On Dec 27, 10:55 pm, Bill Christensen <[email protected]> wrote: > Finally I decided that the prime difference was the power. They were > unprotected. We've got a big UPS (sine wave output, not square > wave). We're all way out at the end of the power system, and the > power is definitely prone to spikes and surges. Our UPS beeps and > boops frequently telling us of slumps and surges. > We put them on a UPS and the problems went away. Same machine, same > use patterns.
Let's add some facts. First you had no idea why the supply was failing. Using anecdotal evidence, you were speculating. From diagnostic programs, where was a fact that identified what hardware was defective? You fixed what? And then it still failed? You did not even know what hardware was defective and when. So how do you know the UPS terminated hardware damage? You don't. You only speculated. Second, anything that a $500 UPS (to create sine waves) would solve is supposed to be inside a $60 power supply. So you spent $500 on a UPS to fix a defective power supply? That is proof? Of what? You somehow _know_ 'dirty' power can corrupt any computer? And that corruption means hardware was damaged? Above are numerous assumptions based only on observation and on few facts. When was observation alone sufficient to know something? Any fact from only observation is classic junk science. What was taught in junior high science? First, the problem must be defined by a hypothesis based in well understood principles. Second, hypothesis must be confirmed with experimental evidence. Without both, only speculation exists. You have posted speculation. Then you converted that speculation into a conclusion. IOW junk science. More likely, you spent $500 to cure symptoms. A power supply was defective even when used in your home. If using basic principles taught in junior high school, then all that trouble and a $500 UPS would have been unnecessary. Plug-in UPSes have their purpose as I stated. I then stated what those purposes are. But to fix a $60 defective computer power supply with a $500 UPS - that is not worthwhile. That $500 UPS only suggests where to look for the defect in a computer's power supply 'system'. Anne Keller-Smith recommends using a UPS to protect hardware. Even a $500 UPS does not claim protection from typical hardware destructive events. Even your example was not a hardware destructive event. Her recommendation was not a $500 UPS. A computer grade UPS is typically under $100. That UPS connects a computer directly to AC mains as if the UPS did not exist. And then you complicate the issue by discussing a $500 UPS? So many defects and assumptions exist in your reasoning. So again, why would you buy a $500 UPS to fix a defective $60 power supply - then assume that solved a hardware failure? A UPS is to protect data from power loss. Even 'dirtiest' electricity created by the typical computer grade UPS is made irrelevant by the computer's power supply. Nothing posted implies a $500 UPS protected hardware. It only implies a $500 UPS was purchased to fix a defective $60 power supply. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
