Reliability and Service: In Search of Trouble-Free PCs
Are today's PCs too cheap? We go behind the scenes to see if manufacturers are cutting corners, and survey 30,000 readers to find vendors that deliver solid systems and support.Aoife McEvoy and Stephen Swoyer
Too much of a good thing can make you suspicious. If your kid offers to get you the newspaper and an iced tea, for instance, you wonder when he wants to borrow the Miata. And if prices at the meat market are too low, you might worry about the grade of the ground beef you're buying.
Plummeting PC prices can provoke a similar reaction. They've fallen so far so fast--35 percent in just three years, according to market research firm Dataquest--that some computer users wonder if manufacturers are using inferior components and laying off support technicians so they can sell PCs cheaply and still make a profit.
We would love to report that the results of our survey on the reliability and service of PCs show that the latest systems have few problems. But based on the responses of 30,490 PC World readers, we can't. To enrich this analysis, we combined the results of our latest survey with those from our July 2000 report and compared these numbers with the previous year's worth of data.
The results for reliability--such as how many problems a PC has each year or how likely a component is to fail--are mixed. While average scores were down for home PCs, work systems and notebook computers generally scored better. But in our measures of service--how long users waited on hold for a technician and whether their problem was ever resolved, for example--results were down across the board among home and work PCs, as well as notebooks. For a detailed breakdown of each company's ratings across our six reliability and six service measures, see our chart for work PCs, as well as the charts for home PCs and for notebook PCs.
Service Without a Smile
Sue Carney knows about service problems firsthand. A residential manager living in Southampton, New Jersey, Carney is fed up with the service she's getting from Toshiba--or rather, the lack of it. The screen on her Satellite 1605CDS notebook started to flicker soon after she bought it. In addition, the screen would suddenly go dark and the PC would freeze. Carney made four trips to an authorized Toshiba service facility, but it could not solve the problem. The service center sent the unit back to Toshiba three times. Even its maker couldn't fix the machine.
"I've owned the laptop for nine months, and it's been in the shop for a total of three months," says Carney. "I seem to be getting nowhere with my phone calls to Toshiba in seeking a replacement." At the time of this writing, Carney is pursuing redress through a mediator suggested by a consumer affairs bureau.
The combination of falling computer prices and our unimpressive survey scores got us wondering: How can PC manufacturers produce their machines so cheaply? And is the cost-cutting effort affecting the quality of their products and the way the companies support them?
To find out, we visited the production plants of several major companies around the country, toured factory floors, and grilled PC makers about their manufacturing practices and service programs.
We found that PC companies are saving money in ways you might not expect--reducing the amount of time they keep supplies of parts in inventory, designing computers so that they require fewer workers to assemble them, and making shipping more efficient.
On the service front, manufacturers are aggressively trying to move technical support customers from the phones--where each call costs a company roughly $10 or more--to the Web, where each query may cost just pennies.
"There's a lot of pressure to cut the costs of the individual boxes," says Rob Enderle, a senior analyst with research firm Giga Information Group. "Big vendors are rethinking the ways that they build PCs, and they're trying to make things as efficient as possible without sacrificing quality."
The Making of Your PC
One fundamental way PC makers reduce costs is by building factories outside the United States. Acer, for example, closed its plant in San Jose, California, last September, and now does most of its manufacturing in Juarez, Mexico. HP makes most of its Pavilion home PCs and Vectra business PCs in Brazil. Almost all notebooks, regardless of maker, are made overseas. Even when you account for the added freight costs to get the units to the United States, foreign assembly can still be cheaper because labor costs are up to ten times lower.
Manufacturers are also cutting costs by keeping parts on hand for as short a time as possible to save storage space and expenses. Large PC makers like Dell and Gateway require suppliers to build warehouses within a few hours' drive of their factories. That means the PC companies hold on to parts for only a few hours before they need them. Gateway, for instance, has significantly cut the amount of time and space it uses to store supplies. "We used to put 30,000 miles per month on our forklifts and take up nearly a third of our facility in North Sioux City to store parts," reports Gateway's Paul Eickhoff, corrective action manager, integration services. The company has cut those figures by about 75 percent, he says.
Some vendors, like Compaq, still use a Henry Ford-style assembly line. PCs zoom by on conveyor belts, and each person performs the same task over and over.
But increasingly, companies are using a newer "cell" method of production. At Acer, Dell, Gateway, IBM, and (for some systems) Compaq, small teams assemble a single PC from start to finish. In the past, Gateway needed five people to assemble a PC. Now three can do the job. Dell uses just two workers, and each Acer "cell" consists of a single person.
Companies cut the number of hands needed by simplifying case design and integrating components, particularly on lower-end machines. With case design, the fewer the screws, the easier it is to pop a case on and off. The new designs speed up assembly while also making it easier for owners to upgrade their PCs. Some examples: Gateway's latest case has just a single screw, and the drives in Compaq's new Presario roll in and out on rails.
Integrated components help, too. Computer manufacturers make assembly quicker, for instance, by putting sound chips on the motherboard; workers don't have to insert a separate card. "When the components are integrated, they're actually more reliable," says Rick McKinnon, NEC's vice president of operations. That's because there's less of a chance that a worker could insert a component incorrectly. Also, integrated components tend to include technology that's been around for a while, with most of the incompatibilities and kinks worked out.
Testing 1-2-3
Once a system is built, the next important step is to make sure it works. PC makers vow that they are still doing extensive quality testing, or burn-in. Compaq and Dell gave us their approximate burn-in times (4.5 hours and 3 hours, respectively), but other vendors wouldn't provide details. In some cases, the testing is no longer handled by a human. Gateway, for instance, hooks its PCs to a server, which installs the operating system and software and tests to make sure that the PC boots up and that components are working.
All companies focus on reducing the number of "touches" a PC undergoes--that is, the number of times it's handled during the manufacturing process. "We know that the fewer people that handle our units, the better," says Roy Perry, Dell's vice president of manufacturing operations in the home and small-business group. "Movement and motion are lost time for us--it's waste."
At Dell, once a new PC is boxed, it's seldom touched again. Electronic eyes read bar codes on the boxes, and conveyer belts automatically route the boxes directly to a truck headed for their particular destination. The process reduces the number of employees needed to handle each unit. It also cuts shipping costs, since the company has already done much of the sorting that carriers like UPS would otherwise do.
Despite these innovations and vendors' assurances that they continue to do burn-in testing, we hear lots of horror stories from readers. Take Nancy Hendryx, for instance. Working as a freelance writer in Concord, New Hampshire, Hendryx told us that her Gateway Essential 433C desktop had been riddled with problems ever since it arrived. "I had to replace the CD-ROM drive, the CPU, and a dead motherboard," she laments. "Then I needed to reformat my hard drive and reinstall the operating system." After three months, Hendryx had a PC that still didn't work properly. She settled for a refund.
Is Your PC Being Served?
Our survey results show that fewer and fewer readers are very satisfied with the service they receive. Their tech support calls are less likely to be answered quickly than in the past. And not as many technicians are very knowledgeable, compared to last year.
During our visits to manufacturing plants, we tried to find out how vendors support today's PCs in the face of lower profit margins. Each company focuses a lot of energy on cutting costs, largely by trying to reduce the volume of calls it gets.
That effort starts even before the system leaves the factory. Companies strive to make their setup instructions clearer. For example, HP recently eliminated all words from its instructions, using just colorful pictures to illustrate the hook-up process. Many companies preload drivers for the most popular printers, scanners, and other peripherals. And when customers report software bugs or incompatibilities, manufacturers will ask the software makers to fix the problem for future computers. If a fix can't be made, companies may stop offering the bundle.
But the biggest push now is to get customers off the phone and onto the Web. Of course, PC makers stressed that they won't be cutting off their phone lines. "We're not doing anything to discourage customers from calling," contends Steve Young, vice president of worldwide customer support for Compaq. "Some customers like to talk to us; others hate to talk. The Web is good, but if your computer is down, then it's not an option."
But vendors are also committed to convincing as many people as possible as soon as possible to use Web support. Dell CEO Michael Dell has told employees at his firm that he wants to see 80 percent of all tech support transactions handled solely through support.dell.com by early 2002, says a company spokesperson.
Growth of Web Support
Vendors are trying to lure customers online by making the experience easier. In earlier days, the online-support customers went to the manufacturer's site, tried to diagnose the problem themselves, and hunted through the site for a solution. The newest versions of online support allow users to chat in real time with a technician. Thanks to the latest diagnostic software, the technician can "see" the sick system's configuration over the Internet, with the user's permission. The techie can then diagnose the problem, and in some cases electronically transmit a solution such as a BIOS update or driver fix directly onto the user's PC.
Many companies have offerings that embody some or all of those traits. Dell bundles Resolution Assistant, a new Web-based troubleshooting tool, with its latest PCs. The tool combines system diagnostics with online chat and lets Dell techies fix problems remotely. HP's tool EDiag, which comes with its Vectra line of business PCs, works the same way.
The Big Picture
In our visits to manufacturers, we're relieved to report, we didn't find any instances of vendors cutting corners irresponsibly or blatantly ignoring customers' needs. (Of course, that's no surprise.)
On the manufacturing floor, a lot of the efficiencies we saw don't seem to harm consumers, and in fact some of them are a boon. Obviously, lower PC prices benefit customers' wallets. Our survey found fewer component failures overall this time, perhaps because of greater integration. And some of the efficiencies mean you could get your PC a day or two sooner. But based on our survey results, we haven't seen other dramatic improvements in reliability, and the average quality of home PCs slipped across the board.
We are seeing some positive developments for consumers on the support side. When companies work hard to prevent problems and make their Web support easier to use, all PC owners benefit. But our survey seems to show that whatever improvements vendors are making have been outweighed by service snags. Re-spondents--whether they use a work PC, a home PC, or a notebook--just aren't as happy with the help they've received.
While companies are understandably attracted by the savings online support offers, they need to sustain a high level of support for the customer who will always want to reach for the phone. And on the manufacturing front, the use of cost-effective methods is all very well for PC companies, but we'd like to see reliability improve as quickly as the prices drop.
Stephen Swoyer is a freelance writer based in State College, Pennsylvania, and Aoife McEvoy is a senior associate editor at PC World. Shane Rau, former senior technical editor at PC World, also contributed to this article.
Winners and Losers
Only one PC manufacturer deserves an Outstanding rating, according to our survey of more than 30,000 PC World readers. Of the 11 companies in our rankings, Dell is at the top of the class again for its work and home PCs. Fortunately, our readers identified only one vendor--home PC maker EMachines--that deserves to be rated Poor overall.
We didn't receive enough reports from readers about their service experiences with some PC makers in our notebooks group to be able to rank those companies in our overall charts. We were able to rate their products' likelihood of mechanical problems, however. For the reliability ratings of Acer, HP, NEC, Sony, and WinBook laptops, see the reliability chart.
Despite receiving sufficient responses from Quantex and CyberMax owners, we did not rank these companies. Last August, closely affiliated supplier Fountain Technologies filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy laws. Since that time, customers have deluged us with complaints about both manufacturers. Because the companies are in such turmoil, we removed them from our Top 100 and this survey report. For info on how Quantex and CyberMax fared in our survey, see "How Did They Fare?"
Winners and Losers (chart)
| Work PCs | Home PCs | Notebooks |
| Outstanding | Outstanding | Outstanding |
| Dell | Dell | None |
| Good | Good | Good |
| Gateway IBM Micron | IBM Micron | Dell IBM |
| Fair | Fair | Fair |
| Compaq Hewlett-Packard | Acer Compaq Gateway Hewlett-Packard Sony | Compaq Fujitsu Gateway Micron Toshiba |
| Poor | Poor | Poor |
| None | EMachines | None |
Readers Rate Work PCs
As in our last survey, Dell earns our highest rating among work PC makers. The company gets top marks in reliability all around. Readers report few problems in the first place--owners of Dell PCs didn't often deal with dead machines or component failures. Dell's service ratings decline a little, however--most notably in the percentage of unresolved problems--but the company still merits an Outstanding rating overall.
Our survey results show that work systems tend on average to be slightly more reliable than home PCs and notebooks in some cases. For example, work machines have a smaller percentage of problems in general and fewer component failures.
IBM earns a Good rating despite a few reliability issues: For example, compared with our last full year of survey results, the average number of problems users experience in a year increased. Compaq earns only a Fair rating--though its customers experienced an impressively low percentage of component failures--in part because relatively few of our survey respondents were especially happy either with their PCs' reliability or with Compaq's service.
We also rate HP as Fair overall. Its PCs are dependable, but its service ratings are troubling. HP had a smaller group of owners who say they are very satisfied with support than most other PC makers.
Readers Rate Work PCs (chart)
| | Percent of PCs with problems | Problems per year | Problems on arrival | Dead on arrival | Component failure | High satisfaction with reliability | Overall reliability score | Short hold time | Quick resolution | No resolution | Knowledgeable tech support | Sincere effort by tech support | High satisfaction with service | Overall service score |
| ***** Outstanding | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Dell Super-solid machines, yet some unresolved problems. | ***** | ***** | ***** | ***** | ***** | ***** | ***** | **** | ***** | *** | **** | **** | **** | **** |
| **** Good | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Gateway Dependable computers, service only mediocre. | **** | **** | **** | ***** | **** | *** | **** | *** | **** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** |
| IBM Sturdy components, fast resolution of problems. | **** | *** | *** | **** | ***** | *** | **** | **** | ***** | **** | *** | *** | *** | **** |
| Micron Few problems per year, terrific follow-through. | **** | ***** | *** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | ***** | **** | *** | *** | **** |
| *** Fair | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Compaq Owners' feedback is only lukewarm in certain areas. | **** | *** | **** | **** | ***** | ** | **** | *** | **** | **** | *** | ** | ** | *** |
| Hewlett-Packard Machines are pretty dependable, yet owners aren't thrilled. | **** | *** | **** | ***** | ***** | *** | **** | *** | **** | *** | *** | ** | ** | *** |
Readers Rate Home PCs
Only Dell is rated Outstanding for its home PCs. Most of the other computer manufacturers in this category received decidedly mediocre reviews in our survey.
For example, Gateway is rated Fair. Readers tell us that the cow-themed computers are getting less reliable and service is declining. Compared to other makers, Gateway machines have a relatively high rate of problems, and a bigger percentage of Gateway customers say they were left with unresolved problems than in our last survey.
Acer--also rated Fair--has substandard scores for the percentage of PCs with problems and the incidence of component failures. Conversely, Acer has improved its service, readers say. Sony, another company rated Fair, had mixed results. A high percentage of Sony owners say they had experienced at least one problem. But aside from that, Sony did well in our other measures of reliability. The company's service is inconsistent, though. Sony techies were fairly quick to pick up the phone, but comparatively few readers were impressed with their technical knowledge.
And at the bottom of the heap is EMachines, rated Poor. Its reliability ratings are all over the map: Its PCs performed well when they first arrived and had few component failures overall, but EMachines owners report an average of almost three problems per year--the worst of the bunch. EMachines' service is even more disturbing. A relatively high percentage of respondents tell us their problems were never resolved.
Readers Rate Home PCs (chart)
| | Percent of PCs with problems | Problems per year | Problems on arrival | Dead on arrival | Component failure | High satisfaction with reliability | Overall reliability score | Short hold time | Quick resolution | No resolution | Knowledgeable tech support | Sincere effort by tech support | High satisfaction with service | Overall service score |
| ***** Outstanding | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Dell Customers give a huge thumbs-up. | ***** | **** | **** | ***** | ***** | ***** | ***** | **** | ***** | **** | **** | ***** | ***** | ***** |
| **** Good | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| IBM Super-reliable components, but service is only middling. | **** | *** | **** | **** | ***** | *** | **** | **** | **** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** |
| Micron Reasonably reliable PCs, but don't expect techies to pick up your call quickly. | **** | **** | ** | *** | *** | **** | **** | ** | **** | **** | *** | **** | **** | **** |
| *** Fair | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Acer Spotty reliability, middle-of-the-road service. | ** | *** | ** | *** | ** | ** | ** | **** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** |
| Compaq Lots of unreliable machines, few customers are very happy. | ** | ** | *** | *** | **** | ** | ** | **** | *** | *** | ** | *** | ** | *** |
| Gateway So-so reliability, and lots of PCs with problems. | ** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | **** | **** | *** |
| Hewlett-Packard Lots of problems per year, yet few components go south. | **** | ** | *** | **** | ***** | ** | *** | *** | *** | *** | ** | *** | ** | *** |
| Sony Fairly reliable machines but some substandard support. | ** | **** | **** | ***** | **** | *** | **** | **** | *** | *** | ** | ** | ** | *** |
| ** Poor | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| EMachines Need support? Good luck. | **** | * | **** | ***** | **** | ** | *** | *** | ** | * | ** | ** | * | ** |
Readers Rate Notebooks
Notebook computers fare a tad better in some measures than home PCs and work PCs. For example, notebooks have a slightly smaller number of problems per year, on average; they're also less likely to be dead on arrival or have problems right out of the box. Dell and Big Blue earned the only Good ratings among notebook manufacturers. We rated the rest of them Fair.
Gateway's service ratings declined across the board compared to last year's. The company took the biggest tumble in the percentage of unresolved PC problems category, with a relatively high number of Gateway owners telling us they were left high and dry. Micron had low spots in both reliability and service, although some of its reliability scores were strong: A relatively small percentage of Micron notebooks were dead on arrival. But readers say the rate of component failures was relatively high. On the service side, relatively few Micron customers got through to technical support in less than 5 minutes, and relatively few were very satisfied with the help they received. Along with its respectable ratings for reliability, Fujitsu got poor scores in almost all the service measures. For example, relatively few owners report that their computer problems were resolved.
Readers Rate Notebooks (chart)
| | Percent of PCs with problems | Problems per year | Problems on arrival | Dead on arrival | Component failure | High satisfaction with reliability | Overall reliability score | Short hold time | Quick resolution | No resolution | Knowledgeable tech support | Sincere effort by tech support | High satisfaction with service | Overall service score |
| **** Good | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Dell Both reliability and support are middling in spots. | *** | *** | **** | ***** | **** | **** | **** | *** | **** | *** | **** | **** | **** | **** |
| IBM Impressive reliability with matching service. | ***** | ***** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | *** | **** |
| **** Fair | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Compaq Shaky notebooks; owners are not jumping for joy. | ** | ** | *** | **** | **** | ** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | ** | *** |
| Fujitsu Good-quality PCs, but service is weak across nearly all measures. | *** | ***** | *** | **** | **** | *** | *** | *** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** |
| Gateway Lots of unresolved problems. | *** | *** | **** | ***** | *** | **** | *** | *** | *** | ** | **** | **** | *** | *** |
| Micron Tons of dead components; you may have to wait a while on hold. | *** | ***** | *** | ***** | ** | *** | *** | ** | *** | *** | *** | *** | ** | *** |
| Toshiba Customers weren't thrilled with the techies' knowledge. | *** | *** | *** | ***** | **** | *** | *** | **** | *** | *** | ** | *** | ** | *** |
Readers Rate Reliability: Other Notebooks
For some PC makers in our notebooks group--Acer, HP, NEC, Sony, and WinBook--we didn't receive enough of our readers' service experiences to be able to rank the companies in our overall star charts. We were able to rate their products' likelihood of mechanical problems, however.
Notebooks in this group had mixed reliability, according to our survey of 30,000 readers. Both HP and Sony had some very good scores. With both brands, respondents ended up with very few lemon computers and reported a low failure rate for the machines' components. But HP and Sony each had an Achilles' heel that harmed their overall rating: Relatively few HP customers were very satisfied with their notebook's reliability, and Sony notebooks had a relatively high number of problems per year on average.
At the bottom of the pack, with a rating of Fair, was WinBook. Owners experienced a lot of trouble with the machines when they first started to use them, and they reported a high percentage of faulty components. On the positive side, the notebooks were very seldom completely dead on arrival and had relatively few problems per year.
Readers Rate Reliability: Other Notebooks (chart)
| | Percent of PCs with problems | Problems per year | Problems on arrival | Dead on arrival | Component failure | High satisfaction with reliability |
| **** Good | | | | | | |
| Acer | **** | *** | **** | ***** | *** | *** |
| Hewlett-Packard | ***** | *** | ***** | ***** | ***** | *** |
| NEC | *** | **** | ***** | **** | *** | *** |
| Sony | ***** | ** | **** | ***** | ***** | **** |
| *** Fair | | | | | | |
| WinBook | ** | **** | ** | **** | ** | *** |
Quantex and CyberMax: How Did They Fare?
Despite receiving a sufficient number of responses from Quantex and CyberMax customers in our survey, we decided not to rank these manufacturers. Last August closely affiliated supplier Fountain Technologies filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy laws. (For more details about the bankruptcy situation, see "Supplier's Bankruptcy Hits Quantex and Cybermax.")
At the time of this writing, CyberMax and Quantex have updated their Web sites and you can still buy a computer, though configuration options are rather limited. However, customers continue to send us tons of complaints about both manufacturers. The biggest problem? Customers tell us they're left stranded; they can't reach anyone who can help fix their problem PCs.
We have removed systems from both CyberMax and Quantex from our monthly Top 100 charts and decided not to include them in our PC Reliability and Service survey report because of the current turmoil.
Had we included Quantex and CyberMax in our Home PCs chart, Quantex would have been ranked Fair overall, and CyberMax would have been rated Poor.
Quantex customers reported a high percentage of problems right out of the box, along with a high instance of component troubles. CyberMax systems had a bigger percentage of problems, and lots of machines that were either dead on arrival or had other problems from the get-go. Customers of both companies said they seldom got through to a technician in less than 5 minutes, but CyberMax fared a lot worse in service than Quantex: CyberMax owners reported a troubling amount of problems going unresolved, and relatively few owners were satisfied with the techies' knowledge.
Methodology and a Word About the Star Scores
PC World's Reliability and Service survey was conducted in conjunction with Survey.com (formerly World Research) of San Jose, California. The Web-based survey was fielded from December 1999 through January 2000, and from June 2000 through August 2000. During those periods, we invited PC World subscribers to take our survey. In addition to the invitations included in the magazine, we also contacted some readers by e-mail. Over the course of the survey, we received 30,490 reports from verified PC World subscribers describing their PCs' reliability and their experiences, if any, in getting service.
Using this data, a team of PC World editors and research experts analyzed the reliability and service performance of each manufacturer's work, home, and notebook PCs, based on 12 measures. In each of six reliability and six service measures, we ranked each company from best to worst. We determined a company's overall ranking based on the sum of its weighted reliability and service scores, as well as on the number of stars it earned in individual measures.
Star Scores Legend
Stars awarded correspond to the companies' relative rankings. Each item relates to a particular question we asked PC World subscribers in our survey.
Reliability
- Percent of PCs with problems: Did your PC have at least one problem needing repair attributable to the company?
- Problems per year: How many problems did your PC have per year?
- Problems on arrival: Did your PC work properly when you first turned it on?
- Dead on arrival: Was your PC non-functioning when you first turned it on?
- Component failure: Did your PC have one or more faulty components replaced?
- High satisfaction with reliability: How satisfied were you with the reliability of your PC? (Measure: "Very satisfied.")
Service
- Short hold time: How long did you have to wait on hold before reaching a technician? (Measure: 5 minutes or less.)
- Quick resolution: How long did it take before the most recent problem was resolved? (Measure: Five days or less.)
- No resolution: How long did it take before the most recent problem was resolved? (Measure: Never resolved.)
- Knowledgeable tech support: How would you rate the knowledge of the service technician who helped you? (Measure: "Excellent" or "good.")
- Sincere effort by tech support: How would you rate the sincerity of the service technician who helped you? (Measure: "Excellent" or "good.")
- High satisfaction with service: How satisfied were you with the service you received for your most recent problem? (Measure: "Very satisfied.")
Star Scores Details (chart)
| | Work PCs | Home PCs | Notebook PCs | Survey average1 |
| Percent of PCs with problems Percentage of PCs that have had at least one problem needing repair | Five stars: 31.2 percent Four stars: 42.3 to 44.7 percent | Five stars: 44.8 percent Four stars: 50.9 to 54.3 percent Two stars: 60.1 to 63.2 percent | Five stars: 38.8 percent Three stars: 44.9 to 49.7 percent Two stars: 53.5 percent | Home PCs: 56 percent Work PCs: 41 percent Notebook PCs: 46 percent |
| Problems per year Average number of problems per year of age for the brand's PCs | Five stars: 0.84 Four stars: 1.08 Three stars: 1.29 to 1.37 | Four stars: 1.06 to 1.28 Three stars: 1.43 to 1.62 Two stars: 2.16 to 2.42 One star: 2.97 | Five stars: 0.73 to 0.79 Three stars: 1.07 to 1.19 Two stars: 1.47 | Home PCs: 1.7 Work PCs: 1.1 Notebook PCs: 1.1 |
| Problems on arrival Percentage of PCs that did not work properly when they were first turned on | Five stars: 3.4 percent Four stars: 4.6 to 5.3 percent Three stars: 6.2 to 6.9 percent | Four stars: 4.1 to 4.7 percent Three stars: 6.4 to 7.9 percent Two stars: 9.1 percent | Four stars: 3.4 to 4.3 percent Three stars: 5.4 to 5.8 percent | Home PCs: 7.3 percent Work PCs: 5.2 percent Notebook PCs: 4.7 percent |
| Dead on arrival Percentage of PCs that were nonfunctional when they were first turned on | Five stars: 0.63 to 0.91 percent Four stars: 1.05 to 1.30 percent | Five stars: 0.61 to 1.02 percent Four stars: 1.32 to 1.62 percent Three stars: 1.94 to 2.45 percent | Five stars: zero to 0.81 percent Four stars: 1.17 to 1.63 percent | Home PCs: 1.8 percent Work PCs: 1 percent Notebook PCs: 0.9 percent |
| Component failure Percentage of PCs that have had at least one faulty component replaced | Five stars: 15.3 to 19.6 percent Four stars: 24.2 to 24.4 percent | Five stars: 21.8 to 23.1 percent Four stars: 27.0 to 28.5 percent Three stars: 35.6 to 38.9 percent Two stars: 42.0 percent | Four stars: 20.0 to 24.0 percent Three stars: 28.5 percent Two stars: 32.4 percent | Home PCs: 31 percent Work PCs: 20 percent Notebook PCs: 24 percent |
| High satisfaction with reliability Percentage of respondents who indicated that they were very satisfied with their PC's reliability | Five stars: 82.7 percent Four stars: 71.0 percent Three stars: 68.4 to 60.1 percent Two stars: 55.6 percent | Five stars: 87.1 percent Four stars: 76.9 percent Three stars: 68.5 to 60.9 percent Two stars: 57.0 to 45.3 percent | Four stars: 78.5 to 71.6 percent Three stars: 64.7 to 61.3 percent Two stars: 53.9 percent | Home PCs: 64 percent Work PCs: 67 percent Notebook PCs: 67 percent |
| Short hold time Percentage of phone service recipients who waited on hold for 5 minutes or less | Four stars: 73.0 to 67.9 Three stars: 62.9 to 60.9 percent | Four stars: 65.3 to 60.0 percent Three stars: 56.7 to 50.0 percent Two stars: 42.3 percent | Four stars: 73.3 to 71.3 percent Three stars: 67.0 to 62.6 percent Two stars: 53.1 percent | Home PCs: 53 percent Work PCs: 66 percent Notebook PCs: 65 percent |
| Quick resolution Percentage of service recipients whose most recent problem was resolved in five days or less | Five stars: 86.5 to 82.6 percent Four stars: 78.0 to 74.1 percent | Five stars: 81.5 percent Four stars: 73.8 to 71.5 percent Three stars: 67.3 to 60.7 percent Two stars: 54.3 percent | Four stars: 71.9 to 69.9 percent Three stars: 63.3 to 59.9 percent Two stars: 57.9 percent | Home PCs: 66 percent Work PCs: 79 percent Notebook PCs: 64 percent |
| No resolution Percentage of service recipients whose most recent problem was never resolved | Five stars: zero percent Four stars: 4.0 to 4.2 percent Three stars: 5.0 to 5.8 percent | Four stars: 4.8 to 5.1 percent Three stars: 8.1 to 10.2 percent One star: 14.8 percent | Four stars: 3.8 percent Three stars: 6.5 to 9.3 percent Two stars: 12.1 to 12.7 percent | Home PCs: 9 percent Work PCs: 4 percent Notebook PCs: 8 percent |
| Knowledgeable tech support Percentage of service recipients rating the knowledge of the technician who helped them as excellent or good | Four stars: 85.6 to 83.6 percent Three stars: 77.5 to 72.2 percent | Four stars: 87.1 percent Three stars: 78.8 to 71.9 percent Two stars: 68.6 to 60.4 percent | Four stars: 87.4 to 83.3 percent Three stars: 79.6 to 77.1 percent Two stars: 69.6 to 63.8 percent | Home PCs: 72 percent Work PCs: 78 percent Notebook PCs: 78 percent |
| Sincere effort by tech support Percentage of service recipients rating the sincere effort of the technician who helped them as excellent or good | Four stars: 86.6 percent Three stars: 83.0 to 82.0 percent Two stars: 78.4 to 76.6 percent | Five stars: 90.9 percent Four stars: 86.2 to 80.1 percent Three stars: 77.1 to 70.6 percent Two stars: 66.1 to 60.9 percent | Four stars: 89.8 to 85.4 percent Three stars: 81.1 to 77.8 percent Two stars: 70.7 percent | Home PCs: 76 percent Work PCs: 82 percent Notebook PCs: 81 percent |
| High satisfaction with service Percentage of service recipients who indicated that they were very satisfied with the service they received | Four stars: 65.7 percent Three stars: 50.8 to 47.4 percent Two stars: 35.6 to 34.5 percent | Five stars: 76.4 percent Four stars: 57.2 to 55.5 percent Three stars: 48.2 to 41.2 percent Two stars: 37.0 to 34.0 percent One star: 31.6 percent | Four stars: 69.1 percent Three stars: 56.9 to 55.2 percent Two stars: 46.3 to 41.5 percent | Home PCs: 46 percent Work PCs: 47 percent Notebook PCs: 51 percent |