Techbargains Black Friday 2006
shareyour...@hotmail.com
Is this worth getting excited about? I'm in the market for a new laptop
and am willing to wait if this is usually a better deal.
Barry Watzman
that there are ALWAYS sales at absurd hours early in the morning (5am,
mostly) at every major national retail chain.
Some of the deals are spectacular, but you have to know what you are
getting into: Most Best Buy stores, for example, will have lines
forming 8 to 12 hours before they open, by the time they open the lines
will likely be about 1,000 people long, and the really good deals might
have 20 to 50 items per store. [Most stores pass out "tickets" for the
hot items to the people at the head of the line about 30 minutes before
they open]. CompUSA is opening for "Black Friday" on Thursday night
from 9 to midnight, closing for 5 hours and reopening at 5am. Most
other stores are opening at 5am or 6am. But, again, lines will form
many hours earlier.
There are two major sites devoted to the various Black Friday sales, and
at this point ALL of the major retailer's Black Friday catalogs (which
normally are distributed with Thanksgiving day newspapers) are available
for download as PDF files. The two major sites (there are others) are
bfads.net and blackfriday.gottadeal.com.
In my opinion, the deals have gotten signficantly worse in the past two
years from what they "used" to be in 2004 and before. But there are
still some spectacular deals (not all deals will sell out, many of them
run all day Friday and Saturday, but the best deals will sell out within
20 minutes, and officially end at noon anyway).
By the way, this is strictly a "crazy American" thing, as far as I know.
Black Friday might well be called "national shopping day".
[As to laptops: There will be a LOT of deals for $399 low end laptops,
and if you can get one, fine (quantities will be extremely limited).
[In fact, Wal-Mart already had such a deal back on November 5th, as a
"warm-up"] But if you want a higher end laptop, you might do better
later in the Christmas shopping season. While a $399 extremely low end
laptop may be what you are looking for, it's likely that later ... say
December 1st to 15th ... you will be able to get an extrememly high end
laptop (say normally $1,200 to $1,500) for $700 to $900. Which may
actually be a better deal.]
shareyour...@hotmail.com
don't suppose you could get some of these "hot" items online of some of
the retailers as opposed to waiting in line in the wee hours? Regards,
Bob
shareyour...@hotmail.com
don't suppose you could get some of these "hot" items online of some of
the retailers as opposed to waiting in line in the wee hours? Regards,
Bob
Barry Watzman wrote:
- Bobb -
<shareyour...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1163600036.0...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi Barry- Thanks for the thorough reply. I will be on the lookout. I
> don't suppose you could get some of these "hot" items online of some
> of
> the retailers as opposed to waiting in line in the wee hours? Regards,
> Bob
We were just discussing this at a local breakfast diner ... What if you
know you want a TV that has ltd qty ... you go to Best Buy late next
WEDNESDAY and buy the TV for $1500. Then take it home and don't open it.
( You know that on Friday it's on sale for $999 for 4 hours.) If you go
back on Friday, (even during those 4 hours) do you think they'd give you
the $501 adjustment in price ? Or would they want to take the TV back
for a full refund ?
Bobb
Barry Watzman
not the best ones.
Barry Watzman
or price guarantees during the time that the "door buster" sales are in
process, or subsequently to those prices. And the stores and registers
are so swamped that they usually don't do returns during that time either.
Funny you mention TVs; Best Buy will have a 56" Toshiba DLP HDTV on sale
for $1199 (it's currently $1899). But that is not a "door buster", it's
good all weekend WHILE SUPPLIES LAST, however. I discussed this with a
salesman and he thought that item would last long enough for anyone who
wanted one to get it on Friday morning at least. But he added that
while that was his guess, he could not guarantee that. The only problem
is that while it's a very nice set, it's 720p and I really wanted 1080p.
Joel Kolstad
> don't suppose you could get some of these "hot" items online of some of
> the retailers as opposed to waiting in line in the wee hours?
In general, no, as that would take some of the "fun" out of it. There are
exceptions, though -- this sort of topic is common of the web sites that
revolve around Black Friday (e.g., bfads.net); check out their forums.
iws
news:455B44CB...@neo.rr.com...
> Good thought but not original; none of the retailers do price matching
> or price guarantees during the time that the "door buster" sales are in
> process, or subsequently to those prices. And the stores and registers
> are so swamped that they usually don't do returns during that time either.
>
> Funny you mention TVs; Best Buy will have a 56" Toshiba DLP HDTV on sale
> for $1199 (it's currently $1899). But that is not a "door buster", it's
> good all weekend WHILE SUPPLIES LAST, however. I discussed this with a
> salesman and he thought that item would last long enough for anyone who
> wanted one to get it on Friday morning at least. But he added that
> while that was his guess, he could not guarantee that. The only problem
> is that while it's a very nice set, it's 720p and I really wanted 1080p.
The latest Consumer Reports (December 2006) tests that TV and many others of
each of the main varieties of large screen: rear projection, LCD and plasma.
The best rear projection sets are Toshiba models 62HM196, 56HMX96, and the
one under discussion 56HM66 and were ranked 1,2,and 3. CR comments: "[these
sets] are among the best TVs we've tested... All have excellent detail,
color, and black levels (though whites tend to be cool or bluish.)" CR also
comments that "resolution alone doesn't determine picture quality. Black
level, brightness, and color accuracy are also important... from a normal
viewing distance, the best 1080p set won't look dramatically better than the
best 720p TV."
Barry Watzman
and the driving resolution will be higher than 1280x720. I've been
researching this whole matter in depth, and I'm pretty knowledgeable
(I'm a degreed EE with an FCC license who has worked in broadcasting as
a TV engineer). AND I subscribe to Consumer's Reports. [Did I mention
that I also stayed at a Holiday Inn last night? :-) ]
The set that I really like best is the JVC 1080p HD-ILA, but I'm scared
to death of the JVC lamp life issues, as there are web reports [lots of
them] that JVC sets have a VERY short life of the $200 lamp. JVC says
explicitly and point-blank on their web site that the lamp has an
AVERAGE life of 6,000 hours, but anecdotally, there are a huge quantity
of irate JVC owners reporting lamp failures at between 600 and 1,500
hours, and there is talk of a class-action lawsuit.
BillW50
news:9tL6h.25377$2A4....@newsfe24.lga
> The latest Consumer Reports...
Years ago I learned not to put too much stock into by what Consumer
Reports says. Their testing methods are just too amateurish IMHO (I'm an
electrical engineer) and half of the time doesn't mean much. And I have
seen them given rave reviews to some real pieces of junk in the past. Or
are they better nowadays?
--
Bill
iws
news:455c55ae$0$1345$834e...@reader.greatnowhere.com...
some specific examples of their giving "rave reviews to some real pieces of
junk in the past." I too am an engineer - Ph.D. in fact - and perhaps that's
why I like to deal in concrete examples rather than generalities.
iws
> I understand, but I will be driving the TV with a computer via DVI/HDMI,
> and the driving resolution will be higher than 1280x720. I've been
> researching this whole matter in depth, and I'm pretty knowledgeable
> (I'm a degreed EE with an FCC license who has worked in broadcasting as
> a TV engineer). AND I subscribe to Consumer's Reports. [Did I mention
> that I also stayed at a Holiday Inn last night? :-) ]
>
> The set that I really like best is the JVC 1080p HD-ILA, but I'm scared
> to death of the JVC lamp life issues, as there are web reports [lots of
> them] that JVC sets have a VERY short life of the $200 lamp. JVC says
> explicitly and point-blank on their web site that the lamp has an
> AVERAGE life of 6,000 hours, but anecdotally, there are a huge quantity
> of irate JVC owners reporting lamp failures at between 600 and 1,500
> hours, and there is talk of a class-action lawsuit.
If other manufacturers don't have that problem then it strongly suggests JVC
has either a design flaw or production problem. FWIW, CR reports that JVC
microdisplay sets have more repairs than average based on data for new sets
bought in 2005 and 2006.
BillW50
This shouldn't scare away those of us who can repair our own equipment.
Should even be able to pick these babies really cheap too. <grin>
--
Bill
Barry Watzman
$200 lamps (the bulbs themselves). And I don't want a set that costs
$200 per year to run, even after the set itself is paid for.
BillW50
No I meant replacing those cheap-o lamps with higher quality lamps.
<grin>
--
Bill
iws
> I can do my own repairs, but that doesn't extend to being able to repair
> $200 lamps (the bulbs themselves). And I don't want a set that costs
> $200 per year to run, even after the set itself is paid for.
I probably shouldn't speculate without knowing more details but if what JVC
claims - i.e. an average 6000 hour life for the lamps - is actually true,
then the fact that significant numbers of people are getting lifetimes of
only 600 to 1500 hours suggests a poorly controlled lamp production which
one would expect could be fixed. Either that or a similar problem with some
other component in the lamp circuitry. In any event, it probably wouldn't
suggest a fundamental design flaw and the likelihood of an improved
lamp/lamp circuitry being soon available might make going with a JVC worth
the risk.. However, if the 6000 hour average life number is bogus and the
REAL average is down around 800 to 1200 hours, then you could be looking at
a fundamental design flaw which might be harder to remedy for existing sets.
Joel Kolstad
news:455c55ae$0$1345$834e...@reader.greatnowhere.com...
> says. Their testing methods are just too amateurish IMHO (I'm an electrical
> engineer) and half of the time doesn't mean much. And I have seen them given
> rave reviews to some real pieces of junk in the past. Or are they better
> nowadays?
I think they're decent in the sense that they're good at testing what the
*average* consumer cares about: Stuff like reliability, how subjectively
"good" does a picture look, etc. They're definitely *not* purists, though --
if, for instance, a TV set has an "image enhancer" (like most do these days),
they're going to turn it on and set a dozen people down in front of it and see
whether they think it "looks pleasing," even though from a certain engineering
perspective you've just added distortion to your display device.
They do similar things with, e.g., MP3 players -- they might like one that
sounds better due to different filtering of the original source content even
though strictly speaking it has greater THD...
Basically, if you don't know enough about the widgets being reviewd to judge
for yourself what a good measurement ought to be, I think CR's metrics are
quite good.
- Bobb -
>> - Bobb - wrote:
>>
>> <shareyour...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1163600036.0...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>> Hi Barry- Thanks for the thorough reply. I will be on the lookout. I
>>> don't suppose you could get some of these "hot" items online of some
>>> of
>>> the retailers as opposed to waiting in line in the wee hours?
>>> Regards,
>>> Bob
>>
>> We were just discussing this at a local breakfast diner ... What if
>> you know you want a TV that has ltd qty ... you go to Best Buy late
>> next WEDNESDAY and buy the TV for $1500. Then take it home and don't
>> open it. ( You know that on Friday it's on sale for $999 for 4
>> hours.) If you go back on Friday, (even during those 4 hours) do you
>> think they'd give you the $501 adjustment in price ? Or would they
>> want to take the TV back for a full refund ?
>>
>> Bobb
> Good thought but not original; none of the retailers do price matching
> or price guarantees during the time that the "door buster" sales are
> in process, or subsequently to those prices. And the stores and
> registers are so swamped that they usually don't do returns during
> that time either.
So the consensus is that they'd only let me return it at the price I
paid for it ?
As for :
>>>> [As to laptops: There will be a LOT of deals for $399 low end
>>>> laptops,
>>>> and if you can get one, fine (quantities will be extremely
>>>> limited).
>>>> [In fact, Wal-Mart already had such a deal back on November 5th, as
>>>> a
>>>> "warm-up"]
I went to Walmart that day to get one and they said that they " SOLD OUT
" the previous evening whic I didn't understand at all. That walmart is
open 24 hrs and - apparently- if you get there late the previous night
and complain enough , they 'll sell it to you at the sale price _ or
give out reservation tickets - he wasn't sure when I asked/complained.
BillW50
> "BillW50" <Bil...@aol.kom> wrote in message
> news:455c55ae$0$1345$834e...@reader.greatnowhere.com...
>> "iws" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:9tL6h.25377$2A4....@newsfe24.lga
>>> The latest Consumer Reports...
>>
>> Years ago I learned not to put too much stock into by what Consumer
>> Reports says. Their testing methods are just too amateurish IMHO
>> (I'm an electrical engineer) and half of the time doesn't mean much.
>> And I have seen them given rave reviews to some real pieces of junk
>> in the past. Or are they better nowadays?
>>
> amateurish" and some specific examples of their giving "rave reviews
> to some real pieces of junk in the past." I too am an engineer -
> Ph.D. in fact - and perhaps that's why I like to deal in concrete
> examples rather than generalities.
Thus why I was asking? As I haven't read a Consumer Reports mag in many
years. But if you insist, I'll try to find something on their website.
Standby...
"But NiMH cells discharge when they’re not in use, so they’re not the
best choice for battery-powered devices that often sit idle, such as a
flashlight or a remote control. Even for those items in which you plan
to use rechargeables, it can be a good idea to keep disposables on hand
as a backup." - Consumer Reports
What? Wouldn't it make more sense to carry spare rechargeable batteries
instead in disposables in devices you wish to use rechargeables anyway?
"Our latest tests of 16 disposable AA batteries--lithium, nickel
oxy-hydroxide, and alkaline--show that there’s a huge difference in
performance depending on what they’re powering. And for the first time,
we found real performance differences among alkaline batteries powering
the same type of gear." - Consumer Reports
Real performance differences for the first time among alkaline
batteries? Get real! It has been this way since day one! Where have
Consumer Reports been?
Since I don't subscribe to this amateurish rag, I don't know everything
they say. But I didn't see them mention that lithium is far superior in
low current applications in very cold weather.
"Our tests, which conform to industry standards, simulate two
situations. One test reflects battery use in a typical digital camera: a
high-current draw and then a low draw in cycles over a 5-minute period
with a 55-minute break between periods. The second test simulates
battery use in a CD player that’s on for 2 hours and off for 6 hours
before that cycle is repeated. Here’s our advice based on those
tests:" - Consumer Reports
Their tests conforms to industry standards? Really? Did they just make
this up? As the industry standards that I know of measures the battery
capacity in amps per hour ot AH. I see nothing here that Consumer
Reports even used this industry standard at all.
And a better test would be draining them at say at least three different
currents and measuring their capacity. And the same battery type will
give you three different capacities. Then adding something like the
"5-minute period with a 55-minute break between periods" would be good
for later.
I can find more silliness from CR if you would like. <grin>
--
Bill
Barry Watzman
have a real problem. The very anecdotal evidence available online (and
I fully understand that there's no way that it's statistically valid)
seems to suggest to me that 6000 hours may be [very optimistically] in
the ballpark if the lamp is run continuously, or nearly continuously,
but that the lamp life is shorter ... dramatically and perhaps
catastrophically shorter .... when the TV set is turned on and off 4 to
8 times per day.
While the light source in DLP, LCD and LcOS sets is superficially
similar, online reports suggest that in fact the consumer result varies
greatly by manufacturer, with apparently Toshiba being the best in this
regard and JVC being the worst. But the lamps cost from $160 to $600,
depending on the brand (JVC is $200), and if they won't consistently
last at least 18 to 24 months, then the cost of operation becomes a
really critical issue.
[In off-the-record discussions, JVC employees seem to admit that that
there at least was [past tense] a problem. They have changed lamp
vendors, but many reports of very short lamp life (less than 1,000
hours, less than a year and in some cases less than 6 months) persist on
the web. However, it could take a year after they really did fix any
problem which existed before it became apparent that the fix was
successful.]
Barry Watzman
always agree with their results, in my view their testing is generally
pretty good and pretty objective. They aggressively insulate themselves
from the manufacturers and all commercial influence, not accepting
advertising, and not even accepting free product for testing, unlike
other similar publications where I think that a favorable review can
effectively be bought.
MikeG
replaced it with a "AA" model bulb. This bulb has 1200 hrs on it now, set
is 18 mo old. I always look at RP TV sets in most of the stores and try not
to look at the brand and just judge the PQ. 9 out of 10 times I choose JVC.
"Barry Watzman" <Watzma...@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:455CA9ED...@neo.rr.com...
BillW50
news:12lp83q...@corp.supernews.com
Well I thought I do a great job of balancing what most people want vs.
what we engineers would want. Like for example, some people think that
the type of processor one gets is very important. I am not in that camp.
As if you want speed, spend the money on RAM first and then a faster HD.
Or maybe the other way around. But the processor is at least third to
think about in any case. And for most people, they wouldn't know the
difference as far as the modern line of processors anyway.
As for total harmonic distortion (THD), well you get it so low and
humans can't hear it anyway. So once you get to a point it doesn't
matter anymore. So you are paying for better and can't hear it IMHO. And
that is a bit crazy if you ask me.
On another note, some believed that direct coupled audio stages where
better (sounding better) instead of using caps between the stages. And I
thought that was fine and dandy, except when one stage fails... it slams
the rest of the stages to the max. And if it was truly direct coupled to
the speakers, you have DC running through your speakers. Which is okay I
guess if they can take it... but I feel uncomfortable with the idea.
So I don't know, maybe I do look at things differently than most
consumers. <grin>
--
Bill
BillW50
Yeah that is true, but some of their tests is no better than one man off
of the street IMHO. Which doesn't sit well with me. If you think they
are so damn honest, why don't they ever come out and say we once said so
and so, but time has proved us wrong?
No they never admit they were wrong in anything IMHO! All a bunch of
know-it-all-snobs if you ask me. I don't know how anybody could trust
people like that? And I can see their hidden bias by the way they test
equipment. And they assume that their readers are *not* too bright so as
not to see it.
Which is worse than paid to review people if you ask me. At least they
admit they are biased and you know where they are coming from. But
Consumer's Reports are too above that and will never admit it. Just my
2¢ anyway.
--
Bill