Sony tackles BBC over 'PS3 failure' report

[Homeroids]

@damndl0ser

^^ Yes it would be good press but why is a console any different to any other electronic consumer product in terms of warranty requirements?

What I am saying is that if something tends to break out of the normal 1 year warranty, then the normal process is to get it fixed at your cost. This is not unique to a PS3. Yes, the 360 has a 3 year warranty and that is a great thing but we know why this was extended - due to severe failure rates.

So the question that needs to be asked here - what are the failure rates of PS3's. Sony has published that figure. Now, if that is just a crap figure, they have left themselves wide open to audit and examination. MS never published a failure rate for the 360. Everyone knew it was bad. They then extended the warranty. If they had not, lawsuits would have been flying. Sony, has published a failure rate. They have put their balls on the line. If it's a lie, they will eventually pay dearly in litigation.

Now assuming the PS3 failure rate is correct, then why is it required that Sony extend the warranty on PS3's? Yes it would be a great PR move but at the same time, one could interpret this to mean the failure rate of PS3's is far higher than what it should be. Sony have said it is not. So, because of the actions taken by MS with an obviously bad failure rate, Sony is damned if they extend a warranty and damned if they do not. It also would beg the question - why don't they extend their warranty on all other products? No one else does.

So assuming the failure rate is 0.5% (which I always thought around 2% was normal in the PC component industry), there is more on the line if they extended the warranty.

I'm not trying to stick up for Sony. I am honestly trying to be pragmatic here. Kudos to MS in how they handled the RRoD issue but I still feel MS had little choice. They took the risks probably knowing the product was not bench tested enough and they paid for it.