Consumer Reports flips its recommendation for Microsoft Surface laptops/tablets due to breakage rates.

[LAwLz]

24 minutes ago, mr moose said:

This should put things into perspective"

 

https://www.squaretrade.com/laptop-reliability-1109/

 

If you look at the PDF report.    It is common for all laptops to experience 31% failure rate within  3 years.  With apple being right in the middle. 

 

It would appear netbooks are more likely to fail than laptops, indicating why the surface might well be over represented if it is compared to a higher number of laptops.  But even the figure of 25% (if true) is not out of the ordinary for that type of device.

Some things you should also take into consideration when reading that report.

1) It was made by an insurance company. While their findings might be legitimate, they also directly profits from the idea that laptops are unreliable.

2) That study is 8 years old, and talks about laptops which were 11 years old at this point.

3) If we assume that both studies and predictions are accurate, that would still make Microsoft laptops much less reliable than even the least reliable brand in the Squaretrade report. It is estimated that 25% of Surface owners will have issues within the first two years. In the Squaretrade report it was estimated that about 16% of HP owners will have issues during the same time period, and that was the least reliable brand tested. 16% to 25% is a big difference.

[mr moose]

17 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Some things you should also take into consideration when reading that report.

1) It was made by an insurance company. While their findings might be legitimate, they also directly profits from the idea that laptops are unreliable.

2) That study is 8 years old, and talks about laptops which were 11 years old at this point.

3) If we assume that both studies and predictions are accurate, that would still make Microsoft laptops much less reliable than even the least reliable brand in the Squaretrade report. It is estimated that 25% of Surface owners will have issues within the first two years. In the Squaretrade report it was estimated that about 16% of HP owners will have issues during the same time period, and that was the least reliable brand tested. 16% to 25% is a big difference.

I made the assumption it was recent becasue it seems people are still using it to judge current laptops

 

 

This is the page I got that report from.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/which-laptops-are-the-most-reliable/

 

 

Too many assumptions here for my liking now.     

[jagdtigger]

3 hours ago, themctipers said:

no fucking shit it is garbage, you're comparing a much more expensive true quad core laptop against a ultrabook

 

its like saying a 2700k will destroy a g3258 in gaming , no fucking shit

Not really, my laptop has a 17,3" screen and costed roughly 850 USD. The cheapest laptop with the same screen size and with a 7200U is around 800 USD.

[themctipers]

28 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Not really, my laptop has a 17,3" screen and costed roughly 850 USD. The cheapest laptop with the same screen size and with a 7200U is around 800 USD.

I bought mine for 650 US new (CAD to usd)

reee I thought they shoved HQ CPUs in the $1200 mark laptops, at least that's how expensive it is here for one. 

[jagdtigger]

6 minutes ago, themctipers said:

I bought mine for 650 US new (CAD to usd)

reee I thought they shoved HQ CPUs in the $1200 mark laptops, at least that's how expensive it is here for one. 

Well in my usual webshop the 800USD is the cheapest option in the 17" screen size range. BTW mine is a QM not a HQ, and its 4 years old.

[Bcat00]

I personally wouldnt get a surface pro but my sister did and shes loving it?

 

Then again shes the type to buy extra long warrenty and to drop soda onto her laptops, aka macbook pro dead after 2 year.

 

also she wouldnt even attempt to fix a computer and would run off to the repair shop if a simple button doesnt work or audio

doesnt sound right.

[Bananasplit_00]

11 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Not really, my laptop has a 17,3" screen and costed roughly 850 USD. The cheapest laptop with the same screen size and with a 7200U is around 800 USD.

How can a 17.3" laptop even be called a laptop anymore? I find 15.6" to be to big to carry. 

[jagdtigger]

1 minute ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

How can a 17.3" laptop even be called a laptop anymore? I find 15.6" to be to big to carry. 

Because its a true laptop, the things that called laptop(/ultrabook, but its just a fancy name) nowadays are more like a netbook in most cases...