Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Information > why am i having so many problems with new computers?

Reply
Thread Tools

why am i having so many problems with new computers?

 
 
Ernie Werbel
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2007
I hate to sound like one of those "older is better" people, but I am
beginning to think that way. My first computer was a Leading Edge Fortive
5000 with a 486 DX 2 (66 MHz) and 16 MB of RAM and Windows 3.11. I expanded
the memory to 32MB, and in the late nineties I was still using the system
and installed an 8.4 GB hard disk in addition to the existing 511MB one. I
had a great multimedia setup, too with Sound Blaster 16 and a Virge DX
graphics card. I had the system tweaked and tricked out the way I wanted it
and everything ran smoothly. If Windows 3.11 crashed on me once in six
months it was a lot...

Fast forward. I finally broke down and built a new system around the year
1999. It was a Pentium 2 366 MHz with Windows 95 and some other stuff I
don't remember. It crashed almost once a day.

Then in August of 2003 I built a new P4 computer with all modern parts,
Windows XP, Radeon 9000 video card (64MB), Sound Blaster 64, and 1 GB of
RAM. That system is still in use at my home and although it is stable, it
is excruciatingly slow, with about 5 minute boot time.

This past December I built a new computer. After going through three
motherboards (defective components, compatibility issues, etc) I finally am
using an ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe (which I hear is really good or really bad,
depending on your luck the day you buy it), AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (whatever
these numbers mean but I hear it is supposed to be good), Windows XP Pro,
512 MB of RAM (will upgrade when budget allows) and a GeForce 6600GT video
card (256MB). So we're talking pretty top of the line, not the latest and
greatest, but it should boot and work no problem right?

Wrong... Well for the first week everything was great but after installing
minimal software (the usual office apps) the system is now running slow and
takes almost 5 minutes to boot and be usable. I regularly run defrag and
the diagnostics and it doesn't help. I am beginning to regret ever getting
the thing.

Has anyone else had similar experiences? Is it that the technology is
upgrading so quickly that the manufacturers are just pumping out stuff to
sell it even if it doesn't perform as well as it should??

Ernie


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
- Bobb -
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2007

"Ernie Werbel" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:t%LUh.988$Qp.693@trnddc07...
>I hate to sound like one of those "older is better" people, but I am
>beginning to think that way. My first computer was a Leading Edge
>Fortive 5000 with a 486 DX 2 (66 MHz) and 16 MB of RAM and Windows
>3.11. I expanded the memory to 32MB, and in the late nineties I was
>still using the system and installed an 8.4 GB hard disk in addition to
>the existing 511MB one. I had a great multimedia setup, too with Sound
>Blaster 16 and a Virge DX graphics card. I had the system tweaked and
>tricked out the way I wanted it and everything ran smoothly. If
>Windows 3.11 crashed on me once in six months it was a lot...
>
> Fast forward. I finally broke down and built a new system around the
> year 1999. It was a Pentium 2 366 MHz with Windows 95 and some other
> stuff I don't remember. It crashed almost once a day.
>
> Then in August of 2003 I built a new P4 computer with all modern
> parts, Windows XP, Radeon 9000 video card (64MB), Sound Blaster 64,
> and 1 GB of RAM. That system is still in use at my home and although
> it is stable, it is excruciatingly slow, with about 5 minute boot
> time.
>
> This past December I built a new computer. After going through three
> motherboards (defective components, compatibility issues, etc) I
> finally am using an ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe (which I hear is really good
> or really bad, depending on your luck the day you buy it), AMD Athlon
> 64 X2 3800+ (whatever these numbers mean but I hear it is supposed to
> be good), Windows XP Pro, 512 MB of RAM (will upgrade when budget
> allows) and a GeForce 6600GT video card (256MB). So we're talking
> pretty top of the line, not the latest and greatest, but it should
> boot and work no problem right?
>
> Wrong... Well for the first week everything was great but after
> installing minimal software (the usual office apps) the system is now
> running slow and takes almost 5 minutes to boot and be usable. I
> regularly run defrag and the diagnostics and it doesn't help. I am
> beginning to regret ever getting the thing.
>
> Has anyone else had similar experiences? Is it that the technology is
> upgrading so quickly that the manufacturers are just pumping out stuff
> to sell it even if it doesn't perform as well as it should??
>
> Ernie
>

My first question: Do you have High-speed Internet ?
DSL ? Running the ISP's software ? If yes to all , I'll tell you that my
neighbor has Verizon DSL and loaded the software CD that came with DSL
originally ( a year or so ago). It ran fine until 2-3 months ago and
then would take 6-7 minutes to go from logon screen to desktop. It was
his DSL software. At boot time it tries to go to their website/do some
stuff behind the scenes and AFTER that all failed, THEN he would see his
desktop. ( maybe they moved a server ?? - their helpdesk was useless).
He was blaming the hardware too and once I removed Norton and DSL
software it booted right up. Added Norton - it was slow again - BUT it
was because DSL hadn't finished init yet. I uninstalled all of the DSL
sw from his startup and added Norton in - runs fine now. From login to
desktop in about 20 seconds.
Start- run - msconfig - click <OK>and then go to STARTUP tab - look to
see what's running when you logon. Uncheck all "necessary" and reboot -
better ? - narrow it down that way.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ernie Werbel
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2007

"- Bobb -" <bobb@noemail.123> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Ernie Werbel" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:t%LUh.988$Qp.693@trnddc07...
>>I hate to sound like one of those "older is better" people, but I am
>>beginning to think that way. My first computer was a Leading Edge Fortive
>>5000 with a 486 DX 2 (66 MHz) and 16 MB of RAM and Windows 3.11. I
>>expanded the memory to 32MB, and in the late nineties I was still using
>>the system and installed an 8.4 GB hard disk in addition to the existing
>>511MB one. I had a great multimedia setup, too with Sound Blaster 16 and
>>a Virge DX graphics card. I had the system tweaked and tricked out the
>>way I wanted it and everything ran smoothly. If Windows 3.11 crashed on
>>me once in six months it was a lot...
>>
>> Fast forward. I finally broke down and built a new system around the
>> year 1999. It was a Pentium 2 366 MHz with Windows 95 and some other
>> stuff I don't remember. It crashed almost once a day.
>>
>> Then in August of 2003 I built a new P4 computer with all modern parts,
>> Windows XP, Radeon 9000 video card (64MB), Sound Blaster 64, and 1 GB of
>> RAM. That system is still in use at my home and although it is stable,
>> it is excruciatingly slow, with about 5 minute boot time.
>>
>> This past December I built a new computer. After going through three
>> motherboards (defective components, compatibility issues, etc) I finally
>> am using an ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe (which I hear is really good or really
>> bad, depending on your luck the day you buy it), AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+
>> (whatever these numbers mean but I hear it is supposed to be good),
>> Windows XP Pro, 512 MB of RAM (will upgrade when budget allows) and a
>> GeForce 6600GT video card (256MB). So we're talking pretty top of the
>> line, not the latest and greatest, but it should boot and work no problem
>> right?
>>
>> Wrong... Well for the first week everything was great but after
>> installing minimal software (the usual office apps) the system is now
>> running slow and takes almost 5 minutes to boot and be usable. I
>> regularly run defrag and the diagnostics and it doesn't help. I am
>> beginning to regret ever getting the thing.
>>
>> Has anyone else had similar experiences? Is it that the technology is
>> upgrading so quickly that the manufacturers are just pumping out stuff to
>> sell it even if it doesn't perform as well as it should??
>>
>> Ernie
>>

> My first question: Do you have High-speed Internet ?
> DSL ? Running the ISP's software ? If yes to all , I'll tell you that my
> neighbor has Verizon DSL and loaded the software CD that came with DSL
> originally ( a year or so ago). It ran fine until 2-3 months ago and then
> would take 6-7 minutes to go from logon screen to desktop. It was his DSL
> software. At boot time it tries to go to their website/do some stuff
> behind the scenes and AFTER that all failed, THEN he would see his
> desktop. ( maybe they moved a server ?? - their helpdesk was useless). He
> was blaming the hardware too and once I removed Norton and DSL software it
> booted right up. Added Norton - it was slow again - BUT it was because DSL
> hadn't finished init yet. I uninstalled all of the DSL sw from his startup
> and added Norton in - runs fine now. From login to desktop in about 20
> seconds.
> Start- run - msconfig - click <OK>and then go to STARTUP tab - look to see
> what's running when you logon. Uncheck all "necessary" and reboot - better
> ? - narrow it down that way.
>


Thanks for the advice, Bobb. As a matter of fact, I have both Verizon DSL
and Norton as you have mentioned. I will uninstall the Verizon software
(don't seem to need it as I connect on my other computers w/o the software)
and disable the Norton on startup. Hopefully this can smooth things up a
bit.

Ernie


 
Reply With Quote
 
babaloo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2007
The common denominator is that these are all home-built systems. I have
built many and if there is a problem it is usually something I have
overlooked rather than the hardware. But not always.
It is easy to overlook some basic things.
It is possible that you do not have the correct settings in your BIOS for
memory, bus speed etc. Too high and too low a setting can cause these
problems. In fact it would be a good idea to review all of the BIOS
settings. The default settings in the motherboard may not be correct. Be
sure you understand what the settings do before you change them. There is
plenty of info on the web.
Do you have the right kind of memory?
Recently I have run into defective memory chips more frequently than in
past years. The Microsoft memory diagnostic is free and very good. If a
memory stick is defective it usually shows up very shortly after beginning
the test-you do not have to run the test overnight. Some RAM defects can
actually destroy the motherboard.(not that I would ever mention how lousy
Mushkin memory is and how they do not stand behind their warranty).
I consider ASUS motherboards to be high quality. They generally cost a
premium over lesser brands despite having the same BIOS, etc. The most
bullet-proof systems I have built have ASUS motherboards.
Video card driver problems are protean: installing the latest clears many
problems.
Are the hard drives and optical drives hooked up properly? As you probably
know hard and optical drives should never share a cable.
Are you sure you have an adequate power supply? The units that come with
many cases are essentially worthless. If they do not supply enough juice
under load you can see the kind of problems you describe.
While 512mbs is not alot it should be sufficient to run office apps,
internet etc without problems. I have run Photoshop without difficulty on an
Athlon 3200 with 512 mbs in an ASUS motherboard. This machine has never had
a problem and is still in daily use in my office.
When in doubt sometimes it is worth the cost to have a local computer repair
facility look at the machine. Admittedly many of the people in these shops
know little more than experienced system builders. But they tend to have
tools like voltmeters and the like to check out certain components (like
power supplies).
Lastly some advice about your next computer: there are several smaller,
nationally advertised custom builders who will put together a system with
components you specify for not much more, and sometimes less, than what the
parts would cost you and they usually offer at least a one year warranty. My
latest and greatest dual core wonder was built that way and saved me both
stress and $. When the dust settles around quad cores this is the way I will
go again.


 
Reply With Quote
 
jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-06-2007
On 16 Apr, 15:46, "Ernie Werbel" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I hate to sound like one of those "older is better" people, but I am
> beginning to think that way. My first computer was a Leading Edge Fortive
> 5000 with a 486 DX 2 (66 MHz) and 16 MB of RAM and Windows 3.11. I expanded
> the memory to 32MB, and in the late nineties I was still using the system
> and installed an 8.4 GB hard disk in addition to the existing 511MB one. I
> had a great multimedia setup, too with Sound Blaster 16 and a Virge DX
> graphics card. I had the system tweaked and tricked out the way I wanted it
> and everything ran smoothly. If Windows 3.11 crashed on me once in six
> months it was a lot...
>
> Fast forward. I finally broke down and built a new system around the year
> 1999. It was a Pentium 2 366 MHz with Windows 95 and some other stuff I
> don't remember. It crashed almost once a day.
>
> Then in August of 2003 I built a new P4 computer with all modern parts,
> Windows XP, Radeon 9000 video card (64MB), Sound Blaster 64, and 1 GB of
> RAM. That system is still in use at my home and although it is stable, it
> is excruciatingly slow, with about 5 minute boot time.
>
> This past December I built a new computer. After going through three
> motherboards (defective components, compatibility issues, etc) I finally am
> using an ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe (which I hear is really good or really bad,
> depending on your luck the day you buy it), AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (whatever
> these numbers mean but I hear it is supposed to be good), Windows XP Pro,
> 512 MB of RAM (will upgrade when budget allows) and a GeForce 6600GT video
> card (256MB). So we're talking pretty top of the line, not the latest and
> greatest, but it should boot and work no problem right?
>
> Wrong... Well for the first week everything was great but after installing
> minimal software (the usual office apps) the system is now running slow and
> takes almost 5 minutes to boot and be usable. I regularly run defrag and
> the diagnostics and it doesn't help. I am beginning to regret ever getting
> the thing.
>
> Has anyone else had similar experiences? Is it that the technology is
> upgrading so quickly that the manufacturers are just pumping out stuff to
> sell it even if it doesn't perform as well as it should??
>
> Ernie


this may be partly a philosophical issue.. i'll try to impart my
experiences and sort of philosophy, as something to consider.


I have heard that technology since 2000 tend to break quicker. It's
alot cheaper than it was pre 1995.
Some think buying more at lower price, evens it out.

Perhaps laptops have a longer life than desktops.

You might want to check the cooling.

If they're second hand, then more usage, so would prob die quicker.

I built one comp where with win98 it didn't crash but with winxp it
did. Win XP was more sensitive. It picked somthing up in event viewer,
I think about the CDROM having a bad block(can't remember if changing
CDROM,CD or IDE Cable or avoiding that IDE connector, fixed it).
People say Win XP is more stable, yet people keep posting about it
freezing and everybody knows now to look in event viewer for the red
Xs, it's a common problem.


If one sound card or video card doesn't work, I can change it in 5
min, it's nothing. No big deal at all. HDD going is a problem if stuff
isn't backed up.

For a comp not to crash and bother me. All I need is a quality MBRD
and working processor.. I don't really consider anything else breaking
to be a "crash". I don't play games, I don't need a good video card.
Any video card - without a fan - will do. Any sound card will do(none
have fans).

I have an ethernet card for if the ethernet port doesn't work
(sometimes they don't work 'cos not exactly the right MBRD drivers.
Or, other times they just don't work)

You need redundant parts. I don't like changing MBRD or CPU though.
Changing MBRD , involves putting the Heatsink back on the CPU, and if
the MBRD is different, can mean you need new parts. If MBRD is the
same, then it should be a new MBRD, not second hand.
Changing CPU, if done with polythene gloves,99% IPA, Arctic Silver
paste, a razor blade, .. Well, it's a job. Maybe water and a tissue
will do! And, I have found putting a heatsink on P4 Socket 478 to be a
struggle. Often easiest taking the MBRD out onto an anti static bag
with a light shining over it. Trying a few times without paste to get
the nack of not messing it up, then, I do it putting the arctic silver
paste on and getting it right.

Anything else is fine to replace. Get used to it!! But I think maybe
you've had some bad luck. If you've got all good make new parts and
had a faulty MBRD. Though the warranty should cover that.


Replacing anything else wouldn't cause me to bat an eyelid. HDDs can
be a nuisance, with screws , and backing up data. I use thumbscrews.
And USB-IDE adaptors (or USB enclosures if you want) are quite good.
One issue of USB-IDE adaptors that just occurred to me that I haven't
written of in a post, is that one should / I should use a USB Ext
cable. 'cos the USB-IDE adaptors usually are about 6" long from the
USB end to the IDE end. So, one has to "build something" e.g. stack
books up, to rest the HDD on - outside the comp.

Since I can replace things. Compatibility isn't much of an issue for
me.

Like with software. If one doesn't work I use another. I can have
both. With HW, it may be one on a shelf and one in my computer.

For my internet connection I have an MBRD ethernet port , an ethernet
card, a PCI DSL Modem , and a backup 56k modem. I've had bad luck all
the time with routers. But recently I think i've run into some good
makes..
Bad ones first.

People keep recommending linksys, maybe it's just a US thing.
My few friends that i've spoken to in UK have moaned about linksys.
They've all got them because they read on the internet they were good,
and they turned out to have issues. Needing rebooting. Port forwarding
nto working. (though the latter may have just been a firmware issue. I
found that eventually it needed rebooting anyway! so may have
overheated too)

I hear good thinsg of netgear.

But I've seen a company that uses Zyxel without needing to reboot them
ZyXEL Prestige 600.

Somebody I know that had many bad experiences with Linksys, said 3Com
were great.

I've heard that the Draytek Vigor is good (Draytek may just be a uk
make)

I called Zen and they agreed many routers have issues. Check their
page. They sell and support Speedtouch routers. They say they haven't
had problems with them. Not very geek friendly, but they work. Though
recently, after a year or so of use, they lose connection temporarily,
maybe for 2 minutes. I assume it's my router rather than my isp..

Anyhow, I have the PCI DSL modem, and the 56k modem, which saved me
from my linksys!

So, you can always deal with problems with redundant parts. I actually
bought 2 speedtouch routers, though one vanished.

I like to keep a running list of good makes or router.

People say bad things about Belkin . I don't use them, but some people
whose comps I fix do use them (sometimes they get things without
asking me, then call me when things don't work out). At least Belkin
tech support is open 24/7 and they are good if you need to send it
back.















 
Reply With Quote
 
Wizard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-07-2007
Christ! what nonsense!

"(E-Mail Removed)" wrote:
>
> On 16 Apr, 15:46, "Ernie Werbel" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > I hate to sound like one of those "older is better" people, but I am
> > beginning to think that way. My first computer was a Leading Edge Fortive
> > 5000 with a 486 DX 2 (66 MHz) and 16 MB of RAM and Windows 3.11. I expanded
> > the memory to 32MB, and in the late nineties I was still using the system
> > and installed an 8.4 GB hard disk in addition to the existing 511MB one. I
> > had a great multimedia setup, too with Sound Blaster 16 and a Virge DX
> > graphics card. I had the system tweaked and tricked out the way I wanted it
> > and everything ran smoothly. If Windows 3.11 crashed on me once in six
> > months it was a lot...
> >
> > Fast forward. I finally broke down and built a new system around the year
> > 1999. It was a Pentium 2 366 MHz with Windows 95 and some other stuff I
> > don't remember. It crashed almost once a day.
> >
> > Then in August of 2003 I built a new P4 computer with all modern parts,
> > Windows XP, Radeon 9000 video card (64MB), Sound Blaster 64, and 1 GB of
> > RAM. That system is still in use at my home and although it is stable, it
> > is excruciatingly slow, with about 5 minute boot time.
> >
> > This past December I built a new computer. After going through three
> > motherboards (defective components, compatibility issues, etc) I finally am
> > using an ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe (which I hear is really good or really bad,
> > depending on your luck the day you buy it), AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (whatever
> > these numbers mean but I hear it is supposed to be good), Windows XP Pro,
> > 512 MB of RAM (will upgrade when budget allows) and a GeForce 6600GT video
> > card (256MB). So we're talking pretty top of the line, not the latest and
> > greatest, but it should boot and work no problem right?
> >
> > Wrong... Well for the first week everything was great but after installing
> > minimal software (the usual office apps) the system is now running slow and
> > takes almost 5 minutes to boot and be usable. I regularly run defrag and
> > the diagnostics and it doesn't help. I am beginning to regret ever getting
> > the thing.
> >
> > Has anyone else had similar experiences? Is it that the technology is
> > upgrading so quickly that the manufacturers are just pumping out stuff to
> > sell it even if it doesn't perform as well as it should??
> >
> > Ernie

>
> this may be partly a philosophical issue.. i'll try to impart my
> experiences and sort of philosophy, as something to consider.
>
> I have heard that technology since 2000 tend to break quicker. It's
> alot cheaper than it was pre 1995.
> Some think buying more at lower price, evens it out.
>
> Perhaps laptops have a longer life than desktops.
>
> You might want to check the cooling.
>
> If they're second hand, then more usage, so would prob die quicker.
>
> I built one comp where with win98 it didn't crash but with winxp it
> did. Win XP was more sensitive. It picked somthing up in event viewer,
> I think about the CDROM having a bad block(can't remember if changing
> CDROM,CD or IDE Cable or avoiding that IDE connector, fixed it).
> People say Win XP is more stable, yet people keep posting about it
> freezing and everybody knows now to look in event viewer for the red
> Xs, it's a common problem.
>
> If one sound card or video card doesn't work, I can change it in 5
> min, it's nothing. No big deal at all. HDD going is a problem if stuff
> isn't backed up.
>
> For a comp not to crash and bother me. All I need is a quality MBRD
> and working processor.. I don't really consider anything else breaking
> to be a "crash". I don't play games, I don't need a good video card.
> Any video card - without a fan - will do. Any sound card will do(none
> have fans).
>
> I have an ethernet card for if the ethernet port doesn't work
> (sometimes they don't work 'cos not exactly the right MBRD drivers.
> Or, other times they just don't work)
>
> You need redundant parts. I don't like changing MBRD or CPU though.
> Changing MBRD , involves putting the Heatsink back on the CPU, and if
> the MBRD is different, can mean you need new parts. If MBRD is the
> same, then it should be a new MBRD, not second hand.
> Changing CPU, if done with polythene gloves,99% IPA, Arctic Silver
> paste, a razor blade, .. Well, it's a job. Maybe water and a tissue
> will do! And, I have found putting a heatsink on P4 Socket 478 to be a
> struggle. Often easiest taking the MBRD out onto an anti static bag
> with a light shining over it. Trying a few times without paste to get
> the nack of not messing it up, then, I do it putting the arctic silver
> paste on and getting it right.
>
> Anything else is fine to replace. Get used to it!! But I think maybe
> you've had some bad luck. If you've got all good make new parts and
> had a faulty MBRD. Though the warranty should cover that.
>
> Replacing anything else wouldn't cause me to bat an eyelid. HDDs can
> be a nuisance, with screws , and backing up data. I use thumbscrews.
> And USB-IDE adaptors (or USB enclosures if you want) are quite good.
> One issue of USB-IDE adaptors that just occurred to me that I haven't
> written of in a post, is that one should / I should use a USB Ext
> cable. 'cos the USB-IDE adaptors usually are about 6" long from the
> USB end to the IDE end. So, one has to "build something" e.g. stack
> books up, to rest the HDD on - outside the comp.
>
> Since I can replace things. Compatibility isn't much of an issue for
> me.
>
> Like with software. If one doesn't work I use another. I can have
> both. With HW, it may be one on a shelf and one in my computer.
>
> For my internet connection I have an MBRD ethernet port , an ethernet
> card, a PCI DSL Modem , and a backup 56k modem. I've had bad luck all
> the time with routers. But recently I think i've run into some good
> makes..
> Bad ones first.
>
> People keep recommending linksys, maybe it's just a US thing.
> My few friends that i've spoken to in UK have moaned about linksys.
> They've all got them because they read on the internet they were good,
> and they turned out to have issues. Needing rebooting. Port forwarding
> nto working. (though the latter may have just been a firmware issue. I
> found that eventually it needed rebooting anyway! so may have
> overheated too)
>
> I hear good thinsg of netgear.
>
> But I've seen a company that uses Zyxel without needing to reboot them
> ZyXEL Prestige 600.
>
> Somebody I know that had many bad experiences with Linksys, said 3Com
> were great.
>
> I've heard that the Draytek Vigor is good (Draytek may just be a uk
> make)
>
> I called Zen and they agreed many routers have issues. Check their
> page. They sell and support Speedtouch routers. They say they haven't
> had problems with them. Not very geek friendly, but they work. Though
> recently, after a year or so of use, they lose connection temporarily,
> maybe for 2 minutes. I assume it's my router rather than my isp..
>
> Anyhow, I have the PCI DSL modem, and the 56k modem, which saved me
> from my linksys!
>
> So, you can always deal with problems with redundant parts. I actually
> bought 2 speedtouch routers, though one vanished.
>
> I like to keep a running list of good makes or router.
>
> People say bad things about Belkin . I don't use them, but some people
> whose comps I fix do use them (sometimes they get things without
> asking me, then call me when things don't work out). At least Belkin
> tech support is open 24/7 and they are good if you need to send it
> back.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 4 12-21-2006 01:15 PM
findcontrol("PlaceHolderPrice") why why why why why why why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 2 12-02-2006 03:46 PM
Panasonic DVD Player S47K: Why So Many Opened Boxes On Shelf ? Anyone Having: Happy With It? Robert11 DVD Video 0 05-24-2004 05:37 PM
Having problems with too many sessions when displaying dynamic image content. Ken Varn ASP .Net 2 05-19-2004 12:53 PM
Re: [News] A Look at Fluxbox and Why Having Many Window God Computer Support 0 01-01-1970 12:00 AM



Advertisments