IT Forums - Dell Q3 results

Tony Hill

11-13-2003, 04:55 PM

Robert Myers

11-13-2003, 07:07 PM

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:19:45 GMT, "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net>
wrote:
There seems to be some interest in this group about Dell. Here is a URLfor their Q3 results:http://www.computerworld.com/news/2003/story/0,11280,87110,00.htmlSome highlights:"Revenue was $10.6 billion, 16% higher than the $9.1 billion reported inthe same quarter of 2002 and up more than 40% from the third quarter of2001."The company said Asia-Pacific and Japan led the company's regionalgrowth with a 35% increase, nearly three times the combined rate ofother companies."Dell said products sold to U.S. consumers increased 28%"Isn't it amazing how gullible U.S. consumers are? If only they hadaccess to the collective wisdom of this NG, they would surely buy lessDell! ;-)

Zowie! And according to Bloomberg, Dell stock is selling at a P/E of
35.7! That's alotta moolah for a company that doesn't really own
anything that promises future growth except the "genius" of one
person. Intel tops them at 42.6, but they actual own intellectual
capital, and Dell is, after all, utterly dependent on them.

Think of that for a moment: a company that is the dominant player in a
dominant industry, and with real assets, cutting-edge technology, and
ongoing forward-looking R&D--not just a marketing department and a
screwdriver shop--selling at a P/E only slightly higher. What a
country!

IBM looks like a real bargain at a P/E of 21.2. Sun and AMD are
losing money, so no meaningful numbers for them. I'll bet there's
some money invested in AMD among the readership here, so why not Dell?

If I were looking to make some real money, I think I'd go for Sun,
because I stubbornly think along with Scot McNealy, that they've got a
better handle than they're getting credit for.

You, uh, wouldn't be holding on to some Dell shares you're looking to
unload would you? ;-).

RM

Dean Kent

11-13-2003, 07:19 PM

"Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net> wrote in message
news:lkUsb.11922$6c3.1583@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net... There seems to be some interest in this group about Dell. Here is a URL for their Q3 results: http://www.computerworld.com/news/2003/story/0,11280,87110,00.html Some highlights: "Revenue was $10.6 billion, 16% higher than the $9.1 billion reported in the same quarter of 2002 and up more than 40% from the third quarter of 2001. "The company said Asia-Pacific and Japan led the company's regional growth with a 35% increase, nearly three times the combined rate of other companies. "Dell said products sold to U.S. consumers increased 28%" Isn't it amazing how gullible U.S. consumers are? If only they had access to the collective wisdom of this NG, they would surely buy less Dell! ;-)

Usenet (comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips) - Nov 13, 2003 The biggest
maker of PCs reported a 21 percent jump in third-quarter profits Thursday.
Nearly 80 percent of Dell's revenue comes from the sale of desktop and
notebook computers. Speaking for all savvy Usenet denizens, Yousef "I think
I" Khan said "I cannot believe how lucky that Michael Dell is. Somehow,
every quarter he seems to just fall on his feet despite making the stupidest
business decisions known to man. Who would buy a Dell system? Nobody I
talk to". Robert "Neo" Meyers wailed "No way, I've personally talked
dozens of people out of buying Dell systems. If they made Opteron systems,
they'd be rich! Ever since Intel put in those Matrix instructions dubbed
'MMX', everyone has been getting manipulated. The secret to this business
is to just realize there is no Intel market!".

Dell said its global server shipments rose 30 percent from a year ago in the
quarter, while sales of external storage systems rose 68 percent. Strength
in Dell's so-called enterprise business segment, which also includes
services, could be a sign of stronger business investment in technology.
Tony "the count" Hill doubted the numbers, claiming that IDC and Gartner
simply don't know how to count and that has rubbed off on Dell accountants.
Eric Rothdeutsch, an analyst with Friedman Billings Ramsey, said it was more
likely that Dell continued to gain market share in these businesses, as
opposed to seeing a major increase in demand. "This was a strong performance
in spite of what is still a bit of a depressed economic environment," said
Rothdeutsch. "The floodgates for corporate information technology spending
have not opened yet." 'Neo' Meyers believes this is all an elaborate
game "Dell has such horrible support and service, there is no way any
business would buy Dell systems. Do you think you are really talking with a
support person - they might as well all be named 'Smith', with as much
personal attention you get".

CEO Michael Dell stressed that its nascent consumer electronics business is
really not a crucial part of its overall strategy. "These new products that
you've seen us introduce are interesting, but most of our growth is still
coming from the enterprise," said Dell. Usenet skeptics are unconvinced,
however.

Dean Kent

11-13-2003, 07:22 PM

"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
news:mbg8rvc9qe86jovog3hqhrfng9dqnon6p6@4ax.com... You, uh, wouldn't be holding on to some Dell shares you're looking to unload would you? ;-).

Ah yes, the inevitable 'ulterior motive' argument. Why not, it always seems
to work around here... *IF* you aren't supporting the 'dark side' :-).
RM

Robert Myers

11-13-2003, 08:00 PM

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 03:19:52 GMT, "Dean Kent"
<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:

<snip>Robert "Neo" Meyers wailed "No way, I've personally talkeddozens of people out of buying Dell systems. If they made Opteron systems,they'd be rich! Ever since Intel put in those Matrix instructions dubbed'MMX', everyone has been getting manipulated. The secret to this businessis to just realize there is no Intel market!".
You've got two things wrong: the spelling of my name and my historical
position with respect to AMD products, which I really hasn't changed
all that much. George MacDonald thinks I am an Intel bigot. Opteron
is interesting because of hypertransport, and I have actively looked
into doing something with that chip just because of that feature.
Other than that, it's been Intel, Intel, Intel, not because they give
me warm feelings, but because they have created products that serve my
needs and because I see them as essentially unstoppable.
'Neo' Meyers believes this is all an elaborategame "Dell has such horrible support and service, there is no way anybusiness would buy Dell systems. Do you think you are really talking with asupport person - they might as well all be named 'Smith', with as muchpersonal attention you get".
Dell actually knows me as two entities: as a home user, and as a
business. As a business, I have gotten service that I would rate as
at least satisfactory, if not good. As a home user, well, you have
heard the story. There are actually two separate support numbers, and
you can't call the business support number to request support for your
home system. I think it's completely transparent why businesses buy
from them, and if they've gotten as good service as a business as I
have, I can see no reason why businesses wouldn't buy from Dell.

I've talked to any number of people and recently read a report that
confirmed my experience as a consumer: hours on hold, more than one
call to get the right answer.

The killer for Dell products, from my point of view, is that their
parts are non-standard. I want the actual product that is sold to
everyone else, not a Michael Dell special.

But it's a free country.
CEO Michael Dell stressed that its nascent consumer electronics business isreally not a crucial part of its overall strategy. "These new products thatyou've seen us introduce are interesting, but most of our growth is stillcoming from the enterprise," said Dell. Usenet skeptics are unconvinced,however.
And if IBM isn't worried, they should be. When I recently talked to a
representative from <mumble>, they tried to steer me right to Dell, no
doubt to make sure that I wouldn't be talking to anyone who sold
anything but bare hardware.

RM

Felger Carbon

11-13-2003, 08:28 PM

"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
news:mbg8rvc9qe86jovog3hqhrfng9dqnon6p6@4ax.com... You, uh, wouldn't be holding on to some Dell shares you're looking to unload would you? ;-).

No. As I've said before, I have no financial interest in any of the
parties under discussion. And I personally prefer legacy-friendly AMD
CPUs to the Intel P4s.

Yousuf Khan

11-13-2003, 09:01 PM

"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
news:hkj8rvor8abqhckap3or56j0jhnrqengta@4ax.com... You've got two things wrong: the spelling of my name and my historical position with respect to AMD products, which I really hasn't changed all that much. George MacDonald thinks I am an Intel bigot. Opteron is interesting because of hypertransport, and I have actively looked into doing something with that chip just because of that feature. Other than that, it's been Intel, Intel, Intel, not because they give me warm feelings, but because they have created products that serve my needs and because I see them as essentially unstoppable.

Hey, he's gotten my name wrong too -- in my case, my first name. But yes,
you are an Intel bigot, anyone can see that. No, I will correct myself,
you're an Itanium bigot. Dean really has to pay more attention to the
positions. :-)

Yousuf Khan

Yousuf Khan

11-13-2003, 10:21 PM

"Dean Kent" <dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote in message
news:sRXsb.10102$K42.5446@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com... "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net> wrote in message news:lkUsb.11922$6c3.1583@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net... There seems to be some interest in this group about Dell. Here is a URL for their Q3 results: http://www.computerworld.com/news/2003/story/0,11280,87110,00.html Some highlights: "Revenue was $10.6 billion, 16% higher than the $9.1 billion reported in the same quarter of 2002 and up more than 40% from the third quarter of 2001.

Blah-blah-blah, did anyone actually ever say that Dell doesn't make a lot of
money? The only thing that's been disputed is how specifically Dell makes
that money. And the right answer to that isn't "giving all customers
excellent support", nor is it "the high responsiveness of a mail-order
business". This matters because it shows the long-term sustainability of
said business model.

Earnings reports don't answer whether Dell is actually receiving some
creative subsidies from Intel. We know about offloading R&D. We know about
ad money. We know about volume discounts. There's plenty of other things
that Intel could do that would never show up without a detailed look at the
books. For example, Dell could keep inventory off of its books by letting
Intel keep it on its book until Dell actually sold a unit; this would of
course require the cooperation of Intel.

Yousuf Khan

Dean Kent

11-13-2003, 10:45 PM

"Yousuf Khan" <removethisspam.bjsk90.removethispam@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:Uv_sb.4098$YX1.1720@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com... Blah-blah-blah, did anyone actually ever say that Dell doesn't make a lot
of money? The only thing that's been disputed is how specifically Dell makes that money. And the right answer to that isn't "giving all customers excellent support", nor is it "the high responsiveness of a mail-order business". This matters because it shows the long-term sustainability of said business model. Earnings reports don't answer whether Dell is actually receiving some creative subsidies from Intel. We know about offloading R&D. We know about ad money. We know about volume discounts. There's plenty of other things that Intel could do that would never show up without a detailed look at
the books. For example, Dell could keep inventory off of its books by letting Intel keep it on its book until Dell actually sold a unit; this would of course require the cooperation of Intel.

Talk about blah-blah-blah. OTOH, it could simply be that Michael Dell is an
exceptional businessman who knows how to make business deals and who knows
how to run a business efficiently. Nah! Yousuf says it can't be, so
surely that isn't the answer. <snicker>.

Got enough tin foil for your hat? (sorry, stole that one from Paul
DeMone)...

Regards,
Dean
Yousuf Khan

Tony Hill

11-13-2003, 11:29 PM

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 03:19:52 GMT, "Dean Kent"
<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:Dell said its global server shipments rose 30 percent from a year ago in thequarter, while sales of external storage systems rose 68 percent. Strengthin Dell's so-called enterprise business segment, which also includesservices, could be a sign of stronger business investment in technology.Tony "the count" Hill doubted the numbers, claiming that IDC and Gartnersimply don't know how to count and that has rubbed off on Dell accountants.

Fewf.. On first read-through I missed my name and got worried that you
had forgotten about me! :>

As for the numbers being right or wrong, I was merely saying that
IDC's numbers didn't necessarily reflect the entire white box market.
FWIW, here's a little quote for you:

"Approximately 38.4 million desktops, notebooks and servers with Intel
or AMD chips left factories during the third quarter, according to
IDC. Gartner said 42.5 million were shipped. The two companies measure
PC shipments slightly differently. Gartner's numbers tend to be
larger, because it includes brand-name PCs, "white box"--or unbranded
PCs--and computers built at home by enthusiasts."

Source: http://news.com.com/2100-1003-5092123.html

Hmm.. sounds like IDC's numbers fail to take into accounts 10% of the
market. Do Gartner's numbers include the entire market? I don't
know, we've only got two data points to go on here.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

Tony Hill

11-13-2003, 11:29 PM

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:07:09 -0500, Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com>
wrote:Zowie! And according to Bloomberg, Dell stock is selling at a P/E of35.7! That's alotta moolah for a company that doesn't really ownanything that promises future growth except the "genius" of oneperson. Intel tops them at 42.6, but they actual own intellectualcapital, and Dell is, after all, utterly dependent on them.Think of that for a moment: a company that is the dominant player in adominant industry, and with real assets, cutting-edge technology, andongoing forward-looking R&D--not just a marketing department and ascrewdriver shop--selling at a P/E only slightly higher. What acountry!

Forget Dell, I can one better you for sure. SCO is trading at a P/E
of 81.8! This is a company that has no sales, no viable products, no
R&D. All they have is a law firm and the broken shell of a company
that used to actually do something long ago. Ohh, that and a crooked
scumbag who sued the pants off his former employer spewing bilge out
of some orifice.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

Yousuf Khan

11-13-2003, 11:54 PM

"Dean Kent" <dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote in message
news:nS_sb.10136$Ri3.3536@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com... Talk about blah-blah-blah. OTOH, it could simply be that Michael Dell is
an exceptional businessman who knows how to make business deals and who knows how to run a business efficiently. Nah! Yousuf says it can't be, so surely that isn't the answer. <snicker>.

Give it a rest Dean, you're starting to sound like you're blowing the guy.

Yousuf Khan

Robert Myers

11-14-2003, 01:32 AM

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 06:45:39 GMT, "Dean Kent"
<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:
...it could simply be that Michael Dell is anexceptional businessman who knows how to make business deals and who knowshow to run a business efficiently.

Apparently he is an exceptional businessman. It is a long step from
there to being a genius, and, in a business where people are
criticised for not being able to see clearly ten years into the
future, Michael Dell apparently gets the Nobel prize for being able to
plan skilfully for the upcoming fiscal year.

RM

RusH

11-14-2003, 01:40 AM

"Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net> wrote in
news:lkUsb.11922$6c3.1583@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:

Isn't it amazing how gullible U.S. consumers are? If only they had access to the collective wisdom of this NG, they would surely buy less Dell! ;-)

People are ignorant most of the time. When I see a DELL commercial where a
person is flooded with tech garbage speech "this processor runs at two
point four hundred megaherz at effective eight hundred megaherz front side
bus rate, the memory is double data rate four hundred megahe .. blaaaa
blalaa bllaaaaaaaaa has an IDE hard drive spinning at bllalalablalaa aa"
and there goes Dell with theyr "This one is the best bang for the buck, has
P4 and a huge flat screen, now BUY" i know why ppl like Dell.

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH // [502-20-14-27 tylko SMS]
http://kiti.pulse.pdi.net/qv30/ <-- to prawdziwy ja
Pent-up passive-aggressive dork alert! Whoop! Whoop!
Whoop! Whoop! Boy, you're really lighting up this alarm here!

Guest

11-14-2003, 02:15 AM

"Yousuf Khan" <removethisspam.bjsk90.removethispam@hotmail.com> writes:
"Dean Kent" <dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote in message news:sRXsb.10102$K42.5446@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com... "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net> wrote in message news:lkUsb.11922$6c3.1583@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net... There seems to be some interest in this group about Dell. Here is a URL for their Q3 results: http://www.computerworld.com/news/2003/story/0,11280,87110,00.html Some highlights: "Revenue was $10.6 billion, 16% higher than the $9.1 billion reported in the same quarter of 2002 and up more than 40% from the third quarter of 2001. Blah-blah-blah, did anyone actually ever say that Dell doesn't make a lot of money? The only thing that's been disputed is how specifically Dell makes that money. And the right answer to that isn't "giving all customers excellent support", nor is it "the high responsiveness of a mail-order business". This matters because it shows the long-term sustainability of said business model.

I think Dell makes money because they provide a relatively safe and consistent
way for companies/institutions to buy generic hardware. They are (usually)
cheaper (and less proprietary) than IBM or Compaq or HP. But they are still
more consistent/reliable/service oriented than the average white box
builder. Also, unlike the average white box builder they have a full line,
ie., desktops, laptops and servers.

Another thing. Wasn't it Dell that first came up with web-based configuration
of systems with instant quotes/updates as you changed the options. I found
this useful, eg., to get a machine to match a certain budget amount. Now
everyone is doing it, but I think Dell was one of the earlier ones.

Yeah, I admit to buying Dell in the past. I typically did this when a
colleague would ask for advice. I didn't have time to walk them through
detailed specs and manage the purchase process. Or when it was an
institutional purchase. But now I have found a good white box builder. He is
a local guy who gives good advice, supplies exactly what I ask for, and builds
it reliably. But this type of service/knowhow is rare in my experience.
Earnings reports don't answer whether Dell is actually receiving some creative subsidies from Intel. We know about offloading R&D. We know about ad money. We know about volume discounts. There's plenty of other things that Intel could do that would never show up without a detailed look at the books. For example, Dell could keep inventory off of its books by letting Intel keep it on its book until Dell actually sold a unit; this would of course require the cooperation of Intel. Yousuf Khan

chrisv

11-14-2003, 06:33 AM

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:19:45 GMT, "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net>
wrote:
Isn't it amazing how gullible U.S. consumers are? If only they hadaccess to the collective wisdom of this NG, they would surely buy lessDell! ;-)

They for sure would buy less Dell. But that's a big "if". Dell is a
decent value for the average person. If someone insists on a
"branded" PC, I recommend them.

chrisv

11-14-2003, 06:39 AM

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:07:09 -0500, Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com>
wrote:
Think of that for a moment: a company that is the dominant player in adominant industry, and with real assets, cutting-edge technology, andongoing forward-looking R&D--not just a marketing department and ascrewdriver shop--selling at a P/E only slightly higher. What acountry!

Hell, nothing like the dot bombs. Some of them were bleeding red ink,
with had no viable business plan to actually make a profit, yet had
market caps larger than Proctor & Gamble and General Motors!

Yousuf Khan

11-14-2003, 07:07 AM

<Mannr@uwaterloo.ca> wrote in message
news:yuaad6ztfvs.fsf@tapir.uwaterloo.ca... I think Dell makes money because they provide a relatively safe and
consistent way for companies/institutions to buy generic hardware. They are
(usually) cheaper (and less proprietary) than IBM or Compaq or HP. But they are
still more consistent/reliable/service oriented than the average white box builder. Also, unlike the average white box builder they have a full
line, ie., desktops, laptops and servers.

Well, there's a whole range of white box makers. Some of them are geared
towards institutional sales, some towards individual sales.

One of the reasons for going with OEMs instead of whiteboxes is that in
times of tight budgets, it makes more sense to lease a computer than to buy
it outright. In the long run it might end up costing the same, but as far as
accounting goes, you can write off a lease much quicker than you can write
off the depreciation of assets. So you get to count the entire cost of the
lease on your tax forms.
Another thing. Wasn't it Dell that first came up with web-based
configuration of systems with instant quotes/updates as you changed the options. I
found this useful, eg., to get a machine to match a certain budget amount. Now everyone is doing it, but I think Dell was one of the earlier ones.

Yeah, there's a lot of convenience of purchase features that they may have,
but I doubt they have anything that nobody else has. It's not really the
secret to Dell's success, as it were.

Yousuf Khan

Dean Kent

11-14-2003, 07:32 AM

"Yousuf Khan" <removethisspam.bjsk90.removethispam@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:zS%sb.62716$HoK.26838@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com... Give it a rest Dean, you're starting to sound like you're blowing the guy.

FO.

Regards,
Dean
Yousuf Khan

George Macdonald

11-14-2003, 04:24 PM

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:00:40 -0500, Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 03:19:52 GMT, "Dean Kent"<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:<snip>Robert "Neo" Meyers wailed "No way, I've personally talkeddozens of people out of buying Dell systems. If they made Opteron systems,they'd be rich! Ever since Intel put in those Matrix instructions dubbed'MMX', everyone has been getting manipulated. The secret to this businessis to just realize there is no Intel market!".You've got two things wrong: the spelling of my name and my historicalposition with respect to AMD products, which I really hasn't changedall that much. George MacDonald thinks I am an Intel bigot.

Aw shit - he misspelled Yousuf's name as well and you've gotten mine wrong
too.:-) I won't deny the "bigot" remark but that was a long time ago...
when you just suddenly turned up here sounding like one of the usual
iWeenies. If you want I'll officially withdraw that moniker for you.:-)
Opteronis interesting because of hypertransport, and I have actively lookedinto doing something with that chip just because of that feature.Other than that, it's been Intel, Intel, Intel, not because they giveme warm feelings, but because they have created products that serve myneeds and because I see them as essentially unstoppable.

I think Opteron has a wee bit more going for it than Hypertransport - we'll
see.
'Neo' Meyers believes this is all an elaborategame "Dell has such horrible support and service, there is no way anybusiness would buy Dell systems. Do you think you are really talking with asupport person - they might as well all be named 'Smith', with as muchpersonal attention you get".Dell actually knows me as two entities: as a home user, and as abusiness. As a business, I have gotten service that I would rate asat least satisfactory, if not good. As a home user, well, you haveheard the story. There are actually two separate support numbers, andyou can't call the business support number to request support for yourhome system. I think it's completely transparent why businesses buyfrom them, and if they've gotten as good service as a business as Ihave, I can see no reason why businesses wouldn't buy from Dell.

I bought one system from Dell years ago for our (small business) office and
swore I'd never buy another. The fact that the monitor went bad just
outside warranty didn't bother me that much - the run-around, the
"solution" and the resulting charges proposed *did*. The feeling of being
"sent to jail without passing Go" did not help. I fixed it myself for a
fraction of the cost. Yes I know one data point is only that in the grand
scheme but it's *my* data point and I can do what the hell I want with
it.:-)
I've talked to any number of people and recently read a report thatconfirmed my experience as a consumer: hours on hold, more than onecall to get the right answer.

What I found with all those OEMs: if you don't get up early and (first get
to the office to) call them at the start of business for the day you're
going to listen to a lot of Musak. I remember one instance with Gateway
(2000 at the time) where some new Micronics 486 mbrds were wrong for the FP
exception handling - the external interrupt routing logic was incomplete
and they did not trap. I ended up giving them the page number in the Intel
i486 Data Book where it was described so they could pass it on to
Micronics. Since, at one point, I'd mentioned this was in one of our own
Fortran progs, it was christened as "The Fortran Bug"!! When I later
volunteered to send an assembly prog which demonstrated the problem, the
response was: "Huh, it happens it assembly too"?

FWIW Micronics then proceeded to get it wrong a 2nd time so that it would
trap only on the 2nd exception. At one point, with all the BS I had to put
up with, I thought I must be the only one in the whole goddamned world who
expected the CPU/FPU to work right. I swear I could actually hear the guy
at the other end thinking: "Oh it's that 'Fortran' geek again".
The killer for Dell products, from my point of view, is that theirparts are non-standard. I want the actual product that is sold toeveryone else, not a Michael Dell special.

Glad you mentioned that - nobody else has in this little saga.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Dean Kent

11-15-2003, 05:22 PM

"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message
news:09parvkgf06us5atm9tas5nrfut943dhee@4ax.com...The killer for Dell products, from my point of view, is that theirparts are non-standard. I want the actual product that is sold toeveryone else, not a Michael Dell special. Glad you mentioned that - nobody else has in this little saga.

Because the discussion was focused on Michael Dell's business savvy, not the
complaints of a very minor market niche. In fact, I believe that one of the
main points of this discussion is that the opinion here about Dell obviously
has little or nothing to do with what happens in the 'real' market. Dell
continues to gain market share, despite all of the whining here about their
products and service. This is true in consumer sales and in business
sales. One can make all the comments one wishes about the intelligence of
others - but that still has absolutely nothing to do with the main point...
that Michael Dell is a very good businessman. All of the negative comments
are sour grapes at best, and ignorant, puerile whining at worst.

Regards,
Dean

Robert Myers

11-15-2003, 08:47 PM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:22:05 GMT, "Dean Kent"
<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:
All of the negative commentsare sour grapes at best, and ignorant, puerile whining at worst.

Did I miss something? This is now a business forum, where the
concerns of people who actually use hardware merit that kind of
comment?

Sure, Dean, I'll just toss my degrees and my decades of experience in
the trash and just do what everybody else does.

I think you're in the wrong newsgroup.

RM

Dean Kent

11-15-2003, 09:02 PM

"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
news:s40ervst04blppapm5mgmid48jbf72v2hl@4ax.com... Did I miss something? This is now a business forum, where the concerns of people who actually use hardware merit that kind of comment?

When someone says "I don't use Dell systems because I think they are lower
quality than XYZ, or one I can build myself", I have absolutely no problem
with it. OTOH, look at the subject and remember what the thread is about -
why Dell is the dominant PC OEM, and why they use exclusively Intel
processors.

It is typical that people will try to run off on a tangent to try and
rationalize their positions...
Sure, Dean, I'll just toss my degrees and my decades of experience in the trash and just do what everybody else does.

It's kind of funny when someone uses their experience and background to
justify their own position, but the same people will completely ignore it
when someone else claims experience or background in an argument.
I think you're in the wrong newsgroup.

Perhaps that isn't the real problem...

Regards,
Dean
RM

Robert Myers

11-15-2003, 09:20 PM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 05:02:59 GMT, "Dean Kent"
<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:

<snip>It's kind of funny when someone uses their experience and background tojustify their own position, but the same people will completely ignore itwhen someone else claims experience or background in an argument.
If you think that I have slighted your education, your experience, or
your judgment, please accept my apologies. Respecting the education,
experience, and judgment of others is not the same, however, as always
agreeing with them or even necessarily of always being able to see the
merit in what others say.

We have had different experiences and we have drawn different
conclusions. That shouldn't cause a problem in any discussion. When
you go from there to making demeaning characterizations of the
opinions, statements, or personality of others, though, you shouldn't
be surprised when you get a sharp response.

RM

Dean Kent

11-15-2003, 10:06 PM

"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
news:8n1erv4b7j7shciepu0epsc0ff074ae7t8@4ax.com... We have had different experiences and we have drawn different conclusions. That shouldn't cause a problem in any discussion. When you go from there to making demeaning characterizations of the opinions, statements, or personality of others, though, you shouldn't be surprised when you get a sharp response.

What generally gets my underwear in a bunch is when I see people ignoring
facts, and using their feelings to come to conclusions that don't jive with
said facts. The fact is that Dell continues to increase market share, and
make profits. Claiming that this is luck, or that their business model is
unsustainable, or because it is only due to Intel special favors are such
arguments.

This is the same with most of the other discussions here that I have jumped
on people about, whether technical or not. Global warming, x86-64/Itanium,
Rambus technology, and a myriad of other issues. The 'usual suspects' tend
to try to squelch expression of any position that isn't popular here by
questioning motives and character, while presenting arguments filled with
emotional appeals and moral judgement.

My excuse? When AMD was the underdog, not just in market share, but in
public opinion, I was taking the contrary view. When Rambus was considered
a shoo-in for the next memory technology, I was taking the contrary view.
I've had many similar reactions to gun control, Sept 11 and terrorists, Iraq
and WMD. So, I have a contrary nature - and some people bring it out in me
more than others. I'm not surprised at sharp reactions, in most cases I
am trolling for it. It tells me the true nature of a person, and their
reasoning.

In this case, I apologize for my caustic remarks and I give you credit for
remaining relatively cool and rational under fire. I take full
responsibility for all antagonism between us...

Regards,
Dean

RM

Robert Myers

11-15-2003, 10:58 PM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 06:06:00 GMT, "Dean Kent"
<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:

<snip>What generally gets my underwear in a bunch is when I see people ignoringfacts, and using their feelings to come to conclusions that don't jive withsaid facts. The fact is that Dell continues to increase market share, andmake profits. Claiming that this is luck, or that their business model isunsustainable, or because it is only due to Intel special favors are sucharguments.
This really isn't a business forum. It's a place where people with a
common interest in a certain kind of hardware share their thoughts.
On the point of real substance here: how to judge whether and why a
business is successful, why markets and entire industries behave the
way they do, and what it all might really mean for even the average
reader of comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips, you and Felger have taken
positions and adopted an analytical style that I cannot agree with.

Since this is not a seminar room at the Sloan School, it is more
appropriate to discuss the subject in terms of anecdotes and off-hand
observations than it is to come with closely-reasoned arguments and
reams of data. Underlying the discussion here, though, are some real
questions about the way that businesses and markets work. You and
Felger have a point of view that I think you believe is intuitively
obvious.

I don't believe that much of anything about business and markets is
intuitively obvious, and there is plenty of research available to back
up my position. Markets are subject to fashions and whims, as are
businesses, and yesterday's winning formula can be today's recipe for
distaster (roll historical footage of IBM and DEC).

That does not mean that I think that success in business or investing
in the stock market are a matter of pure luck. _On_average_, people
with a greater degree of skill and insight are more likely to be
successful and people with a lesser degree of skill and insight are
less likely to be successful. The fluctuations around that
predictable mean behavior are so large that talking about any
individual business situation as if it could be so readily analyzed
and conclusions drawn just doesn't make any sense to me. It fills up
space in the Wall Street Journal, but that's about all it does.

In that sense, I believe I'm the contrarian here. The safest bet, it
usually seems to me, is to assume that what "everybody" thinks is
probably wrong. I remember talking to a professer from a prestigious
institution who had just returned from a speaking tour in Japan at a
time when Japan was at the height of its economic power. He was just
so overwhelmed with their wealth and could see no way that they would
not dominate the economic future of the world. That may yet happen,
but it hasn't happened so far, and you'd have a hard time persuading
the average citizen of Japan that they have in any way benefited from
Japan's thrust into the world marketplace.

<snip>In this case, I apologize for my caustic remarks and I give you credit forremaining relatively cool and rational under fire. I take fullresponsibility for all antagonism between us...
I really don't feel any antagonism, and I'm sorry if you have.

RM

Tony Hill

11-15-2003, 11:34 PM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:22:05 GMT, "Dean Kent"
<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in messagenews:09parvkgf06us5atm9tas5nrfut943dhee@4ax.com...The killer for Dell products, from my point of view, is that theirparts are non-standard. I want the actual product that is sold toeveryone else, not a Michael Dell special. Glad you mentioned that - nobody else has in this little saga.Because the discussion was focused on Michael Dell's business savvy, not thecomplaints of a very minor market niche. In fact, I believe that one of themain points of this discussion is that the opinion here about Dell obviouslyhas little or nothing to do with what happens in the 'real' market. Dellcontinues to gain market share, despite all of the whining here about theirproducts and service. This is true in consumer sales and in businesssales. One can make all the comments one wishes about the intelligence ofothers - but that still has absolutely nothing to do with the main point...that Michael Dell is a very good businessman. All of the negative commentsare sour grapes at best, and ignorant, puerile whining at worst.

I think that one thing that is even more clear is that Dell has a VERY
good marketing department. Their "Dell dude" ads were extremely
successful, until the pothead got busted for, well, smoking pot :>
Now their new "Intern" ads are also being very well received by
consumers.

When was the last time you remember seeing an ad for an HP or IBM
consumer machine that was even remotely memorable? IBM's doing ok
with their marketing servers towards business (probably for good
reason, this is their money-maker). HP still seems to be doing their
best at losing their way again, not quite sure who they're selling
what to. Sony had some good things going for them in marketing for a
while, and it showed, they were gaining market about as fast as Dell
for a while (albeit from a much lower starting point of virtually
nothing).

As far as business desktops go, Dell kind of makes sense as the best
of a bad lot for any medium to large-sized business if you ask me. I
have not been all that happy with the Dell business systems I've used,
but they were no where near as bad as some of the piss-poor crap that
everyone else was putting out. I used to work support in a place that
used Compaq business PC's exclusively (at the time it was their
Deskpro series), and they were VERY up and down. Some machines worked
great and caused virtually no problems. Others were just absolutely
terrible! I have much less experience with HP, but what I have seen
doesn't impress me any more than Compaq. IBM is mostly out of this
business and are expensive to boot, and everyone else has pretty much
left the game. That pretty much leaves Dell as the best of a pretty
weak lot in my experience.

Saying that all this success is simply because of Michael "The Great
One" Dell seems to be ignoring the facts here. There is a LOT more at
work here than simply one man and his business-savvy, no matter how
good it may be.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

Felger Carbon

11-16-2003, 02:26 AM

"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
news:sf5ervksed7sna7pbgpd6bf3v899l9shdm@4ax.com... On the point of real substance here: how to judge whether and why a business is successful, why markets and entire industries behave the way they do, and what it all might really mean for even the average reader of comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips, you and Felger have taken positions and adopted an analytical style that I cannot agree with.

No problem here. If everybody agreed with me, there would be no purpose
to even reading the NG, much less posting to it.
Since this is not a seminar room at the Sloan School, it is more appropriate to discuss the subject in terms of anec- dotes and off-hand observations than it is to come with closely-reasoned arguments and reams of data. Underlying the discussion here, though, are some real questions about the way that businesses and markets work. You and Felger have a point of view that I think you believe is intuitively obvious.

Your last statement is true (speaking for myself). In the first
sentence above, you make it clear that you prefer anecdotal evidence.
To me, the plural of anecdote is not data. I greatly prefer data over
anecdotes, and do not apologize for that fact. Neither do I claim that
you are not permitted to hold your viewpoint.

Right now Dell is shipping at an annual rate of ~30 million PCs per
year. Given that vast number, you can prove anything you want via
anecdote. Anything at all; from "Dell makes the most reliable products
in the history of mankind" to its opposite.
I don't believe that much of anything about business and markets is intuitively obvious, and there is plenty of research available to back up my position. Markets are subject to fashions and whims, as are businesses, and yesterday's winning formula can be today's recipe for disaster (roll historical footage of IBM and DEC).

Agreed. But isn't it also useful and appropriate to analyze why today's
winning formula _is_ today's winning formula?
-----------------------

Changing the subject: Robert, I get the impression that you prefer to
"kick the R&D downstream" because you prefer the resulting diversity
(and it certainly _does_ increase diversity!). Yousuf, on the other
hand, seems to believe that will result in lower costs, since "white
box" R&D is free.

I repeat, these are my impressions. Am I wrong?

Felger Carbon

11-16-2003, 02:26 AM

George Macdonald

11-16-2003, 02:55 AM

Robert Myers

11-16-2003, 05:49 AM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 10:26:00 GMT, "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net>
wrote:
"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in messagenews:sf5ervksed7sna7pbgpd6bf3v899l9shdm@4ax.com...
<snip>
Underlying the discussion here, though, are some real questions about the way that businesses and markets work. You and Felger have a point of view that I think you believe is intuitively obvious.Your last statement is true (speaking for myself). In the firstsentence above, you make it clear that you prefer anecdotal evidence.To me, the plural of anecdote is not data. I greatly prefer data overanecdotes, and do not apologize for that fact. Neither do I claim thatyou are not permitted to hold your viewpoint.
There is a point of substance that I'm not being very clear at making.
Numbers--data--don't tell you all that much at face value when talking
about situations that involve human beings. They often don't tell you
much at face value when talking about situations that don't involve
human beings. That's why laboratory work is a job for people with
knowledge and insight and not merely for people who follow rote
procedures. Throw people into the mix, and you have an unholy mess.

There are people who take these subjects seriously: economists,
management scientists, and others who study human behavior to the
extent of using careful analysis, publishing papers, and writing Ph.D.
dissertations. Unless I am mistaken, there are no such players
present in the conversation. What we have to go on is our own
experience and our own common sense notions of how the world works.

If you read Forbes, or the Wall Street Journal, or the business pages
of the New York Times, you will eventually encounter people with at
least a passing acquaintance with some of the more recent and careful
work on economics and business, but if there is any evidence that it
illuminates what they have to say, it escapes me. They, too, will
talk about business as if some deep meaning could be easily read from
the last quarterly sales numbers.

It's not a completely empty exercise. By comparison with central
planning, markets are manifestly very efficient at managing resources,
and people reading Forbes or the Wall Street Journal or even batting
numbers and anecdotes back and forth on csiphc is not a completely
empty exercise. That exchange of information and people drawing
conclusions based on that exchange of information is how markets
deliver their magic.

I get nervous, and even a little testy, though, when people take
themselves and the conversation too seriously. If I had the time, I
might take up the matter seriously, read the literature, and make a
more careful decision about what careful statements could be made. I
don't lack the interest. I don't necessarily lack the appropriate
analytical tools. I do lack the time.
Right now Dell is shipping at an annual rate of ~30 million PCs peryear. Given that vast number, you can prove anything you want viaanecdote. Anything at all; from "Dell makes the most reliable productsin the history of mankind" to its opposite.
No one can prove anything with the numbers or the anecdotes that have
been presented. People can report the conclusions they have drawn for
themselves and why. As I said, it's barely one step above sports talk
radio, but it is one step up.
I don't believe that much of anything about business and markets is intuitively obvious, and there is plenty of research available to back up my position. Markets are subject to fashions and whims, as are businesses, and yesterday's winning formula can be today's recipe for disaster (roll historical footage of IBM and DEC).Agreed. But isn't it also useful and appropriate to analyze why today'swinning formula _is_ today's winning formula?-----------------------

Just don't kid yourself about how much you understand and how well you
might predict the future based on what's happening today. Or, feel
free to kid yourself. Even feel free to kid me, but don't ask me to
take you too seriously.
Changing the subject: Robert, I get the impression that you prefer to"kick the R&D downstream" because you prefer the resulting diversity(and it certainly _does_ increase diversity!). Yousuf, on the otherhand, seems to believe that will result in lower costs, since "whitebox" R&D is free.I repeat, these are my impressions. Am I wrong?
Building PC's is a very peculiar business, and I can't offhand think
of any analagous situation where building high-tech products is a
cottage industry. The closest I can think of is custom cars and vans,
but it's a tiny market compared to the white box PC market. I don't
want to speak for Yousuf.

PC's as they are sold today to individuals and to businesses are a
very strange combination of cutting-edge technology and absolutely
minimal quality control. The software they come with is in a state of
complete chaos. The net result is that you might actually improve the
efficiency of some businesses by calling a salvage company, removing
all the PC's, and telling people to return to pencil, paper,
calculator, typewriter, carbon forms, and copying machines.

The success of Dell computer is a symptom, not a cause. What the
success of Dell is a symptom of is people imagining that you can
manage complicated information systems with desktop icons and complex
networks with enough switch boxes and CAT5 cable. You can't, but
Michael Dell isn't the cause of that confusion. Neither is he a
genius for capitalizing on it.

It's an unsustainable business model. How it will change, I do not
know, but it's not sustainable.

RM

Dean Kent

11-16-2003, 08:22 AM

"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in message
news:sf5ervksed7sna7pbgpd6bf3v899l9shdm@4ax.com... This really isn't a business forum. It's a place where people with a common interest in a certain kind of hardware share their thoughts. On the point of real substance here: how to judge whether and why a business is successful, why markets and entire industries behave the way they do, and what it all might really mean for even the average reader of comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips, you and Felger have taken positions and adopted an analytical style that I cannot agree with.

I've provided hints that I may have a background in the subject area...
Since this is not a seminar room at the Sloan School, it is more appropriate to discuss the subject in terms of anecdotes and off-hand observations than it is to come with closely-reasoned arguments and reams of data. Underlying the discussion here, though, are some real questions about the way that businesses and markets work. You and Felger have a point of view that I think you believe is intuitively obvious.

I can't speak for Felger, but my position is not based upon intuition.
Perhaps you might want to ask if I have had any background in business and
marketing (other than my own business) before making such a comment.
I don't believe that much of anything about business and markets is intuitively obvious, and there is plenty of research available to back up my position. Markets are subject to fashions and whims, as are businesses, and yesterday's winning formula can be today's recipe for distaster (roll historical footage of IBM and DEC).

This again shows incredible ignorance. IBM still owns the market that they
owned 20 years ago. It is simply that the market has become a niche in the
industry. They literally drove out all other competitors. They never
really tried to own the PC market, for a number of (mostly bad) reasons.
Keith has hinted at some of these, but as usual, people wave off information
that doesn't fit with their own preconceived notion - even when it comes
from a knowledgable source.

Similar statements can be made about DEC.

This has nothing to do with the discussion about Dell and the PC market.
That does not mean that I think that success in business or investing in the stock market are a matter of pure luck.

Tell Warren Buffet that.
_On_average_, people with a greater degree of skill and insight are more likely to be successful and people with a lesser degree of skill and insight are less likely to be successful. The fluctuations around that predictable mean behavior are so large that talking about any individual business situation as if it could be so readily analyzed and conclusions drawn just doesn't make any sense to me. It fills up space in the Wall Street Journal, but that's about all it does.

The vast majority of people who engage in *any* activity are merely average
to simply good. There are going to be a very, very few individuals who are
exceedingly brilliant at it - and they make it look so easy that the average
person just assumes it must be luck or special favors, that got them there.
The fact that there *are* people who are lucky or get special favors just
cements that view. That doesn't mean that it is impossible to be brilliant
at that activity
In that sense, I believe I'm the contrarian here. The safest bet, it usually seems to me, is to assume that what "everybody" thinks is probably wrong. I remember talking to a professer from a prestigious institution who had just returned from a speaking tour in Japan at a time when Japan was at the height of its economic power. He was just so overwhelmed with their wealth and could see no way that they would not dominate the economic future of the world. That may yet happen, but it hasn't happened so far, and you'd have a hard time persuading the average citizen of Japan that they have in any way benefited from Japan's thrust into the world marketplace.

I worked for a Japanese company during that period. Their management style
was *far* superior to any U.S. company I have worked for - before or since.
I've never been at a place that operated as smoothly, or had such teamwork
amongst employees. They had one major (intrinsic cultural) problem,
however. Their pride. They *believed* the hype, and believed that only
Japanese were smart enough to make important business decisions. What's
really funny about it is that it was a non-Japanese person who taught them
the basic principles in the first place (Demming). Now - there was a
genius in his area, and still unsung, for the most part.

Regards,
Dean

Dean Kent

11-16-2003, 08:25 AM

"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message
news:rqlervoqanobv966bm7mc4708tlrp813k5@4ax.com... Huh? You're the one who re-focused the discussion with all the taudry, fabricated misquotes.

Since Felger was the one who posted the original, who was the one who
redirected it and why is it wrong to try and refocus it? Because George
Macdonald is the c.s.i.p.h.c moderator? Should I use the term 'usual
suspect' as you generally do? Or is that reserved only for special posters
here, just like refocusing is?

Thanks George, with every post you validate the fact that you cannot discuss
anything without forcing your own opinions on everyone, and when they don't
agree or try to push it back on topic, you get personal. Nice job.

What a maroon!

I figured you wouldn't be able to resist but... all that in response to a one line sentence!!:-P... and still can't resist the ad hominems either. Oh and I don't see, anywhere in this thread anyway, where I made "comments... about the intelligence of others" - maybe you could address that to the "one" you had in mind.

Your ego is to large George. I didn't name you. I was speaking in general.

I'm surprised you haven't inserted your opinion in here earlier. If one
wants to talk about being unable to resist, why don't you go count the
number of posts here vs. mine. I think you win the title without any
argument at all
For me the "main point" here is that there are any number of successful businesses which specialize in selling sub-standard junk to the global consumer - they lap it up and Henry Ford was not the first to discover this. What's new?<shrug> It doesn't take a genius to figure out the formula but pinning all the blame/credit on Michael Dell personally seems incongruous to me.

It seems disingenuous to me to claim that there are 'any number of
successful business' while looking squarely in the fact of evidence that
shows Dell is increasing market share at the expense of 'any number of other
businesses'.

In your case, it is both sour grapes *and* ignorant, puerile whining. :-).

Regards,
Dean
Rgds, George Macdonald "Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who,
me??

Robert Myers

11-16-2003, 10:33 AM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 16:22:36 GMT, "Dean Kent"
<dkent@realworldtech.com> wrote:
"Robert Myers" <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote in messagenews:sf5ervksed7sna7pbgpd6bf3v899l9shdm@4ax.com...

<snip>
I can't speak for Felger, but my position is not based upon intuition.Perhaps you might want to ask if I have had any background in business andmarketing (other than my own business) before making such a comment.

To be precise, I didn't say that your position was based on intuition,
I said I thought you believed it was intuitively obvious. It isn't
intuitively obvious to me. I won't go so far as to say that your
position is wrong, but I think so differently about business and
markets from the way you apparently do that it's hard for me to know
how to make a path from one to the other.

You simply cannot take a tiny piece of information in isolation, draw
conclusions from it, and expect those conclusions to be correct or
even useful.

Business and markets are like Monte Carlo integration. Any single
contribution to a Monte Carlo sum is just a throw of the dice. Throw
the dice often enough though, and the circumstances under which the
sum doesn't converge to the actual value of the integral is a set of
zero measure.

I feel certain that you can get through an MBA program at <mumble>
College without hearing the term measure (in the mathematical sense)
mentioned even once. You don't need to know about Lebesgue integrals
to do well in business, but it's difficult to get far in probability
theory without them, and it's difficult to make sense of business in
any quantitative sense without a serious sidetrip into the theory of
probability.

The overwhelming majority of people with MBA's probably think you can
talk quantitatively about business without such heavy-duty machinery,
but I don't think you can.

<snip>
That does not mean that I think that success in business or investing in the stock market are a matter of pure luck.Tell Warren Buffet that.

If you google on this newsgroup for my posts and Warren Buffet's name,
you will find that I have already mentioned Mr. Buffet with
admiration.
That doesn't mean that it is impossible to be brilliantat that activity

You seem to want to create a disagreement where there isn't one. It
seems clear the Mr. Dell is a very talented businessman, just as it is
clear that for any given human activity, some human beings are
systematically much better than other human beings at that activity.

<snip>
What'sreally funny about it is that it was a non-Japanese person who taught themthe basic principles in the first place (Demming). Now - there was agenius in his area, and still unsung, for the most part.

Deming, I think you mean. It is ironic that you should mention his
name, since it was Deming who railed against management by "visible
numbers."

RM

Tony Hill

11-16-2003, 02:30 PM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 10:26:01 GMT, "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net>
wrote:"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote inmessagenews:09parvkgf06us5atm9tas5nrfut943dhee@4ax.com...The killer for Dell products, from my point of view, is that theirparts are non-standard. I want the actual product that is sold toeveryone else, not a Michael Dell special. Glad you mentioned that - nobody else has in this little saga.Lessee here, y'all: Dell is currently shipping ~30 million PCs a year,but their parts are non-standard?? Uh, define standard? ;-)And, by that definition, whose parts _are_ standard, and how many PCs ayear do these standard box makers ship?

I'd define a "standard" as the parts that I can easily buy a
replacement for, and with Dell, that often is not the case (though
they're generally a tiny bit better than HPaq and IBM in this regard).
Their power supply debacle is absolutely abhorrent in my mind. What
they've done serves absolutely ZERO purpose except to invalidate
support contracts. It's not even designed to limit support costs
associated with someone putting in their own power supply, otherwise
they would do what HPaq and IBM do in keying their own power supplies
differently from the ATX specification.

To me, what Dell is doing with the PS says that they WANT you to fry
your motherboard so that they can basically say "You fucked up
installing a non-Dell part, please throw that system in the garbage
now and buy a whole new Dell system, I'll forward you to our sales
department now".

On the upside though, at least most things like video cards and sound
cards are fairly standard in Dell systems. HPaq and IBM have often
used very non-standard cards in these cases.

As for who ships "standard" parts, the white box manufacturers do, and
they sell nearly twice as many systems as Dell does. The standards
are well defined by a variety of bodies, comities and companies (most
notably Intel), and followed as closely as possible by virtually
everyone except for Dell, HPaq and IBM.

You know, you could call me a cynic for this, but it seems that using
standard form factors and connectors designed by comities is pushing
the R&D upstream, while Dell's method of defining their own power
supply connector (that just happens to physically fit in the standard
ATX connector, even though the pin-out is different) is moving the R&D
downstream to re-invent the wheel. The custom riser boards and
strange form factors used in some of the big OEM systems is even more
of an example of doing the R&D multiple times instead of doing it just
once. This seems to kind of fly in the face of some earlier arguments
made in favor of Dell's business model.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

George Macdonald

11-17-2003, 01:06 AM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 10:26:01 GMT, "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net>
wrote:

Hmmm, your post got misthreaded in my newsreader - can't be bothered to
check at Google but I dunno how it's going to thread when I post.
"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote inmessagenews:09parvkgf06us5atm9tas5nrfut943dhee@4ax.com...The killer for Dell products, from my point of view, is that theirparts are non-standard. I want the actual product that is sold toeveryone else, not a Michael Dell special. Glad you mentioned that - nobody else has in this little saga.Lessee here, y'all: Dell is currently shipping ~30 million PCs a year,but their parts are non-standard?? Uh, define standard? ;-)And, by that definition, whose parts _are_ standard, and how many PCs ayear do these standard box makers ship?

The standard are in the umm, standards specifications... leading to the
irony that Intel is producing mbrds (for Dell) which do not conform to the
standards which Intel itself has set down. It also leads to the question
of why Dell insists on having a mbrd and PS connector pinout which is uhh,
non-standard. The fact that the connector is otherwise physically
identical to the ATX spec indicates to me Dell's cynical attitude to
diagnosis and repair of their product.

If you are seriously considering buying a Dell PC for yourself I wonder
what you'd say if first asked what your planned repair route would be in
the case of mbrd or PS failure?... Dell parts or no?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

George Macdonald

11-17-2003, 01:06 AM

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 16:25:05 GMT, "Dean Kent" <dkent@realworldtech.com>
wrote:
"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in messagenews:rqlervoqanobv966bm7mc4708tlrp813k5@4ax.com... Huh? You're the one who re-focused the discussion with all the taudry, fabricated misquotes.Since Felger was the one who posted the original, who was the one whoredirected it and why is it wrong to try and refocus it? Because GeorgeMacdonald is the c.s.i.p.h.c moderator? Should I use the term 'usualsuspect' as you generally do? Or is that reserved only for special postershere, just like refocusing is?Thanks George, with every post you validate the fact that you cannot discussanything without forcing your own opinions on everyone, and when they don'tagree or try to push it back on topic, you get personal. Nice job.

<ugh> The usual twisted logic - you blamed *me* for drifting off the
subject when it was you who initiated the diversion. Cutting back the
quoting level doesn't make it disappear you know.

You throw one of your tantrums full of direct insults at bona fide members
of this NG and then you claim I "get personal" when you're pulled up on it
- utterly ludicrous!
What a maroon!

Now, now, just because you employ Bugs Bunny debating habits doesn't mean
you need to quote him verbatim.
I figured you wouldn't be able to resist but... all that in response to a one line sentence!!:-P... and still can't resist the ad hominems either. Oh and I don't see, anywhere in this thread anyway, where I made "comments... about the intelligence of others" - maybe you could address that to the "one" you had in mind.Your ego is to large George. I didn't name you. I was speaking in general.

IOW your usual windbag lecturing to the world at large style.:-[] Save it!
I'm surprised you haven't inserted your opinion in here earlier. If onewants to talk about being unable to resist, why don't you go count thenumber of posts here vs. mine. I think you win the title without anyargument at all

What, the fact that you have already a higher count of posts on the subject
gives you leverage to squelch others? Did ya learn that one in the
schoolyard?
For me the "main point" here is that there are any number of successful businesses which specialize in selling sub-standard junk to the global consumer - they lap it up and Henry Ford was not the first to discover this. What's new?<shrug> It doesn't take a genius to figure out the formula but pinning all the blame/credit on Michael Dell personally seems incongruous to me.It seems disingenuous to me to claim that there are 'any number ofsuccessful business' while looking squarely in the fact of evidence thatshows Dell is increasing market share at the expense of 'any number of otherbusinesses'.

Nobody has denied Dell's current success. Missed the point again.:-(

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Keith R. Williams

11-17-2003, 07:43 PM

In article <ZgItb.2130$sb4.806@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
fmsfnf@jfoops.net says... "George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message news:09parvkgf06us5atm9tas5nrfut943dhee@4ax.com...The killer for Dell products, from my point of view, is that theirparts are non-standard. I want the actual product that is sold toeveryone else, not a Michael Dell special. Glad you mentioned that - nobody else has in this little saga. Lessee here, y'all: Dell is currently shipping ~30 million PCs a year, but their parts are non-standard?? Uh, define standard? ;-)

How many licenses of Win are "shipped" every year? I suppose Win
is standard? And, by that definition, whose parts _are_ standard, and how many PCs a year do these standard box makers ship?

Umm, Dell doesn't even follow it's R&D company's "standards".

--
Keith

11-19-2003, 08:41 PM

In article <01ecbccee02df6cc147fd4ae6e3e6e48@news.1usenet.com>,
Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> writes: On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:19:45 GMT, "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net> wrote:There seems to be some interest in this group about Dell. Here is a URLfor their Q3 results:http://www.computerworld.com/news/2003/story/0,11280,87110,00.htmlSome highlights:"Revenue was $10.6 billion, 16% higher than the $9.1 billion reported inthe same quarter of 2002 and up more than 40% from the third quarter of2001."The company said Asia-Pacific and Japan led the company's regionalgrowth with a 35% increase, nearly three times the combined rate ofother companies."Dell said products sold to U.S. consumers increased 28%"Isn't it amazing how gullible U.S. consumers are? If only they hadaccess to the collective wisdom of this NG, they would surely buy lessDell! ;-) Actually, they probably would! Honestly, how many readers of this newsgroup do you think buy their home systems from any of the big OEMs? I'd guess that the percentage is quite low because most posters know how to build their own "personal white boxes" (or even KeithKits :> ).
Actually, my 2nd most recent acquisition is a Compaq. My sister-in-law
gave it to me after she got a Dell, and I set it up for her.

My most recent acquisition is an older ThinkPad with a missing "2" key
and supposedly dead hard drive, though I haven't had time to fuss with
it, yet. I *wish* I could take the screen to use in a space-challenged
application. (connected to the previously-mentioned Compaq, in tight
(but well-ventilated) quarters.)

Dale Pontius

11-19-2003, 08:41 PM

In article <715fda3d88062f078cb021d8ec262485@news.1usenet.com>,
Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> writes: On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:07:09 -0500, Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote:Zowie! And according to Bloomberg, Dell stock is selling at a P/E of35.7! That's alotta moolah for a company that doesn't really ownanything that promises future growth except the "genius" of oneperson. Intel tops them at 42.6, but they actual own intellectualcapital, and Dell is, after all, utterly dependent on them.Think of that for a moment: a company that is the dominant player in adominant industry, and with real assets, cutting-edge technology, andongoing forward-looking R&D--not just a marketing department and ascrewdriver shop--selling at a P/E only slightly higher. What acountry! Forget Dell, I can one better you for sure. SCO is trading at a P/E of 81.8! This is a company that has no sales, no viable products, no R&D. All they have is a law firm and the broken shell of a company that used to actually do something long ago. Ohh, that and a crooked scumbag who sued the pants off his former employer spewing bilge out of some orifice.
I share your feelings, but the thing that scares me most is that
sometimes it seems that the legal system is SO screwed up that
SCO might even win. The RIAA and MPAA might even like it, because
it would DESTROY the US as a technology engine, and leave their
current (stupid) business models safe. (for the time being)

Dale Pontius

Keith R. Williams

11-20-2003, 06:29 AM

In article <jk9hpb.k75.ln@tomcat.edgehp.invalid>, dale@edgehp.invalid
says...
My most recent acquisition is an older ThinkPad with a missing "2" key and supposedly dead hard drive, though I haven't had time to fuss with it, yet. I *wish* I could take the screen to use in a space-challenged application. (connected to the previously-mentioned Compaq, in tight (but well-ventilated) quarters.)

Make the ThinkPad into and X-server?

--
Keith

11-20-2003, 02:10 PM

In article <MPG.1a26998b763959d1989b04@enews.newsguy.com>,
Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net> writes: In article <jk9hpb.k75.ln@tomcat.edgehp.invalid>, dale@edgehp.invalid says... My most recent acquisition is an older ThinkPad with a missing "2" key and supposedly dead hard drive, though I haven't had time to fuss with it, yet. I *wish* I could take the screen to use in a space-challenged application. (connected to the previously-mentioned Compaq, in tight (but well-ventilated) quarters.) Make the ThinkPad into and X-server?
No, rip off the screen and solder some wires or plug a connector. I've
heard that LCDs done're really work that way. If I had to render it fully
functional, a serial console might be more likely than an X-server.

Dale Pontius

Keith R. Williams

11-20-2003, 06:59 PM

In article <tndjpb.uu6.ln@tomcat.edgehp.invalid>,
dale@edgehp.invalid says... In article <MPG.1a26998b763959d1989b04@enews.newsguy.com>, Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net> writes: In article <jk9hpb.k75.ln@tomcat.edgehp.invalid>, dale@edgehp.invalid says... My most recent acquisition is an older ThinkPad with a missing "2" key and supposedly dead hard drive, though I haven't had time to fuss with it, yet. I *wish* I could take the screen to use in a space-challenged application. (connected to the previously-mentioned Compaq, in tight (but well-ventilated) quarters.) Make the ThinkPad into and X-server? No, rip off the screen and solder some wires or plug a connector.

Good *LUCK*!
I've heard that LCDs done're really work that way.

Not sure what you mean here.
If I had to render it fully functional, a serial console might be more likely than an X-server.

Well, I supposed the system you were attaching it to was a L'IX
box. Serial? You gotta be crazy! ;-)

--
Keith

Keith R. Williams

11-20-2003, 08:23 PM

In article <uo9hpb.k75.ln@tomcat.edgehp.invalid>,
dale@edgehp.invalid says... In article <715fda3d88062f078cb021d8ec262485@news.1usenet.com>, Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> writes: On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:07:09 -0500, Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote:Zowie! And according to Bloomberg, Dell stock is selling at a P/E of35.7! That's alotta moolah for a company that doesn't really ownanything that promises future growth except the "genius" of oneperson. Intel tops them at 42.6, but they actual own intellectualcapital, and Dell is, after all, utterly dependent on them.Think of that for a moment: a company that is the dominant player in adominant industry, and with real assets, cutting-edge technology, andongoing forward-looking R&D--not just a marketing department and ascrewdriver shop--selling at a P/E only slightly higher. What acountry! Forget Dell, I can one better you for sure. SCO is trading at a P/E of 81.8! This is a company that has no sales, no viable products, no R&D. All they have is a law firm and the broken shell of a company that used to actually do something long ago. Ohh, that and a crooked scumbag who sued the pants off his former employer spewing bilge out of some orifice. I share your feelings, but the thing that scares me most is that sometimes it seems that the legal system is SO screwed up that SCO might even win.

I don't think that's going to happen. Stupid things have
happened, but...
The RIAA and MPAA might even like it,

Sheesh! One conspiracy theory going around about M.Jackson is
that these folks turned him in because he was fighting the
"system". COnspiracy theories are fun, until one realizes that
people *believe* this crap.
because it would DESTROY the US as a technology engine, and leave their current (stupid) business models safe. (for the time being)

I'm not sure it would be the end of mankind as we know it. It's
not quite a comet strike.

The fact is that the recording companies are losing money because
they're producing crap. No one wants the garbage. "Big sound"
is *deathly* afraid that internet rock will take hold, bypassing
them completely. To bad, but it's *going* to happen. Note that
RIAA, et. al. are holding up every restaurant and bar for playing
music and even TV. Their desperation shows in their actions.

--
Keith

George Macdonald

11-21-2003, 04:13 AM

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:23:03 -0500, Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net>
wrote:
In article <uo9hpb.k75.ln@tomcat.edgehp.invalid>,dale@edgehp.invalid says... In article <715fda3d88062f078cb021d8ec262485@news.1usenet.com>, Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> writes: On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:07:09 -0500, Robert Myers <rmyers@rustuck.com> wrote:>Zowie! And according to Bloomberg, Dell stock is selling at a P/E of>35.7! That's alotta moolah for a company that doesn't really own>anything that promises future growth except the "genius" of one>person. Intel tops them at 42.6, but they actual own intellectual>capital, and Dell is, after all, utterly dependent on them.>>Think of that for a moment: a company that is the dominant player in a>dominant industry, and with real assets, cutting-edge technology, and>ongoing forward-looking R&D--not just a marketing department and a>screwdriver shop--selling at a P/E only slightly higher. What a>country! Forget Dell, I can one better you for sure. SCO is trading at a P/E of 81.8! This is a company that has no sales, no viable products, no R&D. All they have is a law firm and the broken shell of a company that used to actually do something long ago. Ohh, that and a crooked scumbag who sued the pants off his former employer spewing bilge out of some orifice. I share your feelings, but the thing that scares me most is that sometimes it seems that the legal system is SO screwed up that SCO might even win.I don't think that's going to happen. Stupid things havehappened, but...

I'm sure a jury will get it right but....uhhhhh - beware the
CAFC!!!!!!!!!!!
The RIAA and MPAA might even like it,Sheesh! One conspiracy theory going around about M.Jackson isthat these folks turned him in because he was fighting the"system". COnspiracy theories are fun, until one realizes thatpeople *believe* this crap.

Whatever the truth is, one thing I don't get here: why did his Mommy leave
the kid with a proven weirdo overnight??
because it would DESTROY the US as a technology engine, and leave their current (stupid) business models safe. (for the time being)I'm not sure it would be the end of mankind as we know it. It'snot quite a comet strike.The fact is that the recording companies are losing money becausethey're producing crap. No one wants the garbage.

Oh yeah - MUSIC! What *happened* to that?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Tony Hill

11-21-2003, 08:32 AM

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:13:18 -0500, George Macdonald
<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:Sheesh! One conspiracy theory going around about M.Jackson isthat these folks turned him in because he was fighting the"system". COnspiracy theories are fun, until one realizes thatpeople *believe* this crap.Whatever the truth is, one thing I don't get here: why did his Mommy leavethe kid with a proven weirdo overnight??

So that she could accuse said weirdo of molesting her son and make
millions in TV rights, even if the case gets thrown out of a court?

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

George Macdonald

11-21-2003, 04:28 PM

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:32:10 GMT, Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca>
wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:13:18 -0500, George Macdonald<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:Sheesh! One conspiracy theory going around about M.Jackson isthat these folks turned him in because he was fighting the"system". COnspiracy theories are fun, until one realizes thatpeople *believe* this crap.Whatever the truth is, one thing I don't get here: why did his Mommy leavethe kid with a proven weirdo overnight??So that she could accuse said weirdo of molesting her son and makemillions in TV rights, even if the case gets thrown out of a court?

Well of course but does that mean the Santa Barbara County DA is a retard
then... or just another scoundrel? Of course the media is wallowing in it
up to the ummm... no actually, they're completely sunk. What a pong!!

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Keith R. Williams

11-21-2003, 07:05 PM

In article <r2urrv4889m77lofqbj9fp0btk5vc1uton@4ax.com>,
fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com says... On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:23:03 -0500, Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net> wrote:Sheesh! One conspiracy theory going around about M.Jackson isthat these folks turned him in because he was fighting the"system". COnspiracy theories are fun, until one realizes thatpeople *believe* this crap. Whatever the truth is, one thing I don't get here: why did his Mommy leave the kid with a proven weirdo overnight??

Listening to the reports, perhaps they should be charged as
pimps. ...and what about those who took the money rather than
pressing charges for their minor children? ...not to say a(n
alleged) perv isn't a perv because of someone else's failing.
because it would DESTROY the US as a technology engine, and leave their current (stupid) business models safe. (for the time being)I'm not sure it would be the end of mankind as we know it. It'snot quite a comet strike.The fact is that the recording companies are losing money becausethey're producing crap. No one wants the garbage. Oh yeah - MUSIC! What *happened* to that?

I think it started on Feb 03, '59. Don Mclean had something to
say about it somewhat later. ...something about a pie.

--
Keith

The little lost angel

11-21-2003, 07:46 PM

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:59:12 -0500, Keith R. Williams
<krw@attglobal.net> wrote:
No, rip off the screen and solder some wires or plug a connector.Good *LUCK*!

Why wouldn't it work? Though isn't it easier for Dale to just unplug
the thin ribbon connector and get the pin out from somewhere?

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

Tony Hill

11-21-2003, 10:06 PM

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 19:28:15 -0500, George Macdonald
<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:32:10 GMT, Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca>wrote:Whatever the truth is, one thing I don't get here: why did his Mommy leavethe kid with a proven weirdo overnight??So that she could accuse said weirdo of molesting her son and makemillions in TV rights, even if the case gets thrown out of a court?Well of course but does that mean the Santa Barbara County DA is a retard

No idea, I've been doing my best to avoid this particular new media
circus. Hmm... I guess this must mean that the Kobe Bryant case is no
longer doing anything so the media needed a new story.
then... or just another scoundrel? Of course the media is wallowing in itup to the ummm... no actually, they're completely sunk. What a pong!!

The media sunk ages ago, as anyone who witness the incredible display
of stupidity was the OJ Simpson "trial" can attest to. This sort of
thing has never been about innocence or guilt, and it's certainly
never been about protecting the innocent. It's all about TV ratings
and advertising revenue.

For the record, I'm not saying that either OJ or Michael (or Kobe for
that matter) are either innocent or guilty because honestly I don't
care. Just that the way these cases are religiously followed and
plastered everywhere paints a VERY sad picture of the state of our
society.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

George Macdonald

11-22-2003, 03:13 PM

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:05:41 -0500, Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net>
wrote:
Oh yeah - MUSIC! What *happened* to that?I think it started on Feb 03, '59. Don Mclean had something tosay about it somewhat later. ...something about a pie.

Hmmm, that seems a bit extreme to me. BH was very significant but IMO what
followed, partly inspired by him surpassed him, or what we'd seen of him,
by a long way - hard to tell what would have happened. As it stands we're
back in a similar era to "How much is that doggie in the window?"<Ugh>...
musically as well as the way the business is run.... with a hefty dose of
cynicism added in. It stinks!

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

Keith R. Williams

11-23-2003, 06:29 AM

In article <3fbedbe6.219607288@news.pacific.net.sg>, a?n?g?e?
l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com says... On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:59:12 -0500, Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net> wrote: No, rip off the screen and solder some wires or plug a connector.Good *LUCK*! Why wouldn't it work? Though isn't it easier for Dale to just unplug the thin ribbon connector and get the pin out from somewhere?

Is that interface standard? Is the screen smart? ...or are the
smarts on the motherboard? Dunno, but I thought LCD screens were
rather dumb, leaving the interface, at that point, hairy. I
could easily be wrong here. Anyone know?

--
Keith

Yousuf Khan

11-23-2003, 10:19 AM

"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message
news:6lpvrvc1miqhmi4s1g1hq22920b7ml93tl@4ax.com... On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:05:41 -0500, Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net> wrote: Oh yeah - MUSIC! What *happened* to that?I think it started on Feb 03, '59. Don Mclean had something tosay about it somewhat later. ...something about a pie. Hmmm, that seems a bit extreme to me. BH was very significant but IMO
what followed, partly inspired by him surpassed him, or what we'd seen of him, by a long way - hard to tell what would have happened. As it stands we're back in a similar era to "How much is that doggie in the window?"<Ugh>... musically as well as the way the business is run.... with a hefty dose of cynicism added in. It stinks!

The era of commercial recorded music is at an end. Consumers are no longer
going to buy prepackaged music, filtered through a record company's tastes.
In a sense we're now going back full circle where musicians were amateur
minstrals, doing it for fun and personal satisfaction. P2P will not allow
anyone to put out an album of crap with a few good songs in it all.

Yousuf Khan

The little lost angel

11-23-2003, 10:25 AM

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 09:29:46 -0500, Keith R. Williams
<krw@attglobal.net> wrote:
Is that interface standard? Is the screen smart? ...or are thesmarts on the motherboard? Dunno, but I thought LCD screens wererather dumb, leaving the interface, at that point, hairy. Icould easily be wrong here. Anyone know?

Heehee, I dunno. From looking at the innards of my A20, it looks like
connected to a video card thing. But Dale should have the necessary
resources to figure those things out no?
--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

Keith R. Williams

11-23-2003, 04:45 PM

In article <3fc0fb22.20831694@news.pacific.net.sg>, a?n?g?e?
l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com says... On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 09:29:46 -0500, Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net> wrote:Is that interface standard? Is the screen smart? ...or are thesmarts on the motherboard? Dunno, but I thought LCD screens wererather dumb, leaving the interface, at that point, hairy. Icould easily be wrong here. Anyone know? Heehee, I dunno. From looking at the innards of my A20, it looks like connected to a video card thing. But Dale should have the necessary resources to figure those things out no?

Dale? Well, I'm sure I don't have the "resources" to find out
about that interface if it's proprietary. You may indeed be
right though. The LCDs I've seen tend to have the controller
close to the display. It certainly would make the multiple
laptops using the same designs simpler with a consistent
interface. I concede that I may be 100% wrong here. Dunno
though.

--
Keith

George Macdonald

11-24-2003, 02:53 AM

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 18:19:05 GMT, "Yousuf Khan"
<removethisspam.bjsk90.removethispam@hotmail.com> wrote:
"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in messagenews:6lpvrvc1miqhmi4s1g1hq22920b7ml93tl@4ax.com... On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:05:41 -0500, Keith R. Williams <krw@attglobal.net> wrote:> Oh yeah - MUSIC! What *happened* to that?I think it started on Feb 03, '59. Don Mclean had something tosay about it somewhat later. ...something about a pie. Hmmm, that seems a bit extreme to me. BH was very significant but IMOwhat followed, partly inspired by him surpassed him, or what we'd seen of him, by a long way - hard to tell what would have happened. As it stands we're back in a similar era to "How much is that doggie in the window?"<Ugh>... musically as well as the way the business is run.... with a hefty dose of cynicism added in. It stinks!The era of commercial recorded music is at an end.

Only as we've known it to date - video of the "artist" with a hint of pubic
bone seems to be the current trend... for the female ones anyway.:-) The
form, format and distribution methods will change.
Consumers are no longergoing to buy prepackaged music, filtered through a record company's tastes.In a sense we're now going back full circle where musicians were amateurminstrals, doing it for fun and personal satisfaction. P2P will not allowanyone to put out an album of crap with a few good songs in it all.

"Amateur" won't cut it. If you want properly recorded music, the artist
and other talents have to be motivated to do the considerable work
involved. We need a mechanism for electronic distribution which offers
full reward to professional musicians, recording engineers, sound techs
etc. but the companies which sell us plastic discs are understandably
reluctant. It *is* going to happen but theft through P2P is not the way.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

The MyLounge.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for any advice. The information contained on MyLounge.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of MyLounge.com. MyLounge.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation. Please note that our forums also serve as mirrors to Usenet newsgroups. Many posts you see on our forums are made by newsgroup users who may not be members of MyLounge.com Term of Service