Why First Generation Apple Products Suck 148
mmAPP writes "CoolTechZone.com has an article up that pleads with Apple to focus on its quality assurance before releasing new products. From the article: 'If anything, I think Apple should do a better job at quality assurance than Dell, HP or other OEMs that deal with more units than Apple. The benefit of being a considerably small company (in comparison to other OEMs) is to focus on delivering quality products. There's no denying that Apple is perhaps one of the most innovative companies when it comes to consumer electronics, but ignoring quality as a result is not something it needs to ignore.'"
Re:Show^W Give me the money (Score:5, Informative)
Not similar to my experience. (Score:5, Informative)
Worst Apple product ever: The "saucer" power supplies. I've seen at least ten of them fail, some in ways that involved visibile flickering sparks over a period of time. We've had to mix and match parts to cobble together working power supplies. They sucked so much it's unbelievable... Even three years after they came out. Why? Not "rushed to market". "Fundamentally stupid design."
Dumb article. (Score:4, Informative)
All the heat problems people had with Inspirons in '03? The Pentium floating-point bug? It's just that Apple happens to release new products more often than most other companies, so they crop up now and again. I have a first-gen iPod that still works okay (though the battery is pretty much shot after all this time), and one of the first white iBooks that still works grandly.
I would say from my personal experience, Apple's biggest problem is breaking stuff with software updates. In the past, I've had sleep, cd burning, and fink unexpectedly broken with minor revisions; currently (10.4.6) airport is flaky. But that's not what people are talking about when they complain about first-gen products.
Re:Quick Product Cycle (Score:4, Informative)
It might be a good idea to look a bit further back in the history of a firm before making any sweeping statements. For every first-gen Apple product that sucked, you can name another that was wildly successful. Apple IIc's were great, Apple III's sucked. There are still Mac IIci's running today, the Mac IIvx was a "roadapple" the day it was released. The Blackbird series of Powerbooks were fabulous, the 5300's crashed and burned (literally). Aluminum PowerBook G4's were/are great machines, the iBook G3 series never were satisfactorily revised, the same form factor with a G4 was a winner from generation one.
One could continue on like this. I upgraded my first-gen iPod to 20gigs and I suspect I'll probably be buried with it (hopefully not soon).
Apple a 'small' company? (Score:3, Informative)
This erroneous concept that Apple is, in some way, a 'smalltime' player, an equal to the likes of, say Atari, Acorn, etc. deviates hugely from the truth.
Re:Apple's QA... (Score:2, Informative)
The DVD settlement was not in the form of a gift certificate for the Apple store or anything like this. It was "special deals" on various Apple merchandise, and no, none of it was reasonably priced. Most of it was extraneous stuff I wouldn't want anyway. The most interesting was the ram, but the price was not a "special deal." I remember looking up the same ram in price watch and it being like 20 dollars or something. It was pretty insulting to be honest. "Sorry about selling you a crappy computer, SPEND MORE MONEY!!!"
You are technically correct in saying that OS X ran on the imac. But I would say that crawl is far more appropriate. The early versions of OS X were not the most responsive, as I am sure you are aware. It was terrible on my computer even after maxing the ram out.
As for the fahrenheit thing, I completely retract that conversion. Yes I just typed it into google and went with it. Stupid mistake.. I found 68 degrees a bit surprising at the time.