Study: Asus, Toshiba Make Most Reliable Laptops

Indeed... out of 10 laptops that end up in my desk at work I would say 7 are HP. Seems that Quanta and Compal doesn't like'em very much...

These rates seem a little high... maybe it's because my 4 year old Compaq still (amazingly) works? Or did they include battery failures as well?

I drop (3ft) my Asus laptop (6.5lbs) on the solid wood floor and it barely had a dent. I couldn't say that to every other brand.

I think it's because a lot of people don't take proper care of their computers. I used my Dell laptop for three years, and it still ran as smoothly as when I first got it. Then I sold it to my roommate two months ago and it presently runs like shit.

Lenovo needs to bring back IBM's old designs for notebooks. Those were tanks.

I'm actually looking forward to the Asus/Toshiba deal. When looking for a laptop for work a few weeks ago I was torn between two builds that were the same from both manufactures. Hopefully they can tag up and destroy the competition.

surprised to see Dell doing so well (especially compared to HP) a few years ago I'm pretty sure they would have faired worse

I find these numbers to be very off actually. We have hundreds of laptops as well as desktops and the between dell and hp's we only seem to have problems with the dell's. What is also rather funny to me is the hp laptops that I have had at my home have Asus motherboards. Heck even my hp desktop had an asus motherboard and video card. Does anyone actually even know who makes dell's boards????

As far as the failure rates go what exactlly are they measuring for failures? Are these failure's due to HD's, Mem, Motherboards, CPU's, GPU's, etc...... Perhaps the reason for higher rate of failure from one brand to the next is due to the components used. I have a compaq that is 10 years old and still works fine. Then again I have purchased higher powered laptops that only last a year. Lets face it. typically in the past you got more for your money from HP, Acer, etc.. than lets say dell or sony. However, with a more powerful laptop comes increased heat. It should be a no brainer that heat is what kills a laptop faster than a desktop.

I don't see how these studies have any relevance since most of these companies don't include their own hardware (except ASUS)...it seems more like a trend of bad luck to me...

I can see how this study is reliable. The HP's and Compaqs I have owned have been junk; barely lasted a year each. That has nothing to do with maintenance or luck. I decided enough with that and got a Toshiba laptop and I am quite impressed with its reliability and build quality.

HP C.C look at that failure rate. Still I like the dv6t core i7 edition and the price. Dell seems to have jacked up their price a bit on their i7 offering.

Asus? Sony? hmmm same company right? I wouldn't buy their product though.. I think Dell on this chart is very fair. I'm amazed that Apple is only a little below Dell. I am guessing comparing Dell and Apple here might have a lot to do with geforce 8600M failures but I'm not sure.

HP might be counting Compaq too since I don't see it listed here. Never buy a Compaq unless you want headaches. Everyone I talk to knows that though. I think HP should build their compaq line with higher quality and match up the price and quality to the HP products. Why would Compaq have to be an inferior brand? Kinda ignorant to buy Compaq then continue it being crap.

Now Asus buying Toshiba? Looks like 3 manufactures to strike off my list as reliable. Chart or not chart, I know the facts.

toshiba batteries are terrible though. after two years of almost no use, my battery doesn't last 7 minutes. but the laptop still works great just now its a 2nd smaller desktop.

apple tax obviously isn't enough to keep that self proclaimed satisfaction level

If they weighed like tanks as well, that might have been a problem...

Not trying to be funny (well, not so much) but rather practical - people need to be able to carry notebooks around, that's their whole point of existence!

But how well does this scale I mean sure 30% is not a good thing for the bigger manufacturers but if ASUS and Toshisba sold the same ammount of their counterparts, would their precentage be higher than it is per laptop?

You totally went over the concept of my response. These companies don't include their OWN hardware (except ASUS I'm sure has options for it's motherboard possibly)...so why base failure on a company that pieces together your computer? My Alienware laptop hard drive just failed which was made my Samsung...so do I blame Alienware? I don't see how they had anything to do with the hard drive other than putting it in my laptop...that was the idea of my point!

After rereading my response I guess that is just how things work in life. If your alternator dies in your vehicle you blame who made the vehicle (found out my old dodge had a German alternator) and then they will probably blame the manufacturer who made it...so I guess yeah...the stats does have some relevance...

I love Asus products.. I haven't had any problems with them.. Good stuff!

Does this study take into account the differences in the type of users who would buy an ASUS instead of an HP? I'm thinking there is a fundamental difference between "sold at Wal-Mart" and "hot seller on New Egg." I'd venture to say the average NewEgg shopper knows how to troubleshoot their own hardware. The average Wal-Mart (computer) shopper.... "What does this button do?"

Useful information. Thanks for digging this tidbit out for us.

QFT
There is surely significant difference between tech-savvy users and average users

The study is incomplete.
Where are Samsung, Fuijtsu, BenQ, Acer, MSI, Gigabyte, etc...?

They should (hopefully they did) exclude failures due to bad memory, HD, optical drive, and battery. Malfunctions of the mainboard, display are the important ones.

What I don't understand is that when people have doubts or thoughts, CAN'T THEY F*ING READ THE MANUAL !?!

Here's a quote from the Appendix of the report;



That wasn't hard to read now, was it?

I read the PDF, they need to do a study showing the trends in mainboard/display/graphics adapter failures. Failures due to normal wear and tear components don't count.

Failure rates have to do with the customers who buy these products. HP/Compaq laptops can be bought at any computer retailer for mid range to really low prices, and everyone knows the name so any idiot can buy one and feel confident until they wreck it. Whereas Asus is usually sold online and at some retailers for a mid range to high price, the brand is recognized most by the tech savvy (...anyone who has bought a motherboard) and these people take good care of their equipment.

Analogy to cars:

If you go to a dealership and buy the first thing that catches your eye and meets your budget, you're not apt to put much love into it. If you search several dealerships and find a specific model that you like, you'll take great pride in it and care for it regularly.

My personal experiences with Toshi products have all been bad. That includes the two Toshiba notebook drives that I have owned over the years. Guess My Milage has Varied. (significantly)

I think they need to compare products of the same performance level. It's reasonable that a 2.8GHz laptop will fail more often than a 2.0GHz laptop due to more complicated circuitry. But also, ppl who buy higher-end products are those computer or game experts who need high performance & running intensive jobs while those who buy average performance one only use for accessing Internet, listen to music and watch video, of course, laptop will last longer.

How did the massive Sony faulty battery thing not impact their score more?

Want is intersting is that Apple laptops fail about as much as Dell. Something I have known but Apple and its fans hide. Yes, you pay a nice penny for them but their all made somewhere in China.

Oh man. Steve Jobs must be pissed.

Go Asus, glad to see it reigning supreme.