K6KR wrote: > Yours is anecdotal evidence based on small sample dizes. The > manufacturers have the data for large numbers.
Frankly, I doubt whether sample size has anything to do with it. It's much more likely to be the ability to meet current marketplace demands cheaply (these include consumer preferences for "gee whiz" features, as well as energy efficiency criteria). Manufacturers and consumers measure reliability in different ways. To the consumer, unreliability is measured by failure to function as desired. To the manufacturer, unreliability is measured by warranty and repair calls, or perhaps if the issue becomes widely enough known to affect consumer confidence in the product, by negative impact on sales. These consumer and manufacturer measures can be very different. If the typical consumer response to a failure is to go out and buy another unit from the same manufacturer, perhaps even a more expensive model, then unreliability, at least with respect to that particular failure mode, is actually good for the manufacturer's balance sheet. 73, Rich VE3KI ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
