Benson
|
2008-01-15
, 20:11
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#11
|
|
2008-01-15
, 23:36
|
Posts: 26 |
Thanked: 2 times |
Joined on Jan 2008
|
#12
|
Since you seem to have done all the research, why do you want us to make a decision for you? Either get one, based on what you have read here (and it seems as if you have done lots of research), or don't.
I call troll.
|
2008-01-16
, 16:38
|
Posts: 479 |
Thanked: 58 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
@ Dubai, UAE
|
#13
|
|
2008-01-16
, 16:50
|
Posts: 64 |
Thanked: 14 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
|
#14
|
|
2008-01-16
, 18:05
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#15
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2008-01-16
, 18:17
|
Posts: 26 |
Thanked: 2 times |
Joined on Jan 2008
|
#16
|
derekp brings up a good point, one that I know I've harped on many times here: don't confuse perception (created by forum posts) with reality. Typically, failures of new devices in the field amount to 5% or less of all shipped. Any more and you risk going out of business fast. Any less and you are probably spending more to accomplish that than you save in reverse logistics (YMMV).
When I worked at the Alliance factory, our FFR (field failure rate) was usually 3% or less. Folks, that's outstanding in any industry except maybe automotive. The initial N800 launch enjoyed even better rates. I have no knowledge of current rates (and couldn't share if I did) but they're nowhere near what one would gather from forum complaints.