Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

ASUS: Reviewers & Users Get Different Battery

By - Source: Tom's Hardware | B 29 comments

ASUS officially admitted that it provided better batteries to reviewers of its popular Eee PC 900 than those it shipped to actual customers. According to reports flowing in from Hong Kong, customers who purchased the new UMPCs on launch day complained that ASUS mislead consumers and reviewers. The batteries that were given to reviewers were 5800mAh batteries while consumers were given 4800mAh.

Officials at ASUS told reporters that the standard for the Eee PC 900 is a 4800mAh battery. The company said that it had plans to introduce a higher capacity 5800mAh model at a later date, but accidentally shipped those to reviewers instead.

Company representatives state that due to the confusion, it will consider a exchange program for users who have 4800mAh batteries — currently all of them at the moment. However, ASUS did not indicate to reporters if it will follow through with this program or when it would be available.

This is not the first time that companies have shipped "special edition" equipment to reviewers, which ends up skewing overall impressions of the product from actual models that are for sale.

Found: Gizmodo

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
  • 0 Hide
    spuddyt , April 22, 2008 5:57 PM
    mistake my A$$
  • 1 Hide
    ZOldDude , April 22, 2008 6:11 PM
    This sort of thing goes on all the time.
    The only way to test any product is to get -retail samples- from different venders/shops over a period of a few weeks and insure all tests are run the exact same way.
  • 0 Hide
    veritas_aa , April 22, 2008 7:31 PM
    This is a typical case of lack of INTEGRITY. Things will be different if only ASUS admitted it first but it is still not to late for them to correct this "mistake" with exchange program immedidately instead of just "consider it". WHAT YOU SENT TO REVIEWER SHOULD BE THE SAME AS WHAT YOU SELL or it is called CHEATING.
  • Display all 29 comments.
  • -1 Hide
    johnbilicki , April 22, 2008 7:43 PM
    Asus does not RMA expensive/new items, it sends dead/used items to replace them. It was my first and last item I'll ever buy from Asus. It sickens me to see them get so much coverage here and at Maximum PC. They simply don't stand behind their products. It doesn't matter if a product trumps all others with a hundred times the performance without overclocking or anything special if when it does break you get not only used but broken replacements on $200+ parts!
  • 0 Hide
    SvenBoogie , April 22, 2008 8:25 PM
    "Asus would like to assure our customers, we never intended to get caught."
  • -1 Hide
    Zoonie , April 22, 2008 9:21 PM
    SvenBoogie"Asus would like to assure our customers, we never intended to get caught."


    LOL
  • 0 Hide
    crash27 , April 22, 2008 11:10 PM
    "This is a typical case of lack of INTEGRITY. Things will be different if only ASUS admitted it first but it is still not to late for them to correct this "mistake" with exchange program immedidately instead of just "consider it". WHAT YOU SENT TO REVIEWER SHOULD BE THE SAME AS WHAT YOU SELL or it is called CHEATING."

    I disagree i think it's stealing.
  • 0 Hide
    wrack , April 22, 2008 11:18 PM
    Yeah right "Accidentally Shipped"! You got caught with your pants down and now you are trying to justify that.
  • 0 Hide
    doomsdaydave11 , April 22, 2008 11:31 PM
    commies. How can a huge company "accidentally" ship different batteries, and not know about it. Either they have absolutely no quality control, or they just scammed a lot of people. Either way, I'm not going to buy from asus for a while.
  • -2 Hide
    zpyrd , April 23, 2008 1:47 AM
    Asus is the Anus of the PC hardware industry.
  • 0 Hide
    nukemaster , April 23, 2008 2:41 AM
    SvenBoogie"Asus would like to assure our customers, we never intended to get caught."

    Priceless.
  • -1 Hide
    lunyone , April 23, 2008 2:58 AM
    Quote:
    "Asus would like to assure our customers, we never intended to get caught."

    LOL!!!
    Sorta reminds me of several recent companies, i.e. Enron, Global, Worldcom, etc.
  • 0 Hide
    martel80 , April 23, 2008 7:59 AM
    C'mon, it's not even 20 per cent less the capacity. And you make it look like the computer is useless now... and Asus is a serial killer.
    First of all, you should have read the computer's specs at the hardware/internet store before you bought it. If they would sell/ship you the PC with inferior specs, you could argue about scamming and you could just RM that.
  • 1 Hide
    cynewulf , April 23, 2008 11:33 AM
    crash27I disagree i think it's stealing.


    You can't really classify this as stealing. Fraud, deception, misdirection yes but stealing, no.
  • 0 Hide
    Onus , April 23, 2008 12:30 PM
    It sounds absolutely dishonest, but Martel does have a point. Having read the article, I'm not sure that consumers were told one thing but given another. One could even say that the onus should be on the reviewers for not pointing out that they were testing using an extended-life battery rather than the standard one. What did Asus tell the reviewers about the battery they got? Did they claim it was the standard? If so, then everyone who bought one based on the reviews should get the better battery. If not, then people too lazy to read suffered the consequences.
  • 1 Hide
    nihility , April 23, 2008 1:17 PM
    Marketing departments tend to prefer scamming customers over telling the truth. It makes their jobs much easier.
    Take a look at the EEE PC 900 page http://eeepc.asus.com/global/news04152008.htm - there is no information there about the battery. Rarely do you get much information about the battery, reviewers had no reason to suspect they were getting a bigger battery. The blame is 100% on ASUS for being scumbags.
    This happens with a lot of products. When Toms gave the Viewsonic VP930 a glowing review I went out and bought one. When 6 months later it died, I got a replacement unit which was terribly inferior to the original. Nothing I can do about it. What can anyone do about it?
  • -1 Hide
    sandmanwn , April 23, 2008 1:45 PM
    Sounds like the reviewers didn't ask the most basic questions and are trying to pass the blame on to someone else. Idiot reviewers should know what they are actually reviewing. How can you not tell the difference between an extended battery and a standard battery.
  • -1 Hide
    sandmanwn , April 23, 2008 1:55 PM
    The 4G also has more than one battery option as well (4 cell 4400mAh and 4 cell 5200mAh) so this really shouldn't have been a surprise for reviewers.
  • 0 Hide
    SvenBoogie , April 23, 2008 7:11 PM
    I see the Asus employee trolls have arrived...
  • 0 Hide
    Onus , April 23, 2008 7:29 PM
    That's the question, Sandman, what did the reviewers know, vs. what SHOULD they have known. Did Asus lie to anyone, or just not bother to make sure people weren't making favorable assumptions?

    And no, I don't and have never worked for Asus. I haven't used an Asus mobo in too long to remember, although a pair of Asus EAH3850 video cards I bought for different systems (mine and one for my niece) have worked well.

    A failure to think for oneself is NEVER someone else's fault, even if that someone else could have been more clear.
Display more comments