If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 21:25:30 +0100, Dr Teeth
wrote: On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 12:02:56 +0100, Peter Parry wrote: Question is if you pay the extra for a machine with no dead pixels what happens to the machines with dead pixels? Where did that come from? The OP said he paid for a dead pixel check, not a 100% assurance that his screen did not have any. From "they checked my Sony for missing pixels ... it cost me £49 for the service but ... as I was concerned about the disappointment of missing pixels, I think this is a cracking idea and cheap at the price." Do you interpret that as the OP being happy with dead pixels and paying to be told they are there? -- Peter Parry. http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/ |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Johannes H Andersen wrote:
it is not unreasonable to assume that it is just an extra quality control check. And before you reply, I never assumed anything Johannes. I just did a bit of checking first and found that laptops direct detail on their website what the predelivery check consists of and found - "or you are concerned about purchasing a laptop with missing pixels then choosing our Pre-Delivery Inspection service will give you the reassurance that your laptop will arrive in perfect condition." pretty conclusive proof that yourself and Dr Teeth are a bit naive to all this really aren't you, and guys like me are never wrong really. How annoying is that! g. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
yes wrote:
If you think a company charging about £1300 per hour, pro rata for this sevice is a good deal, then you are mad. £5 is probably an acceptable fee in my book for a dead pixel check. Charging for SP2 installation is thievery. Its a rip-off plain and simple. I dont give a **** if its a ripoff or not. I was merely explaining to Guy what a deadpixel test was. g. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 23:17:37 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote: Do you interpret that as the OP being happy with dead pixels and paying to be told they are there? I can think of a couple of interpretations. What's needed is *not* interpretations but facts. -- Cheers, Guy ** HTML email should be treated in the same manner as sexual acts between ** consenting adults. Only done in private places where willing parties, who ** have agreed beforehand, will see it! |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Dr Teeth wrote:
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 23:17:37 +0100, Peter Parry wrote: Do you interpret that as the OP being happy with dead pixels and paying to be told they are there? I can think of a couple of interpretations. What's needed is *not* interpretations but facts. -- Cheers, Guy Which have been provided via the laptopsdirect website in another part of this thread... so unless you've got me killfiled and can't see my posts, you are a real numpty. g. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Fat Freddy's Cat wrote: Johannes H Andersen wrote: it is not unreasonable to assume that it is just an extra quality control check. And before you reply, I never assumed anything Johannes. I just did a bit of checking first and found that laptops direct detail on their website what the predelivery check consists of and found - "or you are concerned about purchasing a laptop with missing pixels then choosing our Pre-Delivery Inspection service will give you the reassurance that your laptop will arrive in perfect condition." Hmm, I'm still skeptical. 'Perfect condition' relative to some industry standard? The only phrase that would convince me would be: "No pixel errors". Why beat about the bush if that's what it means? pretty conclusive proof that yourself and Dr Teeth are a bit naive to all this really aren't you, and guys like me are never wrong really. How annoying is that! Not at all Sir, just the university of life :-) |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 19:46:33 GMT, Johannes H Andersen
wrote: Hmm, I'm still skeptical. 'Perfect condition' relative to some industry standard? The only phrase that would convince me would be: "No pixel errors". Why beat about the bush if that's what it means? Exactly. -- Cheers, Guy ** HTML email should be treated in the same manner as sexual acts between ** consenting adults. Only done in private places where willing parties, who ** have agreed beforehand, will see it! |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Dr Teeth wrote:
On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 19:46:33 GMT, Johannes H Andersen wrote: Hmm, I'm still skeptical. 'Perfect condition' relative to some industry standard? The only phrase that would convince me would be: "No pixel errors". Why beat about the bush if that's what it means? Exactly. -- Cheers, Guy Although I am usually a firm believer in prolonging the spectacle of ****s floundering about with half-hearted attempts to cover their own idiocy, I think its time I let the 2 of you off the hook on this point. Its clear you've made big enough arses of yourselves without further input from me. It was funny at first letting the guys at work read your ever-more desperate responses, but alas all good things have to come to an end. See you in another thread, g. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 17:55:48 +0100, Dr Teeth
wrote: I can think of a couple of interpretations. What's needed is *not* interpretations but facts. Apparently their website confirms that those that pay the extra charge get a machine with no dead pixels and those which have dead pixels are, one presumes, passed on to customers who chose not to pay this premium. Something people may wish to bear in mind before ordering. -- Peter Parry. http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/ |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Fat Freddy's Cat wrote: Dr Teeth wrote: On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 19:46:33 GMT, Johannes H Andersen wrote: Hmm, I'm still skeptical. 'Perfect condition' relative to some industry standard? The only phrase that would convince me would be: "No pixel errors". Why beat about the bush if that's what it means? Exactly. -- Cheers, Guy Although I am usually a firm believer in prolonging the spectacle of ****s floundering about with half-hearted attempts to cover their own idiocy, I think its time I let the 2 of you off the hook on this point. Its clear you've made big enough arses of yourselves without further input from me. It was funny at first letting the guys at work read your ever-more desperate responses, but alas all good things have to come to an end. See you in another thread, g. Nice try, but water down a duck's back. Too old to be so sensitive, especially when I'm in the right... I ask again, why beat about the bush with weasel words? Why don't they state loud and clearly that the check will guarantee zero pixels! Whether this is appropriate or not is not the issue, this another discussion which we've already had ad nausea. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dots and Pixels | measekite | Printers | 17 | March 17th 05 11:43 PM |
Direct CD on DVDs - it kind of sucks | [email protected] | General | 0 | April 15th 04 11:05 AM |
Anyone know where I can buy an LCD screen with no dead pixels? | Alex Vallat | UK Computer Vendors | 6 | January 16th 04 10:24 AM |
Dial up modem problem | Richard Freeman | General | 21 | September 22nd 03 05:50 AM |
Dial up modem problem | Richard Freeman | Homebuilt PC's | 21 | September 22nd 03 05:50 AM |