Gregory wrote:
>The nice techs there tested every single function on it, and
>they couldn't understand it.. for 3 weeks..
>
>Until I mentioned that I don't use Windows.
>They finally told me that the monitor was "A Plug and Play" unit,
>designed <specifically> to <automatically> pick-up the video-
>signals from Windows 95 and 98.
Completly bogus if you ask me. There's a standard for what a monitor should
recieve from the card. But let's assume it's true just for the sake of it...
>1. Is there some way to "manually-over-ride" this insanity?
Perhaps a TSR is available. Or something to set between the card and the
monitor.
>2. What are my options at this point? (It's still under warranty.)
If I were you I would go back to the shop where it was bought and demand a
new monitor that works. If they complain that they only have 15" (or
somehting like that) monitors left then that's there problem (and possibly
NECs) not yours. Or you could take a refund if you can get a new monitor
for less then what you bought the NEC for. Whatever you gain the most from.
I traded my HP IDE 2x CD-R(W) to a Sony SCSI 4x CD-R(W) in a simular
fashion :)
>3. Is this kind of deliberate sale, design, and use, even Legal?
Not really since you have bought a "computer monitor" not a "Windows 95/98
monitor" and it's not allowed to sell something under an incorrect name.
Remember to ask them (the sales person) to get money back for your expenses
with the monitor (travelling, phone calls etc.)
Hmm... perhaps I should get myself an internal win-modem if the sales
person doesn't say that it requires Windows to me just to bother them some
and get a new (external) modem ;=)
//Bernie
http://hem1.passagen.se/bernie/ DOS programs, Star Wars ...
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
