🚀 go-pugleaf

"Tom Bird" <hamster@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>Kyle D. Ross <rosss@emeraldis.com> wrote in article
><68uhur$hg0@opal.emeraldis.com>...
>> Almost every "brand-name" PC has integrated video and riser cards (Compaq
>> Presario, Compaq Deskpro, HP Vectra).
>> 
>> I'm not defending any PC maker... My philosophy is if it works for you,
>then
>> it's the PC you need.
>
>And when it stops working for you (AFAIK Packard Bells do that a fair bit)
>then it's not the PC for you.  :)

Unfortunately for PBL, that's a bit of a misconception.    If you were
to compare the defective record of PBL computers vs that of other name
brand manufacturers as a percentage of total sales, you'd be surprised
just how close they all are.     Components are what fail more often
than anything and those are made by other companies.   And if you
think that other brands choose better components...   sometimes, but
not usually.    I actually prefer the hardware of a PBL because PBL's
hardware is almost always the same, so its very predictable and easy
to troubleshoot (same soundcard/modem, etc).    Companies like Compaq
have an inflated ego and think that they can do whatever they want and
people will like it.   Ha.  

Packard Bell's major problem for so many years was their restore
material.   There are so many master CDs, restore diskettes, format
numbers, and revisions that it would make your head spin.   This was
because so many of those CDs had flaws on them that never should have
left the factory.    As a result, a "bad CD" does not allow you to
restore the machine properly and may even render it completely useless
until PBL can send you another CD (which takes a week or more).    I
think they must have fired the guy who was doing them before (I
imagined it was some lunatic in a basement who was only mildly aware
that anyone used what he created).    Now the restore CDs are fairly
reliable....  but is it too late?

PS.  I don't own a Packard Bell, mostly because I think they are butt
ugly.   :)