Time Computers?

96 views
Skip to first unread message

mikew...@hotmail.com

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
I'm about to buy a new computer for myself, and I've seen what looks
like a really good system from Time. I'm just wondering if people have
had any (negative) experience with them and whether they should be
avoided or not. I know they were regarded as reasonably dodgy a few
years ago, and that their warranty is pants, but beyond that they seem
reasonable...

Any help appreciated! Thanks!

Mike

------------
MIKE W. MILLER
mw...@yahoo.com


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Kelvin Fagan

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to


A friend of mine bought one, & its been nothing but trouble,
and the customer service/repair has been useless.
On my friends experience I can offer no good points.

Kelvin

Jon

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
mikew...@hotmail.com wrote:
: I'm about to buy a new computer for myself, and I've seen what looks
: like a really good system from Time. I'm just wondering if people have
: had any (negative) experience with them and whether they should be
: avoided or not. I know they were regarded as reasonably dodgy a few
: years ago, and that their warranty is pants, but beyond that they seem
: reasonable...

Avoid Time. I have this advice straight from a bunch of people who are
forced to use their PCs at their work and none of them have ever said
anything nice about them. They especially didn't like the way video and
sound were integrated onto the motherboard.

Jon

--
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
j...@durge.org
http://www.durge.org/~jon/

Paul Hudson

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
j...@durge.org (Jon) wrote in <873vv1$eb1$1...@fof.durge.org>:

>They especially didn't like the way video and
>sound were integrated onto the motherboard.

That's not inherently evil. Dell do this too.

You'd have to avoid lots of other people too, in that case (there's a
flurry of cheaper computers based on Intel's 810 chipset that have this
integration. They seem to be disliked in reviews I've read).

P.

Simon Arnold

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:20:40 GMT, mikew...@hotmail.com wrote:

>I'm about to buy a new computer for myself, and I've seen what looks
>like a really good system from Time. I'm just wondering if people have
>had any (negative) experience with them and whether they should be
>avoided or not. I know they were regarded as reasonably dodgy a few
>years ago, and that their warranty is pants, but beyond that they seem
>reasonable...

I ordered a time machine last January on a buy now pay later schem, no
deposit required! i elected to pay a deposit of around £600 leaving
around £1000 to pay. Time never ever delivered the machine. I got my
money refunded after about 4 months and bought an Advent computer from
PC World. £1300 cash off the shelf. It has had a couple of faults both
of which where fixed at "my" convenience and without quibble. I
should recommend these machines to anyone. Plus the upgradeability is
second to none, no on board graphics or sound, easy access and simple
setup. Time can keep their computers,
-
Simon Arnold
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~arnold
arn...@globalnet.nospam.co.uk

Colin Rosenstiel

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
In article <873vv1$eb1$1...@fof.durge.org>, j...@durge.org (Jon) wrote:

> Avoid Time. I have this advice straight from a bunch of people who are
> forced to use their PCs at their work and none of them have ever said

> anything nice about them. They especially didn't like the way video and


> sound were integrated onto the motherboard.

While this does seem to be a general view of Time, I have to say that a
good friend of mine, well known on the web in the City, has been happy
with them.

I suppose one can be lucky with them. Their stuff has tended to look
under-specced and over priced (or over-bundled). But I've never bought any
of their stuff.

Colin Rosenstiel

Rob Harle

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
Go to Deja and look at uk.comp.vendors. You really should avoid Time and
Tiny.

Rob

Nick Wagg

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
mikew...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I'm about to buy a new computer for myself, and I've seen what looks
> like a really good system from Time. I'm just wondering if people have
> had any (negative) experience with them and whether they should be
> avoided or not.

They seem cheap to start off with but then the bundle does not
include the CDs (so I've heard) so you can't reinstall stuff yourself
or easily reconfigure the system. Guess who you have to pay through
the nose to do it for you...

--
Nick Wagg <>< (mailto:ni...@lsl.co.uk) Laser-Scan Ltd,
Technical Project Manager Science Park, Milton Rd,
Tel: +44(0)1223 420414 (ext 213) Cambridge, CB4 0FY, UK.
Fax: +44(0)1223 420044 http://www.laser-scan.com/
Opinions expressed are attributable to me, not my employer.

Byron Hinson

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
<mikew...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:873r66$bch$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...

> I'm about to buy a new computer for myself, and I've seen what looks
> like a really good system from Time. I'm just wondering if people have
> had any (negative) experience with them and whether they should be
> avoided or not. I know they were regarded as reasonably dodgy a few
> years ago, and that their warranty is pants, but beyond that they seem
> reasonable...

Avoid them, the support is awful, the components they use in there PC's are
no where near the best you can get for the price either. One of my friends
worked for them for just over a year and they had nothing but complaints
from customers and the staff couldn't even get through to the head office
support most of the time.

Unless you plan on building a machine yourself, I would go for Evesham
Micro's.

--
Byron Hinson
ActiveWindows - http://www.activewin.com
Homepage - http://www.activewin.com/byron

Mark Goodge

unread,
Jan 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM1/31/00
to
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:48:08 GMT, Paul Hudson, cam.misc spokesperson
for null string, issued a statement claiming:

>j...@durge.org (Jon) wrote in <873vv1$eb1$1...@fof.durge.org>:
>

>>They especially didn't like the way video and
>>sound were integrated onto the motherboard.
>

>That's not inherently evil. Dell do this too.
>
>You'd have to avoid lots of other people too, in that case (there's a
>flurry of cheaper computers based on Intel's 810 chipset that have this
>integration. They seem to be disliked in reviews I've read).

It's fine if you're unlikely to ever want to upgrade the sound/video
independently of the motherboard. For a budget system, I suppose
that's reasonable. Otherwise, it can be a pain.

Mark
--
Pretentious waffle now at http://www.mark.x.tc

Paul Hudson

unread,
Feb 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/1/00
to
ma...@good-stuff.co.uk (Mark Goodge) wrote in
<38a1f890....@bobble.good-stuff.co.uk>:

>
>It's fine if you're unlikely to ever want to upgrade the sound/video
>independently of the motherboard. For a budget system, I suppose
>that's reasonable. Otherwise, it can be a pain.

I've not seen a system where the onboard stuff can't be disabled. They may
well exist, I suppose.

Roland Perry

unread,
Feb 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/1/00
to
In article <38a1f890....@bobble.good-stuff.co.uk>, Mark Goodge
<ma...@good-stuff.co.uk> writes

>It's fine if you're unlikely to ever want to upgrade the sound/video
>independently of the motherboard. For a budget system, I suppose
>that's reasonable. Otherwise, it can be a pain.

This us history repeating itself. When we designed the Amstrad 1512 (in
1985) it was slammed in the reviews for having non-upgradeable
motherboard video [1]. So the 1640 and all subsequent machines had a
switch to disable it [2] and allow video upgrades.

[1] Although the fact that there are still many of these machines in
daily use 15 years later rather destroys the argument.

[2] Actually, it's worse than that. The 1640 still had the core logic
video circuitry of the 1512, disabled. The EGA, although on the
motherboard, was wired as if it was on the ISA bus. So disabling it was
actually a virtual-unplug from that bus; at which point the machine had
*two* sets of disabled motherboard video circuitry! But it was still
cheaper to build them that way.

--
Roland Perry

David Damerell

unread,
Feb 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/1/00
to
Paul Hudson <phu...@pobox.com> wrote:
>ma...@good-stuff.co.uk (Mark Goodge) wrote in
>>It's fine if you're unlikely to ever want to upgrade the sound/video
>>independently of the motherboard. For a budget system, I suppose
>>that's reasonable. Otherwise, it can be a pain.
>I've not seen a system where the onboard stuff can't be disabled. They may
>well exist, I suppose.

Typically, however, expansion slots are in short supply because of an
assumption that you won't want a video card, etc.
--
David/Kirsty Damerell. dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
CUWoCS President. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/ Hail Eris!
|___| I was wrong. I was wrong to ever doubt. I can get along without. |___|
| | | I can love my fellow man. But I'm damned if I'll love yours.[AE] | | |

Mark Goodge

unread,
Feb 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/1/00
to
On Tue, 01 Feb 2000 09:46:48 GMT, Paul Hudson, cam.misc spokesperson
for , issued a statement claiming:

>ma...@good-stuff.co.uk (Mark Goodge) wrote in

><38a1f890....@bobble.good-stuff.co.uk>:


>
>>
>>It's fine if you're unlikely to ever want to upgrade the sound/video
>>independently of the motherboard. For a budget system, I suppose
>>that's reasonable. Otherwise, it can be a pain.
>
>I've not seen a system where the onboard stuff can't be disabled. They may
>well exist, I suppose.

Unless you physically disable it (which is harder than simply pulling
out one card and slotting a new one in), Windows has an annoying habit
of trying to resurrect it when adding any other new piece of kit.

Nick

unread,
Feb 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/1/00
to
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:20:40 GMT, I believe
mikew...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>I'm about to buy a new computer for myself, and I've seen what looks
>>like a really good system from Time. I'm just wondering if people have
>>had any (negative) experience with them and whether they should be
>>avoided or not. I know they were regarded as reasonably dodgy a few
>>years ago, and that their warranty is pants, but beyond that they seem
>>reasonable...
>>

BBC Radio Cambridgeshire's Mark Williamson recently said on the
morning show that there was one computer company which was the
subject of more complaints than all the others put
together....and it was Time. Allegedly, one customer who did
manage to get through to Time's "customer service" to complain
was told to f*** off !

Nick.


Tisza

unread,
Feb 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM2/2/00
to

I ordered a PC from Time and paid with a cheque which they couldn't get
authorised straightaway (probably because it was a company cheque). They
said they'd process the order when the chqeue cleared, which seemed
annoying but fair enough, entailing a delay of 3 days or so. When I rang
10 days later to see how things were going, I was told that the cheque
was still in the showroom, as the van hadn't called to pick it up.
I cancelled the cheque and went to Tiny.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages