I thought Indicators of Death were patented by Microsoft (Blue Screen of Death, Red Ring of Death).
The PS3 and the 'Yellow Light of Death'
- Thread starter rossatdi
- Start date
Recommended Videos
This is a great example of random chaos theory. My PS3 will be 2 years old this december and I have had no problems. While "round 12,500 of the 2.5 million PlayStations sold in the UK have shut down" I have heard since day one of the 360 launching of it dieing from everyone. This man has had the exact opposite proving that no matter how reliable a product, someone will have the exact opposite experience as everyone else. Also, on a final note...the warranty for the 360 was extended to 3 years because of it's failure rate, if Sony's console starts to fail as often they would probably do the same.CantFaketheFunk said:
See, once again distorting my words... what I implied was that Microsoft did not respond to the allegations in the survey. In fact, Microsoft's statement was a boilerplate that could realistically have been applied to anyone who had asked them a question concerning failure rates or pretty much any other questions of quality. The statement released makes absolutely no mention of the survey, failure rates, or even the person asking the question. Claiming this as "Microsoft is not disputing the survey results" is blatant MS hatred if I ever saw it.Mazty said:
In fact, if Microsoft did dispute the survey results that would be even worse... that would be like Sony disputing a poll on Facebook. It's just not going to happen because it's a stupid survey!
If you actually knew what a troll was you would understand that my post had no evidence of trolling at all.
You know what.... you're absolutely right.... it's got nothing to do with the fact that the BBC is far more reputable than Game Informer and the story could do WAY more damage to Sony's reputation, when the 360's reputation at that point was already damaged.Mazty said:
It's got nothing to do with the fact that whether it's 35%, 40% or 54.2%, the RROD has still been a ton of negative PR for the 360, yet they continue to see to unprecedented sales because, according to you, we're all a bunch of blithering idiots that just do whatever the evil mega corporation tells us too. You know... we all keep buying these 360's with the knowledge that they could RROD at any time and that one in every 2 people will have an RROD, meaning we'll have to just turn around and fork out more money for a new console.
So obviously, the PS3 is the better investment because at least it will always work whenever you need it. So you don't play it because there's nothing you like on it... that doesn't matter, what matters is that it works and it's better! What matters is that PS3 owners are smart, sensible people and are obviously way cooler because they have the best hardware.
Why don't you go wait in line for the latest iPhone while spraypainting "54.2%" all over town. I'm sure we'll get it eventually.
Also, I'm wondering.... http://gameinformer.com/blogs/membe...tudy-shows-33-of-all-xbox-360-s-red-ring.aspxMazty said:
How credible can a website be when they change their tune once a month? I suppose you're just going to have to yell "33%" in your flame wars now..... or you could petition game informer to pump the number back up... how about 60%? 70%? I think if you wrote an angry enough letter to them you could get them to report that 90% of all 360's have failed. C'mon, give it a try.... it will help you win more arguments!
A: This seems to only be affecting the Slim modelsrossatdi said:
B: There are less PS3's going wrong than 360's despite this bad batch
C: Microsoft treat RROD customers just as bad
I'd rather a PS3 anyday. Our PS3 has only had 1 problem, the Blu-ray drive failed so they exchanged our pre-owned 40gb version and gave us a brand new 80gb one for free. Was changed within about 30 mins
I disagree. Redeeming means doing something so well it erases previous mistakes. Merely bringing a product to the quality level it should have had all along is not redeeming.Nieroshai said:
Obviously Microsoft could have, but what would have been the point? The real number, whatever it is, is still bad enough. Microsoft chose to ignore the allegations because the Game Informer survey is not credible.Mazty said:
At least the BBC had credible data, even if that data showed PS3's failure rate to be less than 1% in the UK. The BBC did not base their statistics on 3 consoles, the repair testing they did was actually on 16 consoles, and the tests were to determine whether the re-soldering would fix the machines, which they said was successful on 9 of 15 models. As for the failure rate, they actually quoted SONY'S OWN FIGURES of 12,500 failures out of 2.5 million.
They also mention that Sony refused to release official failure rates for the 60 GB model. Hmm, I guess they're just as bad as MS refusing to release their rates right?
Did you even read the article? I know you CAN read because you insist on looking up internet terms to throw at people, but do you bother to check facts or information before you yammer on about them? Didn't think so. The gist of the BBC article was that Sony's failure rate is good, but of the console owners who have had failures through no fault of their own, Sony only covers the system for 1 year, while MS covers all their systems for 3. How about them apples?
You're too busy throwing out internet terminology to make it look like you know what you're talking about that you don't even bother to check your facts. Actually reading the article in question for the WIN!
I've never understood how the PS3 even stands up to the 360 nowadays, the number of good games on it seems to be less than half. Sorry, I don't wanna start an arguement, the PS3 does have some good things, like Infamous and Resistance.
But it seems like Sony is just making one bad decision after another...
But it seems like Sony is just making one bad decision after another...
Well, I'm glad you learned how to copy and paste, but you once again proved my point through your ignorance. You claim that BBC's figures were from 3 consoles, yet the very article you posted states that the BBC's 3 consoles figure comes from the attempted repair setup that they ran during a Sony event, which happened after the article was published. The ARTICLE in question tested 16 PS3 units for the same repair spec, and quoted Sony's figures of 12,500 out of 2.5 million.Mazty said:
Once again proving that you don't read anything, you just copied and pasted all the proof I needed to win the argument. At least BBC actually researched units instead of quoting figures from a survey. At least BBC researched and compiled PS3's own data into their argument. Yes the Watchdog article went too far in attacking Sony, but by Sony's own admission, a 1 year factory warranty is all they provide, and it's an 'industry standard'. Microsoft was forced to extend their warranty for the problems with their console, but at least they're owning up to it and not charging customers 128 GBP if their console YLOD's after 1 year.
For someone who keeps telling me to grow up you certainly don't bring much education or maturity to an argument.
This argument has never been about which system's failure rate is worse, but you like to keep bringing that up for some reason. The argument has always been about which system's customer service is better, and in my opinion, it's MS that's winning this one. As a 360 owner from launch I can say that I've had 2 360's fail on me in the 3.5 years I've owned the system, and both were replaced, free of charge, within a week.
In fact, MS's customer service has been so good I confidently bought an Elite a few weeks ago, knowing that I'll be covered if anything happens to it, and that the Elites are way less problematic to begin with.
First of all, BBC's 3 console test was only the consoles that were given to it at the demonstration and are obviously not an accurate representation of the console failure rate. They did not claim that it was. They were demonstrating the soldering problem to Sony in their report. BBC's not arguing that PS3's failure rate is within industry standards. No one is, but you seem to be making a big stink about PS3 doing something they're supposed to do.Mazty said:Oh sorry, because the BBC took 0.00062% of PS3's (going with a 2.5million unit sample) and that is an acceptable percentage to prove a point is it?
And Sony's figure that 0.05% of PS3's broke is what? Bad? I don't see what you are getting at here...I don't think you have done the math have you?
And which part of the UK Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 do you not understand? If a PS3 breaks out of warranty, the supplier still has to, BY LAW, replace it. So what are you whining about?
Sure I'm the one that needs an education?
Go away you little troll.
Also, 12,500 out of 2,500,000 is 0.5%, not 0.05%, you need to go back to math class. Also, I'm not saying Sony doesn't have to replace them, but they are CHARGING PEOPLE MONEY to do so, and that apparently is not illegal in the UK. MY point the whole time has been that MS is NOT charging money until your 360 is 3 YEARS OLD to replace defects.
I don't even know why I still argue with you because you are clearly ill-equipped to do so.