Are DELL laptops still reliable?

[E. F.]

Over the years my family members and I used different DELL laptops. Overall they proved to be pretty reliable (though obviously not without problems).

With all the turmoil the company is apparently going through, is quality of their products started suffering?

Is it no longer a good idea to buy DELL? Or is the answer (as usual) "depends"?

Among established brand names would you say are still reliable (i.e. not likely to have hardware problems)?

TIA, Eugene

[Dirk Weber]

Op 18-03-13 18:22, E. F. schreef:

> Among established brand names would you say are still reliable (i.e. not likely to have hardware problems)?

Fujitsu (older ones Fujitsu-Siemens). I have bought several pcs of that
brand second hand - desktops and laptops. But not just the consumer
machines but the office pcs and laptops (Celsius, Lifebook E and S).
They came back from lease, thus some 3 to 4 years old. Checked and with
one year guarantee.

With Linux it is no problem to get them working. Fujitsu has all the
manuals and infos on their website, thus no problem from that side.

In my opinion you get more for your money when buying second hand office
systems from leasing than new consumer machines.

My Laptop FSC Lifebook S6420 was 320 EUR now, whereas it was some 1500
EUR only 3 to 4 years ago. And still very good for office use.

Groetjes uit Arft,

Dirk

--
D. Weber, Arft, Germany (50°22'56"N 07°05'01"E)
If possible, no html mails please
jabber me

[Bob_Villa]

I have 4 notebooks (5 if you count the netbook). 3 are Dell and one is an Asus.
The newest Dell (i3) is over a year old...the Asus is brand new.
I know it's preference and prejudice but I wouldn't buy an HP or Compaq.

[Bob_Villa]

On Monday, March 18, 2013 12:22:47 PM UTC-5, E. F. wrote:

Here's a foreign tech's answer (found here: https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups=#!topic/alt.sys.pc-clone.dell/PWj_GcTfank)

15R...Luckily I have only seen two of those. Can't remember if the hatch
is there, but I do remember one model had the hatch and all it gave you
access to was the memory. The hdd and the hd/cpu are buried. Not a user
friendly system at all. If you're not familiar with removing a mobo you
have to take it to someone to have upgrades done.

For someone considering one of these, they are neat machines, but BUY
WHAT YOU THINK YOU WILL NEED WHEN YOU ORDER IT! If you're not handy with
a screwdriver, you're not going to be able to upgrade this by yourself!

IIRC, on the bottom cover it says "Designed by Dell in China" or
something like that. Stupid design!

I love the new Latitudes. Very easy to upgrade or repair.

Studios are cool, too, and most of them are upgradeable, but are a
nightmare if you have to delve any further. They ran the freakin wires
for the WiFi under a daughter card, and a lot of the connections are on
the bottom of the MoBo, so you have to remove it to replace anything.

I REALLY want to hand my field kit to one of these engineers and say,
"Here, YOU fix it!" They'll never design a unit like that again! ;)

I spent FIVE HOURS repairng a 1458 (Studio 14") one day. The usual Dell
takes 45-90 minutes. Ugh.

[Top]

E. F. used his keyboard to write :

I have a Studio 1737 that I've had for
somewhere over 3 years and it's still as good as
new with no problems along the way that were self
inflicked. If I were to buy a new laptop today
the first place I would look would be Dell. It
might not buy one but there is where I would
start my search.

Ed

[Mark]

On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 10:22:47 -0700 (PDT), "E. F." <pm77...@gmail.com>
wrote:

AFAIK Dell laptops have the second worst reliability, only 'beaten' by
HP right at the bottom. In addition Dell (in the UK anyway) is awful
to deal with.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?

[Bob_Villa]

Mark, who is at the top...or what is your information source? Thanks!

[Mark]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:23:27 -0700 (PDT), Bob_Villa
<pheeh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 4:56:39 AM UTC-5, Mark wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 10:22:47 -0700 (PDT), "E. F." <pm77...@gmail.com>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> AFAIK Dell laptops have the second worst reliability, only 'beaten' by
>>
>> HP right at the bottom. In addition Dell (in the UK anyway) is awful
>>
>> to deal with.
>

>Mark, who is at the top...or what is your information source? Thanks!

This is from Which? magazine. If you look at the actual figures
there's not a big difference between the most reliable and the least
so it's probably not that significant.

The best are Acer, Apple, Sony, Toshiba
The lower ones are Lenovo, Samsung, HP & Dell.

[Bob_Villa]

On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:02:44 AM UTC-5, Mark wrote:


>
> >Mark, who is at the top...or what is your information source? Thanks!
>
>
>
> This is from Which? magazine. If you look at the actual figures
>
> there's not a big difference between the most reliable and the least
>
> so it's probably not that significant.
>
>
>
> The best are Acer, Apple, Sony, Toshiba
>
> The lower ones are Lenovo, Samsung, HP & Dell.
>

So is this like Consumer's Report in the US?

[Mark]

Unfortunately I don't know the "Consumer's Report".

"Which?" is an independent publication that tests a variety of
products for suitability, reliability etc. It's the only organisation
of this type in the UK (that I know) that is truly independent since
it is not supported by the trades or advertising.

[Bob_Villa]

On Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:19:19 AM UTC-5, Mark wrote:

> >
>
> >So is this like Consumer's Report in the US?
>
>
>
> Unfortunately I don't know the "Consumer's Report".
>
>
>
> "Which?" is an independent publication that tests a variety of
>
> products for suitability, reliability etc. It's the only organisation
>
> of this type in the UK (that I know) that is truly independent since
>
> it is not supported by the trades or advertising.
>

So it is the same...although Consumer Reports (CU) has dubious opinions on autos. I used to subscribe years ago and found them to be arrogant in their reviews. I followed their advice a few times and was surprised at the failure of their assessments.
I would not use the words, "truly independent" about anyone or anything. We all have our phobias and biases. (I'm NOT chiding you) 8^)

[Adrian C]

On 20/03/2013 16:02, Mark wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:23:27 -0700 (PDT), Bob_Villa
> <pheeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 4:56:39 AM UTC-5, Mark wrote:
>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 10:22:47 -0700 (PDT), "E. F." <pm77...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> AFAIK Dell laptops have the second worst reliability, only 'beaten' by
>>>
>>> HP right at the bottom. In addition Dell (in the UK anyway) is awful
>>>
>>> to deal with.
>>
>> Mark, who is at the top...or what is your information source? Thanks!
>
> This is from Which? magazine. If you look at the actual figures
> there's not a big difference between the most reliable and the least
> so it's probably not that significant.

Which magazine (UK) suffers from a consumer readership that is so
concerned about reliability through various social factors (mostly use
of item by elderly or non-technical), that the user feedback they
collect is swayed specifically in support of previous items they have
written about. It's all safe hand-holding blandness. They probably
haven't heard yet about Asus, and LG / Samsung just sound "wrong".

Ocasionally, Which hypes an item of technical brilliance, like a very
good / expensive home cinema enthusiasts flat panel TV - and then gets a
host of dim witted feedback from those that can't understand the
options, interfaces, remote control buttons and end up using 10% of the
recommeded item's true capabilities. And one day, the active input
channel accidently is upset by the dog (or an interested visitor) and
they fuss that the item is broken and hence unreliable.

I'd like to see magazines and media organisations that educate people to
make their own selections. Not dumb down and spoon feed the blandness of
safe choices for the unthinking.

>
> The best are Acer, Apple, Sony, Toshiba
> The lower ones are Lenovo, Samsung, HP & Dell.
>

Can't tell much from that.

All the above makes have ranges for different applications and markets.
Some of it is unreliable goods as the customer hasn't invested properly,
and so has got what was deserved.

Unfortunately HP & Dell have made much throwaway consumer grade IT that
looks like it has tainted their name and overtaxed their support. Spend
more money with them and buy a better specification then they are quite
OK. On the other hand, Apple doesn't let badly engineered rubbish out of
their factories - and charges customers for that fact. Handsomely.

For business equipment with better build quality and support (and a
higher price) - HP, Dell, Apple, Toshiba and Lenovo are still top tier IMO.

--
Adrian C

[Mark]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 12:41:38 +0000, Adrian C <em...@here.invalid>
wrote:

>On 20/03/2013 16:02, Mark wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:23:27 -0700 (PDT), Bob_Villa
>> <pheeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 4:56:39 AM UTC-5, Mark wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 10:22:47 -0700 (PDT), "E. F." <pm77...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AFAIK Dell laptops have the second worst reliability, only 'beaten' by
>>>>
>>>> HP right at the bottom. In addition Dell (in the UK anyway) is awful
>>>>
>>>> to deal with.
>>>
>>> Mark, who is at the top...or what is your information source? Thanks!
>>
>> This is from Which? magazine. If you look at the actual figures
>> there's not a big difference between the most reliable and the least
>> so it's probably not that significant.
>
>Which magazine (UK) suffers from a consumer readership that is so
>concerned about reliability through various social factors (mostly use
>of item by elderly or non-technical), that the user feedback they
>collect is swayed specifically in support of previous items they have
>written about. It's all safe hand-holding blandness. They probably
>haven't heard yet about Asus, and LG / Samsung just sound "wrong".

I don't know where you get the statistics for Which? subscribers. It's
not just the elderly and non-technical that read it. Which? is not
perfect by any means but is unique in the way it works. I like the
emphasis on reliability and this is what this thread it about. Very
few other professional reviewers are able to look at this since they
probably only have the laptop for a week before the next toy needs
reviewing.

I've seen reviews for LG and Samsung products in Which?.

>Ocasionally, Which hypes an item of technical brilliance, like a very
>good / expensive home cinema enthusiasts flat panel TV - and then gets a
>host of dim witted feedback from those that can't understand the
>options, interfaces, remote control buttons and end up using 10% of the
>recommeded item's true capabilities. And one day, the active input
>channel accidently is upset by the dog (or an interested visitor) and
>they fuss that the item is broken and hence unreliable.

Huh?

>I'd like to see magazines and media organisations that educate people to
>make their own selections. Not dumb down and spoon feed the blandness of
>safe choices for the unthinking.

Most magazines are not in the business of educating people to make
their own choices. They are about earning money from their
sponsors/advertisers.

>>
>> The best are Acer, Apple, Sony, Toshiba
>> The lower ones are Lenovo, Samsung, HP & Dell.
>>
>
>Can't tell much from that.
>
>All the above makes have ranges for different applications and markets.
>Some of it is unreliable goods as the customer hasn't invested properly,
>and so has got what was deserved.
>
>Unfortunately HP & Dell have made much throwaway consumer grade IT that
>looks like it has tainted their name and overtaxed their support. Spend
>more money with them and buy a better specification then they are quite
>OK. On the other hand, Apple doesn't let badly engineered rubbish out of
>their factories - and charges customers for that fact. Handsomely.
>
>For business equipment with better build quality and support (and a
>higher price) - HP, Dell, Apple, Toshiba and Lenovo are still top tier IMO.
--

[Adrian C]

On 03/04/2013 10:41, Mark wrote:
>
>> Ocasionally, Which hypes an item of technical brilliance, like a very
>> good / expensive home cinema enthusiasts flat panel TV - and then gets a
>> host of dim witted feedback from those that can't understand the
>> options, interfaces, remote control buttons and end up using 10% of the
>> recommeded item's true capabilities. And one day, the active input
>> channel accidently is upset by the dog (or an interested visitor) and
>> they fuss that the item is broken and hence unreliable.
>
> Huh?
>

Yup. It happens :(

--
Adrian C