The J.D. Power Initial Quality Survey is something of a skin-deep beauty contest—especially since it became a touchy-feely survey, in 2006. Still, I love the IQS. It has always measured defects and malfunctions per 100 cars in the first 90 days of ownership. But since defects are so few these days, last year Power rejiggered the survey to measure design and usability issues as well. Not surprisingly, many tech-heavy cars tanked on the IQS in 2006, although Mercedes-Benz, notably, came back near the top this year.

The survey is helpful for a few reasons. First, it holds the automakers' feet to the fire. In the 1980s, J.D. Power quantified what Detroit wasn't ready to believe: Buyers were switching to smaller, higher-quality cars from Japan over bigger, less reliable cars from Detroit that didn't have much more cabin room. (We knew it, but Detroit was blocked on the concept that it wouldn't be number one forever.)

Second, automaker winners-and-losers lists are just plain fun, and perhaps a bit more useful than People's "Most Beautiful People of 2007." And third, they do provide some buying advice, although for reliability results you're better off with Power's Vehicle Dependability Study, which measures reliability after three years, not just 90 days. If you don't have the strength to click on the link, that's another of the Lexus-on-top surveys.

The current surveys from Power, Strategic Vision and others, point out some less recognized truths: For instance, that the build quality of a lot of American automakers (meaning GM, Ford, and Chrysler) is world-class. Some surveys continue to show that buyers appreciate the handholding of world-class dealerships (such as Lexus) and the satisfaction of owning a car with a great interior and entertainment system. But franchise laws make it tough for automakers to crack down on all but the worst dealerships, so there's a limit to what can be done when automakers can only wave carrots, not brandish sticks. Now, Power's IQS seems to be showing that tech-heavy cars come with built-in problems with satisfaction, as users grapple with technology. Actually, that one is only partly true.

A drilldown into the past two Power IQS reports shows a split among the German automakers, all of whom (except Porsche) tanked last year, falling from well above average to well below average. Mercedes-Benz, it turns out, had mechanical problems with some of its new models in 2006 that it resolved this year. That's why it went from 5 (in 2005), to 26 (2006) to 5 on the IQS this year, and ranked second to Lexus in fewest defects in the first 90 days. But it's still below average on design issues, meaning buyers still find the Mercedes-Benz cockpit complex. In my recent tests, I've found the latest-generation Comand cockpit controller moderately easy to use, but the previous generation of the controller, which is on most Benzes, continues as Ground Zero for button overload.

Porsche's top ranking stems from the industry-best score on design issues, followed by a top 10 (with ties) of Lincoln, Scion, Lexus, GMC, Honda, Ford, Volvo, Jaguar, Mercury and Nissan. While Porsche has a complex engine and suspension, that's invisible to most customers, and the dashboard is relatively uncluttered. "Porsche has loyal, repeat buyers, who understand cars" notes Gartner automotive analyst Thilo Koslowski, adding with just a bit of hyperbole, "…and the dashboard hasn't changed a lot in 50 years." Where Porsche adopts current technology, it's done so wisely. The steering-wheel buttons, for instance, are big enough to tap with gloved hands.

BMW went from 3 to 28 to 21 on the IQS during the past three years. Initial build quality hasn't been an issue with BMW: It ranked third last year and sixth this year. But on the design side, BMW and its buyers still don't see eye to eye. BMW was number 34 this year on design, ahead of only Hummer, and last year was ahead of only Land-Rover.

In looking at the breakout scores, I found BMW has the biggest negative differential between the traditional defects score versus the new design score—18 places worse on design. The only others where the design score is at least 10 places lower are Mercedes-Benz, minus 18; Pontiac, minus 16; Buick, minus 13; Hummer, minus 12; and Audi and Chevrolet, minus 10. For some models, it may be technical complexity, and for some—perhaps Buick—it may be that their traditional buyers aren't ready for technology even in moderate doses.

BMW spokesman Tom Plucinsky agreed that BMW owners continue to have issues with its iDrive controller and perhaps with the mechatronic turn-signal mechanisms that don't stay in place when pressed. Although the most complex iDrive implementation, the 7 Series, had the best (that is, least negative) owner feedback, mostly likely because it's been out the longest (six years) and buyers have gotten used to iDrive.

Then there's the "design problem" BMW is unlikely to change: a top-three design complaint is brake dust. When you design a sporty car meant to be driven hard and use brake compounds that stop quickly without squealing and without using asbestos (now forbidden), brake dust follows as logically as night follows day.

Looking at the brands where design satisfaction outweighs low-defects satisfaction is less illuminating, since they're mostly clustered at the middle to lower middle of the IQS rankings: number 6 (overall) Toyota, number 11, Scion; number 15, Volvo; number 18, GMC; number 19, Nissan; and number 29, Mitsubishi. Note that most of these vehicles also don't go heavily into dashboard electronics beyond offering navigation systems that are on only a handful of cars sold.

Take the ratings with a grain of salt, and remember that you're reading only the averages for all the automakers' vehicles. For example, Acura owners rate their vehicles better on design than on defects/malfunctions, but anyone who's confronted the center stack in the MDX or RDX may differ. Or it could be that within 90 days, the owners make their peace with the center stack's four dozen buttons and three displays and get on with their lives. Ultimately, what counts as intelligent design matters most to you as a buyer, not to a statistical average. Some buyers are smart enough to figure out even the most complex dashboard or cockpit. Whether they ever learn to like it is a different matter.