Beware of LG
Yugo
> Many people are probably not aware of this, but the relatively "new"
> higher end appliance manufacturer "LG" is a reincarnation of the Korean
> company "Lucky Goldstar" or, as we knew it here, Goldstar, which used to
> be considered a cheap end appliance company. Amazing how a change of
> name can make such a difference... ;-)
>
> In fairness, Goldstar developed into a higher quality company and
> retargeted the price point they wanted to address. It seems to have
> worked for the most part.
I'm not sure "Goldstar developed into a higher quality company". Recently
I had to replace my Samsung 950P CRT. In the price range I could afford,
there were 2 monitors I considered: the LG L1952TX anf the Viewsonic
VX922. Finally, I opted for the LG because the contrast range was supposed
to be twice the Viewsonic's and it was cheaper. I thought there would be a
trade-off in terms of quality because the Viewsonic was a gamer's monitor,
and I'm not a gamer at all.
The little LG thingy was packed in a little brown cardboard box with very
thin polystyrene padding. When I opened the box, I noticed there were two
vertical streaks running in the middle of the screen, probably from
rubbing on the polystyrene.
When I booted, I noticed the top of the screen was not as bring as the
bottom. Once on the Desktop, it also seemed the bottom corners were
brighter. So I made a gray 1280 x1024 test picture with the Gimp. The
problem was quite obvious, the brightness of the screen was far from
equal, no need for a La Cie colorimeter to find out: there were two hot
spots at the bottom right (~10 square inches) and left (~3 square inches).
I wasn't ready to cope with problems on a new monitor. That's what I
had done when I discovered that my Samsung 950p CRT displayed fuzzy
images at 640 x 480. I thought I'd wait to see if the problem would
evolve. It did... four years later, when the monitor was not on
guarantee anymore. (I now see the CRT tube is also nearly dead.)
Anyways, after I checked other monitors at a store with my gray
picture to make sure I wasn't exagerating a common LCD problem, I
called LG to ask if I could bring the monitor to a closeby authorized
service center.
I was told that LG had only a swap policy on LCDs and... "wait a
minute, it just so happens that we don't have any in stock at the
time". Arrrgh! In other words, I was lucky to have a picture with no
dead pixel, I had to do with very uneven brightness.
So, there were those stripes in the middle -- though I hadn't tried to
remove them -- hot spots, the swithes for ajusting the monitor felt
like dollar stores' toy switches and the company was laughing at me.
The monitor was still on a money-back program at the store, I decided
to bring it back.
The round part of the stand removed easily. As a matter of fact, if
you move your monitor and forget about it, the round part might very
well stay there and the monitor might fall on its side at the new
location. But when it came to remove the square plastic part that
fitted at the back of the monitor, I couldn't remove it. The manual
said it must click when installed, but there were no instructions on
how to unclick it.
So I called LG back, and after the line was cut off once or twice as
usual, I was told that there was no way to remove this part. "But how
can one send the monitor back in its box for a swap if you can't put
the monitor back in its box? " I asked.
Well, it seems all you had to do was put the monitor in any plastic
bag you could find and bring it back to the courrier company, where
the exchange would be made, only on the LCD + stand. That's not what
the LG documentation said about their swap guarantee! It said that the
new monitor would be sent to your place and that, if you didn't send
the old one soon enough, you'd be charged for it.
I called the store where I had bought the monitor and I was told that
removing the stand required a special tool and about three employees! So I
could hardly bring back the monitor by bus, the monitor in one hand, the
box in the other. I had to take a taxi.
I swore I'd never buy another LG product in my life.
At the store, they offered to exchange the monitor. After all, didn't
I still needed a monitor? The thing is I had doubts about LG's
guarantee from the onset -- telling why would be too long -- and I
had asked the salesman if LG was a company that could be trusted. He
made no negative comment about LG. (Hey, they sell the monitor, could
he say dealing with the company is a nightmare?)
So I went to Staples, right beside, and got myself a Viewsonic VX922.
I had a good feeling about Viewsonic. About ten years ago, I went to
a computer exhibition and, at every monitor manufacturer stand I went
to, ALL the monitors were set haphazardly. Representatives would
explain that it had nothing to do with the quality of the monitors,
that all one had to do is to set them right. And the one was not
them. When I came to Viewsonic's stand, all monitors were set
correctly. I loved this company!
So I brought the Viewsonic home. It was in a huge printed cardboard
box with thick padding, wrapped in two bags, a pastic and a foam one,
with a sheet of plastic taped over the monitor screen. The stand was
not removable and was made of aluminum and plastic. The switches felt
real and you didn't have the feeling the monitor would bounce back in
your face if you tilted it. Whereas behardware says:
"For example, for this test, we have taken the ViewSonic VX922. It’s a
great monitor for games, but for picture editing as it is (without
calibration) it’s a disaster."
http://www.behardware.com/news/lire/22-06-2006/
I found the color was quite good. (Though I must admit I'm a bit
color blind.) What's more, I could get MUCH more detail in the shade
than with the LG. I tried ajusting the brightness and contrast of the
same picture of a girl with dark hair on both monitors. I never could
get any detail with the LG, whereas my default settings with the
Viewsonic gave me a lot. There's a lack of detail in the highlights,
though, but I didn't test this on the LG. I can only compare with my
Samsung with a dead CRT tube. Of course, it has a lot of detail in
highligths! :)
Countrary to the LG, the Viewsonic lacks many adjustments. There are
no presets for viewing text, movies... or when the sun is flashing in
your window in the afternoon. No gamma adjustment. No focus adjustment
with any effect, even on text. I must say I don't have a DVD player yet so
maybe the problem is not that important, raising the brightness should do it.
Then... There was this stupid warning in the user guide about the
possibility of scrapping the monitor with a wrong refresh rate. I thought
that was a long forgotten problem. The LG even had an invitation to throw
anything at it since it's a multisync. So, I tried to get Viewsonic's
comments and, also, better settings for Linux. (I now use an XF86Config
file made for the LG by PCLinuxOS. It's OK, but autorecentering is needed
at every definition.)
When you contact Viewsonic's support, all you get is some drone reading
from the online site. No information whatsoever. A lady did tell me that
using other refresh rates that those suggested by the company was "at your
own risk" :) Shit! One's blood pressure better not be too high from the
onstart!
Then, after many calls, they refer you to corporate service, which
looks more like Viewsonic than a company under contract from
Viewsonic. You're nonetheless transfered back to the standard
customer's service. After much insistance, they transfer you to a
voice box and nobody calls back. Same for messages sent through their
web interface.
In other words, nobody at Viewsonic has the faintess idea of the
hardware they're selling. Some engineer in California designs the
monitor. It's manufactured in China at cutthroat wages, which gives
them an edge over Korean products. Support and distribution are
handled by local companies. All Viewsonic does is pick up the money. If
what can be read from their site cannot help you, too bad. The only access
you have is to reading machines, in case you're illeterate or blind.
I then called Staples to see if, by any chance, they would have a
phone number to contact somebody with minimal technical knowledge. I
then learned that not only Viewsonic doesn't support its products, it
doesn't distribute them either. Staples' contacts were the same as
mine. But the manager of the store told me he would try to get in
contact with Viewsonic and call me back. But he couldn't get any
explanation either.
Finally, he consulted Staples technicians who said that it was unlikely
that the monitor would be damaged by a wrong refresh rate and Staples gave
me a letter saying they would guarantee the monitor for 3 years in case it
was damaged by a wrong refresh rate.
I've bought other things at Staples, but it's the first time I need their
help, and they've been very helpful. It feels very different from Future
Shop service, believe me!
Staples deals a lot with offices and their clientele is no as much a bunch
of morons dealing for the best deal, whatever they buy, as at Future Shop.
When you get into the store, if a salesman is free, he asks you "May I
help you?" If you say you're just looking, the salesman goes to another
customer or places some stock on the shelves. They don't stick on you like
a bunch of wasps buzzing around your head. If you need help, they're
there. If the salesman is with another client, he says so and comes back
to you soon as he's finished answering the first client. So, there's some
money left to offer service. I find that's kinda neat.
Take note that Viewsonic only advises its customers about this refresh
rate problem once they've bought the monitor. In order to get to the user
guide:
http://viewsonic.com/pdf/userguides/vx922-1_ug_eng.pdf
you must provide a monitor's serial number. (I got there with mine, so you
can access the user guide too.)
On page 11 (xpdf pages) or page 7 of the manual, you'll find:
WARNING: Do not set the graphics card in your computer to exceed a
resolution of 1280 x 1024@75Hz or the maximum refresh rate of 85Hz at
lower resolutions; doing so may result in permanent damage to your LCD
display.
There's even the same warning for their professional series of monitors:
WARNING: Do not set the graphics card in your computer to exceed the
maximum refresh rate of 85Hz; doing so may result in permanent damage to
your LCD display.
http://viewsonic.com/pdf/userguides/vp930-1_ug_eng.pdf
So, according to Viewsonic, their Professional Series monitors can be
ruined by a wrong refresh rate! Isn't this amazing when LG says you can
throw anything at their cheapest monitors and even my old Samsung sends an
error message in such a case?
The company that offers read-from-the-net /service/ for Viewsonic is in
Raleigh, NC. I don't see what difference it would make if it moved to
India: people can read english there too! So, that's probably what's going
to happen next.
You know what? I wished the magazines did their job and told us what is
really to be expected from a product instead of running their irrelevant
fancy tests. Testing monitors is not my thing!
But since I had to, I'd say that despite their rotten service, I'd rather
buy a Viewsonic monitor than an LG. The construction and the picture
quality are much better. Then again, next time, I might consider an
Acer... or whatever. It often seems to me that, the bigger the company,
the less service you get. Somehow somebody's got to pay for their Cs --
CEO, CFO, CIO, CTO, CSO, CCO, etc., call them Caesars -- skyrocketing wages.
Richard Steinfeld
printer group.
A few years ago, I bought a Viewsonic graphics monitor. I've done time
in electronics repair, so it's not like I don't know anything about
build quality. My monitor was not able to withstand the voltage that was
normal in my home at the time, and within normal parameters with my
electric company: a steady 126 volts. Its high voltage section blew out.
When I opened the cabinet to have a look, all the assemblies except the
tube flopped loosely, held in position only by the plastic cabinet
itself. I was disgusted. (This is probably normal in many brands these
days.)
For the replacement, I took a precaution that I often use. Before
plunking my money down, I call the manufacturer to see what the
situation is regarding availability of repair data. After all, I may
want to be able to do a simple repair myself. Also, if I know that the
manual can be had for a reasonable price, I know that professional
repair people can get it, too.
Mag Innovisions flunked the test. Yeah; they'd sell me a manual for a
humungous price. "We don't want guys like you fixing your monitor. You
might kill yourself and sue us."
NEC flunked this simple test: they had no manuals at any price for their
current monitors. "If it's in the warranty period, just send it to us;
we'll replace it." Yeah: 6,000 miles round-trip and some landfill caused
by a 20-cent capacitor.
Panasonic flunked the same test regarding a decent quality personal
stereo: "We don't have a schematic available because it's not repairable."
Now, I'm using a Princeton LCD monitor that I'm regarding as a
throw-away product. It's been working fine. I didn't check for repair
data in advance, I'll admit.
Repairable products, sadly, cost more to manufacture than the throw-away
garbage that's become so popular, products that are sometimes reviewed:
"It outperformed products selling for twice the price." This is a
strategy achieved by layered construction (almost impossible to repair
without damage) and the use of crappy parts. Sometimes, as my late bench
technician once discovered with a certain bottom-feeding Korean brand of
cars, microwaves, and TVs, the products are simply dangerous, capable of
starting fires and leaking microwaves.
Do we fight 'em or join 'em. I no longer have the answer. I almost
cannot think of any brand of consumer electronics that's made to be
repairable any more. My aforementioned electronics technician was so
impressed with the picture quality at slow speed of my two Toshiba
6-head VCRs (Malaysia) that he bought one for himself (China). Well, I
don't know how his made out because he's no longer with us. But my two
have, I believe, broken prematurely, probably due to the use of a
plastic, instead of steel, transport frame.
Since this is a printer group, I'd appreciate comments about durability,
repairability, and available of maintenance data for inkjet printers. Is
anyone doing this right?
Thanks.
Richard
Edwin Pawlowski
"Richard Steinfeld" <rgsteinBUT...@sonic.net> wrote in message
> Since this is a printer group, I'd appreciate comments about durability,
> repairability, and available of maintenance data for inkjet printers. Is
> anyone doing this right?
Durability? Sure, I expect to get a few trouble free years from any
printer. I have three, a six or more year old, a four year old, and a three
month old acquired just for photos. I really don't care about maintenance
data for self repair. My electronic skills are limited, and the cost of a
technician to troubleshoot and repair is more than a new printer. Does not
make sense to spend $75 minimum to get a $65 printer repaired. The new
printer will probably have better quality print output and new features.
When my monitor was fading away, same thing. I now have a nice LCD with
much higher quality and it fits my desktop better.
Toaster technology as about the same as it was 50 years ago. There is
little need to upgrade and simple repairs would be a good thing, but with
technology rapidly advancing, keeping the old iron working is not always the
best value (landfill considerations aside) if you want to be able to do more
with your hardware.
Yugo
> I'm going to keep this (relatively) brief because, after all, we're on a
> printer group.
Yes, maybe I should haveadded OT to the title . But it's still hardware
after all and, after what I went through, I didn't appreciate Arthur
Entlich's comment about "Goldstar develop[ing] into a higher quality company"
> Mag Innovisions flunked the test. NEC flunked this simple test. Panasonic flunked
> the same test.
You may add Toshiba and Canon. After many threats, Toshiba finally
provided the manual, but it really took too many threats. Flunked.
> Repairable products, sadly, cost more to manufacture than the throw-away
> garbage that's become so popular, products that are sometimes reviewed:
> "It outperformed products selling for twice the price."
Isn't that pretty much how America got kicked out of the electronics
market? One wonders how come manufacturers never insisted much on the
quality of construction. Most probably it would have been in vain. Because
Japanese products were built at much lower wages, maybe America's wouldn't
have standed the comparision.
Yugo
> "Richard Steinfeld" <rgsteinBUT...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>
>>Since this is a printer group, I'd appreciate comments about durability,
>>repairability, and available of maintenance data for inkjet printers. Is
>>anyone doing this right?
>
>
> Durability? Sure, I expect to get a few trouble free years from any
> printer. I have three, a six or more year old, a four year old, and a three
> month old acquired just for photos. I really don't care about maintenance
> data for self repair. My electronic skills are limited, and the cost of a
> technician to troubleshoot and repair is more than a new printer. Does not
> make sense to spend $75 minimum to get a $65 printer repaired. The new
> printer will probably have better quality print output and new features.
Indeed, but when it's quite evident the machine has been designed with
planned failure in sight, it's infuriating.
Ten years ago, I took a C programming course. In the class was an HP 4L
printer. It certainly gobbled more than a pack of 500 sheets a day, 5 days
a week and the little thing never stopped working. I now have an HP 1012,
with little flimsy hinged plastic parts to hold the printed sheets. This
printer wouldn't last one week in the setting the 4L was in. The 4L had
been there for 2 years!
> When my monitor was fading away, same thing. I now have a nice LCD with
> much higher quality and it fits my desktop better.
>
> Toaster technology is about the same as it was 50 years ago.
No, not at all. When my mother got married she was given a GE toaster. It
worked for 25 years without any problem, then I had to fix it once in a
while for another ten years. Then, she bought a nice Philips toaster, you
know that Dutch associate of LG. Hardly more than a year later, just as
the guarantee was finished, it broke: the handle wouldn't stay down. I
called Philips and said there was no way my mother would pay $80 a year
for a toaster. Knowing that they would get their money's worth in
publicity, they sent a new one.
Now, my mother is dead and I have the **&&?%$ toaster. The part that holds
the bottom of the toast has three prongs on each side and they're not
evenly spaced, so that there's more than an inch between some of them. I
like french parisian bread and the latest slice is small and falls easily
inbetween two prongs.
In a normal toaster, this would be no problem: you'd just flip the bottom
open and remove the bread. But this toaster's bottom doesn't flip open,
there's a sliding 3 mm high tray to remove crumbs. Crumbs, not pieces of
bread.
Of course, if you leave the bread there, the fire alarm goes on every time
you make a toast and removing the piece of break through the prongs is not
that easy: you really wonder how it got there in the first place. So, it's
quite clear that Philips-LG figured out that people would break the
heating elements, which, of course, isn't guaranteed. That kids could
eventually get electrocuted working on the toaster while it's still on,
they couldn't care less about.
In conclusion, if our computers and appliances go awry so fast, it's not
so much because modern manufacturing processes, per se, make things cheap.
It's because there're specifically designed to break fast.
> There is
> little need to upgrade and simple repairs would be a good thing, but with
> technology rapidly advancing, keeping the old iron working is not always the
> best value (landfill considerations aside) if you want to be able to do more
> with your hardware.
First, landfill considerations shouldn't be set aside: electronic products
contains a lot of toxic elements, which are still rarely recycled. Then,
it's just amazing what you can fix with a few instructions and basic
tools. You'd ba amazed at how many appliances are thrown away just because
current is not fed to them.
Moe
checked with a few places about repairs and was told it would cost about
as much to fix it as to replace it. The motor replacement cost was over
300 bucks. I took it on as a project and found out Goldstar was now
LG, a call to the company and a new motor for a little something over
100 bucks and some time changing the motor and it was fixed and it's
still in the rent house. I found it interesting that none of the local
repair shops even bothered to check around and buy from LG. I can't
complain about LG (at least not this time) they treated me OK.
Edwin Pawlowski
"Yugo" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
Ed said:
>> Toaster technology is about the same as it was 50 years ago.
>
Yugo replied:
> Then, she bought a nice Philips toaster, you know that Dutch associate of
> LG. Hardly more than a year later, just as the guarantee was finished, it
> broke: the handle wouldn't stay down. I called Philips and said there was
> no way my mother would pay $80 a year for a toaster. Knowing that they
> would get their money's worth in publicity, they sent a new one.
>
> Now, my mother is dead and I have the **&&?%$ toaster. The part that holds
> the bottom of the toast has three prongs on each side and they're not
> evenly spaced, so that there's more than an inch between some of them. I
> like french parisian bread and the latest slice is small and falls easily
> inbetween two prongs.
But the technology is the same. Heated wires taosting bread. You can get
them for $7 at WalMart and they perform rather closed to the $200 unit made
in England. Aside from that one, (can't remember the brand right now) they
are all made in China for cheap. When they fail you may be able to repiar
them, but it is not cost effective when new is less than $10.
>
>
> In conclusion, if our computers and appliances go awry so fast, it's not
> so much because modern manufacturing processes, per se, make things cheap.
> It's because there're specifically designed to break fast.
Perhaps some things are, but there is a balance to dance around. Do you
want to pay for a printer that will last for 50 years of home use when you
will want a better performing one in 2 or 5 years? Look at what our parents
had, what we had even 30 years ago, and compare that to the computers,
printers, cameras, etc that we can afford today. Do you want to keep that
14" Zenith black & white TV going yet?
>
> First, landfill considerations shouldn't be set aside: electronic products
> contains a lot of toxic elements, which are still rarely recycled. Then,
> it's just amazing what you can fix with a few instructions and basic
> tools. You'd ba amazed at how many appliances are thrown away just because
> current is not fed to them.
I agree with recycling, some things should last a very long time, but others
are best receycled and replaced both from a cost point of view and practical
use point of view. I intend on keeping my toaster for as long as I live, but
I'm not so sure I want back my 8088 computer with two floppy drives and no
hard drive, with the 10" monochrome monitor. I paid $999 for it. What a
bargain.
TJ
doing a fine job. We keep it in a corner of the kitchen (Old farmhouse -
big kitchen) and turn it on every morning to watch the news shows over
coffee. Good picture, good reception with rabbit ears, what else would
you want? OK, so there's no remote - exercise is good for you. Who needs
the Today Show with stereo sound?
Do I really need to send this aging electronic marvel to the recycle
bin, just because it has a few years on it? I'd rather wait until it
breaks down.
TJ
Edwin Pawlowski
"TJ" <tja...@dreamscape.com> wrote in message
>>
> My grandmother's 24 year-old 20" Zenith color TV is still going and doing
> a fine job. We keep it in a corner of the kitchen (Old farmhouse - big
> kitchen) and turn it on every morning to watch the news shows over coffee.
> Good picture, good reception with rabbit ears, what else would you want?
> OK, so there's no remote - exercise is good for you. Who needs the Today
> Show with stereo sound?
>
> Do I really need to send this aging electronic marvel to the recycle bin,
> just because it has a few years on it? I'd rather wait until it breaks
> down.
No, not if it does the job you need it for. OTOH, it may not be able to
receive cable and the History Channel. But I doubt you'd still use granny's
24 year old computer today.
TJ
miles away, but the population density of my road is to low for it to
pay the cable company to run it. I get good broadcast reception, and
that's all I need for TV. As to my grandmother's 24 year old computer,
you've got me there. She didn't own one. But I do. Last winter I dug out
my 1982 Atari 800 and played a few games of Star Raiders on it for an
entirely enjoyable afternoon. Worked great, and it would have connected
to that old Zenith if I didn't have a monitor. Much more fun to play
than most of the PC games I see today.
It all depends on what you want out of something.
TJ
Yugo
> But I doubt you'd still use granny's
> 24 year old computer today.
Well, it used to ne that you'd change your computer soon as you could have
4 megs of RAM instead of 1, or because that 386 was a 32 bit computer. But
I don't feel in such a hurry these days.
I built my computer with old and new end of line parts almost 5 years ago
and I don't believe I'll change it for another 2 or 3 years. So, the next
one might very well last 25 years. I meant, if it could stand the run, I
would keep it for that long.
Of course, I understand this is not very good for economy. I see all those
ads with young couples going out on "shopping sprees" and having so much
fun. I know I must feel ashame. I too should work 60 hours a week to make
ends meet, send my children to child care soon as there're 6 months old
and contribute to the landfill.
But I'm not norm-al.
Yugo
> A year ago a friend's Goldstar window unit A/C blower motor quit. He
> checked with a few places about repairs and was told it would cost about
> as much to fix it as to replace it. The motor replacement cost was over
> 300 bucks. I took it on as a project and found out Goldstar was now
> LG, a call to the company and a new motor for a little something over
> 100 bucks and some time changing the motor and it was fixed and it's
> still in the rent house. I found it interesting that none of the local
> repair shops even bothered to check around and buy from LG. I can't
> complain about LG (at least not this time) they treated me OK.
I'm afraid our experiences were at odds. You called LG to see if you could
send them more money and they said "Sure!" I asked LG if they would honor
the guarantee I had already paid for and they said "Good luck, sucker!"
LG didn't do you a favor by charging 100$ -- or, wasn't it 122.95 + taxes?
-- to hand you a motor off the shelf. This "some time changing the motor"
is rather costly nowadays when the job is done by a service center.
Edwin Pawlowski
> Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> But I doubt you'd still use granny's 24 year old computer today.
>
> Well, it used to ne that you'd change your computer soon as you could have
> 4 megs of RAM instead of 1, or because that 386 was a 32 bit computer. But
> I don't feel in such a hurry these days.
>
> I built my computer with old and new end of line parts almost 5 years ago
> and I don't believe I'll change it for another 2 or 3 years. So, the next
> one might very well last 25 years. I meant, if it could stand the run, I
> would keep it for that long.
Hey, I can get you a really good deal on a Pentium 90!
The need for computer advancement has slowed for most of us over the past
few years. The difference between a 1.8G processor and a 2.8G processor is
very slight for what we do every day. But that DSL line sure beats the `200
baud modem I used to have.
But a 25 year old toaster still can make good toast.
William R. Walsh
> I'm not sure "Goldstar developed into a higher quality company".
I didn't know they weren't a "reasonably good quality" manufacturer.
I have a lot of Goldstar/LG products around, and each one has given decent
service. From a small fridge made in 1989 to a StudioWorks 17 inch CRT,
everything I have from them has done pretty well. I don't, however, consider
their products to be "professional" grade.
It sounds to me like you got a bad example or a cheap display, which I find
odd since it seems like you value high quality/correct color and brightness
output. I have an AOC (certifiably cheap!) flat panel display that sounds
very similar to what you got with your LG....it too has the uneven
brightness problem, along with a lack of sharpness to the picture.
William
William R. Walsh
> My monitor was not able to withstand the voltage that was
> normal in my home at the time, and within normal parameters with my
> electric company: a steady 126 volts.
That's hard to determine with absolute certainty. I have a Viewsonic A90f+
that has been performing well for a long time at a similar 126 volts AC.
I've always considered Viewsonic to be one of the higher end monitor makers
out there. (Most of what I've seen appears to be made by Panasonic for
them.) Their OptiQuest line of monitors, however, are quite cheaply made.
> When I opened the cabinet to have a look, all the assemblies except the
> tube flopped loosely, held in position only by the plastic cabinet
> itself. I was disgusted. (This is probably normal in many brands these
> days.)
I don't find that unusual. Just about every plastic cased monitor and TV
I've had apart (both new and sometimes 20+ years old) have been done this
way. I don't know that I like the concept of a board flopping around like
that any better than you do, but I'm at a loss to devise a better way.
> Mag Innovisions flunked the test. Yeah; they'd sell me a manual for a
> humungous price. "We don't want guys like you fixing your monitor. You
> might kill yourself and sue us."
Cheap stuff. Pretty reliable, but cheap.
> NEC flunked this simple test: they had no manuals at any price for their
> current monitors. "If it's in the warranty period, just send it to us;
> we'll replace it." Yeah: 6,000 miles round-trip and some landfill caused
> by a 20-cent capacitor.
Pretty much the experience with my NEC MS95...a good monitor when I bought
it, but it failed just out of warranty. Two new filter capacitors got it
going again. It is still running today.
> Now, I'm using a Princeton LCD monitor that I'm regarding as a
> throw-away product. It's been working fine. I didn't check for repair
> data in advance, I'll admit.
You might have gotten some. They used to be a higher end brand.
Even if you did, I'm not sure there is much you can do to fix an LCD if it
goes bad. I've read a lot of success stories where people repaired the
backlighting or inverter boards, but that's it.
> But my two
> have, I believe, broken prematurely, probably due to the use of a
> plastic, instead of steel, transport frame.
I'd believe it. Modern JVC VCRs seem to be reasonably well made. I just
cleaned up a fairly nice stereo/hi-fi one, and while definitely
cheaper/lighter/not as well made as one of my older machines, it seems to
work well. The tape loading assembly is made of metal in this one, and the
power supply runs very cool when the VCR is working. It might be three years
old.
Panasonic and Sony also seem to still be making decent VCRs these days.
> Since this is a printer group, I'd appreciate comments about durability,
> repairability, and available of maintenance data for inkjet printers. Is
> anyone doing this right?
I don't know that anyone is providing maintenance data about their printers.
I'm not sure anyone ever has. But if I had to comment on durability and
repairability, I'd probably pick HP as the leader. Apart from a few
troublesome models, the DeskJet lineup has a lot going for it in terms of
simplicity and reliability. I've worked on a few DeskJets here and there.
Some are tricky to open, but it can be done. Apart from a few cases of
controller failure, I've been able to fix nearly all of them.
The only printer I'd stay clear away from is Epson. They have some
interesting products, but I'm leery of the reliability. I don't think Epson
has made a really great printer since the days of the ActionWriter T-1000.
William
Stuart
Edwin Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:
> The need for computer advancement has slowed for most of us over the
> past few years. The difference between a 1.8G processor and a 2.8G
> processor is very slight for what we do every day.
Well, in anycase, all that happens is that BG comes along with a new
incarnation of Windoze that is bigger, more CPU power and memory hungry
and it's really no quicker that a 286 running DOS
--
Stuart Winsor
From is valid but subject to change without notice if it gets spammed.
For Barn dances and folk evenings in the Coventry and Warwickshire area
See: http://www.barndance.org.uk
zakezuke
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> Hey, I can get you a really good deal on a Pentium 90!
>
> The need for computer advancement has slowed for most of us over the past
> few years. The difference between a 1.8G processor and a 2.8G processor is
> very slight for what we do every day. But that DSL line sure beats the `200
> baud modem I used to have.
>
> But a 25 year old toaster still can make good toast.
So can that 2.8G processor. The pentium 90 was not very good at making
toast.
I had a supra 14.4k modem which was excelent for keeping my tea warm,
and a Sun 4/260 which made the best space heater.
Yugo
> But the technology is the same. Heated wires taosting bread. You can get
> them for $7 at WalMart and they perform rather closed to the $200 unit made
> in England. Aside from that one, (can't remember the brand right now) they
> are all made in China for cheap. When they fail you may be able to repiar
> them, but it is not cost effective when new is less than $10.
It all depends on your accounting to define cost effectiveness. People
like you say "I earn $15 an hour, I'm not going to spend an hour fixing a
$10 toaster." OK, maybe you earn more than $15 an hour, but it must be
quite some time since you last checked toaster prices at Walmart's.
People like me say "Yes, I do earn $15 an hour but, once I've paid my
taxes, rent, electricity, phone, internet, food, bus tickets, etc. I'm
lucky if I have $3 an hour left." which means that spending an hour fixing
a toaster is a real saving.
> Perhaps some things are, but there is a balance to dance around. Do you
> want to pay for a printer that will last for 50 years of home use when you
> will want a better performing one in 2 or 5 years?
One year ago, I had a printer that I had bought around 1990. If it hadn't
given up for some unknow reason, I'd still be using it. It printed. What
more could I ask?
> Look at what our parents
> had, what we had even 30 years ago, and compare that to the computers,
> printers, cameras, etc that we can afford today. Do you want to keep that
> 14" Zenith black & white TV going yet?
What you can afford today is because people who make your TV set earn 25¢
an hour. ALL our electronics industry has moved to Asia. I wonder if
there's even a single transistor made in America.
I'm not that old, but I remember the days when you went to a television
station and cameras were made in America by GE and RCA. The monitors were
made by Conrac. Etc. Not anymore. These days, twice a year or so, you send
a few dollars to Asia to get a new computer, TV set, cell phone,
microwave, what not, etc.
Ours C-aesars, CIO, CFO, CTO, etc. make fortunes selling our jobs to Asia
and people who made their money in the good old days, when wages were high
and taxes low, can afford this new life style. But younger people, when
they're lucky enough to get a job, end up as policemen, firemen, wardens,
social workers, psychologists, teachers, specialized care teachers,
salesmen, service clerks, civil servants, doctors, layers, accountants,
etc., but they don't produce much that can be exported. Since housing
costs have soared, many of them have a hard time making ends meet.
Do you sometimes give a thought about tomorrow?
Yugo
> In article <9nbsg.62307$Lm5....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>,
> Edwin Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:
>
>>The need for computer advancement has slowed for most of us over the
>>past few years. The difference between a 1.8G processor and a 2.8G
>>processor is very slight for what we do every day.
>
>
> Well, in anycase, all that happens is that BG comes along with a new
> incarnation of Windoze that is bigger, more CPU power and memory hungry
And everyday use is left totally unchanged. That's why I use Linux. I
could manage with 256 MB of RAM till the end of times.
Yugo
> "Yugo" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:12b2a6k...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>
>>>But I doubt you'd still use granny's 24 year old computer today.
>>
>>Well, it used to ne that you'd change your computer soon as you could have
>>4 megs of RAM instead of 1, or because that 386 was a 32 bit computer. But
>>I don't feel in such a hurry these days.
>>
>>I built my computer with old and new end of line parts almost 5 years ago
>>and I don't believe I'll change it for another 2 or 3 years. So, the next
>>one might very well last 25 years. I meant, if it could stand the run, I
>>would keep it for that long.
>
>
> Hey, I can get you a really good deal on a Pentium 90!
I'm sure I could get a good deal on a Pentium III, nich would be more than
enough for my needs.
Edwin Pawlowski
> like you say "I earn $15 an hour, I'm not going to spend an hour fixing a
> $10 toaster." OK, maybe you earn more than $15 an hour, but it must be
> quite some time since you last checked toaster prices at Walmart's.
Last year when we needed a new toaster, you could find one at Wal Mart for
$7 and change. I don't take my earnings into consideration when it comes to
my time doing repairs. If I'm in the mood for tinkering, I'lls pend an hour
to repair a $2 widget just for the fun of it. OTOH, if I have need for the
Widget Supreme that cost $4, I'll toss the old and buy tne new.
>
> One year ago, I had a printer that I had bought around 1990. If it hadn't
> given up for some unknow reason, I'd still be using it. It printed. What
> more could I ask?
>
If you are printing text, recipes, and shopping lists, it is a good deal.
I'd still use my HP 500C for that. But I now have the ability to pring high
quality photso from my Canon printer. Nothing made in 1990 came close.
Depends on your needs.
>
> What you can afford today is because people who make your TV set earn 25¢
> an hour. ALL our electronics industry has moved to Asia. I wonder if
> there's even a single transistor made in America.
Mostly, but not the only reason. There is still some good cost effective
manufacturing left in the US.
>
> I'm not that old, but I remember the days when you went to a television
> station and cameras were made in America by GE and RCA.
RCA was one of our largest customers in the 1970's and up to about 1984 or
so when they shut down the picture tube plant in Scranton, PA.
> Ours C-aesars, CIO, CFO, CTO, etc. make fortunes selling our jobs to Asia
> and people who made their money in the good old days, when wages were high
> and taxes low, can afford this new life style. But younger people, when
> they're lucky enough to get a job, end up as policemen, firemen, wardens,
> social workers, psychologists, teachers, specialized care teachers,
> salesmen, service clerks, civil servants, doctors, layers, accountants,
> etc., but they don't produce much that can be exported. Since housing
> costs have soared, many of them have a hard time making ends meet.
You left out casinos
>
> Do you sometimes give a thought about tomorrow?
Yes, quite often. I've worked for manufacturing companies all my life. Our
products are mostly sold to other manufacturing plants. In the past, a
piece of the "pie" could keep a company in business and profitable. Now the
pie is shrinking and many of our customers have gone overseas. The pie is
shrinking every day. Skilled workers at Electric Boat have been laid off
and now work at the casino for less than half their old wages. Casinos brag
how they have crated jobs, but none pay worth a damn.
If I was starting life over, I'd consider a medical field. People will
always get sick.
Yugo
> It sounds to me like you got a bad example or a cheap display, which I find
> odd since it seems like you value high quality/correct color and brightness
> output.
I don't see what's odd. You can't check monitors in most stores with the
settings and pictures they provide.
> I have an AOC (certifiably cheap!) flat panel display that sounds
> very similar to what you got with your LG....it too has the uneven
> brightness problem, along with a lack of sharpness to the picture.
The LG was sharp, though. As for the Viewsonic, I must have been lucky :)
Colors, I read at behardware, are horrible. I didn't touch mine. Toms'
Hardware says that this monitor is not ideal for office work. I've read
and written for 3 weeks, 10 hours a day, on mine and I can't find any
problem at all. Letters' sharpness is excellent. Many people report faint
bleedthrough at Cnet's. I checked with a black picture and I can't see any.
Maybe the contrast ratio could be higher but the Viewsonic is not put to
shame by some monitors that advertise higher contrast ratios. Most
probably a monitor in the $500-600 range would do better, but I can't
complain as only the highest highlights lack details. I'd have to see a
monitor that does better before I can comment on this.
If only Viewsonic didn't advise its customers that even their higher
priced models can be scrapped by an inadequate refresh rate like the
cheapest CRTs of long ago, I'd recommend the VX922 without hesitation.
None of the reviews I've read so far at Tom's Hardware or Behardware
mention this "little" problem. So much for extensive testing!
Yugo
> If I was starting life over, I'd consider a medical field. People will
> always get sick.
There was a time when doctors were pretty poor. They were paid with
whatever people could offer that was worth anything: a chicken, a pie,
flour, etc. Dying was an alternative.
Let's hope for doctors that people can still pay them with good money in
the years to come.
Stuart Winsor
Edwin Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:
> If I was starting life over, I'd consider a medical field. People will
> always get sick.
Undertaking (Funeral director) was always considered a career without an
end. Then of course, there will always be taxmen and revenue collectors
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ _____________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | /
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | /...Internet access for all Acorn RISC machines
___________________________/ stuart...@argonet.co.uk
101 uses for a Pentium: No2 - A greenhouse heater.
John McWilliams
> In article <wejsg.168539$F_3....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>,
> Edwin Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:
>> If I was starting life over, I'd consider a medical field. People will
>> always get sick.
>
> Undertaking (Funeral director) was always considered a career without an
> end. Then of course, there will always be taxmen and revenue collectors
>
term, but doesn't pay well.....
--
john mcwilliams
Arthur Entlich
they treated you, and how their products are/did hold up.
I would agree with you that it is nearly impossible to get reliable
after purchase service or tech support with many products today. It
seems to be all about sales figures, and little about service. Today a
couple of hundred dollar item doesn't seem to warrant in any customer
service in the high tech field. I suppose part of it is lowered profit
margins, but part is just a basic dismissive attitude.
Art
Arthur Entlich
printers were more costly and designed to last (even inkjet)... now they
are made to be at best recycled within a year or two, and at worst, to
be just dumped.
Art
Arthur Entlich
higher grade products through reinventing themselves. They did also
somewhat improve the build of their products from the Goldstar period.
Art
Yugo
> My main point was that they had developed the reputation of producing
> higher grade products through reinventing themselves. They did also
> somewhat improve the build of their products from the Goldstar period.
Somewhat... It must have been real bad before! Being honest would be a
good start. AFAIAC, they made a name for themselves.
Yugo
> Well, thanks for your detailed story about the two companies and how
> they treated you, and how their products are/did hold up.
>
> I would agree with you that it is nearly impossible to get reliable
> after purchase service or tech support with many products today. It
> seems to be all about sales figures, and little about service. Today a
> couple of hundred dollar item doesn't seem to warrant in any customer
> service in the high tech field. I suppose part of it is lowered profit
> margins, but part is just a basic dismissive attitude.
Don't forget what I said about Staples, though. They don't pressure you to
buy and if you do, they offer service. This attitude is so refreshing in
all this fooling around, I feel like I'm daydreaming. And, you know what?
I do believe that, in the end, addressing customers' problems is less
costly for Staples. Rigmarole doesn't come cheap.
Kudos!
Arthur Entlich
emphasis of the interviews was issues of customer services, so Staples,
at least in Canada, obviously feels it is important, and in my personal
experience they have made an effort to accommodate customer needs.
There are still things that they need to improve upon, but of the "big
box" stores, they do a pretty good of it.
The problem is that some of the other competitors shave off a few more
pennies, and this attracts some additions clients. It is only after
they have to deal with the aftermath of a return or defect that they
often wish they had paid a few dollars more.
However, I have to admit that here in Canada, although we often pay a
premium for it, we get better customer service than found in other
countries, but that is probably because Canadians are pretty
conservative with money and want assurances for their purchases.
We also often have longer warranties from manufacturers than are offered
just across the border in the US.
Art
William R. Walsh
> If only Viewsonic didn't advise its customers that even their higher
> priced models can be scrapped by an inadequate refresh rate like the
> cheapest CRTs of long ago, I'd recommend the VX922 without hesitation.
I don't know why they say this.
I've overdriven my Viewsonic A90f+ several times, and sometimes I walked
away. (I know, bad idea!) Each time it shut down gracefully after
complaining of "out of range" sync. It would even display the sync frequency
so you could see which one exceeded the monitor's ratings.
Part of the reason I've tested this is because the video card the monitor is
plugged into sometimes goes into a strange mode when a full screen command
prompt/console is requested. I guess the video card is somewhat defective...
William