Apple reliability: More better than worse

Someone glancing at this month's Consumer Reports might take caution at Apple's frequency of repair ranking for its laptops: It came in dead last.

But those who move beyond the bar chart eye candy to read the explanation (note, subscription required) will come to a different conclusion.

Consumer Reports surveyed readers about the repair history of their computers. Among those with Apple laptops bought between 2003 and 2007, 23% experienced at least one repair or serious problem. But the top-ranked vendor, Lenovo, experienced a repair rate of 20%. The margin of error for the study? Exactly 3 percent. "Differences of less than 3 points are not meaningful," says Donato Vaccaro, manager of survey research at Consumer's Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports.

My argument, that Apple might as well have lead the list as ended it, is buttessed by an adjacent chart in the story that shows repair statistics for desktops. Here Apple not only comes in first but does so by a statistically significant lead. While its repair rate was 12%, others ranged from 17 to 20%.

Not only did Jobs & Co. do well in that department, but Apple whomped the competition on support. A score of 80 or higher (out of a possible 100) indicates that readers were "very satisfied." Apple was the only vendor to cross that hurdle: While other vendors scored between 47 to 66, Apple scored an 81 for desktop support and 83 for laptops.

For all intents and purposes, Apple could have been at the top of the repair rankings versus the bottom. The use of a bar chart in this case gives the casual reader the impression that an Apple laptop might be more problematic. Bar charts provide information snapshots at a glance and therefore can be misleading. I'd like to think that everyone reads the fine print. But perhaps in cases like this, Consumer Reports should rethink the use of the bar chart, or else more clearly label it so as to avoid giving the casual reader a false impression.