Well, In France most people thinking that now mass high tech product are not build for during, not like the old high tech made for 20+ years of using!
So, more free warranty is better.
RUMOR: Xbox 360 20GB SKU to be replaced by 60GB SKU
- Thread starter AzBat
- Start date
Well, In France most people thinking that now mass high tech product are not build for during, not like the old high tech made for 20+ years of using!
So, more free warranty is better.
I'd love to know where you guys get your data on consumer reliability expectations!
Talk a lot with people… with no search for a specific response…
And more of the time the most important thing is not the real state of a thing but the perception by people of this thing.
A good product, idea with bad press is a bad thing for people and vice versa…
But for more valis data you have some insurance report or here
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...tes-worse-than-most-consumer-electornics.html
Alot of people are learning form their cell phones . Their cell phones are most likely the most advanced item they buy and every two years they get $50-100 bucks to upgrade their phone from their service provider. Most of them will need to upgrade as the phones really don't last more than that time. Batterys go dead and keypads stop responding.
People (esp the next generation in their teens) don't expect things to last very long. They buy a product and expect to get a few years out of it and then replace. They are trained to be consumers
I can see that reasoning, but I think there's a world of difference between buying an $n hundred CE product like a console or TV, versus buying a mobile as part of a new package deal, upgrading hardware where old models of phone are being eclipsed faster than PC tech was progressing at its fastest. The up-and-coming teen demographic may well see goods as quite disposable, but I don't think most high-end console buyers are of that mindset yet. That is just my expectation though - I've seen no such figures or read reports of people trying to measure consumer attitudes to product longevity. Certainly within my sphere of experience, people don't shell out £200-300+ on an electronic product content with the expectation it may well break after two years and they'll have to buy a new replacement.
If you consider that in the context of the iPod and RAZR and so on, then I think you are wrong. These devices cost every bit as much as a game console, but the average consumer has no expectation of long-term reliability. These devices are generally used for as long as the initial lithium battery is viable, if not replaced sooner.
I wouldn't class handheld devices in with living-room products though. For starters the tech on these things, principally the storage, is increasing at such a rate that in two years, you can get a much more functional product. Thus consumers would likely upgrade anyway even if the device would keep working for years. I know lots of people, heck a good 90% of the time, who upgrade their mobiles not because they stop working but because they are changing contract and the phone comes in a bargain bundle. A TV isn't going to be totally superseded in 2 years, or even 5/10 years. Neither is a console, at least at the price being paid. That is a £300 console won't be superseded in 5 years time. A £120 console might if you buy it near the end of its life-cycle, but then you won't be able to buy the new model for £120. So unlike a mobile phone or iPod where you buy a replacement in 2 years because it's much better, a busted console will see you spending money on the same product, the same experience, with no upgrade. That won't sit pretty with most folk, I think.
I agree that most would expect a console to last longer thana cell phone. However how many people are actually having problems with the 360. I don't think the average consumer thinks the xbox 360 has a huge problem . The news reports on the quality have been out of the media for al ong time and the only ones that still report it are fan sites that attract the hardcore. The longer the new falcon systems (which apear to be largely problem free) are on the market the fewer new incendents of broken 360s will be reported.
I don't think advertising less hardware failures will do anything but remind people that htere were hardware figures and then people will think to the 30% numbers that were thrown around. I thin kthey should just advertise the 3 year warrenty better and thats it.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
This most certainly must be a market issue, especially when you are using cellphones as your basis for what console owners will do.
Consumers in the United States don't buy cell phones, for starters.
They buy service contracts for 1-2 years that subsidize the phones. The entire business model for the hardware company, the service providers and the end users of cell phones is completely dissimilar to the console market.
If you categorize consoles as expensive high end electronics (which I think is fair), you'd have to compare them to a similar market. Such as that for HDTVs, or Blu-Ray players, or component audio equipment, etc.
And consumers of those products most certainly do not expect a high failure rate or to replace those products in 1-2 years.
We don't know the size of the effect of the 360's failure rate on their sales, but I don't think a theory that says the size has been restricted because high failure rates are expected on high end mass produced purchases has any factual merit.
Consumers in the United States don't buy cell phones, for starters.
They buy service contracts for 1-2 years that subsidize the phones. The entire business model for the hardware company, the service providers and the end users of cell phones is completely dissimilar to the console market.
If you categorize consoles as expensive high end electronics (which I think is fair), you'd have to compare them to a similar market. Such as that for HDTVs, or Blu-Ray players, or component audio equipment, etc.
And consumers of those products most certainly do not expect a high failure rate or to replace those products in 1-2 years.
We don't know the size of the effect of the 360's failure rate on their sales, but I don't think a theory that says the size has been restricted because high failure rates are expected on high end mass produced purchases has any factual merit.
I don't think this is a reasonable categorization. Most consoles sell for between $100 and $250. This is a market well below all of the other items you listed. They may share a shelf in your house, but the similarities end there. I really think the iPod comparison is the most valid, but another comparison would be the Nintendo DS.
Cellphone contracts are popular in NA, but I think to say "nobody buys cellphones" is vastly overstating it. "Some" people buy cellphones with no contract, and there's a huge market for buying phones, mostly at the $200 to $400 price range. The comparison to consoles is valid.
Those consoles are the same hardware being sold at $300, $400, $500 at launch. I've spent more on my PS3 than I'll ever be spending on a monitor. If these devices couldn't be expect edot last a good many years, I couldn't afford a computer! Price isn't really the deciding factor on longevity, but the expected lifespan is defined I think mostly by product nature. As repeated, mobile phones are superseded and upgrades come as part of a package. So a phone might cost $400, versus a $250 console, but the console won't be obsolete in two years, and owners won't be looking to move onto a new product in two years. Someone buying a console now is expecting to be using it, playing their games library, some four or five years from now, if not longer. No-one buying a console at launch is expecting to replace it after two years. Well, some might look for cooler slimline versions. You can't rely on that when designing a product though.
I'm just trying to explain why I think customers reacted favorably to the RROD/warranty announcement. It should not be up for debate that the (short term) reaction was favorable, based on sales figures before and afterward. The question is why was it favorable. Your argument leaves no explanation. My explanation is that in 2007+ customers prioritize warranty over failure rate, in a way that they might not have prior to the ipod era.
Warranty and failure rate are basically the same thing though. If you have a product that'll last 5 years, or a product that'll break down but be replaced in 3 years to last you five years, it amounts to pretty much the same thing - the customer gets 5 years of use from their initial purchase. The warranty announcement was extending the product life. If people didn't care about product life because they expect things to be short lived, sales should not have been negatively impacted by lack of reliability. Which is in effect here :
1) "XB360 breaks down? So what, I expect it to after a while, and it won't stop me buying one now knowing I'll have to buy a new one when it breaks."
2) "XB360 breaks down? Well I'm not going to spend money on it if it's just going to break. Oh, there's a three year warranty so I can be sure I'll get good use? Then in that case I don't mind."
1) "XB360 breaks down? So what, I expect it to after a while, and it won't stop me buying one now knowing I'll have to buy a new one when it breaks."
2) "XB360 breaks down? Well I'm not going to spend money on it if it's just going to break. Oh, there's a three year warranty so I can be sure I'll get good use? Then in that case I don't mind."
Last time I looked the iphone costs $300 or more even with a 2 year service contract. My mogul on sprint cost me $200 even with a 2 year contract and my sisters lg rumor cost her $50 bucks .
Some people may opt for the free phone that you get however I doubt that most do. I see my younger cousin (17) and her friends and they all like to buy the newest phones. Alot of them have the venus and voyager by lg on verzion. Those are $200-300 phones even with a 2 year contract.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
What on Earth are you talking about?
When has the 360, in any flavor, ever been available for between $100 to $250?
It never has been.
Right.. Sure.. And.. What? 'this market' doesn't include the 360. So how is it relevant to the 360's failure rate?
The issue is where the similartities BEGAN, not where they ended.
Uhh... WHAT? Now you're comparing the price point of a handheld gaming device to that of a next-gen console? This makes sense to anybody, HOW?
"SOME" people do? Sure, and the percentage of that market would be what exactly? Care to estimate? I'll be happy to. I'll estimate the amount of cellphones purchases in the United States that are done so at Retail without any discount due to a service contract is about 5%.
I'll be willing to give you a margin of error up to 20%.
Even at 20%, which is incredibly absurd, still doesn't meet the threshold of being able to compare cellphone purchases to that of consoles, 100% of which are NOT subsided by service agreements.
Provide some statistical data to demonstrate that more than 20% of Americans purchase cellphones at RETAIL price without discounts due to service contracts and we can continue this conversation.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
OF COURSE it's up for debate, that's the entire factor that is being debated!
The EFFECT of the failure rate of the 360 CANNOT be measured because we don't know what sales would have been had the failure rate NOT EXISTED.
Making the assumption that the reaction to the failure rate was "FAVORABLE" is absurd on its face.
It was either a NON-FACTOR or it was NEGATIVE, but it certainly wasn't FAVORABLE as you've just claimed.
No, your basic premise that the reaction was favorable leaves no explanation.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
Your anecdotal evidence is a completely flawed failure.
For starters, the phones you are referencing would all cost even more had they not been subsidized by service contracts, and second, the percentage of cell phone users that purchase phones at retail without extending their contract or signing into a new contract is such a small percentage it isn't relevant to the conversation.
So you are comparing 'bleeding edge new adopters' who have cell phones to 'bleeding edge new adopters' who purchase consoles?
How is that relevant for this discussion?
You're talking about a single digit sample of the population of ownership.
You are also claiming that people are expecting to change their iPhone to something else within the 1-2 year time frame, because that's when 'high end mass produced electronics are expected to fail'.
So how many of your friends that you are using as anecdotal evidence purchased the iphone at FULL RETAIL without a service contract and have now gotten rid of the iphone and moved on to something else that they also purchased at FULL RETAIL price?
It simply doesn't happen.
The comparison is a horrific one, it doesn't translate because the business models are different, you simply can't compare cellphones to consoles just like you can't compare handhelds to consoles.
Show me statistics of how many people purchased the iPhone at the retail price of $500 without a service contract that expect to dump the phone in the next 6-10 months to pay full retail price of the 'next best thing' and if that percentage eclipses more than 50% of total users, then you might have a point.
As it is, the true numbers will be in single digits and probably below 1% of the total population.
The entire comparison is absurd.
why . Why is it absurd to compare a product that the seller sells at a loss and makes it up through product plans and future charges where they sell insurance monthly incase the phone breaks more than 60 days after purchase to a product that the seller sells at a loss and makes it up through future purchases and where they sell insurance plans (a flat fee) to insure it.
Cell phones last for 2 to 3 years and its replaced. There are very few people i know that have phones that last longer than that , they physicly crap out and its excepted .
I'm not saying its right for the console to crap out so soon but i think its much less of a scandle than it would have been 10 years ago. Look at alot of the big products lately. Ipods had massive problems , laptop batterys go boom , its not the same as it was before.
I think that for the majority of people they will go out and buy a 360 regardless of the rrod problem. A) it doesn't affect everyone B) its covered for 3 years in the case of a rrod . That is an industry leading warrenty. C) both the ps1 and ps2 had massive problems in its first year and they both wnet on to being the highest selling consoles ever.
I don't know anyone with an iphone that has had it for 2 years. Is it even 2 years old yet? My buddy bought it in july of 2007 . He bought the 8 gig and has already hit the wall in terms of space. He is eyeing the 16 gig but as i've told him , he is waiting for the second generation iphones. When you buy an iphone you pay full retail price of $300 /400 depending on the model your buying. Last time I checked there are no rebates for buying with a plan. Actually on the at&t website it only lets me buy a phone and says that a 2 year contract is required at activation. Their other phones have me buy the phone with a plan and the phone is then reduced in price http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/cell-phones/pda-phones-smartphones.jsp see how both iphones have their prices and then the phone after that shows the rebate you get for the 2 year contract.
How many iphone users who spent $400-500 bucks on an iphone and in 2 years will have battery problems or screen problems or what have you and will opt to buy the iphone 2 at full retail again .
its the way the cell phone industry works. Those phones that cost $500 bucks and then have $200 off don't really cost $500 bucks. That is just the service company trying to get you into longer and longer contracts where they make their money. Case in point. Look at sprint.com/sero They offer a 500 minute , unlimited text and data plan for $30 bucks. The same plan with verizon would cost you $100 bucks . You need to know a sprint employee to get the phone plan from them , however they do make money off it. Its actually been a very profitable plan. They have now made the $100 unlimited plan avalible to everyone because they can still make alot of money off it monthly. They charge you $100 bucks for what costs them $50 or under and whats more the majority of the people who opt for the plan will barely come close to everything they feature.
In the end I just think that your wrong. My generation (25) and the one under me are just consumers. We are trained at a young age to have the newest and best as often as possible. We see this every where in like. People buy new cell phones yearly or every other year. They buy the lasted cameras every few years even if the old ones work fine(guilty as charged) they lease a car for 2-3 years so they allways have a brand new hottest car to drive in.
That is the way this country is being trained. Now though we may see a shift away from that. Money will get tight over here and we may see people starting to expect to see things last longer than they have through the late 90s and early 2000s . However i think cheap electronics from china have changed the game forever.
Look at me . I spent 27 thousand on an suv last march and now i'm already eyeing the plug in vue based on the volt in 2010. I know realisticly though that I wont buy it till 2012 but man it looks really good to me. Just like my launch 360. I bought it at launch and now 3 years later i'm eyeing the elte . I don't need it , my hardrive isn't full but man i'm thinking of buying one and most likely will in the summer
Last edited by a moderator:
1. If you mean Sony's laptop batteries, that was a batch that people weren't happy with and Sony replaced. No-one was content for them to go boom
2) Anything dependent on battery tech has a short life because because tech isn't hot. Laptop's going back to their first battery powered beginnings needed the battery replaced after a short time because the longevity of NiCads was pants in that use, but there was no better alternative. Now we have lithiums, which are a step up but still not great. These devices are limited by technology. If a portable stops working because the battery dies, even using the best technology possible in batteries it'll happen, the owner is faced with either replacing the battery, normally at considerable cost - they aren't cheap, up moving on to the new, improved device. There's no similarity in consoles. There's no technology in them that is expected to fail in 18 months of use because engineers don't have available any better solution. If they put in a CPU that melts after 18 months, it's not because human technology is the limitation, but that they chose a cheap system. Quite different to battery tech, where there is no alternative to batteries with limited lifespans.
Which is exactly what I was saying earlier! People upgrade some devices like phones rapidly because after 2 years of ownership, a far better model is available. This isn't the case with large CE goods. A mobile phone maker knows no-one is going to keep their mobile for more than 2 years (not true, but let's stick to this generalization) so doesn't need to sweat long-term device longevity. If it dies in 2 years, or 18 months, the owner was going to chuck it away anyway so it doesn't matter, they don't care. You don't buy a brand new console every two years that surpasses your old console though. When you buy a console now, you don't do so thinking in 2 years you'll buy a different brand new console. There is not that expectation where there is with the mobiles. Thus the expected longevity, IMO, is for the machine to last until the owner moves on to the next new thing.