Holy Toledo, Lenovo replaced IPS UXGA with non-IPS UXGA !!

Message

#31 Post by **Mark@Lenovo** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:03 am

Wearetheborg,

I'm also communicating with Jamiphar via email on this. As I posted on the Lenovo forum, there is a substitution to 42T0356 for continuity of supply and I have been assured that this is an IPS display of the same specs as well, but that an alternate part number was required due to source and logistic needs of the business.

We are looking into this further. If the second panel ordered for wearetheborg turns out to have an issue we will take next appropriate steps to make this right.

While very rare, off spec parts, or mislabeled parts could get into the process, and we would take appropriate action to resolve that if it occured.

Lophiomys,

In my opinion, recommendations to contact consumer protection agencies including BBB, Attourney General offices, Media, other consumer advocacy sites (who oftern have their own agendas) do not increase trust, openess, or transparency.

Rather, such actions impede it. Our ability to discuss issues on blogs and forums with varying degrees of openess is founded upon mutual respect and trust with the audience.

It also sounds like you have an open issue or concern as well?
Am I working with you already (hard to keep up some days), or do you need help? If so, send me a PM with the particulars...

All,

As a comment.. Private messages are intended as just that - private. If I trade private messages with personal contact information, serial numbers, or some additional detail which may be required to understand a specific issue, I have an expectation as does the other party that it will stay private.

If I want something public, I will post it publically. I'm disappointed to see that a private message was quoted publically here.

If I find that my private exchanges are at risk of being posted to the public domain on other forums, then I'm limited in what information I can share, and I'm limited in my ability to help.

I'm asking for your help.

Peace.

Mark

lophiomys · #32 Post by **lophiomys** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:08 pm

Mark@Lenovo,
I really appreciate your initiative and especially I do hold the
greatest respect for you.

Yes you are working with me..
And you are the first who responds to my issue since
one whole month.

Please try to understand my point of view:
After patiently waiting for one month,
I have been contacting since last week various "official"
Lenovo representants through the normal channels.
None did respond in an appropriate way.
Again, you are the first to do so, many thanks.
The same for Wearetheborg, who also ran against walls
in the beginning, and needed to drop your name on the phone
in order to get the correct spare part re-ordered.

Therefore this is the reason, why I lost all my trust in the customer
services and this is the reason why I opt for maximum publicity
as a remedy. I really tried everything else before.

Of course, if I do see a way forward to resolve the issue,
I will avoid any actions, which could impede progress,
and given that, I would do everything in support to reach
a happy ending.

Regards,
Lophiomys

wearetheborg · #33 Post by **wearetheborg** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:39 pm

Mark,

I'm so sorry, I thought the PM only contained info you had posted in a reply to my thread over at Lenovo forums, just that the PM was clearer. This wont happen again. I really apologize.

#34 Post by **JaneL** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:54 pm

wearetheborg wrote:This wont happen again. I really apologize.

It had better not.

There's been a slight modification to the Rules of the Road to cover this since the existing statement which said "Respect the privacy of others." apparently was too obscure.

wearetheborg · #35 Post by **wearetheborg** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:26 pm

Update:

The tech came and replaced the LCD today. It is the same non-flexview LCD.

The tech also said that after the first time he replaced my LCD last week, he had another LCD replacement job for the exact same issue (only that the replacement LCD was correct). He said since I had shown him a flexview LCD for comparison, he knew exactly the matter in the second job.

Mark is looking into this.

So, we now have 4 cases of dud screens.

Here is a picture of the LCD:

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/9514/t43lcdxq1.jpg

Here are the numbers I noted:

Area1:

IEC S/N: CG3100J9P008ZD

SPS U000020110

Date Code: J3074

Area 2:

6091L-0125A

030702 A2

Area 3:

P/N: 68705-0003E

DESC: LP150U03-A2

Area 4:

SCB3720LV2A00125AN

ajkula66 · #36 Post by **ajkula66** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:43 pm

15U03 refers to ID Tech IPS 1600x1200, but it's A2 that seems to be the problem here...and it's not even on the list there...

#37 Post by **erik** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:11 pm

LP150U03-A2 is an LG-philips 15" UXGA panel. the kicker... it's TN, not IPS.

ajkula66 · #38 Post by **ajkula66** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:16 pm

Wow............is it possible that we've found the root of the problem here...tremendously similar product codes between two different suppliers, with entirely different meanings...?????

#39 Post by **erik** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:33 pm

it's possible. 15U/150U means 15"/15.0" UXGA and the "3" is just a series designator for that particular display manufacturer. the similar part numbers are purely coincidental between LG's TN and ID Tech's IPS models. with that said, they could easily be a cause for confusion during parts ordering by someone unaware that these numbers are not cross-compatible between display manufacturers.

Izzyzx · #40 Post by **Izzyzx** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:26 pm

I think I can explain what is happening here… A con-artist in the Far East or Middle East saw an opportunity to stick it us gullible Americans. They said well... if we can make fake Gucci bags and Rolex watches, why not make fake HDD and LCDs. All they had to do was find a knock off and re-label it (or steal the logo). In order for their copies to pass the test we should be able to sell them to IBM and Lenovo. And they did, but they also release these counterfeit to the PC parts market.

I don’t beleive IBM, Dell, Lenovo would risk their reputation on selling fake components.

jamiphar · #41 Post by **jamiphar** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:48 pm

Izzyzx wrote:I think I can explain what is happening here… A con-artist in the Far East or Middle East saw an opportunity to stick it us gullible Americans. They said well... if we can make fake Gucci bags and Rolex watches, why not make fake HDD and LCDs. All they had to do was find a knock off and re-label it (or steal the logo). In order for their copies to pass the test we should be able to sell them to IBM and Lenovo. And they did, but they also release these counterfeit to the PC parts market.

I don’t beleive IBM, Dell, Lenovo would risk their reputation on selling fake components.

A con-artist doesn't have to be in another country to be dishonest. There are plenty of crooks in the US. Be careful about generalizing things like this.

I think it's much more likely that there was simply a mistake in the parts supplied. After all, the LCDs are completely compatible and virtually identical to the flexview panels when the screens aren't displaying an image.

It's probably just a matter of the person in charge of ordering the parts not being familiar with the difference between IPS and non-IPS.

These aren't fake parts, just wrong ones. It could be from the same supplier the non-IPS Dell and HP screens came from a few years ago.

Tim M · #42 Post by **Tim M** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:10 pm

jamiphar wrote: I think it's much more likely that there was simply a mistake in the parts supplied. After all, the LCDs are completely compatible and virtually identical to the flexview panels when the screens aren't displaying an image.

It's probably just a matter of the person in charge of ordering the parts not being familiar with the difference between IPS and non-IPS.

These aren't fake parts, just wrong ones. It could be from the same supplier the non-IPS Dell and HP screens came from a few years ago.

I agree. It's far more likely that this mix-up is due to laziness and not insidious intent.

Izzyzx · #43 Post by **Izzyzx** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:58 pm

I agree the con-artist could be right here in the US. But if you go on the Lenovo website it specifically states which LCD panel manufacturer is correct for the 15.0-in UXGA.

http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site. ... MIGR-55304

Why is it so hard to believe that someone is getting rich off our misforture. Is it so hard to accept someone would create a destrutive computer virus just to proof they're so freaken smart.

Who was it that said: "I will dress in bright and cheery colors, and so throw my enemies into confusion."

Izzyzx

jamiphar · #44 Post by **jamiphar** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:23 pm

I really don't see any reason to assume that there's any kind of con or scam going on. An analogy might be if you had a 100GB/7200RPM drive that died, and IBM replaced it with a 100GB/5400RPM drive because it was mislabeled as a sub-part of the original part. Inexperienced workers could very well not know the difference between the speeds and mistakenly assign it as a compatible part.

To be honest, you have nothing to back up what you've said, while everything so far points to someone making an honest mistake with the part labeling.

fasterbybike · #45 Post by **fasterbybike** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 5:21 am

I think it is a honest mistake. Even an experienced member like George misread the model number a couple of days ago and confused 5U03 with 50U03.

ajkula66 · #46 Post by **ajkula66** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 6:21 am

George is seriously overdue for Lasik...

, all jokes aside, but is being a chicken about it...

Izzyzx · #47 Post by **Izzyzx** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 12:54 pm

"Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it."

What can I say... Have a nice day.

lophiomys · #48 Post by **lophiomys** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 1:39 pm

What happend to this warranty case?
22 days since the last post from wearetheborg.
Did you get the correct Flexview LCD?

Holy Toledo, Lenovo replaced IPS UXGA with non-IPS UXGA !!

Who is online