 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at all
>> for the extra money, that's all.
>
> Yeah, they guaranteed that it won't fail within certain tolerances.
> Those tolerances are *much* stricter than for the cheap version.
Well, certainly for resistors, they have a machine that just churns out
resistors. They vary all over the place. The ones that are more than 10%
wrong get thrown away [or perhaps recycled, IDK]. The ones that are
within 10% of the correct value get sold cheap. And the ones that are
within 5% of the correct value get sold expensive. But it all comes out
of the same machine, and costs the same to produce. [Although I guess
the 5% ones are rarer, assuming a normal distribution...]
>> you it'll take up to 15 days to arrive. But actually it arrives within
>> hours. And it still arrives within 12 hours. Do they actually do
>> anything different? Or is it just a tax on stupidity?
>
> It's a guarantee. Sure, you order something online and you could get it
> in 12 hours. Or, you could get it in 2 weeks. I've had both occur.
It's like when I paid extra to have my package from Zazzle arrive fast.
The ones I didn't pay extra for arrived within 6 days. The ones I paid
extra for never arrived at all. In the end, I had to drive to the depot
and get them my ****ing self! >:-[ NOT AMUSED!
[And then they tried to invoice me for unpaid VAT. I never did pay them
that back...]
> When you pay extra for shipping, you're paying for a guarantee that it
> will arrive within a certain timeframe. If you're ordering a gift for
> someone's birthday, for instance, and their birthday is 3 days from now,
> do you want to gamble that the gift won't arrive on time? Or do you
> want to know *for a fact* that it will arrive within 3 days?
If only it was a *fact*. It's not like you can demand your money back
when the item still turns up 3 weeks late...
> As trite as the old saying is, "You get what you pay for". A lot of the
> time, people decide that the quality really is worth the extra money
> (like your printer). The trick is knowing when to pay for quality, and
> when to go cheap.
For something like a printer, which actually wears out, it can be worth
paying more. For something that passively measures a temparature and has
almost no possible way of malfunctioning... well, I know what I'd do. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
> Oh, hey, I'm not *stressing* about this! I couldn't care less. ;-) I'm
> merely curios about the design of it...
>
That's the way, keep up the good work ;).
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethis zbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> on the UK weather map looks a slightly different shade to your neighbour?
NTSC - Never The Same Color!
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers wrote:
> But it's not like a bunch of guys in suits sat down and said, "Now we
> need to design a version that's going to fail really soon."
You sure? How many devices have you had that failed within days of the
warranty expiring? ;-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> But it's not like a bunch of guys in suits sat down and said, "Now we
>> need to design a version that's going to fail really soon."
>
> You sure? How many devices have you had that failed within days of the
> warranty expiring? ;-)
You know how traffic lights always turn red just as you get to them?
Well, one day I decided to ignore them when that happens. But each time
I arrive at a set of traffic lights just as they turn green, I'm all
like, "woo! I got the green!"
Now almost every single set of traffic lights I come to turn green
immediately. Seriously, you should try it!
The Jedi were right - your focus determins your reality. :-D
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Now almost every single set of traffic lights I come to turn green
> immediately. Seriously, you should try it!
Heh. I think I shall. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>>> I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at
>>> all for the extra money, that's all.
>>
>> Yeah, they guaranteed that it won't fail within certain tolerances.
>> Those tolerances are *much* stricter than for the cheap version.
>
> Well, certainly for resistors, they have a machine that just churns out
> resistors. They vary all over the place. The ones that are more than 10%
> wrong get thrown away [or perhaps recycled, IDK]. The ones that are
> within 10% of the correct value get sold cheap. And the ones that are
> within 5% of the correct value get sold expensive. But it all comes out
> of the same machine, and costs the same to produce. [Although I guess
> the 5% ones are rarer, assuming a normal distribution...]
Of course they're rarer. If they weren't, some other company would
charge a lower price for them.
>> When you pay extra for shipping, you're paying for a guarantee that it
>> will arrive within a certain timeframe. If you're ordering a gift for
>> someone's birthday, for instance, and their birthday is 3 days from
>> now, do you want to gamble that the gift won't arrive on time? Or do
>> you want to know *for a fact* that it will arrive within 3 days?
>
> If only it was a *fact*. It's not like you can demand your money back
> when the item still turns up 3 weeks late...
Actually, you can. At least for the shipping.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Chambers wrote:
>> But it's not like a bunch of guys in suits sat down and said, "Now we
>> need to design a version that's going to fail really soon."
>
> You sure? How many devices have you had that failed within days of the
> warranty expiring? ;-)
>
None, actually. But that's probably a fluke :)
I bet what really happens is more along the lines of, "OK, we're at the
point where it will outlast the warranty, we can stop spending money
improving it now."
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 16 May 2008 15:51:04 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>
> For something that passively measures a temparature and has
>almost no possible way of malfunctioning... well, I know what I'd do. ;-)
Sorry but you are wrong, there. Electronic components can fail under
normal usage also electronic circuits can drift and need recalibrated
from time to time. A temperature measuring device that has a range of
That is very accurate.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> almost no possible way of malfunctioning...
Famous last words...
Seriously, how much would *you* be willing to bet that a temperature
measurement system from Maplin doesn't fail during 5 years use? $1, $100,
$100000 ? This is exactly what bet companies have to make, and if the bet
is millions of dollars, you don't get a $50 meter from Maplin.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
