business is business i am sure this was the most profitable route.....

Ianab;1463557; said:Having a 30% failure rate because the designer skimped on a $1 piece of aluminium isn't good business![]()
Ianab;1463557; said:Having a 30% failure rate because the designer skimped on a $1 piece of aluminium isn't good business![]()
johnptc;1463883; said:but getting into the market place on time was more profitable than fixing them first rather than later
sorry its about the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$![]()
sorry its about the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Ianab;1464657; said:Unfortunatly you are right - but I bet MS wished now that they had spent the extra $1 upfront, and I'm sure that everyone whose unit has failed wish now that they had been charged $2 more for a unit that didn't blow up.
It's now a PR nightmare for MS just because they cut corners in the original design and specced the cooling wrong. The chip is probably running at it's design temp, but the circuit board underneath is getting too hot and thermal cycling is busting the solder joints.
Cheers
Ian