The rejected material has been used on my new Thinkpad

[mobcols]

Did anyone meet the same problem as me? When I bought a new Thinkpad, I found the scrap form inside. After checking that carefully, I found many questions. I called Lenovo, and they told me the rejected material has been used by mistake, but they don't think that is a big problem. How did they control their quality? I feel confused.

I also upload the details on Youtube, so you can find more information on that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAU6jxbR8no

Hope all of you will not meet the same problem as me. Poor me!

[BillMorrow]

hello and welcome to the thinkpads.com open forum..

in verifying your new membership i read this first post and i see some complaints against lenovo and your new thinkpad..

i can say, from many years of thinkpad ownership and reselling for many years up until IBM sold the PC division that i have seen some strange things but never such as you have documented on your youtube post..

my first GUESS is something is going on with your "new" thinkpad and the vendor you purchased it from.. the serial number label is telling in that those are never torn like you show in the video..
something happened and it may be a used or badly vendor refurbished returned thinkpad..

all this is speculation..

i suggest you contact the vendor anbd just tell them it looks like what you got was a used thinkpad and not a new, factory sealed thinkpad..

[mobcols]

Thank you for your reply. But the staff of Lenovo, Mr. Wang told me that was the mistake of production. They used the rejected material by mistake.

[BillMorrow]

that sounds like an interesting explanation..
but the serial number label seems to indicate something more might be going on..
still, did that thinkpad arrive in a factory sealed carton..?
if so, then mr. wang might be right..
if the box had been opened before you received it i would be suspicious..
still, they should offer apologies, a new replacement thinkpad and a free memory upgrade..
if it were me, i would sure do that right away..

good luck and welcome to the forum..

[Theokretes]

Yeah I would contact the vendor. None of the thinkpads we have ordered ever came in that condition.

Was the thinkpad sealed with one of the 'red lock' stickers? If not, it's not genuine and has been tampered with.

[mobcols]

that sounds like an interesting explanation..
but the serial number label seems to indicate something more might be going on..
still, did that thinkpad arrive in a factory sealed carton..?
if so, then mr. wang might be right..
if the box had been opened before you received it i would be suspicious..
still, they should offer apologies, a new replacement thinkpad and a free memory upgrade..
if it were me, i would sure do that right away..

good luck and welcome to the forum..

Yes the ThinkPad arrive in with the factory sealed carton, and it seems that carton didn't opened before.

[mobcols]

Yeah I would contact the vendor. None of the thinkpads we have ordered ever came in that condition.

Was the thinkpad sealed with one of the 'red lock' stickers? If not, it's not genuine and has been tampered with.

Yes that came with the red lock sticker. They changed that ThinkPad for me for free, but the new one still have some problem, bad screen with black point, missing pixel, and the adapter is very noise especially in the evening. Poor on me!

[TTY]

Hallo,
the lid's shape is not a bug, it's a feature. The lids are not intended to be totally flat, but to have the shape of an arch. The reason for this is, that one wants to avoid that the lid becomes deformed to a concave shape when pressure is applied to its centre. Instead, the lid is designed to flatten out when pressure is applied to it.

The width of the gap between the base and the battery probably doesn't impair functionality, i.e. the battery delivers current to the notebook even if there is a gap. I suppose it would be possible to manufacture a notebook with a smaller gap between battery and base, but it would be more expensive. I doubt that many customers would be willing to pay for design changes that don't improve functionality.