I wouldn't say "quick to point the finger". It took me quite a long time to come to the conclusion that there was a CPU/Windows interaction. And yes, now that you mention it I've see a few Intel boards be unstable under Windows. Truth is, there really is engineering involved in building a stable robust system. A lot of the cheap clones use really cheap power supplies which can easily result in instability. Another issue is the power handling of the motherboard itself. At least one motherboard I've used had an accessory card that was used to help filter the onboard power to the CPU. Basically, aside from a regulator, it had quite a few big capacitors to try to smooth out the spikes resulting from the processor jumping from milliwatts of consumption to 30-50 watts under heavy load.
I'm not sure if that particular Compaq model was on the HCL. Microsoft has an HCL for every version of their OS and it even changes from service pack to service pack. But Compaq being in bed with Microsoft, you would have thought they wouldn't have problems this egregious. I certainly felt burned from my purchase of that particular box. I've had a laptop as well that I've found hidden flaws in long after the warranty expired. Bottom line, caveat emptor! -Alex ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Greater NH Linux User Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 12:41 PM Subject: Re: Wireless weirdness (was: NT Stuff) On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, at 12:16pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thing is though Ben, the machine I had the most trouble with was > manufactured by a now merged PC company called Compaq. That's nice. Was it on the HCL? :-) > With the original factory installation the machine wouldn't run more than > an hour or so without crashing or blue screening. I would have had some strong words for the vendor in that case. Actually, *I* wouldn't, because I wouldn't buy a Compaq if someone else paid for it. But that's another issue. ;-) > In fact I don't remember ever seeing a stable AMD K6 based system. I have. I have also seen plenty that are *not* stable. There is one infamous motherboard, the FIC VA-503, which I have *never* seen run Windows successfully (sample = four units, three vendors, two different sites). It does run Linux well, but as near as I can tell, Windows simply will not run. The same processors worked fine in other motherboards, but not that one. Come to think of it, I have also seen motherboards for Intel chips which never ran right, either. Point being: You're quick to point the finger at the CPU, but I suspect the problem lies elsewhere. There *are* a disproportionately higher number of crap motherboards (and core logic chipsets) for AMD's chips, because AMD is a much bigger presence in the "low end" sector of the market. -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
