RE: Video Capture Boards VS. "Retail" Computer Systems

[Brooks Lame <Brooks_Lame@mcg.mot.com>]

Find the real, technical problem or incompatibility before you go
spouting off!  I doubt very much that those systems you mention as
compatibility problems are not PCI 2.1 compliant.  The PCI 2.1 spec is
essentially a highway specification and there is practically an infinite
number of ways that bad drivers and vehicles (poorly designed PCI
peripherals and software device drivers) can mess things up on that
highway.  The PCI bus is well thought out, but just one "sunday driver"
can screw it up for the other vehicles that need to use it.  All you are
seeing is that there's a traffic jam.  Well, before you blame the
highway or its designers, be sure you know what the real cause is.  And
when it all comes down to it, you get what you pay for.  The PC market
is a high volume, low margin place, which means that there's not a lot
of encouragement to worry about a few incompatibilities.  If you want to
minimize your setup problems, pay the extra bucks for hardware that is
designed and/or tested to a complete interoperational system spec - like
a MacIntosh, or a turnkey system.
--
Brooks Lame'
Engineer
Motorola Monterey Design Center
blame@prolog.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	reporter@micron.net [SMTP:reporter@micron.net]
> Sent:	Tuesday, 07 April, 1998 21:39
> To:	Mailing List Recipients
> Cc:	consumerline@ftc.gov
> Subject:	Video Capture Boards VS. "Retail" Computer Systems
> 
> To:  The PCI 2.1 Specification Group and the Federal Trade Commission
	[Brooks Lame]  ...snip... 
> Whatever benefits the PCI 2.1 specification has brought to the world
> of
> PCs from the
> point of view of the sponsors of this newsgroup, I offer a contrasting
> point of view:
> The PCI 2.1 Specification, or more specifically, the lack of adherence
> to this standard, is in my opinion a travesty to the average personal
> computer consumer.  Moreover, it
> has been a DISASTER to me, financially.  Compaq's Houston
> Representatives not only
> denied my request for a full refund for my Presario 4814, they failed
> to
> get back to me with a final answer regarding my case.  They also
> insisted the Presario 4814 was, indeed, PCI 2.1 compliant.  Prior to
> that unresolved phone exchange, both Compaq and Pinnacle/miro failed
> to
> respond to FedExed, lengthy letters detailing my difficulties making
> their products work together.  
> 
> Rather than being proud of the PCI 2.1 Specification and its so-called
> positive benefits to the consumer, I would ask the sponsors of this
> organization to do some soul searching and be aware that there is
> serious consumer unrest brewing with regard to this problem.
> Compaq could've solved my problem by simply trading my Presario for a
> DeskPro or a WorkStation model that could at least be adapted to work
> for video editing.  Instead, the company representatives to whom I
> spoke
> chose to leave me no alternative but to take the machine back to Sears
> for a 50 cents on the dollar PARTIAL refund and lingering
> dissatisfaction with Compaq's handling of this situation.  I would
> venture to guess there are thousands and thousands of computer users
> just like me who have either run into this issue using a Presario or
> an
> Aptiva or a Pavilion or who are going to run into the problem... given
> the overwhelming market presence of these consumer-level machines.
> 
> Can't anything be done to rectify this injustice?