Mr. Chandler may not be a sysadmin, but...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| caitlyn Jul 18, 2012 3:30 PM EDT |
Mr. Chandler may not be a sysadmin, but anyone who lists emacs and other programmers' editors among their favorite apps isn't a typical home user either, or even a typical writer. The screenshot is another dead giveway. Don't get me wrong: it's a decent article profiling a somewhat different use model. It just isn't an article or use model that will convince many "ordinary" users that Linux is for them. |
| helios Jul 18, 2012 11:17 PM EDT |
LOL....if the novice mistakes "Emac" with "Emachines" the movement is dead. Even the most brain-numb computer user knows to avoid Emachines like the plague..... |
| caitlyn Jul 18, 2012 11:53 PM EDT |
Ummm... I'm writing this on an eMachines mini desktop. eMachines and Acer are one and the same nowadays. I bought this box new on closeout for $150 almost three years ago and it has worked very well for me indeed. Actually, in general, my experience with eMachines has been entirely positive. |
| helios Jul 19, 2012 3:00 AM EDT |
Not this shop....unless it's the small form factor like you are talking about, they go straight up on the bench, they are stripped for salvage and parts then E-Wasted. We don't even plug them in. I've never encountered such crappy quality in electronics in the 6 or so years I've been doing this work. Every Emachine we've placed has been picked up and replaced within the first 6 months due to the MB burning up or the power supply taking a poop. Fact is, I have that small form factor sitting by my door ready for deployment Saturday. They seem to be pretty good. It's the desktops from 3 to 6 years ago that I give the golden goose-it. |
| jdixon Jul 19, 2012 6:48 AM EDT |
> eMachines and Acer are one and the same nowadays. Yep. And they're don't seem to be bad machines any more. Not great either, but pretty much worth what you pay for them. > ...unless it's the small form factor... It's the desktops from 3 to 6 years ago that I give the golden goose-it. Hmm. Wikipedia says the following: eMachines was acquired by Gateway in March 2004 for $262 million in cash and stock. Under the deal, Wayne Inouye, CEO of eMachines, became CEO of Gateway, replacing founder Ted Waitt. It remains a stand-alone brand that is sold through retailers, catalog and online merchandisers. Gateway itself was purchased by Acer in October 2007. So Acer took over in 2007. Those desktops are probably from their old Gateway line and before Acer started designing the systems. And yes, the small form factor models seem to be much better than their full size models. But eMachines is now simply Acer's low cost line of computers. They're extremely common at Walmart, for example. |
| caitlyn Jul 19, 2012 12:08 PM EDT |
Ken, I think jdixon makes an excellent point. Rather than looking at the form factor I'd look at the manufacturing date. If it's 2007 or newer I wouldn't write the machine off. Granted, we had machines before that which were fine, but old and low cost usually isn't a good combination. BTW, their laptops are OK as well. |
| helios Jul 19, 2012 12:40 PM EDT |
I understand Caitlyn....it is a rare, rare thing that we receive machines newer than that. The newer ones get a shot at eternity....others, not so much. |
| caitlyn Jul 19, 2012 12:45 PM EDT |
On some current and recent models the only difference between Acer and eMachines is that the Acer model comes in a black case and the eMachines model comes in a white case. Clearly the white case is inferior :) Seriously, all I'm suggesting is that you evaluate a machine before scrapping it. You're a donation based organization trying to help kids. The more functional machines you have the more kids you can help. |
| helios Jul 19, 2012 1:10 PM EDT |
But that's my point....Our history clearly shows that the older Emachines are not trustworthy and to be honest, we don't have the resources to be running all over central Texas to replace machines that have proven themselves unworthy of service. I am extremely aware of being a donation based organization but I am also extremely aware of burning up gas and time going to replace a machine that we knew to be unreliable. The idea is to get it right the first time with as little cost as possible. Older Emachines have taught us they are a money pit. Many of our in-house computers and one of our servers is an Emachine....of which we have replaced the power supply twice in a year. Luckily we have a box of them on hand....but six months average lifespan just isn't a comfortable time frame in which to trust them. |
| CFWhitman Jul 19, 2012 1:51 PM EDT |
My brother had an eMachines computer from quite a while ago that was actually pretty decent internally. The issues it had were more cosmetic, like the external power button breaking and things like that. When he asked me to upgrade it, I noticed it had an ASUS motherboard. The only internal hardware issue I saw with it was that the internal modem went bad and caused the machine not to boot. I just removed that since he never used it anyway (it was getting old at that point anyway). This machine may have been from just before the 2004 merger with Gateway though. |
| caitlyn Jul 19, 2012 2:11 PM EDT |
Quoting: This machine may have been from just before the 2004 merger with Gateway though.That may also be key. I've had a lot of bad experiences with Gateway hardware. Perhaps it's the 2004-07 period that needs avoiding. |
| Koriel Jul 19, 2012 2:24 PM EDT |
We have an Acer Aspire AS7750G Core i7 which is a lovely laptop couldn't be more happy with it, I think the wife loves it more than she does me! It has switchable graphics and even runs Skyrim pretty well which I wasn't expecting. My brother has an Acer from 3 years ago and it has to be said the build quality on his is not a patch on our one so I think it may be safe to say that Acer have improved significantly over the last few years. Now I have no idea if their support is any good but their machines are. |
| caitlyn Jul 19, 2012 2:33 PM EDT |
@helios: I also want to add that I am not discounting your experience at all. Mine has been different. I also am rethinking my last comment as any machine that is eight years old or more is probably going to be a support nightmare. Anyway, since we agreed that 2007-newer is probably fine I think our positions have more in common than not :) |
| helios Jul 19, 2012 4:27 PM EDT |
@ Caitlyn....I'm thinkin' so too. |
| CFWhitman Jul 19, 2012 4:56 PM EDT |
Yes, my brother retired that computer a few years back just because it was getting too old. Machines that old are a little better with the right Linux distribution than with Windows though (he ran Windows XP). I've noticed that machines that ran XP just fine (well, relatively speaking) when they were new now seem not powerful enough for XP with all the current updates. It used to be that 256MB of RAM would work, but with unacceptable performance, while 512MB was OK. Now it seems that 512MB works with unacceptable performance and you need a gigabyte for it to work OK. Fortunately there are modern Linux distributions which still work fine with 512MB of RAM (I have an old machine running in the basement). |
| jdixon Jul 19, 2012 9:41 PM EDT |
>It used to be that 256MB of RAM would work, but with unacceptable performance, while 512MB was OK. Now it seems that 512MB works with unacceptable performance and you need a gigabyte for it to work OK. Yes on all counts. Windows XP SP3 seems to use most or all of 512MB just booting up. You really need 1GB for it to run well. The original Windows XP would run in 256MB. I think it would install with 128MB, but it wasn't really usable. |
| BernardSwiss Jul 20, 2012 1:11 AM EDT |
Now I get it! It's not "bit rot", it's "obesity". |
| Steven_Rosenber Jul 20, 2012 3:14 PM EDT |
I'm having a lot of trouble in Windows XP SP3, even with 1.2 GB of RAM. It's the sucking that makes it hard to use. |
| gus3 Jul 20, 2012 3:36 PM EDT |
256M is all you'll ever get on a current Raspberry Pi (it's un-expandable). Maybe it could run Windows... 95. |
| jdixon Jul 20, 2012 4:07 PM EDT |
> Maybe it could run Windows... 95. Windows 2000 should run fine in 256MB, but there is that small matter of the processor. :) |
| Steven_Rosenber Jul 20, 2012 7:00 PM EDT |
The Raspberry Pis are now up to 512 MB. Not enough to be comfortable, that's for sure. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!