>On the good side: (to answer Robert) the computer would be a good one if
>the ones I've been in possession of (two so far) hadn't had major hardware
>problems. These problems could have been caused by shipping damage. As for
>software and compatibility, there are still bugs to be worked out, but for
>the most part, it is (or could be) a kick-ass computer. Don't write it off
>totally just cos I've had problems and absolutely HATE dealing with Apple
>service people.
There was a report on CBC Radio (Morningside most likely, but the source
escapes me at the moment) about the prevalence of brand-new defective
computers. I believe the statistic quoted was that something like 1 out of
every 3 or 4 computers shipped from the manufacturer has major hardware
problems, i.e., some piece needs to be replaced. The problem, it seems, is
that the continued "mystique" of computers means that the manufacturing
process is seen to have a complexity level much, much higher than, say, an
automobile assembly line, so that having some sort of problem is considered
to be par for the course. It wouldn't be acceptable if the brakes on 25% of
all cars manufactured were faulty, but it's something that people are
expected to put up with when they buy a new computer.
____________________________________________________________________________
At that time the course of | osadchuk@uvic.ca
humanity was orderly. | http://www.xtc.net/~osadchuk/
The foreigners made it otherwise |
when they arrived here. |
-from _Chilam Balam_, a history of the Maya |
____________________________________________________________________________