T43 == Crap

Message

zamxz · #1 Post by **zamxz** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:28 pm

I am tired of the quality IBM provides me.
First of, I had the 2668-71u...the wireless card didnt work...
Second, I decided to get the 2668-74u. The wireless card works
wonders but had a bad pixel( really noticeable) and when you close the laptop...there was a gap between the lcd and the keybroad...
With that, I decided to try again...maybe the third one will be a charm you know.
Well I am using the third one(which is still the 2668-74u), tested the finger
scanner and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesnt.
The finger scanner wasnt a biggy. However, like again this one came with a dead pixel.
I was gonna keep it since the dead pixel is on the lower left and you only see it when that corner is all blue. Out of nowhere, the LCD had a dead pixel right at the center of the screen now!
I thought I could live with one dead pixel and a really loud fan. But the thought of the quality IBM had delivered to me is just awful!
Warning to all protential buyers,
IBM is not the greatest laptop out there.
maybe just a barely decent one.

egibbs · #2 Post by **egibbs** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:36 pm

Click the Ultranav center button.

Steve007 · #3 Post by **Steve007** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:54 pm

zamxz wrote:I am tired of the quality IBM provides me.
First of, I had the 2668-71u...the wireless card didnt work...
Second, I decided to get the 2668-74u. The wireless card works
wonders but had a bad pixel( really noticeable) and when you close the laptop...there was a gap between the lcd and the keybroad...
With that, I decided to try again...maybe the third one will be a charm you know.
Well I am using the third one(which is still the 2668-74u), tested the finger
scanner and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesnt.
The finger scanner wasnt a biggy. However, like again this one came with a dead pixel.
I was gonna keep it since the dead pixel is on the lower left and you only see it when that corner is all blue. Out of nowhere, the LCD had a dead pixel right at the center of the screen now!
I thought I could live with one dead pixel and a really loud fan. But the thought of the quality IBM had delivered to me is just awful!
Warning to all protential buyers,
IBM is not the greatest laptop out there.
maybe just a barely decent one.

How many times did you mention dead pixels in your post? Were you going for a world record?

admsteiner · #4 Post by **admsteiner** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:06 pm

Steve007 wrote: How many times did you mention dead pixels in your post? Were you going for a world record?

He had a dead pixel?

In all seriousness, with the exception of the gap between the montior and keyboard when closed I fail to see the problems.

Many LCD panels have dead pixels. You happend to get one that had one. It is not uncommon or unusual. If its a problem you can return it and have IBM send you a new one.

Not all wireless cards work all the time. Sometimes I have problems with mine, but it invariably ends up being an issue with the access point and not my card. Are you 10000% sure that it was the card?

The fingerprint scanner...if its dirty it may not work correctly, if you swipe the wrong way it may not work correctly. None of these are automatically equipment problems...

--Adam

craigg · #5 Post by **craigg** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:26 pm

Maybe you're just having bad luck with the few bad pixels but everything else seems subjective.

I am using virtually the same T43 as you and it works exceptionally well. I have had no problem connecting via wireless B, G, and also have synced with several bluetooth devices. It has worked perfectly and the range is great too.

The finger print reader is very sensitive and may not function well if it is dirty or you have sweaty hands. I found out the hard way how sensitive it is when I burned my finger grabbing a hot piece of chicken out of the oven. My finger only burned for a minute or two but I guess I seared some flesh and the finger print reader would not read that finger for a few days...lucky for me I scanned more than one finger

zamxz · #6 Post by **zamxz** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:36 pm

I see there is a problem because when you buy something you expect everything to be in working form(or what is advertised). IBM doesnt advertise that the lcd may have bad pixels, the wireless card may not work or the fact that the fingerprint reader may not work all the time. So I am only stating this because it is expected from IBM to have all the functionalities checked before leaving the factory. And if we continued to accept the flaws from IBM, it only makes them think it is alright--while the consumer will have to pay for a crappy product that they have a high expectation for. I am only trying to voice my opinion so that others will have the opportunity to "see" my revelation.
Also, out of the 3 laptops I have gotten from IBM, 2 of the LCD screens have atleast one bad pixel.

stgreek · #7 Post by **stgreek** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:53 pm

zamxz wrote:I see there is a problem because when you buy something you expect everything to be in working form(or what is advertised).

...which is why you were able to return your laptop for a new one...

zamxz · #8 Post by **zamxz** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:28 pm

how many times must I return to get an advertised one???; _)

baraider · #9 Post by **baraider** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:32 pm

order from Bill, he'll handcheck the dead pixel for you. Problem solved.

jeeva · #10 Post by **jeeva** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:37 pm

The big problem is everything should be cheap, in Germany you say "Geiz ist Geil" and a store sells 700€ NBs and so IBM must react to not to be contra productive, there are no consumer shops i know which sells IBM ThinkPads or ThinkCenters. I think they had to make things go cheaper and faster and thats the product of this, but my brother with a cheap Notebook had to change the Harddisk 3 times in 3 Months periods so I think it's better to see the Problem directly after purchase and not after 3 Months.

dfumento · #11 Post by **dfumento** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:29 pm

Sorry you 've had so much trouble. I'd return the laptop for one without stuck/dead pixels.

My hard drive died after 1 month on my new machine. IBM overnighted me a new one with recovery CDs which I had by 10AM.

admsteiner · #12 Post by **admsteiner** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:35 pm

zamxz wrote:I see there is a problem because when you buy something you expect everything to be in working form(or what is advertised). IBM doesnt advertise that the lcd may have bad pixels, the wireless card may not work or the fact that the fingerprint reader may not work all the time. So I am only stating this because it is expected from IBM to have all the functionalities checked before leaving the factory. And if we continued to accept the flaws from IBM, it only makes them think it is alright--while the consumer will have to pay for a crappy product that they have a high expectation for. I am only trying to voice my opinion so that others will have the opportunity to "see" my revelation.
Also, out of the 3 laptops I have gotten from IBM, 2 of the LCD screens have atleast one bad pixel.

I have yet to see an advertisement for an LCD that says "17" LCD with 4 dead pixels!" or "Hard drive WILL die after 45 days!" Certain things are expected.

You expect IBM to check every single laptop for every single small little thing? They have quality control but no quality control is going to catch every single thing.

Again, with the exception of the bad pixels and mangled case the others are subjective. That it doesnt connect with a WAP doesnt mean the card doesnt work. Perhaps your finger was dirty (or the fingerprint scanner was) when you tried swiping.

The office chair I'm sitting in is defective too. I thought it would be a "blacker" black and the leather would resist dirt better. Oh well.

--Adam

#13 Post by **AlphaKilo470** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:56 pm

No matter who you buy from, dead pixels are inevitable. This is especially true with the bigger and higher resolution LCD's. An 800x600 screen has 480,000 pixels, now that's a huge number, and one or two dead pixels is expectable. Now we go to some of the newer screens, lets say 1024x768 which has 786,432 pixels or a 1280x1024 screen which has 1,310,720 pixels, now the numbers are really getting ginormous. One or two, maybe even three or four dead pixels out of that many is not that bad. Just about every LCD you buy will have at least one dead pixel, it's just a matter of how noticable that dead pixel is.

dfumento · #14 Post by **dfumento** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:22 pm

AlphaKilo470 wrote:Just about every LCD you buy will have at least one dead pixel

I disagree. A lot, if not most, of LCDs come without dead pixels.

#15 Post by **K. Eng** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:10 pm

Yeah, make sure it's not a software bug. I remember I thought I had a dead pixel at (0,0) or top left corner and it turned out to be the ATI driver

egibbs wrote:Click the Ultranav center button.

#16 Post by **K. Eng** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:12 pm

This is untrue. From the polls here at ThinkPads.com and seeing computer labs deployed, I'd say the rate of panels with bad pixels is 30-35% in the worst case.

AlphaKilo470 wrote:Just about every LCD you buy will have at least one dead pixel, it's just a matter of how noticable that dead pixel is.

admsteiner · #17 Post by **admsteiner** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:38 pm

K. Eng wrote:This is untrue. From the polls here at ThinkPads.com and seeing computer labs deployed, I'd say the rate of panels with bad pixels is 30-35% in the worst case.

Just to move us back on point. Regardless of whether its most, 5% or 35% the actual important thing is that it is not uncommon or unusual.

--Adam

#18 Post by **aamsel** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:00 pm

If you mean a "non-defective" unit, you have proven that the number is not set in stone. I have ordered several Thinkpads, and none of them arrived with a single defect that I could find, and none of them had a single dead pixel that I could find.
Apparently you were not that lucky.
Switching to another manufacturer would not guarantee you a perfect unit either.
Go to www.thinkpads.com and check to see which units Bill has available. He can do an LCD check for dead pixels for you before shipping.

Andrew
Austin, TX

zamxz wrote:how many times must I return to get an advertised one???; _)

xtypestereotype · #19 Post by **xtypestereotype** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:41 pm

Why doesn't IBM (or any LCD manufacturer for that matter) have their laptops eye-checked for dead pixels, and the ones that have them get tagged and sold for a discount? I think its just fair that you know what you are buying....

#20 Post by **aamsel** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:15 pm

You have to understand that probably less than 5 percent of anyone buying a notebook has any knowledge of dead pixels to begin with. Most people simply don't know, and if they did know, wouldn't care.
Unless there is some huge glaring defect in the display, they are just going to keep it and use it. So, checking them would not be cost effective. Also, notebook manufacturers have certain agreements with the LCD suppliers. They can't just send stacks of LCD's back with a dead pixel or two.

We are more informed buyers, and are in the enthusiast category.
We are not the norm for the average consumer.

Andrew
Austin, TX

xtypestereotype wrote:Why doesn't IBM (or any LCD manufacturer for that matter) have their laptops eye-checked for dead pixels, and the ones that have them get tagged and sold for a discount? I think its just fair that you know what you are buying....

edelrc · #21 Post by **edelrc** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:31 am

aamsel, you´d said it!

To place a detector of dead/hot pixels for IBM would not cost IBM more than the cost that IBM has to cover when a few laptops are returned for bad pixels. But the fact is that the vast mayority of customers simply won´t ever notice the difference.

We are probably the pickiest customers that a computer brand can have... (and also the most willing to spend the most $$$) If IBM has not implanted the policy of 0% dead pixels, is becase have done their numbers! Also that is probably why we have 30 days return policy... to satisfy those few % that we do want perfection.

beeblebrox · #22 Post by **beeblebrox** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 6:19 am

If people complain about lousy notebooks, because their battery failed or the hard drive crashed or because there is a defective pixel, they shoudl realize that ALL computers and notebooks are build from a common source of manufaturers.
The Fujitsu, Hitachi, Samsung, etc. drives are all the same, regardless of a Sony, IBM or Apple notebook.
If the drive fails, it is just poor bad luck and has nothing to do with IBM. Same with displays. There are a handfull of display manufacturers who sell to all their customers, be it Apple, Dell, Sharp, Sony or whoever.
Displays are mass produced, millions of pieces per months. It is only possible to reduce defects statistically. 100% defect free displays only go to special application areas, such medical firms, hospitals, R&D etc.
And they pay dearly for them.

The displays in notebooks are consumer grade I-III.
IBM has the higher grade and pays more. Thus the quality is better.
However, by pure statistics there might be a defect pixel once in a while. There can occur defect pixels after some time, although the display passed 100% defect free in the fab.

Every economist will tell you it is far cheaper to live with statistics and simply replace the few that customers complain about.

On one hand you ask for cheaper products, on the other hand you ask for 100% perfect products. That's contradictive.

You can test a micro-chip for 100% defect free, still they sometimes fail after some time. In production terms it is called the bathtub statistical failure. It is pure law of nature and mathematics.
You can only reduce a statistical failure rate, but can not eliminate it.
You would have to ask for Military Quality chips and components, that are burned-in, tested and re-tested. The costs simply skyrocket.
Why don't you be happy that you can buy an IBM notebook for less than $1000 now. 5 years ago they would have cost $5000.

#23 Post by **K. Eng** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:17 am

If I'm spending $2,000+ for a good quality T4x and not less than $1,000 for some cheap junk from Dell, I'm going to expect the display to be defect free. I just can't justify paying extra cash if the quality isn't better.

beeblebrox wrote: Why don't you be happy that you can buy an IBM notebook for less than $1000 now. 5 years ago they would have cost $5000.

admsteiner · #24 Post by **admsteiner** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:15 am

K. Eng wrote:If I'm spending $2,000+ for a good quality T4x and not less than $1,000 for some cheap junk from Dell, I'm going to expect the display to be defect free. I just can't justify paying extra cash if the quality isn't better.

And for that $2k you can call up IBM, wait on hold for 30 seconds instead of 45 minutes and have them send you a brand new laptop if there's anything (mythically or actually) wrong with it.

You're not paying $2,000 for a defect free LCD and laptop. You're paying $2,000 because you place a higher value on an IBM laptop than a laptop from Dell, due to build quality, service, name, feel, etc. In addition to that is the LCD. Whether or not IBM has fewer defects in the LCD than Dell is a question which has yet to be answered (I haven't run across any actual studies on it, merely user opinions).

If you want a defect free LCD then you should specify it when you buy it and prepare to pay a higher price because it costs more.

IBM doesn't advertise their LCDs as defect free. There's a reason for that. To demand that you purchased a defect free LCD may be your expectation but that doesn't translate into what you bought.

--Adam

#25 Post by **K. Eng** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 9:55 am

If someone advertises a display as 1024x768, I expect 1024x768 pixels, not (1024x768) - Y pixels (where Y is the # of defects > 0). The expectation of consumers is that the panel will display the proper image.

This is why I tell people to buy from Bill. An extra $100 to assure a perfect panel is better than going through the hassel of having to return & reorder, with the chance that the new unit will be worse than the original. As I recall, a person here (Daba, I think), went through *3* X40s and still didn't get a panel without a bad pixel.

Any way I look at it, it isn't fair when people pay the same amout of $ for a certain type of ThinkPad, and one person could get a perfect display while the other person could get one with up to 8 defects.

admsteiner wrote:IBM doesn't advertise their LCDs as defect free. There's a reason for that. To demand that you purchased a defect free LCD may be your expectation but that doesn't translate into what you bought.

xtypestereotype · #26 Post by **xtypestereotype** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 10:26 am

aamsel wrote: Also, notebook manufacturers have certain agreements with the LCD suppliers. They can't just send stacks of LCD's back with a dead pixel or two.

That is why I am saying they do not have to return it to the manufacturers. It is OK to sell them, but let us know that IT DOES have bad pixels and maybe deduct a couple of hundred dollars off the normal price to make up for it... When they pack the notebooks, they could just put a sticker on the box or something... How hard is that?

tensai_jin · #27 Post by **tensai_jin** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 11:12 am

er regarding the gap between the keyboard and lcd when closed...is it a problem? cos my t42 seems to have it too...as in can see the motherboard (?? looks like it) if i peep at the correct angle...though i posted pic links and people said it looks normal...

dvorak · #28 Post by **dvorak** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:51 pm

tensai_jin wrote:er regarding the gap between the keyboard and lcd when closed...is it a problem? cos my t42 seems to have it too...as in can see the motherboard (?? looks like it) if i peep at the correct angle...though i posted pic links and people said it looks normal...

The word normal usually means "like others".
You say normal for a person with two feet, just because everyone else has two feet too :)
If seeing the motherboard was intended, I don't know, altough I slightly doubt.

Regarding other faults, there are many that are bothering me too, multibay slot being to big, lcd bezel crack on the right side, palmrest creaking, screens having poor color uniformity and in my case slow red pixels, and that with the third display also. Thinkpads are not as perfect as I thought they would be in the beginning, but heck, it's just a computer.

T43 == Crap

T43 == Crap

Re: T43 == Crap

Re: T43 == Crap

Who is online