9 Legend

 • 

87.5K Posts

February 13th, 2007 13:00

Statistics from Consumers Union say that one in five notebook computers will have a major failure within the first three years of life. Often, that is a system board failure. If you look back 5-6 years or more, notebooks were generally bulkier than they are now, often with discrete boards for power supplies, ports, etc. They also topped $2,000-2,500 for an average machine. Today, notebooks run faster, are slimmer, and more often run $1,500 on average. To achieve this design and cost goal, everything is integrated onto a single board, and every possible cost-corner is cut to meet the price points consumers demand. Translation: while newer notebooks are faster, lighter, and cheaper, they are also far more expensive to fix when something goes wrong, because a system board often has to be replaced. It matters little whose name is on the system when you buy it - it was really built by Quanta, Compal, Wistron, Arima, Clevo, or one of a few other Taiwanese or South Korean ghost manufacturers. 70% of ALL notebooks, regardless of brand are built by the first two, which make almost all Dell notebooks as well. Translation: they may look different, but inside they're all alike.

4 Posts

February 13th, 2007 15:00

Thank you.  Very informative reply, I appreciate your input.
 
I've noticed more and more notebooks failing over the past few years and often I'm stuck with telling my clients it's due to a "bad motherboard".  I feel like I'm cheating them of an accurate answer, but this appears to be true more often than I care to admit.
 
I'm sure overheating is a large issue, too.  Processors get faster, power requirements get larger and form factors get smaller and smaller.  Less and less air is getting through to the parts that need it.
 
I'm just going to have to condition myself to emphasizing to my clients the high probability of failure and expense to fix notebooks, no matter what the manufacturer.
 
Thanks again.
No Events found!

Top