New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sager dead pixel policy change

post #1 of 55
3/4/05 at 10:19pm
Thread Starter 
See the news announcement:

http://notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=67389

The option will be found in the system builder on our site shortly. We will also have it added to policies and put together a full pixel policy for all the systems as clear as possible and sticky it to replace the current one.

Currently working on another news release or two.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 55
3/4/05 at 10:58pm
$200

glad they finally did it, but
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 55
3/4/05 at 11:11pm
I ordered yesterday, and I'll be the first to tell (ok, second) that $200 isn't worth it to me. $50 is worth it, not $200. And I've used an LCD with a dead pixal in the past and it didn't bug me. When I get mine, if it's got one, it's got one. I think I'll live.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 55
3/4/05 at 11:26pm
Thread Starter 
-That's how much it's going to cost to do it legit meaning adding labor to catch units with bad pixels BEFORE they leave (though I'm sure one can be missed, they're human). If you check other dead pixel policies out there, you'll notice it just means they will replace a unit if you get a bad pixel, no extra tests are ran if you order the no dead pixel policy.

-This policy also means they are not sending back units into the system with a bad pixel after testing. So if someone doesn't order the no bad pixel policy their chances do not increase of having a bad pixel. What do other places do?

-Here's the one I like most, if you don't want it, you don't have to pay for it! Orders same as always and go by the standard dead pixel policy which already is better than many brands out there. Dead pixels aren't seen by most people in most cases, lit pixels are more noticed, but the chances of either aren't huge and doesn't bother most people. We pushed for this option for people that really wanted it and it's the best we could come up with while doing it legit and not cutting corners. I think you will find the price of the notebook even with the dead pixel policy is very competitive still even if $200 sounds like a lot.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 55
3/4/05 at 11:37pm
$200 is a pretty hefty price for a guaranteed no dead pixel policy. However, I do find this policy to be very good in the following scenario: let's say I order a 9860 with one of the killer chameleon paint jobs that hopefully PCtorque will be offering soon again and it comes with one dead/stuck pixel, then you can return the unit and have another try at a newly painted no dead pixel machine.

Would this be correct Adam, or would this policy not apply to future customized painted 9860's offered at PCtorque? I'm asking because those old painted machines you used to offer were simply gorgeous and I would be considering getting a painted machine in the future when you will offer it again.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 55
3/4/05 at 11:48pm
Thread Starter 
Yes it will apply to painted systems when we have those back online (may be awhile) and another good reason it's an option.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 55
3/5/05 at 12:00am
cool, that would probably be the only reason I would purchase this dead pixel policy.

Also, so am I correct in thinking that the 15% restocking fee will not be applied to the painted systems if this dead pixel policy is purchased and the unit is returned for a dead pixel?

And thanks for the fast reply Adam, you guys at PCtorque are very prompt, knowledgeable, and extremely helpful.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 55
3/5/05 at 1:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by propofol
cool, that would probably be the only reason I would purchase this dead pixel policy.

Also, so am I correct in thinking that the 15% restocking fee will not be applied to the painted systems if this dead pixel policy is purchased and the unit is returned for a dead pixel?

And thanks for the fast reply Adam, you guys at PCtorque are very prompt, knowledgeable, and extremely helpful.
subtracting the 99 bux policy from hypersonic then compare the original base price btw the 2, sager is only 101 more but i think it definitely worth it. it is a guarantee that you don need to worry about getting a bad system and even u do u can exchange it for a complete free dead pixel system for sure this time ( no one like to keep waiting n exchange)
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 55
3/5/05 at 1:54am
What this means, in reality, is that if you do not pay the extra for the DPP, you are more likely to get a unit with dead pixels. Why? Because what Sager will be doing is testing ALL units and sorting them into two piles - those with dead pixels and those without. If you don't pay for the DPP, guess from which pile your machine will be selected...

This is a great marketing ploy - too bad it is nothing more than highway robbery.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 55
3/5/05 at 1:57am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groston
What this means, in reality, is that if you do not pay the extra for the DPP, you are more likely to get a unit with dead pixels. Why? Because what Sager will be doing is testing ALL units and sorting them into two piles - those with dead pixels and those without. If you don't pay for the DPP, guess from which pile your machine will be selected...

This is a great marketing ploy - too bad it is nothing more than highway robbery.
Wow, guess YOU didn't read my post where I explained why it was $200 for the exact reason of them NOT doing that.

Anything else to share? Except maybe this time AFTER you read the thread you're posting in
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 55
3/5/05 at 2:30am
Quote:
What this means, in reality, is that if you do not pay the extra for the DPP, you are more likely to get a unit with dead pixels. Why? Because what Sager will be doing is testing ALL units and sorting them into two piles - those with dead pixels and those without. If you don't pay for the DPP, guess from which pile your machine will be selected...

This is a great marketing ploy - too bad it is nothing more than highway robbery.
Ya... umm... you are a very stupid and/or incredibly lazy.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 55
3/5/05 at 6:11am
wish they had that when i ordered, i would have gladly paid 200$ more for a no dead pixel guarentee *looks at the red pixel glareing angrily at him*
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 55
3/5/05 at 6:13am
Good to see Sager listening to what their customers want. $200 seems a bit steep, but when you think about it, if you would return a unit with one dead/lit pixel, that's an extra $40 each way plus the extra hassle of having to wait longer... and we all know how much that sucks. Say it happens twice... another $40 each way and you're almost at the $200 mark anyway and end up getting your system a month later.

I have a dead pixel on my camcorder LCD and it's v. annoying. I'm cheap so would probably not buy the DPP and rather chance it. But for people who need their machines perfect and need them now, it comes at a price. Keep it up Sager (and you too PCT )
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 55
3/5/05 at 7:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam@PCTorque
Wow, guess YOU didn't read my post where I explained why it was $200 for the exact reason of them NOT doing that.

Anything else to share? Except maybe this time AFTER you read the thread you're posting in
Yes, you did articulate the new policy very well Adam, thank you. I too feel it's a little steep but also won't claim to know all of the "cost" variables involved. Overall, truly a great policy.
Now in defense for Groston, even after reading the new policy myself, my gut reaction was: "sure they won't use the rejected screens for "non-policy" purchasers".... Besides, why wouldn't you????? If all it has is one or two bad pixels and they fall outside the center say around the outer edge,,,, it perfectly falls within the "standard" screen specs. Why would PC-T waste money by selling it at a "discounted rate via other channels" when it meets everyday specs??
As groston eluded to - and I would have to agree, it's quite a leap of faith for any logical thinking consumer to believe that the ratio of single bad pixel screens wouldn't increase for "non-policy" purchasers due to the new policy.

But, this is just a gut reaction and PC-T deserves the benefit-of-the-dought.
I commend them if the "rejected" screens (regardless of degree, ie one or ten bad p's) are taken out of normal build selection.

Just my humble opinion

Thanks again
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 55
3/5/05 at 10:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrobob83
Good to see Sager listening to what their customers want. $200 seems a bit steep, but when you think about it, if you would return a unit with one dead/lit pixel, that's an extra $40 each way plus the extra hassle of having to wait longer... and we all know how much that sucks. Say it happens twice... another $40 each way and you're almost at the $200 mark anyway and end up getting your system a month later.

I have a dead pixel on my camcorder LCD and it's v. annoying. I'm cheap so would probably not buy the DPP and rather chance it. But for people who need their machines perfect and need them now, it comes at a price. Keep it up Sager (and you too PCT )
on your camcorder? that sux dude..those screens are small, i thought the probability of getting one is nonexistenet.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 55
3/5/05 at 11:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by KJ
But, this is just a gut reaction and PC-T deserves the benefit-of-the-dought.
I commend them if the "rejected" screens (regardless of degree, ie one or ten bad p's) are taken out of normal build selection.

Just my humble opinion

Thanks again
If thats how you feel , only time will tell if you are right or wrong. If Pct does what you stated, it may hurt their sales. Not everyone will be interested in paying 200 more, nor would they accept the need to purchase the option to stay out of the dead pixel pit.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 55
3/5/05 at 1:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambitwogunz
on your camcorder? that sux dude..those screens are small, i thought the probability of getting one is nonexistenet.
Yeah, a single one in the bottom left section. It's not too bad though - a) it's green and b) I never really use the screen anyway.

It should be pointed out that it's not PCTorque that are offering this policy - it's Sager. Whether or not they are true to their word and the rejected screens are used elsewhere is really hard to tell - we just have to go on their word. Which as of now, I trust. However, the whole thing really has nothing to do with PCTorque - they're just passing on the policy, just like they do with the available warranties. Which in a sense is disappointing because I trust PCTorque's word even more than I do Sagers.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 55
3/5/05 at 1:18pm
It still seems crazy needing to worry about avoiding dead pixels when you're buying a brand new product. I never heard about buying a new hard drive and expecting it to contain one or more bad sectors... or buying any new hardware with acceptable defects.

Why are quality standards lower with a new LCD?
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 55
3/5/05 at 1:26pm
HDD does have bad sectors when you buy them. it's just that those sectors are MARKED bad and locked away so you don't see them. as all XXX Gig HDD are much bigger then what they are sold as, this is also why you can run their utility and lock them away when new ones show up. and they decided to not let us do low level format as it might unlock them.

CPUs also from both Intel & AMD, look at their Specification Update pdf, they all have some sort of errata (BUGS) that you buy with brand new.

http://support.intel.com/design/pent...pdt/302352.htm


everything hightech have some sort of bugs / problems that are hidden when you buy them brand new and spend good money on. it's just a matter of are you able to see it or not. it would be hard to hide a bugged pixel on a display device LOL.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 55
3/5/05 at 1:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by T4sys
Why are quality standards lower with a new LCD?
Economics, Economics, Economics....

How sad but true...
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebooks