Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 65
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by SeldomVisitor
    The point is that if the poll is ===100%=== incorrect (above not below) then the resulting 20+% matches the OTHER datapoint about the 20+% internal return rate!

    That's good enough for me - ESPECIALLY since there literally are NO datapoints anywhere else suggesting the return rate is reasonable! (indeed, all - and I mean ALL - of the anecdotal non-quantified evidence to date - such as "ease of return" to Sprint stores - STRONGLY suggest that the two very good datapoints we have are EXCELLENT datapoints).

    Like it or not.

    If you have a hard number for the return rate that is significantly less than 20%, please give it! (and its source)
    I sure hope I never have to rely on this kind of weak analysis for investment advice. The absence of data of a reasonable return rate is proof that your two ginned up 20% data points are accurate? You may as well claim that the fact no ones proven that Bigfoot doesn't exist is proof that it must exist.

    You still have not responded to mine and steven's irrefutable point - Wall Street would be glad to crucify PalmOne for such a ridiculous return rate, which as steven pointed out could not be hidden in the outlfow of inventory versus segment revenue.

    Keep trying, maybe you'll find an acorn...
  2. #42  
    > I'm not a statistics major but is it really an overall return
    > rate of 50% anyway?...

    No, it's actually considerably greater than that!

    The poll noted previous asks how many have you returned but stops at "3 or more" and MUCH more importantly, you CANNOT UPDATE YOUR REPLY. Thus if you answer, say, "1" and later on your replacement fails, you canot change your "1" to a "2" (note - one never changes a "2" to a "1"). So if you simply add up all the returned TREOs and compare it to those who said "Never replaced" you ALREADY get something much worse than 50% replacement! Then when you add in all those NEW TREOs geting replaced the results are beyond outrageous.

    The poll (as noted so many times my fingers have calluses) is of a bunch of picky geeks. SO it's gonna be incorrect if it were perfect.

    So HOW incorrect would one like to state it is?

    If it is 100% incorrect the return rate is GREATER than 25%.

    If it is 200% incorrect the return rate is GREATER than 10%.

    If it is 400% incorrect the return rate is GREATER than 5%.


    Like it or not.
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by SeldomVisitor
  4. #44  
  5. #45  
    When making a $600 purchase, many people like to do their homework on the product. There are links on the Sprint site and on Handspring (palmone) to this site. This would lead an average consumer to follow the link and read thru the postings while researching the product. I think it is fair for everyone to post their experience with the product. Why would you want a one-sided, glowing review kind of place when there are obvious problems. I am on my third (defective 600) purchased directly thru handspring. Both Sprint and Handspring refuse to make this right (either give me a model that isn't defective or a refund). This information is critical to any who is considering purchasing this product. I guess we can say that some models are great, while others are pieces of crap. You pay your $600, you take your chances? I'd rather go to Vegas. At least I know what the odds are there.
  6. #46  
    When you've replaced your handset 3 times because of product defects, the only statistic that matters to you is the 100% failure rate you have experienced and the $600 that handspring/palmone/sprint has stolen from you. flame away.
  7. #47  
    Oh btw, the manufacturer of your mama's pacemaker states it only has a 20% failure rate. Not bad is it? We are not beta testing this $600 p.o.s. are we now?
  8. #48  

    There's no need for a flame war. No doubt, there are defective units out there (this many people aren't lying). My beef is that no one can extrapolate from this poll, or other anecdotal evidence, that Palm has terrible quality control.
  9. joele's Avatar
    313 Posts
    Global Posts
    320 Global Posts
    If some (many?) of these returns are due to a defect in the software on ALL treo 600, then should this count???? As Palm/Handspring could simply get off their butts and fix it. My example is of course the SMS (contacts lookup) bug where the unit resets when looking up a contact when creating a new sms message. This happens EVERY time on my unit and on MANY other peoples (we obviously have a trigger in our address book in common)....

    If you call Handspring/Palm and report this problem first they want hard reset (yeah ok) and then they say send it back as you add 3 contacts after hard reset and the problem returns. The people on the Helpdesk our STUPID and will not let you pass to a techie, who you may very well be able to solve the problem with.

    I have been bugging them for ages trying to let them take my AddressDB.pdb file which was created on a freshly reset Treo 600 and will crash the SMS program on ANY Treo and even on the SIMULATOR from palm source developer network, obviously I don't have the code to debug the Treo with this address file in use, they could do this though and solve this problem, but all they want to do is replace the entire unit (which will not solve anything).

    In summary simple software bugs and a VERY STUPID company may very well be the cause of many of these returns....

    P.S. Apart from this one problem my Treo works perfectly and I am happy with it, but I really want this problem fixed..........
  10. #50  
    As Hawkins stated "we had to get this unit (600) out" A looming Palmone deal, short on cash at HS, pressure for release may have indeed caused some quality issues. Was it done on the cheap? Was it released too soon? Return rates do seem to be inordinate, and yet, many remain exicited for the opp. to upgrade.
  11. #51  
    Not to change the subject, but the carriers aren't completely off the radar on this either. I asked Cingular for a refund when the first unit was identified by Handspring as a defective unit. Their response was that since I was outside the 15 day period, I could not return the phone. So after selling me a defective unit, they only stand behind the contract and send you off to the manufacturer.

    The reason I wanted a refund through my carrier is because I received a discount for signing a contract. I've used that discount on the Treo, if I get a refund through HS/Palmone, I've lost that discount because going back to Cingular would mean buying a phone at full price.

    Yet no one saw this logic in their customer service department.

  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by dstrauss

    There's no need for a flame war. No doubt, there are defective units out there (this many people aren't lying). My beef is that no one can extrapolate from this poll, or other anecdotal evidence, that Palm has terrible quality control.
    With all due respect, can't agree with that one. There are too many cases of people returning 2nd, 3rd, and 4th units (myself included) to suggest that Palmone's QC is acceptable. All of us spent pretty big bucks on this excuse for shipping and reshipping duds.
  13. #53  
    of course dstrauss and I know that there are a lot of defective units ON THIS BOARD.

    Seldom has done a semi-decent QUANTITATIVE analysis, but has completely ignored the QUALITATIVE aspects (such as who the population is, and the fact that usually survey takers are people with strong opinions).

    The real return rate may be high, who knows. We'll find out when the 10-Q's come out. This kind of thing is tough to hide from Wall Street analysts. True, PalmOne could lie, but a coverup of inventory related financials involves too many people, so it is too risky to undertake (Enron's lies were in a small circle of people and involved shell companies set up by them).
  14. #54  
    > ...The real return rate may be high, who knows...

    A post right here somewhere said the "internal return rate" was 20-something percent - unfortunately, that post appears to have disappeared with the crash. Though ANY post is suspect without confirming external information, the poster made it unambiguously and without any caveats about possible incorrectness.

    Since "the poll" shows a greater than 50% return rate and is suspected to be exaggerated due to the sample population, the two datapoints cross-confirm each other.
  15. #55  
    I spoke with counsel yesterday regarding the issue of the defective Treo 600. In a nutshell, the manufacturer's warranty/provider's liability is irrelevant. Each state has "lemon laws" pertaining the sale of products to consumers. There is also a statute of limitations in each state which sets forth the time limits for a consumer to take action.

    I was advised to get a copy of my state's lemon laws and attach it to a letter addressed to both the provider and Handspring/PalmOne. Hopefully the squeaky wheels will get the grease.

    He also advised filing an action in small claims court if the problem is not resolved immediately. In some states, there are penalties that apply for a company not complying with the consumer laws. In my state, the fine is $200 each time an element of the law is violated (even if the consumer is happy with the product).

  16. #56  
    seldom, a message board rumor and a non-random survey in NO way cross confirm anything. a survey is never random if one knows the question before they elect to participate, and RANDOM surveys are the only way to get any meaningful data.

    your survey may, MAY be able to test positive for P>0, where P is the return proportion.
  17. #57  
    > ...a message board rumor and a non-random survey in NO
    > way cross confirm anything...

    Of course they do!

    In addition - who needs a RANDOM survey!?

    It is sufficient to state - with or without proof - that the sample population received their TREO 600s randomly (rather than, say, all from the same production run).

    BTW - the poll had more respondents saying "Only 1 so far" than all the others summed thus the silly "Only the disappointed took the poll" is questionabe right up front (however, the summed RETURN RATE was much greater than 50%).

    So, okay, say the poll is wrong by some ambiguous measure - HOW wrong?

    If it overestimates returns by 100% the results correlate very well with what that other poster said was the "internal return rate" known to PalmOne.

    So - how WRONG!?


    BTW - now that you've decided "how wrong" think about how bad even THAT is as a return rate!

    And THAT is what the original message in this thread - and theoretically the thread itself - is all about.
  18. #58  
    Since when did this forum become Alice in Wonderland....

    SeldomVisitor: How can you possibly rely on the fact that the recipients of the poll's Treos got them randomly, therefore justifying the results they report? Regardless how random the distribution to them, THEY are the ones reporting the problems, so they are automatically a subset of the distribution data. For all you know, thousands of people, with fully functional Treo 600's, have never even heard of Treocentral or this useless poll. I thought you were an analyst, but that kind of reasoning violates Statistics 101.

    Your correlation is nothing more than coincidence, just like the first day of Statistics 101 where they remind you that the incidence of rum runners in the Caribbean cannot be correlated to slavery in pre-Revolutionary War America, just because they happened at the same time.

    I don't mind you'e having an opinion, but quit trying to make it look like fact by shady statistical analysis.
  19. #59  
    You have nothing (literally) to support the conclusion that quality control is excellent at PalmOne.

    The Subject of this thread, however, is supported by two overt datapoints and literally dozens of anecdotal datapoints such as the "Treo number 5" thread (!).

  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by SeldomVisitor
    You have nothing (literally) to support the conclusion that quality control is excellent at PalmOne.

    The Subject of this thread, however, is supported by two overt datapoints and literally dozens of anecdotal datapoints such as the "Treo number 5" thread (!).

    Seldom: Please show me one time I've (or anyone else in this thread) said PalmOne quality control is excellent. Neither do you have ANY evidence to support the thread title "Handspring/Palm Terrible Quality."

    Your repeated failure to address mine and steven's point concerning Wall Street's failure to report ANYTHING on unreasonable return volumes or inventory shrinkage (relative to reported sales) PROVES you have no real support for your terrible quality control position. You will never convince anyone (other than like victims of some lemons) that this is a widespread problem based upon your closed-end poll.

    Why don't you address these huge holes in your analysis rather than repeating your mantra of "two datapoints."
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions