It's not so much the quality of the individual components inside a Dell or HP. Its the millions they spend testing that all the components work together as designed. (i have a long memory of a intel white box server doing random BSOD and intel not helping) And thats why my clients are coming back for their 2nd batch of Dell hardware. They look back over the last 3-4 years and realise how little trouble they have had. And when they do have trouble Dell is there in 24hrs with the correct replacement parts. Like to see a clone manufacturer do that !
Like Peter said he has had a bad run with various brands of hdd. He didn't mention Fujitsu drives though. I won't use one even as a paperweight after my experiences. I remember a Dell server arriving in 2001 at a client. When i realised it had fujitsu scsi drives i was appalled. I rang dell and complained and got nowhere but they noted my displeasure. I was so happy to call back 2 months later and tell them one had died :) Funny they replaced it with a beautiful quantum. (its still going in my garage) Having said al lthat about Dell quality... I have a lovely AMD64 clone to play games on :) It ROCKS !!! But i don't need 24x7x365 reliability from it. Andrew C > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Horst Herb > Sent: Monday, 21 November 2005 8:42 PM > To: General Practice Computing Group Talk > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Re: Healthlink messaging] > > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:30, Peter Machell wrote: > > > Yes QUALITY being the key word, > > > HP, DELL, Cisco for the rich, Dlink for the poor. > > > No-name cheapies are just that, cheap shit. Intel > switches do funny > > > things from new, and the fans die early. > > > > Interesting how our experiences dictate our opinion of brands, and > > this opinion can so differ amongst us. > > Who manufacturers Dell's switches - hopefully not the same brand > > making their laser printers (Samsung)? > > Interesting indeed. Never would have occurred to me to > associate Dell with quality, and I would build my own from > selected quality components any time before settling for a HP > where quality of individual components may vary substantially > between batches depending on what they can source, but price > remains the same - namely twice as much as it costs to roll > your own from equal or better components. > > The "quality" of Cisco is nothing but a myth - they deal > mostly in embedded systems which are usually indestructible > by nature regardless of brand (if we disregard the very > cheapest of the Chinese "make dos"), and their operating > system / proprietary protocols took some heavy negative > publicity recently if I remember right. > > Horst > _______________________________________________ > Gpcg_talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
