 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/04/2011 04:19 PM, scott wrote:
>> I think perhaps the way to remedy this is to make it possible to do
>> something about poor quality products. Make it so that if the customer
>> is not happy, it directly affects the manufacturer in some way. Damned
>> if I know how though...
>
> Write a review on amazon.
How does that help?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> How does that help?
You don't read reviews before buying something?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/5/2011 7:41, clipka wrote:
> Am 05.04.2011 16:09, schrieb Invisible:
>
>> I have absolutely no idea whether these "server-grade" drives really
>> *are* more reliable, or whether it's just a sucker tax.
>
> Server drives are designed to endure continuous use.
>
> Desktop drives are designed to endure lots of power cycles.
The drives in a NAS are exactly the same as what you'd buy off the shelf in
an electronics store.
Google has a whitepaper telling about the drive reliability based on
statistics from half a million disk drives. There's little correlation
between "category" and reliability.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/5/2011 3:14, Invisible wrote:
> I would pay serious money to obtain hardware and software which isn't
> infuriatingly awkward to use. But unfortunately, that doesn't appear to be
> an option. Nobody makes it.
I have found that is just plain how it works in video. I'm not sure why. I
haven't been able to find a capture card that will process HD coming off a
TV cable, in spite of every TV having this capability. The few capture cards
that *seem* to have this capability require you to use their custom playback
software that only runs on the same machine where you have the card plugged
in, which kind of defeats the purpose of capturing the stuff in the first place.
Find a set-top box that'll play files *and* record TV.
Don't even get me started on the PS3 usability failures. :-)
Every day I notice 101 minor things where I say "with a little thought (or,
if they didn't make the compromise this way) it would have been much less
annoying."
> I doubt integrating whatever 3rd party code they bought into their own
codebase was a five minute job.
You'd be surprised.
> What, fundamentally, can we do about this?
Shop someplace like Amazon where people give reviews that the company
doesn't get to vet.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/04/2011 04:50 PM, scott wrote:
>> How does that help?
>
> You don't read reviews before buying something?
No. But generally I don't buy hardware from Amazon anyway...
(Usually I only buy music from Amazon. And then only when I already know
what I'm trying to buy, so the reviews are irrelevant.)
From what I've seen, the reviews for just about *everything* are
unwaiveringly positive.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 19:54:23 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> On 05/04/2011 04:50 PM, scott wrote:
>>> How does that help?
>>
>> You don't read reviews before buying something?
>
> No. But generally I don't buy hardware from Amazon anyway...
>
> (Usually I only buy music from Amazon. And then only when I already know
> what I'm trying to buy, so the reviews are irrelevant.)
>
> From what I've seen, the reviews for just about *everything* are
> unwaiveringly positive.
That's not been my experience. But more to the point, if you had a
problem and you don't write a review, you're not helping the next buyer
make an informed decision.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/5/2011 11:54, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> From what I've seen, the reviews for just about *everything* are
> unwaiveringly positive.
Maybe for music...
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/04/2011 8:16 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> That's not been my experience. But more to the point, if you had a
> problem and you don't write a review, you're not helping the next buyer
> make an informed decision.
I agree.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/04/2011 06:07 PM, Darren New wrote:
> On 4/5/2011 7:41, clipka wrote:
>> Am 05.04.2011 16:09, schrieb Invisible:
>>
>>> I have absolutely no idea whether these "server-grade" drives really
>>> *are* more reliable, or whether it's just a sucker tax.
>>
>> Server drives are designed to endure continuous use.
>>
>> Desktop drives are designed to endure lots of power cycles.
>
> The drives in a NAS are exactly the same as what you'd buy off the shelf
> in an electronics store.
>
> Google has a whitepaper telling about the drive reliability based on
> statistics from half a million disk drives. There's little correlation
> between "category" and reliability.
So it *is* a sucker tax then.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/04/2011 08:33 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 05/04/2011 8:16 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> That's not been my experience. But more to the point, if you had a
>> problem and you don't write a review, you're not helping the next buyer
>> make an informed decision.
>
> I agree.
Well, perhaps. Perhaps if I actually bought hardware from Amazon instead
of the 10^17 other suppliers, and for every single one I wrote a long
description of why it sucks, the manufacturers might lose 0.02% of their
sales, and a tiny few people would be spared buying one sucky product
only to buy another equally sucky product. I doubt this is going to
bring quality back to the marketplace.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
