Re: OT: Built-in obsolescence
- From: larwe <zwsdotcom@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 02:49:14 -0000
On Jul 6, 8:57 am, Roman <m...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I came into this when I had to repair a PC and a LCD finding out the
electrolytic caps were placed right by a huge heatsink.
There is NO NEED to engineer obsolescence into PC hardware; software
vendors keep the buy cycle churning at a respectable speed without any
need for skulduggery in design. Of course, Vista's release has people
rethinking this and maybe deciding to stick with their old hardware,
but by and large what I said is true.
The device you were inside was engineered with specific MTBF
characteristics in mind. While you are correct insofar that the
engineers who designed it didn't care if it died at {warranty} +
0.01us, you can be certain that no extra effort went into deliberately
shortening its lifespan.
There is a hard limiting factor in the LCD anyway, which is the CCFL.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OT: Built-in obsolescence
- From: Didi
- Re: OT: Built-in obsolescence
- References:
- OT: Built-in obsolescence
- From: Roman
- OT: Built-in obsolescence
- Prev by Date: Re: Built-in obsolescence
- Next by Date: Re: Built-in obsolescence
- Previous by thread: Re: Built-in obsolescence
- Next by thread: Re: OT: Built-in obsolescence
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|