No 'Red Ring Of Death'-style disasters for Xbox One, says Microsoft

[Michael-5]

Adinnieken said:

Michael-5 said:

Adinnieken said:

Michael-5 said:

Of course One won't have as bad of a RRoD problem as 360, MS still denies the high failure rate of the 360, and never did release a 360 fat which included the two $0.50 clips which hold the motherboard fixing this problem.

With the One, they have learnt how to cover up for mass failures even better.

The failure rate significantly dropped after the Falcon -based board was released to something along the lines of 15%.  The Jasper-based Xbox 360's did even better dropping it below 10%.  Both of these were the original Xbox 360 design, not the Xbox 360 S.

Microsoft may not have published numbers, but a repair facility that Microsoft used did. 

Are those the HDMI model 360's? Yea, 10% and 15% aren't bad, but it's not good either and the HDMI model 360's didn't release until 2008 I believe, that's 3 years and what 16 million consoles in?

Plus, what's worse is MS extended the warrenty on 360's for RRoD problems, and even if you had an extended warrenty from someone else, you had to ship to MS. MS would then replace your console with a "fixed" console someone else sent in. Problem is, these consoles aren't always fixed, and they are still original models with high fairlure rates.

I speak from experience, I had to ship my 360 out and get it replaced twice, and I had to specifically ask for a new one to replace my console with. That replacement console still broke, but thankfully, a good floor manager from Best Buy replaced my console with an HDMI 360 after my 3rd 360 broke.

P.S. What was the actual fail rate for original 360's? What about PS3/Wii? I read PS3's are about 2.5% and Wii is <0.2%.

No, September of 2007 was when officially the Falcon-based HDMI models launched.  The Zephyr-based HDMI models launched in April of 2007, however Zephyr-based 360's didn't adequately resolve the heat problem and still had the larger 90nm GPU and CPU.  10% is actually considered within the industry average.  The PS3 is now worse than the Xbox 360. 

Again, initially they refurbished the motherboards by removing the 90nm CPU and replacing it with a 65nm CPU, installing a larger heatsink on the GPU, and securing it to the mainboard.  While some of the refurbished boards didn't last, these refurbished boards were viable.  That is to say, they worked just as well as a brand new board, which for the non-HDMI models was functionally the same as a refurbished board.

My original Xbox 360 (Jan/06) failed with the RRoD 2 3/4 years after it was purchased.  It was replaced, and within 90 days the DVD failed.  I repeated this sequence every three months, with the exception of two 6 month periods and one year where life prevented me from using the console until I went through 8 consoles because of a DVD failure.  The final straw, for Microsoft, was my last console.  I sent them pictures, I explained everything, they sent me a console and within 90 days it failed.  Through my persistence and their analysis, come to find out a patch, when applied in the wrong order, had a detrimental affect on the DVD drive.  Subsequently, Microsoft provided a retro-active warranty on the DVD drive for anyone who had a specific problem, had it repaired, and paid for it, as well as changing the installation order for patches.

While I feel your pain regarding refurbished units, in my opinion, they were fine.  The worst thing I ran into was a bad rear USB port.  It worked, but it was just loose.  But the majority of the units I came across looked new, and were in great condition.  One of them I desperately tried to keep, because it was so quiet and had one of the smoothest operating DVD drives I'd ever ran across -- before it failed. 

I don't believe the PS3 is that low.  It may have been that low initially, but after about two years of operation, the YLOD on the original BC PS3's started to rear it's ugly head.  In 2009 Game Informer did a survey of 5,000 and found that 10.6% of those surveyed PS3 owners had a hardware failure.  This might be slightly inflated, because Game Informer didn't distinguish between people having a problem, getting it repaired, and having another problem with the repaired unit.  Subsequently, their Xbox 360 number is extremely high.  I don't believe people who had a PS3, a hardware failure, and got it repaired had a signficant number of repeated problems.  Speaking from experience, certainly the Xbox 360 circumstance was not that way.

It would have been nice if the Game Informer article specified people who had an initial problem on a system they purchased, vs people who had a problem with each console.  I think the Xbox 360 rate would have dropped to one that was inline with other figures being reported, e.g. 33%.  By the way, the PS3 figures also match up to those provided by a repair service Square Trade, while the Xbox 360 figures don't. 

http://www.gamegrep.com/news/24032-hardware_failure_rates_for_the_wii_360_and_ps3/

http://www.gamespot.com/news/xbox-360-failure-rate-237-ps3-10-wii-27-study-6216691 
 
Again, currently the Xbox 360 S enjoys a failure rate below that of the PS3.  That isn't to say Xbox 360's don't still fail, they do, but they're now well within industry averages.

I can't remember where I got that 2.5% figure for PS3, but I remember reading that that was the failure rate "within 3 years." The PS3 fail rate is probably higher, from my experience with a PS1 and PS2, Sony consoles typically last 5 years before they break. If this figure is accurate, it means that some PS3's and Wii's break within 3 years, but most break within 3-4 years.

------

Also i disagree with you about refurbished units. You resent your X-Box 360 8 times, that's not okay.

From experience, I feel MS has terrible customer relations. When my 3rd console broke I sent it to MS 3 or 4 times, only for them to say "It's operating fine." It wasn't fine, it was breaking, and it actually broke a month after warrenty, but I had an extended warrenty with Best Buy, and the guy was real nice. Got an HDMI model, finally. I really don't like how MS couldn't just send me a Falcon HDMI model....

In terms of reliability, all I want is a console that lasts the entire gen. That's how long consoles used to last, that's how it should be. All my Nintendo home consoles are fine, and like I said my PS1 & PS2 lasted about 5-6 years, which to me was just a bit too short because I still had a bunch of unfinished games at the point. I bought my PS3 used, so I can't judge it breaking after 1 year, and my PSP is only a year old, so no comment on that.

However to be fair, my PS1/PS2 were 1st gen models. So were my Nintendo's, but still.

----

Funny thing is, I bought a 360 because I was tired of my Sony Home consoles breaking right when the next gen starts. I thought MS reliability was good because most people I know with an XB1 still had a working model. Maybe people just played XB1 less....

Either Way because of Sony/MS's poor reliability record, I refuse to buy a 1st gen console by either developer. So I can't get a PS4 until 2015/2016.. That means Wii U is first