The Internet was Right: Microsoft admits X360 flaws

[crosseye]

Sure, but they are obviously inherently unreliable. Mine hasn't moved in 8 months, it's on top of my AV rack in open air, the power supply is on hardwood, with plenty of open air around it. It just started to really crap out last week.

That's incorrect. YOUR system is obviously defective. It happens and it doesn't matter what complex electronic device it is. Some of them WILL be defective. The big problem is this:
When a console launches, hundreds of thousands are sold immediately. Some of those are going to be defective. Other complex electronic devices have time on their side. They don't sell so quickly, thus the number of defective units in consumer hands is a lot lower. They slowly trickle in giving the company time to figure out which batch, plant, part, etc. is defective. Then, they can recover product that would have gone to consumers before they get off the shelf and replace them with "functioning" product. There are still defective units, the difference, unlike a console they didn't actually reach the hands of consumers. Thus, the appearance is the defect rate is much lower.

 

[-=P3tRaN=-]

lets not bring ps2 into this.
and mind you, I have pretty good "basic" education on electronic goods handling, yet, I can be considerer a "multiplatform gamer" just by the # of ps2's I have
lets just hope that ps3 will be a different story.

 

[-=P3tRaN=-]

Sure, but they are obviously inherently unreliable. Mine hasn't moved in 8 months, it's on top of my AV rack in open air, the power supply is on hardwood, with plenty of open air around it. It just started to really crap out last week.

yes, of course there is always a chance that a console turns defective, without the owner doing anything wrong.

 

[scooby_dooby]

That's incorrect. YOUR system is obviously defective. It happens and it doesn't matter what complex electronic device it is. Some of them WILL be defective. The big problem is this:
When a console launches, hundreds of thousands are sold immediately. Some of those are going to be defective. Other complex electronic devices have time on their side. They don't sell so quickly, thus the number of defective units in consumer hands is a lot lower. They slowly trickle in giving the company time to figure out which batch, plant, part, etc. is defective. Then, they can recover product that would have gone to consumers before they get off the shelf and replace them with "functioning" product. There are still defective units, the difference, unlike a console they didn't actually reach the hands of consumers. Thus, the appearance is the defect rate is much lower.

Look at the number of members on this board alone that are on their 2nd or 3rd 360. That is not normal for any consumer electronics device. I realize what you're saying, but there's no denying that there are signifigant issues with the reliability of the first 360's.

 

[crosseye]

Look at the number of members on this board alone that are on their 2nd or 3rd 360. That is not normal for any consumer electronics device. I realize what you're saying, but there's no denying that there are signifigant issues with the reliability of the first 360's.

I am not arguing that the first batch of 360s didn't have a problem. However, to say look at how many people have had a 2nd etc is ignoring all the people that haven't. I've got 2 launch systems and neither of them has had a problem. The only reason I keep pointing back to the PS2 is as a reference point. It's still hard to get some people to believe they had a massive problem. You know why? Clever tactics of outright denying ANY problem. By doing this many people were convinced it just wasn't happening. MS went the opposite route. Said some consoles will be defective and gave people a chance to repair those consoles.

For those that know anything about psychology (**purely speaking from a psychological standpoint) Sony made the right move. MS had already convinced people there was a problem. Guess what, now everybody thinks the system itself is, and will remain, defective. Talk about the PS2 and the response you get will be "there was never a problem. that was just some made up crap."

You do have to hand it to Sony, believe it or not, they are the KINGS of psychology.

 

[-=P3tRaN=-]

You do have to hand it to Sony, believe it or not, they are the KINGS of psychology.

well, they can't fool me very easily

and I really appreciate the more "mature" stance that ms has assumed. and not only on defects.

 

[scooby_dooby]

It's still hard to get some people to believe they had a massive problem. You know why? Clever tactics of outright denying ANY problem. By doing this many people were convinced it just wasn't happening. MS went the opposite route. Said some consoles will be defective and gave people a chance to repair those consoles.

I guess so, it seems in the real world it's common knowledge that the PS2's were very unreliable, so I don't know how effective this tactic was. Forums are a whole different beast, and not really representative of the real situation.

As for 360, it already has the reputation as extremely unreliable due to the whopping amounts of bad press it recieved, so I really don't know how much of an effect this announcement will have on that perception, almost none would be my guess.

 

[Diamond.G]

My launch 360 has been good to me so far. I wonder if I can get MS to extend my 2 year warranty another year, especially since mine is a launch unit...

 

[crosseye]

My launch 360 has been good to me so far. I wonder if I can get MS to extend my 2 year warranty another year, especially since mine is a launch unit...

Magic 8 Ball says .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Not a chance in hell.

 

[crosseye]

can't edit my freakin posts sorry.

If people would read the WHOLE statement MS made, it would be pretty evident what was happening.

Upon further investigation, it was further discovered that the bulk of the units were isolated to a group that was part of the initial manufacturing run of the console

Let's put this in perspective here. Let's say 60k where in that "group" (which is a large number of "for sure" defective consoles). That leaves what, 440k launch systems. If you take 3-5% of that you've got 13K-22K more defective consoles. You're starting to push toward a quarter of the launch consoles coming down as defective.

When attempting to do what MS did with the worldwide launch, a lot of complex deals come in to play. They are pumping full steam to get as many systems out as possible. Not every unit is playtested. They use random samples. Even then, the systems weren't just not working. It took several days or long hours. Something testing just doesn't do no matter what company.

The fact is, they isolated the problem and have now, and always might I point out, offered a solution. People can say whatever they want, but the fact that 400+k launch (not to mention the hundreds of thousands after launch that seem to be WELL within 3-5% defect) are having no problem whatsoever says the issue overall is not as big as some would like to make it.

 

[scooby_dooby]

The fact is, they isolated the problem and have now, and always might I point out, offered a solution. People can say whatever they want, but the fact that 400+k launch (not to mention the hundreds of thousands after launch that seem to be WELL within 3-5% defect) are having no problem whatsoever says the issue overall is not as big as some would like to make it.

Fact is they told us explicitly the failure rate was not above 3-5%. So we really can't believe anything they say with regards to this issue.

 

[Sis]

can't edit my freakin posts sorry.

If people would read the WHOLE statement MS made, it would be pretty evident what was happening.

I'm not sure why you're trying to spin this. The bottom line is that there was an issue, widely reported on the Internet but always denied by Microsoft. You have many Xbox fans in this thread basically coming around to the idea that the initial launch units may be defective, and yet you continue to try to downplay the significance of this report.

Just let it go. No one is saying the Xbox sucks. Certainly no one is saying Microsoft sucks. If anything, many are impressed with how they're extending the warranties and giving refunds.

I've long held the view that the malfunctioning units was more a symptom of the internet era where problems are reverberated and compounded beyond the actual problem. It was certainly not the case here, and many of us have a bit of egg on our face for downplaying the problems people were having (I include myself in the "egg on face" category).

So, please, drop it. I find the discussion of why it's happening far more interesting than seeing someone downplay it or switching the topic to Sony's past problems. Create a seperate thread if you want to discuss that.

 

[crosseye]

Fact is they told us explicitly the failure rate was not above 3-5%. So we really can't believe anything they say with regards to this issue.

That's fine. I just expect more balance out of this board. Just because I'm new to posting here doesn't mean I haven't been reading for some time. Remarks like that should go for all the companies, but somehow it just isn't happening.

I'm not sure why you're trying to spin this. The bottom line is that there was an issue, widely reported on the Internet but always denied by Microsoft. You have many Xbox fans in this thread basically coming around to the idea that the initial launch units may be defective, and yet you continue to try to downplay the significance of this report.

See, here is where I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. MS did not deny that systems can be defective. I don't downplay the significance of this report. On the contrary, I believe this report reaffirms the ONLY problems were with a group in the INITIAL batch.

In fact, you should be the one chastised for your selective quote and dramatic bolding to make it look WAY different than what was actually being said. Furthermore you go a little overboard with the defect rate possibly at 50%. That's just downright absurd. I'm sorry, but if you didn't know, companies do have to answer to shareholders. That would be HUGE if it were the case. The reality is due to the initial batch, it's probably right about 16%.

I could care less if you, the next person, or anyone for that matter thought MS sucks. I am loyal to no company. Show me something better than my ipod and I'm there. I see a gas station that has a better price, I'm filling up. I see games I like, I'm buying.

 

[Geo]

Fact is they told us explicitly the failure rate was not above 3-5%. So we really can't believe anything they say with regards to this issue.

When did they do this? Have we considered the possibility that these things are dying in a group as well, post that statement? That would not be unusual in the least. We had a group of 100+ PCs once that ran fine for 2 years. . . and then over a course of two months, about 1/3 of them blew their PSU's in most spectacular fashion. . .

 

[crosseye]

When did they do this? Have we considered the possibility that these things are dying in a group as well, post that statement? That would not be unusual in the least. We had a group of 100+ PCs once that ran fine for 2 years. . . and then over a course of two months, about 1/3 of them blew their PSU's in most spectacular fashion. . .

I'm sorry, they just can't grasp this concept. They don't understand that the systems just didn't stop working on day one. In fact, the longer it took for systems to stop working, the more dilluted the percentage of faulty systems became. The fact that consoles made anytime starting in 2006 have not had problems even further brings the percent down.

Maybe an example would help. On day one 500k systems launch. By January, 1.4 million have shipped. 50k consoles roll through for repair. Guess what, that's less than 5%. February 2million shipped. Another 50k consoles roll through. Guess what, they're still in the acceptable range. You see, people keep thinking all the consoles broke at once on the first day. THAT is where you guys start to sound crack pot.

 

[Sis]

That would be HUGE if it were the case. The reality is due to the initial batch, it's probably right about 16%.

Why is the number you pulled out of your ass any more or less valid than the number I pulled out of my ass? Do you have insight into their production issues? Studies of failures to base your number on? How do you know in 6 months from now Microsoft won't re-evaluate post-launch failures and say, "There are problems with those as well?" In fact, what do you know, other than what Microsoft has said?

The quote was selected due to my wanting to highlight a point, detailed in the title of this thread. Accusing me of selective quoting is just slight of hand debating.

Note that the quote you felt I intentionally left off does not negate my point. It only clarifies the impact, which was not the point of the thread nor the point of my 50% statistic remark.

 

[Sis]

Maybe an example would help. On day one 500k systems launch. By January, 1.4 million have shipped. 50k consoles roll through for repair. Guess what, that's less than 5%. February 2million shipped. Another 50k consoles roll through. Guess what, they're still in the acceptable range. You see, people keep thinking all the consoles broke at once on the first day. THAT is where you guys start to sound crack pot.

That 50K would be grouped by production time and facility, so you'd be right if the 50K was evenly spread throughout all produced consoles. That is not what happened here.

 

[crosseye]

That 50K would be grouped by production time and facility, so you'd be right if the 50K was evenly spread throughout all produced consoles. That is not what happened here.

What exactly is so hard to understand about this? IF out of the first 500k to launch on day one, 100k were in fact defective, it does NOT mean all 100k will show they are defective on the same day. It's more likely that they will stagger.

i.e. 25k go defective through Jan. Another 75k go defective through Feb. The defective rate remains the same.

 

[Rolf N]

When did they do this?

It's funny. The original message seems to have fallen off the end of the internet, but e.g. here we have already talked about 3~5% return rates it in June.

Not a Mercury News subscriber? That may or may not be a problem. Or use this carbon copy instead.

Wherever the original message went I don't know. I recall, with some confidence, however that Microsoft officially made a statement that all the hoopla around the red rings of death was just the stupid internet talking out of its rear, and that the failure rate for the 360 was well within the normal range for consumer electronics, purported to be 3~5%. When asked about an exact figure a reply was denied.

Believe it or not.

 

[crosseye]

The first reports of the 3-5% started coming around late Jan., early Feb. See a few posts up and start going down to see how this could very well be when considering the overall number of consoles shipped vs. those returned at the time.

Even if 20% of the launch consoles were defective, they didn't all go bad on the same day. They staggered in over the months. As more consoles were shipped, the TOTAL defective rate drastically started falling. It was the INITIAL batch of consoles, not those from Jan. on that had the problems.