[Le Flaneur]

I've never had a Mac laptop that didn't need a repair after the warranty expired. I actually have a brand-new MacBook Pro which technically belongs to my employer, but to which I have exclusive access as long as I'm an employee. For complex reasons, my employer won't pay for AppleCare.

So: is it worth it to buy AC? (which I could get for about $160 via eBay/PayPal through this evening). Any repair besides a hard drive and/or memory replacement would cost more than this, right?

[Chuckit]

They obviously haven't been out long enough to say how they hold up in the long term. I wouldn't bet on it. But I also wouldn't shell out my own money for my employer's laptop.

[TheoCryst]

It's always a complicated decision, but the answer is always the same: if you buy it, you won't need it; if you don't, you'll wish you had. For me it's worth the peace of mind, but that's my opinion. Don't forget that you can buy it any time within the first year of ownership, so there's no rush to make a decision.

Fun story: my previous Macbook (1st gen, not Pro) is still covered under AppleCare, yet already has amassed a total repair cost that exceeds the original purchase price. In fact, it's almost twice as high by my last count. Repairs include a new motherboard, a new combo drive, three keyboard/palmrest/trackpads, and a fresh hard drive. Hell, the motherboard alone would have run me over a grand, including parts and labor. Thank God for AppleCare: I haven't paid a cent.

[ghporter]

Laptop computer parts are all somehow smaller/lighter/more compact/otherwise different from desktop parts such that they all cost more. Service on laptops costs more for any procedure than the same procedure on a desktop computer. It makes sense to bet that if something goes wrong, it'll cost a lot to fix. So I would get Apple Care on any Mac laptop no matter what. I think it's worth the price.

[dimmer]

If the computer is owned by your employer, and they don't want to get AppleCare I'd let it go at that. I assume you wouldn't be asked to pay for any maintenance yourself?

If you plan to leave your employer, you have 12 months to buy AppleCare (if they let you take the laptop when you go.)

[Le Flaneur]

Originally Posted by TheoCryst 

It's always a complicated decision, but the answer is always the same: if you buy it, you won't need it; if you don't, you'll wish you had. For me it's worth the peace of mind, but that's my opinion. Don't forget that you can buy it any time within the first year of ownership, so there's no rush to make a decision.

There was a bit of a rush because one can buy AppleCare (and MobileMe) subscriptions on eBay at a considerable discount, and PayPal was offering 20% rebates on purchases through December 19. So AppleCare for a MacBook Pro was available for about $145.

[Atheist]

Originally Posted by Le Flaneur 

There was a bit of a rush because one can buy AppleCare (and MobileMe) subscriptions on eBay at a considerable discount, and PayPal was offering 20% rebates on purchases through December 19. So AppleCare for a MacBook Pro was available for about $145.

But as dimmer said, why bother if it's your employer's computer? If it breaks it's their problem... not yours.

[Le Flaneur]

Originally Posted by Atheist 

But as dimmer said, why bother if it's your employer's computer? If it breaks it's their problem... not yours.

No, in reality it's my problem. That's the way things are nowadays. Universities are cash-strapped. I'm not sure my employer would pay to have it repaired. In any case, it would be a lot of hassle. Would the hassle be worth $144? Hmm...

[Atheist]

Ok... sorry to dwell on this... but it's not making any sense. They provide you a computer to perform your job, and if it breaks they won't fix it, resulting in you not being able to do your job?

[Le Flaneur]

Well, they might, or else they might find some really old computer lying around to replace it with. Several people would have become involved, it would take time to find a solution, and what would I do in the meantime? The point is that you want to avoid this situation if you can

My employer's computers normally come with AppleCare, but this is a replacement computer offered by Apple after multiple repairs had been performed on the original one.

[dimmer]

If you need a computer to do your work, and you can't get something approaching usable, then enjoy the time off!

[idykenano]

Coming from a student at a cash-strapped university, I appreciate that you're going above and beyond LaFlaneur.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by TheoCryst 

Fun story: my previous Macbook (1st gen, not Pro) is still covered under AppleCare, yet already has amassed a total repair cost that exceeds the original purchase price. In fact, it's almost twice as high by my last count. Repairs include a new motherboard, a new combo drive, three keyboard/palmrest/trackpads, and a fresh hard drive. Hell, the motherboard alone would have run me over a grand, including parts and labor. Thank God for AppleCare: I haven't paid a cent.

That just adds to my list of reasons not to buy another Apple laptop. You're saying that the actual price range for the MacBook starts at $1250 rather than $1000.

For $800, you can get a Dell Latitude 6400 that is about equal to the MacBook in specs (better in some areas, worse in others), but includes a 3 year warranty. And it actually looks nice. Sure, it's a Dell, but I'd rather buy a laptop from a company that stands behind the build quality of it's product for 3 years than from a company that's known to frequently build laptops that require repairs within the first 3 years and wants to charge me extra for 2 more years of peace of mind. As more and more 3yr warrantied, business-class laptops cross the $1000 line, Apple's 1yr warranties on their +$1000 laptops look increasing draconian. Especially on their +$2000 "pro-class" laptops.

[TailsToo]

In my 15+ years of owning Apple portables, I have had exactly 1 problem that wasn't caused by me (and therefore would have been covered by AppleCare), a bad DVD drive in my 2001 iBook that appeared a year and a half after I owned it.

I buy my Apple Products on my Amex. They cover the 2nd year, and are great to work with. When my AC Adapter stopped working for my 15" PowerBook three years ago, I called them, and they said to just go to the Apple Store and buy a new one. They took the charge right off of my bill, and that was that.

[Le Flaneur]

Originally Posted by TailsToo 

In my 15+ years of owning Apple portables, I have had exactly 1 problem that wasn't caused by me (and therefore would have been covered by AppleCare), a bad DVD drive in my 2001 iBook that appeared a year and a half after I owned it.

You probably don't use them or move them around very much.

I buy my Apple Products on my Amex. They cover the 2nd year, and are great to work with.

VISA cards offer this, too. The difference is that you don't have to pay $60-$80 a year for the card.

In any case, my MacBook Pro is a replacement unit offered by Apple, so it wasn't purchased with a credit card and isn't covered by a CC warranty protection plan.

[Big Mac]

I'm not sure if Visa cards offer extended warranties - at least I've never heard of them doing so. I know some but not all MasterCard cards do. Perhaps I've got it mixed up, but that's my understanding of it.

Are the new MBPs so reliable that they don't need AppleCare? I'd say that based on the early reports of some of them having GPU hardware issues, that would be "no." Most people who buy extended warranties don't end up using them; that's why they're profitable enough to be sold in the first place. For the minority who do require warranty service, though, it makes a lot of sense to have them. The trouble is that it's hard to know which devices will be trouble free and which won't. I will say that independent Apple technicians highly recommend AppleCare even when their companies aren't selling them. They say it's really inexpensive protection compared to the comprehensive service you get in the event of a failure.

[Le Flaneur]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I'm not sure if Visa cards offer extended warranties - at least I've never heard of them doing so. I know some but not all MasterCard cards do. Perhaps I've got it mixed up, but that's my understanding of it.

VISA cards definitely offer extended warranties in their premium versions (some of which still have no annual fee) -- I have several of them.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The trouble is that it's hard to know which devices will be trouble free and which won't.

Well, I think it's clear that Apple isn't too confident in the reliability of their laptops beyond 1 year; if they were, they'd include a longer warranty period in the current prices. That's the gauge for me; I consider myself lucky for every day the product I purchased continues to work past the last day of it's warranty.

[Spheric Harlot]

I don't think you've got this capitalism thing figured out right:

They'd offer a longer warranty if it'd help them move more machines and make more profit.

IOW, if they were convinced their machines were so badly built that people with your attitude would lose them more money than they'd lose on extended warranties, they'd offer longer warranties.

As it is, customer satisfaction among Apple customers ranks #1 in the industry, and Apple seems to be doing fairly well for themselves by offsetting the above balance with the (admittedly hefty) fee they charge for AppleCare, and adding the occasional extended repair program for things that *do* go wrong (batteries, MacBook topcases, etc.).


IOW, if you were right, their reputation would drop and the market would correct itself.

It hasn't, so I suspect you're wrong.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Well, I think it's clear that Apple isn't too confident in the reliability of their laptops beyond 1 year; if they were, they'd include a longer warranty period in the current prices. That's the gauge for me; I consider myself lucky for every day the product I purchased continues to work past the last day of it's warranty.

I don't know if that's necessarily fair, Wikedjak. Most good consumer electronics products only come with 1 year warranties. I think Apple's quality control has certainly slipped in comparison to eras past, but Apple products still generally get high marks for quality. Where Apple really does skimp is on the complementary technical support. It used to be one year until it was shortened to 90 days during Apple's financial crisis; they could easily afford to bump it back up at this point.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I think Apple's quality control has certainly slipped in comparison to eras past

I actually don't think that's true - there have *always* been quality control issues (Performa 5200 video cable SEVEN-YEAR extended repair program, anyone?).

Two factors make it seem like Apple has problems:

1.) Anybody and everybody can scream bloody murder on the internet, and it only takes one idiot to create a "massive issue" - like those two morons who single-handedly turned the 1st-generation iPods into battery disasters (mine is coming up EIGHT YEARS old and *still* gets several hours on its original battery).

2.) 4% of four million is quite a bit more than 4% of 40,000 machines sold in a quarter, but no more a "quality control" issue at all.

[Le Flaneur]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

I don't think you've got this capitalism thing figured out right:

They'd offer a longer warranty if it'd help them move more machines and make more profit.

I do think it's about profit margins: Apple has a higher profit margin with just a one-year warranty. And yes, not having a 3-year standard warranty apparently hasn't hurt Apple. Big Mac's analogy isn't really good, because computers really don't fall into the "consumer electronics" category but constitute a category of their own. I guess the question is: is Apple's warranty competitive with that of other laptop manufacturers?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

I actually don't think that's true - there have *always* been quality control issues (Performa 5200 video cable SEVEN-YEAR extended repair program, anyone?).

I never even heard of that Performa problem you mentioned. I can't think of one really serious, recurring quality control problem from the classic era all the way to around the G3 era. The G3 iBook fiasco is one big quality control fark up that never should have gone on as long as it did (five or six revisions).

Originally Posted by Le Flaneur 

I do think it's about profit margins: Apple has a higher profit margin with just a one-year warranty. And yes, not having a 3-year standard warranty apparently hasn't hurt Apple. Big Mac's analogy isn't really good, because computers really don't fall into the "consumer electronics" category but constitute a category of their own. I guess the question is: is Apple's warranty competitive with that of other laptop manufacturers?

I consider computers part of the consumer electronics market. But if you want to limit Apple to the computer market, I still think most computer companies offer standard 1 year warranties.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I never even heard of that Performa problem you mentioned. I can't think of one really serious, recurring quality control problem from the classic era all the way to around the G3 era. The G3 iBook fiasco never should have gone on as long as it did.

Well, I OWNED that machine, and I certainly remember the issue. And I don't think I've ever heard of any other issue, in any other electronics device, that warranted SEVEN YEARS of manufacturer support. As it was, I got the monitor cable fixed on mine, and the problem never appeared again until I replaced the box with a Rev. B iMac.


And seeing as you don't remember that issue, nor the flaming 5300 (though that was more media hype than actual machines), nor (quick google on Apple recalls) the IIci static RAM cache card recall, nor the Apple ADB mouse recall, nor the Mac Portable power supply recall, well, I'd wager that there's just an AWFUL lot of stuff you just never heard about before the internet became a commodity - intriguingly, right around the G3 era...hmm...

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Two factors make it seem like Apple has problems:

1.) Anybody and everybody can scream bloody murder on the internet, and it only takes one idiot to create a "massive issue" - like those two morons who single-handedly turned the 1st-generation iPods into battery disasters (mine is coming up EIGHT YEARS old and *still* gets several hours on its original battery).

(Of those I mentioned, only the 5300 and a bit of the mouse recall falls into the "Classic" era, of course, since that didn't come out until late 1990...)

No: There's ALWAYS been "quality control" issues. Since 1984, to be sure.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Well, I OWNED that machine, and I certainly remember the issue. And I don't think I've ever heard of any other issue, in any other electronics device, that warranted SEVEN YEARS of manufacturer support. As it was, I got the monitor cable fixed on mine, and the problem never appeared again until I replaced the box with a Rev. B iMac.

It may have been a serious issue for you. It wasn't a major issue for most Mac users. If it had been, I would have seen it in Macworld, Mac User or MacWeek, and I don't remember seeing that issue in any of those publications that I used to read religiously.

And seeing as you don't remember that issue, nor the flaming 5300 (though that was more media hype than actual machines), nor (quick google on Apple recalls) the IIci static RAM cache card recall, nor the Apple ADB mouse recall, nor the Mac Portable power supply recall, well, I'd wager that there's just an AWFUL lot of stuff you just never heard about before the internet became a commodity - intriguingly, right around the G3 era...hmm... (Of those I mentioned, only the 5300 and a bit of the mouse recall falls into the "Classic" era, of course, since that didn't come out until late 1990...) No: There's ALWAYS been "quality control" issues. Since 1984, to be sure.

Thank you so much for that litany of issues. 1) I know and remember the flaming 5300s. A very small quantity of "Black Bird" 5300s went out before that issue was well known and the recalls were issued. I didn't even get a chance to see them in stores before they were off the shelves. I had not known of the IIci cache card recall, nor the Mac Portable recall - that much is true. But those were pretty minor issues affecting a small segment of the Mac using population, which itself was much smaller in that era. I think anyone who goes that far back to remember those Macs will agree with me. It's easy to repeat myself (thanks to copy and paste): Those may have been a serious issues for some. They weren't major issues for most, or even a large minority, of Mac users. Btw, SH, anyone ever tell you that you can easily rub people the wrong way with the arrogant way you sometimes present your arguments?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I don't know if that's necessarily fair, Wikedjak. Most good consumer electronics products only come with 1 year warranties. I think Apple's quality control has certainly slipped in comparison to eras past, but Apple products still generally get high marks for quality. Where Apple really does skimp is on the complementary technical support. It used to be one year until it was shortened to 90 days during Apple's financial crisis; they could easily afford to bump it back up at this point.

Absolutely. I've felt lately that either Apple has low confidence in their build quality or they're gouging the faithful for peace-of-mind. Either way, I've decided that the next laptop I buy will be from someone who includes a 3yr warranty in their price. Both Dell and Toshiba have a 3yr on their $1000-range business-class laptops. The Latitude e6400 I'm on at work is actually a rather nice machine, in both aesthetics and specs.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It may have been a serious issue for you. It wasn't a major issue for most Mac users. If it had been, I would have seen it in Macworld, Mac User or MacWeek, and I don't remember seeing that issue in any of those publications that I used to read religiously.

I'm not sure how you get from "Apple has quality control issues" to "it's not an issue if it didn't affect most Mac users".

It affected every single user of the Performa 5200 - IIRC, Apple's best-selling line at the time. It was a DESIGN FLAW. Not everyone got bitten by it, but every single machine was susceptible to this problem.

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Thank you so much for that litany of issues. 1) I know and remember the flaming 5300s. A very small quantity of "Black Bird" 5300s went out before that issue was well known and the recalls were issued. I didn't even get a chance to see them in stores before they were off the shelves. I had not known of the IIci cache card recall, nor the Mac Portable recall - that much is true. But those were pretty minor issues affecting a small segment of the Mac using population, which itself was much smaller in that era. I think anyone who goes that far back to remember those Macs will agree with me. It's easy to repeat myself (thanks to copy and paste): Those may have been a serious issues for some. They weren't major issues for most, or even a large minority, of Mac users.

I'm not sure how you get from "Apple has quality control issues" to "it's not an issue if it didn't affect most Mac users".

If issues that affected entire product lines enough to keep them off the shelves after they were officially released, or to slap a seven-year warranty on them, aren't "quality control" issues, then I'm genuinely curious as to how you consider these terrible issues that Apple is letting slip through today different?

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Btw, SH, anyone ever tell you that you can easily rub people the wrong way with the arrogant way you sometimes present your arguments?

Possibly.

I have little patience for fallacious arguments.

Don't take it personally.


Edit: Strike that - maybe it is a personal thing:

What really gets my goat, for some reason, is the schtick you've been pushing ever since the Intel switch: this completely overdrawn sense that the Apple of old could do no wrong, and that in the past few years, the company has been rife with mismanagement, quality control issues, and blatant disregard for their users.

That, coupled with the arbitrary distinction that declared PPC Macs somehow the "real" Macintosh - while all of us who were there well remember that the "real" Macintosh was Motorola-based (and IBM was the sworn enemy), and that Macintosh was always about computing accessibility for the user, and expressly NOT about numbers, technical innards, and a plethora of models (which, btw, was one of the most blatant examples of suicidal mismanagement at Apple during the golden years of the PPC heyday and dwindling market share).

Never mind that the WORST "quality control" issues were the System/Mac OS versions themselves.

Normally, I'd just ignore it, but the fact that you're so consistently, adamantly, flauntingly WRONG and historically revisionist over such a long period of time just rubs me in a thalo.net way.

[Remlyor]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

That just adds to my list of reasons not to buy another Apple laptop. You're saying that the actual price range for the MacBook starts at $1250 rather than $1000.

For $800, you can get a Dell Latitude 6400 that is about equal to the MacBook in specs (better in some areas, worse in others), but includes a 3 year warranty. And it actually looks nice. Sure, it's a Dell, but I'd rather buy a laptop from a company that stands behind the build quality of it's product for 3 years than from a company that's known to frequently build laptops that require repairs within the first 3 years and wants to charge me extra for 2 more years of peace of mind. As more and more 3yr warrantied, business-class laptops cross the $1000 line, Apple's 1yr warranties on their +$1000 laptops look increasing draconian. Especially on their +$2000 "pro-class" laptops.

so you think Dell didn't add the cost of a 3 year warranty onto that unit, your badly mistaken. Yes it should only cost 550 or 600 dollars. Sounds like cheap crap to me.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

What really gets my goat, for some reason, is the schtick you've been pushing ever since the Intel switch: this completely overdrawn sense that the Apple of old could do no wrong, and that in the past few years, the company has been rife with mismanagement, quality control issues, and blatant disregard for their users.

I never said anything like that, even at the height of my Apple-Intel bashing. I was one of the most vocal critics of Apple during the iceBook logic board fiasco and then the PB G4 disappearing RAM slot issue. I have never been blinded to Apple's faults. I do stand by my belief that Apple's QC as far as hardware goes has slipped a bit in the modern era, but I never said that started with the Intel switch. Indeed, I know it started before that time, when we were still PPC based.

That, coupled with the arbitrary distinction that declared PPC Macs somehow the "real" Macintosh - while all of us who were there well remember that the "real" Macintosh was Motorola-based (and IBM was the sworn enemy), and that Macintosh was always about computing accessibility for the user, and expressly NOT about numbers, technical innards, and a plethora of models (which, btw, was one of the most blatant examples of suicidal mismanagement at Apple during the golden years of the PPC heyday and dwindling market share). Never mind that the WORST "quality control" issues were the System/Mac OS versions themselves. Normally, I'd just ignore it, but the fact that you're so consistently, adamantly, flauntingly WRONG and historically revisionist over such a long period of time just rubs me in a thalo.net way.

I have made peace to a large extent with the Intel switch. I stopped arguing with the wisdom of Apple's choice when the proof was shown in the sales numbers. I own a Mactel. Yes, I still harbor some resentment toward Apple for giving up the PPC. I don't see how you can blame those of us who do still feel that way - Apple fostered a 25+ year rivalry between its processor lines (the 68K and PPC families) versus Intel. Then suddenly Apple converts and puts that 25+ year history away. It may be a seamless transition for the corporate PR spinners, but it's not so easy to accept as a loyal Mac partisan who got interested in computing in a major way on his family's LC. And yes, I do know that at one time IBM was Apple's mortal enemy, moreso than Microsoft and Intel put together. When the AIM alliance was formed I was jarred by IBM being part of it. It took some time to get used to, but it made sense that IBM wasn't really the enemy we were led to believe it was by Apple propaganda all those years prior - it was really Wintel hegemony. Now that Apple has made peace with Intel there's only one enemy left, and no matter what Apple ever does in the future I'm never going to become a Microsoft fan. But to distort my view and tell me I'm wrong about my own beliefs (and justifications of them) when you apparently don't respect me enough to argue against them in an honest way is, I think, rather petty and small. This thread had nothing to do with PPC v. Intel and the subject was only broached by your seemingly willful misinterpretation of my remarks.

[Spheric Harlot]

Big Mac,
I appreciate the explanation and hereby duly bury the hatchet.

I will point out, though, that Microsoft was never considered an "enemy" until Windows 3.1. After all, they put out the killer office software that made the Mac the superior office machine in *addition* to being the only graphics game in town.

It was a PR move that aligned Apple with its former sworn enemy, IBM, and, in one huge swoop of irony, divested it of the whole "IBM PC-compatible" baggage that *defined* the rivalry and somehow managed to dump that in a newly invented Windows/Intel "enemy" camp, shifting the focus from the platform to a chip-maker.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Big Mac,
I appreciate the explanation and hereby duly bury the hatchet.

Thank you, heartily agreed.

[bishopazrael]

Originally Posted by Le Flaneur 

I do think it's about profit margins: Apple has a higher profit margin with just a one-year warranty. And yes, not having a 3-year standard warranty apparently hasn't hurt Apple. Big Mac's analogy isn't really good, because computers really don't fall into the "consumer electronics" category but constitute a category of their own. I guess the question is: is Apple's warranty competitive with that of other laptop manufacturers?

How many other laptop makers like Compaq, HP, Dell, have 1 year warranties vs a 90 day warranty?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Remlyor 

so you think Dell didn't add the cost of a 3 year warranty onto that unit, your badly mistaken. Yes it should only cost 550 or 600 dollars. Sounds like cheap crap to me.

I'm sure they did. and it's still cheaper and better supported than the MacBook. even if it's cheap crap, it's cheap crap that's guaranteed to last 3 years, unlike the MacBook.

[SierraDragon]

Applecare is grossly not a cost effective purchase for laptops. Physical damage is not covered, and most necessary repairs occur during the free one year warranty. Applecare covers years 2-3 when issues rarely crop up. So when buying Applecare one is betting the cost of Applecare/repairs against the much lower value of a 2-3 year old box. Note too that common failures (drives) get better/faster/cheaper all the time, so replacing a hard drive for instance one can put a better drive in for less than the cost of Applecare.

Obviously some individuals will benefit from having Applecare sometimes (duh) but that is not the point. The fact is that the odds say don't buy Applecare unless just to make yourself feel good.

-Allen Wicks