Ebay horror ...

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Tue Jun 12 22:29:49 2001

While it's probable you're right about your own relationship with your
computers, others seem to have different relationships. My own experience
suggests that if I replace the serial port board with a fully functional and
identical one, the fault in the serial port board can be fixed AFTER the system
is running again. Otherwise, I have to fix the board first. If that's the box
I use to order the parts needed to fix the serial board, I have a problem that a
board swap will fix and no other method will handle as quickly.

Now, maybe swapping out the offending component won't fix some systems, but I
don't have any of those.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Duell" <ard_at_p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 4:33 PM
Subject: Re: Ebay horror ...

> >
> > I won't say you're alone there, but I've more often than not seen people,
> > particularly people paid to do this sort of thing, isolate faults to the
> > level by swapping boards, then sending the board off for depot repair. I
> > if you don't mind that the machine is down until the board is fixed then it
> > doesn't matter, but if that's the case, the machine isn't that important.
> Mnay people have tried to convince me that board-swapping is worthwhile,
> none have ever succeeded. I've tried it twice, and on both occasions it
> was a total waste of time. It didn't cure the fault, it didn't tell me
> where the fault was (in fact in one case it made me even more confused).
> I had to spend the time to find the real fault anyway. And if I'd started
> doing that rather than swapping boards I'd have had the system running
> much sooned.
> And on serveral occasions I've managed to _repair_ the old board using
> components sitting around on my workbench or in the junk box before the
> field servoid has managed to order the right replacement board, let alone
> actually have it in his hand.
> However, you are also missing a _very_ large point here. Whether or not
> component level diagnosis/repair is faster or slower is _irrelevent_ to
> me. I enjoy component level repair. I enjoy tracing faults. I enjoy
> repairing things that have been claimed to be unrepairable.
> It's a hobby. In general, it doesn't matter if one of my classics has
> some downtime. I'm not running them all 24/7 anyway. Nobody else is
> depending on my machines. So if I have a fault and it takes me a couple
> of weeks to repair it (remember I can't spend all my time repairing
> computers :-)), so what?
> >
> > Having spares of everything is a strategy for keeping a system running. It
> A complete second system which you can use for backup is one thing. A
> collection of parts that you randomly swap into a faulty system is
> something else. The former is useful, the latter is IMHO not a way to
> maintain a reliable machine. Certainly if I was depending on the results
> from a system, I would not depend on a system which only seemed to be
> working. And in general board swapping is done by replacing modules until
> the fault _seems_ to have gone away -- the machine boots and passes
> diagnostics. The real fault is not found, it is not known that it has
> been put right. No thanks!
> I've posted my horror stories often enough -- find them in the archives
> if you want them. Suffice it to say I've had too many problems caused
> directly or indirectly by board-swapping to ever want to do it again.
> -tony
Received on Tue Jun 12 2001 - 22:29:49 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:33:58 BST