capable of silencing retailers and warranty companies, despite MS failing to do so.
Its also complete nonsense that 360's mainly failed inside warranty, the original one year warranty was extended for exactly this reason. The second two years of a 360 warranty cover only two things, RRoD and E74 failures, anything else and you are not covered at all.
If most failures were within the original 1 year warranty MS would not have estimated (and reported on end of year figures) that this 2 year extension would be costing them in excess of $1.5 billion.
I never said anyone could make up figures, is this you twisting my words now to suit your own perspective?
Lets take a look at my quoted piece for this....
Scaff
Every single one of your points is based on what individuals have said (and I know personally 10 people with PS3s and none of them has had a problem does that allow me to claim a failure rate of 0% - of course not) or what you believe may happen.
That's no more (or less) valid than me claiming that PS3 reliability could increase massively in the future and the problem will all go away, neither of these can be backed up with anything.
....OK I've read and re-read it and I didn't say that you made up figures either?
I actually never came on saying "the PS3 failure rate is above 3% oh my god we are all going to die!!!!!!!!!" What i said was that its clear that this is an ongoing and growing issue when you investigate it even just by reading about it. Figures from early 2008 are not going to do you any justice here.
How do you know its a growing issue?
From forum posts alone, by which token I can now argue that the Wii has a growing problem due to a 14% failure rate.
Figures for 2008 are the most recent available for any console and still represent hard data, something you have singularly failed to provide for any time period at all.
Ok so say Sony have sold 22,000,000 units and 660,000 have failed so that is a failure rate of 3% - when or if they sell 40,000,000 units 3% failure is 1,200,000. So even though the failure rate is still 3% its still a growing problem.
No its not, its still a 3% failure rate.
More units have failed yes, but more have also been produced, that doesn't not mean that failure rates have increased at all.
If a 3% failure rate is still 3% after you have produced almost twice the number of units then your failure rate has not increased at all. Your ratio of good to bad units remains exactly the same, the working units yield is the same.
No matter which way you look at it (unless you have no grasp of statistical analysis at all) failure rates have not grown in this example at all.
More machines have failed in this example, but more have also been produced. That does mean that potentially more people will be around to complain about it, what it doesn't mean is that the product in question is any more or less reliable. In fact its reliability have remained exactly the same as it always was in this example, which does not mean the problem is growing at all.
If Sony ceased production of the PS3 then the failure % would be allowed to rise.
Or they may fall or remain the same!
If the PS3 has a lifetime failure rate (so the number that fail within the expected lifespan of a product) then if you stop production that will not automatically rise.
Well you told me (and Robin.) not to listen to 'a bloke on a web-site posted' but in reality I am that bloke posting my complaint. So basicly no one should listen to me??
Once again that is not what I said at all.
I said that personal experience does not automatically match to country or worldwide trends, for exactly the same reason that me never having a problem with a Renault does not mean that they never go wrong.
At no point did I say that people should not listen to you (or Robyn) and I would like you to either quote me directly as having said that or stop with this behaviour.
I never said Honda's never had any issues ever but I believe them to be one of the worlds most reliable car manufacturers. I doubt you would ever see renault in that sort of category. And again personal experience influences my statement.
The link was to once again illustrate that anecdotal evidence from forums alone does not automatically mean its an accurate representation of the reliability of a product.
Ok fair point but no one even hinted Sony is lying, my point is that they dont know about all of everyones issues because there are alot of people who are refusing to even contact Sony about their PS3 as it costs almost £100 just for Sony to have a look at it. Their figures also do not compensate for people who may have a problem they do not know about.
So they cant lie if they dont know about it and in this situation with most PS3's failing after warranty period it leaves a big gap in the figures not everyone has the kind of money lying around to pay Sony to fix it or people refuse to pay it as they feel robbed.
Its does not cost almost £100 for Sony just to look at it, they charge a flat fee of £150 to fix a PS3, and it costs NOTHING AT ALL to phone them and ask (and these contact rates will be recorded at customer service centres).
This part however.........
Their figures also do not compensate for people who may have a problem they do not know about
....actually make no sense at all. Are you saying that to be accurate the figure should include those who have a machine that might fail but neither the owner nor Sony know about it?
Now I have to ask how do you know that most PS3's are failing outside the 1 year warranty period? have you done a direct study of the failure rates for both time periods? Or are you simply guessing at this?
While I acknowledge quite openly that figures for this are difficult to find and they are from 2008, your entire argument is based around anecdotal evidence posted on forums and assumptions you have made based on that (some of which are quite inaccurate).
What we do know is that PS3's do fail (no one would be daft enough to dispute that) and that the BR drive is one of the more common form of failure; however as it stands today no evidence at all exists that these failure are outside the industry accepted norms of 3% - 5%.
No third party warranty providers, nor retailers have released press statements saying they know of a problem, or that they even suspect a problem or that failure rates are increasing for any reason. The last such statement released, put fail rates for both the PS3 and Wii well within the normal range.
All we have countering this is forum posts of an indeterminate number claiming to have had a problem. Now I don't dispute that a good number of these people have 100% genuine issues, but I also think it would be ludicrous to not accept that some of these could be inaccurate (people who break an item through abuse will not always admit it), downright lies (lets be honest fan-boys are not exactly beneath this kind of thing) and the result of duplicate posts (I know of one person who posted complains about a PS3 issue on at least four different forums). Given all of this we do not know that these numbers are above a 'normal' failure rate for electronic items at all.
Scaff
