Re: OT- Buying new computer, which way to go?

J. Clarke wrote:

Sounds to me like you need to learn something about statistics. Statistics
based on a sample that small are meaningless. Even if there is a
statistical difference on those machines that doesn't mean that it's a
problem with the processors. Computer designers do make mistakes such as
incorrectly calculating cooling capacity you know.

Sounds like you need to wake up and realize this is a "real world"
situation and not Statistics 305. I didn't make the processors fail so
I can't really adjust the sample size.... duh??!! And I've only dealt
with 1000+ PCs in the last 4 years so I was kind of limited in my
sample size.. Sorry, you'll need to complain to the president of my
company for not hiring more people. ;-Þ

And how the heck can you say "Even if there is a statistical difference
on those machines that doesn't mean that it's a problem with the
processors."? Of course it was a problem with the processors (again, I
was there and you and Rich weren't. ;-) or the machines wouldn't have
worked after the processors were replaced.(and still work today with
their new respective AMD or Intel processors)

I never claimed that it was a statistical fact that AMD failed twice as
much in some huge scientific studies or that it would be true in all
cases. It was the zealots that were up in arms about my "real world
experience" as they thought it was "B.S."

In fact in my last email (which apparently you were too zealot angered
by to completely read. ;-) I even stated that it could have been a
bunch of other reasons that caused the processors to fail. I also said
I didn't care what those reasons were, just that I had seen twice as
many failures in AMD machines. So, in my "real world situation", my
statement is 100% true. (Sorry you don't like the sample size, when I
get another blown PC processor I'll add that to the list and let you
know. ;-)

However, I still stand by the comment that "configuration" like Rich
was suggesting was not the reason for the AMD failures and him bringing
it up was not only stupid, but wrong.

BTW to be fair (but not to anger any of the Apple zealots ;-), I do
know of an Apple laptop processor failure too. My brother-in-laws
laptop (Apple - have no idea what model or chip) had a blown processor
about a month ago. Apple apparently did a great job and replaced it
through the warrenty program and it works fine now.(it did take 7 days
which caused my brother-in-law to act like it was the end of the world
though??) So even Apples aren't immune to processor issues. (My God,
Rich is that B.S too?? ;-Þ


You're coming across as some kind of zealot. Why are you so angry about
this?

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

If we're talking anger; if anyone is angered it's you and Rich since
you don't believe me or even read my emails.

And Zealot? In what way?

I never said that Steve should chose any one processor over
another.(sorry, no zealoting here ;-) I was just offering up advice
for the MOST cost effective method of obtaining a computer that could
do what he said he needed it to do. That happened to be the Dell 9150
with an Intel chip for about $900 - which I've had experience with and
know to be a solid machine. The 5150 [not 5150C] is also a decent
machine and even cheaper, but the 9150 offers more expansion which is
worth the extra dollars in my opinion. The 3100 is too little machine
for what he wants and is not a good choice for his needs as it has on
board video.

And yes, to the zealots out there I KNOW Intel paid Dell to use Intel
(Duh, I am in the IT field and don't live under a rock... hello? ;-)
If AMD had done that then I'd probably have more AMD machines at my
workplace(not just 100+)... Again, not my fault or concern that they
didn't and given that we don't do "high end graphics processing
or play bleeding edge games all day" the Intel has been a solid
performer fine.

If Steve desires a Mac or an AMD, then more power to him and they'll
both be decent machines I'm sure. But again, he'll pay more for
both of them and I'd personally rather save the money since he
doesn't need an Apple or an AMD it and use if for camera equipment
which is what this group is supposed to be about... right?

I guess I'm just really confused why all of the other people in this
thread feel that Steve "must" have a G4 or "must" have an AMD for the
low end stuff he wants to do? Why spend a ton of money and buy a G4 or
custom build an AMD monster gaming PC for simple accounting, a few
games, and some picture editing? (Heck, I hesitated suggesting he go to
the 256 video card as the 128 would be fine.)

So Angry??? Nope not at all, actually more just disappointed that the
zealots are so injured that they can't believe the facts about my
"personal experience" or that Dell can offer an Intel PC cheaper than
you can build or that the Dell I quoted is cheaper than the G4.

Perhaps you are confusing this disappointment with anger, but that may
be because Rich said that having twice as many AMD failures as Intel
failures was B.S.... It wasn't B.S. and I proved that by explaining it
r e a l s l o w l y for him.(he apparently needs that ;-) And
explaining that someone is wrong when they just say "B.S" when they
were not at my company to witness the failures in no way denotes anger.

So nice try, but I'm not the angry zealot here. I'm just the one
offering the cheapest solution for Steve's needs without trying to
get into the Apple / PC war.

Is my opinion a bit biased though? Yep, I admit it. I think he should
spend as little as he can while getting a good computer. Just because
Dell happens to offer that isn't my fault but it is the reason for
the bias. If Apple or another manufacturer that used AMDs was the
cheapest machine for what he needs, I'd have recommended that.

I mean come on, would you really suggest he buy a Ferrari FXX for trips
to the corner store to pick up his beer or perhaps maybe that he gets a
nice Saturn /Honda /Ford /Toyota /whatever car that won't offend people
that's MUCH cheaper than the FXX but will do it just as well given the
need he has?

Jim


..

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT- Buying new computer, which way to go?
    ... to AMD and Intel. ... on those machines that doesn't mean that it's a problem with the ... know of an Apple laptop processor failure too. ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Fwd: [PATCH 7/9] ACPI: Only use IPI on known broken machines (AMD, Dothan/BaniasPentium M)
    ... Subject: ACPI: Only use IPI on known broken machines (AMD, ... Use IPI for blacklisted CPUs, ... According to Intel only specific Intel models are broken ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: AMD vs. Intel
    ... It's common knowedge that AMD ... It has always been a trend that there tend to be cheap motherboards for ... cheap&nasty motherboards for cheaper processors. ... unstable and troublesome Celeron machines out there - ask anyone who works ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: Advice" Decline XP SP 3 for now!
    ... MVPs Do Not Work For Microsoft ... yes I test but then I wouldn't of thought of testing Intel vs AMD, also one site maybe Intel and SP3 works fine so why shouldn't it roll out to another site with AMD.. ... The real issue is not the service pack, but rather the idiot OEMs who used the same image for intel machines as they did for AMD machines. ... I've been beta testing since Beta 1 release and only filed 1 bug. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Problem with /proc/diskstats on RHEL4
    ... of statistics on my Redhat boxes and have noted that the read values ... local SCSI disks and mounts several filesystems over ... I know that /proc/diskstats works correctly on many machines, ... Also, if you are using RHEL4, perhaps you might take a moment to see if your own /proc/diskstats is progressing on reads, and drop me a line about your hardware/kernel configs? ...
    (Linux-Kernel)