3 ms·

It's true, but it doesn't apply in this case. Here's the backstory: When Apple released the retina MBP in 2012, they had 2 suppliers for the 15 inch retina sc

by jychang 12y ago

It's true, but it doesn't apply in this case. Here's the backstory: When Apple released the retina MBP in 2012, they had 2 suppliers for the 15 inch retina screen: Samsung and LG. To be fair with Apple, isn't gaming the system by giving earlier review models better quality screens. More likely, this is to ensure that instead of relying on one supplier, they can diversify their screen manufacturing so they don't get screwed if one manufacturer has production difficulties. At the time, I had purchased a retina MBP with the LG screen that summer. (You don't know what screen you will get when you buy it). The LG screen, as it turned out, had very bad burn-in problems. After complaining to the Apple store a few times, they finally relented and switched it out for me to the better Samsung screen. The customer service at the time wasn't the best, since Apple should have gone "This is a real issue, if you can show proof of screen burn in on your LG screen, we'll immediately replace it for you" rather than try to brush it under the rug. However, it wasn't a malicious case of screwing over customers after sending better units to reviewers.

Curmudgel 12y ago
The problem is that consumers could not know whether they were buying a defective product or not, even if they knew about the problem. Two different products were sold without any means of differentiating them, which is inexcusable. It would have been very easy to construct different serial numbers for the different models. It could have been as simple as adding an A or B or adding something to the tiny print on the back of the laptop or and the packaging.
- sigterm 12y ago
  To what end should hardware manufactures be required to inform their customers of component changes? One big advantage of Apple products compared to other competitors is that there are very limited number of decisions for average consumers to make. It will cause huge amount of confusion if a new model name and change list is generated each time any of the thousands of components in an MBP changes.
  - mikeash 12y ago
    It seems to me that focusing on component changes is completely missing the point. The real problem was not that Apple had two subtly different versions of their MacBook Pro with no way to tell them apart. The real problem was that Apple was shipping seriously defective hardware. Imagine if Apple hand standardized entirely on the defective LG panels. That eliminates the "panel lottery" complaint, right? And yet the actual problem, in terms of what you get when you buy one, is worse, not better. Manufacturers need to ship products that are fit for purpose and that perform as advertised. As long as that's maintained, swapping components shouldn't be a problem. If swapping components affects that, then it's the bad products, not the swapping, that are the real problem.
    - sigterm 12y ago
      I totally agree with you. For this particular article, if there is a clear and comprehensive specification on how the drives should perform (IOPs, latency, BW, etc), the problem will be resolved immediately with no controversy. The comment I was replying to implied that Apple should provide a means for customers to distinguish the products, which I do not believe is a realistic solution because swapping components is quite common in hardware world.
      - mikeash 12y ago
        I agree with you too! I'm just expanding on that a bit, and saying how even if distinguishing the products was somehow realistic, it's solving the wrong problem anyway.
  - Curmudgel 12y ago
    Apple already has different model identifiers and different model names for their MacBook Pros. That's because they don't sell only one version of each laptop; they usually offer two or three versions that have different processors and different amounts of RAM. There were 6 different model numbers and 9 different configurations (across two different sizes and two different batches) of the MacBook Pro sold in 2013 alone: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4132 http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4132 I'm not suggesting that they advertise the MacBook Pros by their model numbers. My point is that they already have to differentiate between different models and different configurations, so it would not be difficult for them to make the model numbers different (it could be simple as one letter or digit change at the end) when they change such a significant part component.
glitch003 12y ago
I turned in my July 2012 MBPr about a month ago for the screen burn in issues. It went almost exactly like this: "This is a real issue, if you can show proof of screen burn in on your LG screen, we'll immediately replace it for you" Except that I watched them run the test on it instead of proving that it had burn-in myself. Got it back a few days later with a new screen :) So I guess it just took a bit of time for them to admit the issue.
kbar13 12y ago
while apple's customer support is generally pretty good for ordinary requests, they are known for never admitting fault. i.e. "you're holding the phone the wrong way"

by jychang 12y ago

Curmudgel 12y ago

The problem is that consumers could not know whether they were buying a defective product or not, even if they knew about the problem. Two different products were sold without any means of differentiating them, which is inexcusable. It would have been very easy to construct different serial numbers for the different models. It could have been as simple as adding an A or B or adding something to the tiny print on the back of the laptop or and the packaging.

sigterm 12y ago
To what end should hardware manufactures be required to inform their customers of component changes? One big advantage of Apple products compared to other competitors is that there are very limited number of decisions for average consumers to make. It will cause huge amount of confusion if a new model name and change list is generated each time any of the thousands of components in an MBP changes.
- mikeash 12y ago
  It seems to me that focusing on component changes is completely missing the point. The real problem was not that Apple had two subtly different versions of their MacBook Pro with no way to tell them apart. The real problem was that Apple was shipping seriously defective hardware. Imagine if Apple hand standardized entirely on the defective LG panels. That eliminates the "panel lottery" complaint, right? And yet the actual problem, in terms of what you get when you buy one, is worse, not better. Manufacturers need to ship products that are fit for purpose and that perform as advertised. As long as that's maintained, swapping components shouldn't be a problem. If swapping components affects that, then it's the bad products, not the swapping, that are the real problem.
  - sigterm 12y ago
    I totally agree with you. For this particular article, if there is a clear and comprehensive specification on how the drives should perform (IOPs, latency, BW, etc), the problem will be resolved immediately with no controversy. The comment I was replying to implied that Apple should provide a means for customers to distinguish the products, which I do not believe is a realistic solution because swapping components is quite common in hardware world.
    - mikeash 12y ago
      I agree with you too! I'm just expanding on that a bit, and saying how even if distinguishing the products was somehow realistic, it's solving the wrong problem anyway.
- Curmudgel 12y ago
  Apple already has different model identifiers and different model names for their MacBook Pros. That's because they don't sell only one version of each laptop; they usually offer two or three versions that have different processors and different amounts of RAM. There were 6 different model numbers and 9 different configurations (across two different sizes and two different batches) of the MacBook Pro sold in 2013 alone: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4132 http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4132 I'm not suggesting that they advertise the MacBook Pros by their model numbers. My point is that they already have to differentiate between different models and different configurations, so it would not be difficult for them to make the model numbers different (it could be simple as one letter or digit change at the end) when they change such a significant part component.

glitch003 12y ago

I turned in my July 2012 MBPr about a month ago for the screen burn in issues. It went almost exactly like this: "This is a real issue, if you can show proof of screen burn in on your LG screen, we'll immediately replace it for you" Except that I watched them run the test on it instead of proving that it had burn-in myself. Got it back a few days later with a new screen :) So I guess it just took a bit of time for them to admit the issue.

kbar13 12y ago

while apple's customer support is generally pretty good for ordinary requests, they are known for never admitting fault. i.e. "you're holding the phone the wrong way"