Display pixel policy
In regards to the article on the front page about Apple's policy about what constitutes an "acceptable" monitor, personally I don't find the thought of dropping over 3 grand on a 30" monitor and discovering it has over 20 bad pixels that I'm stuck with "acceptable." From a purely theoretical standpoint I object to Apple's idea that they can define what is "acceptable" in any case. Their products, not cheap, should be far better than acceptable, and if not they should be willing to make an exchange or a refund.
Practically speaking I can purchase a monitor at Fry's and be protected by their generous return policy. However, also due to Apple's bizarrely customer-unfriendly practices, I can't purchase an Apple Care plan for a monitor alone, so that means I'd also have to purchase a G5 from Fry's... but Fry's can't "build to order" a G5, so I can't get the G5 I want (can they even put in the 6800 vid card to go with the 30"?).
All of this ends up looking like something out of a Terry Gilliam movie, where it's impossible to purchase the product you want because of contradictory restrictions imposed by the manufacturer.
I'm sure I'm not the only one here wrestling with this issue. Let's hear your thoughts.
Practically speaking I can purchase a monitor at Fry's and be protected by their generous return policy. However, also due to Apple's bizarrely customer-unfriendly practices, I can't purchase an Apple Care plan for a monitor alone, so that means I'd also have to purchase a G5 from Fry's... but Fry's can't "build to order" a G5, so I can't get the G5 I want (can they even put in the 6800 vid card to go with the 30"?).
All of this ends up looking like something out of a Terry Gilliam movie, where it's impossible to purchase the product you want because of contradictory restrictions imposed by the manufacturer.
I'm sure I'm not the only one here wrestling with this issue. Let's hear your thoughts.
Comments