Is this a good computer?

[Kerry Brown]

I agree. You get what you pay for. I could build a computer to that price
point but it would not be one I would care to support.

 

[Ted Zieglar]

I'm planning on building my next computer, but not to save money. No way can
I buy parts for the same price as the big boys. I'll build my computer for
the feeling of accomplishment, since I used to be a hardware klutz.

 

[Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User]

Ted

Some of the parts used by the big boys in their 'deals' are the cheapest and
worst.. you get what you pay for in this world.. at least by building your
own, you know what your are getting.. I wouldn't have it any other way..

--
Mike Hall
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User

I'm planning on building my next computer, but not to save money. No way
can
I buy parts for the same price as the big boys. I'll build my computer for
the feeling of accomplishment, since I used to be a hardware klutz.

 

[Ted Zieglar]

Agreed. I get to pick exactly what I want, which also compels me to learn
more about what the specifications mean, adding to the educational
experience.

 

[Leythos]

The part that everyone is missing is that the O/P likes the $400 price of
the e-Machine.

I don't know about others, but I would be hard pressed to build a machine of
comparable specs for anywhere near that price using off the shelf
components. Remember, the manufacturers buy components by the hundreds of
thousands and likely pay $20-25 for a motherboard and another $20 for a CPU.

I didn't miss the $price, I just don't agree with that being the
limiting factor. While a cheap, and $400 barely qualifies as a computer,
computer has its place, none of the cheap $400 computers I've seen are
even worth $400.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Is this a good computer? Emachine T3302

NO.

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

 

[cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)]

On Thu, 11 May 2006 11:28:52 -0400, "Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows

Some of the parts used by the big boys in their 'deals' are the cheapest and
worst.. you get what you pay for in this world..

That's best-case. It's easy to get less than you pay for.

at least by building your own, you know what your are getting..
I wouldn't have it any other way..

Me neither; in fact, that's become my business. I work through the
spec with the client, then build it, though I pretty much refuse to
build with sucky parts. Actually, what I do is price sucky parts with
extra margin to cover added post-sale headaches; once you do that,
they often cost more than relatively suckless parts

IMO, this is the key to a successful "Genuine Windows" initiative. To
begin with, the "Genuine" product should always offer better value (as
it will always be more costly than its warez competitor).

What currently kills the validity of the "Genuine" advantage, is
crippled but legal OEM distros. Instead of addressing this, MS seems
intent on creating an artificial reduction of value, and that
backfires when these moves impact the "Genuine" product as well (WGA
detection false-positives, added WPA/WGA overhead that a warez
competitor may strip out of the product)

-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

Tip Of The Day:
To disable the 'Tip of the Day' feature...

 

[paulmd]

\
Dell does not offer AMD processors, so going from the model posted to a Dell
will be a step backwards.

Not a big step, for stated purpose: photos priting and 'net surfing
it'll be fine. AMD is for gamers, intel for business. But neither is a
bad chip.

 

[paulmd]

I have had "many" people bring me a brand new e-machine computer still
sealed in the box. I spend a couple of hours cleaning it of the un-necessary
garbage and set it up for them, adding the necessary anti-spyware and
anti-virus programs. When I give it back to them it is set up to do
everything automatically, as long as they leave it running on Friday night.
That is when I have everything scheduled to run, starting at 1:00 am.

I have not had any more of these come back to me than Dell's, Compaq's, HP's
etc.

If the e-Machine will do what you want, go for it. You will likely want a
newer computer in 2-3 years anyway, no matter what brand you buy.

As a guy who regularly works on 5 year old computers, and often much
older. I know that many people hang on to them for a while, Or give
them to friends, charities and family members. And the lower income
folks often rely on secondhand machines. A computer should be
functional for 10 years before it meets its final resting place.

A Pentium 1 will get you on the internet, and do word processing.

 

[NoNoBadDog!]

Not a big step, for stated purpose: photos priting and 'net surfing
it'll be fine. AMD is for gamers, intel for business. But neither is a
bad chip.

AMD is not for gamers. It will outperform Intel in every category, business
included. Please refer to the following:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-1.html

You will see that AMD beat Intel in *EVERY* category. That is why AMD now
sells 65% of the business machines (servers and workstations) sold in the
U.S. That is why dell lost 38% of its business clients last year, and so
far 19% this year.

Please do not make such blanket statements such as "AMD is for Gamers" and
"Intel is for business". Both statements are inaccurate.

Bobby

 

[Kerry Brown]

AMD is not for gamers. It will outperform Intel in every category,
business included. Please refer to the following:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-1.html

You will see that AMD beat Intel in *EVERY* category. That is why
AMD now sells 65% of the business machines (servers and workstations)
sold in the U.S. That is why dell lost 38% of its business clients
last year, and so far 19% this year.

Please do not make such blanket statements such as "AMD is for
Gamers" and "Intel is for business". Both statements are inaccurate.

Bobby

While I agree that the CPU really doesn't make a lot of difference for
business use the chipset does. For the most part Intel chipsets are more
stable than others. If you install an Intel based all in one motherboard you
very rarely need to update the motherboard drivers. With other chipsets it
seems that Windows updates often cause conflicts with older drivers
requiring more frequent driver updates. This is the main reason Intel CPUs
are often recommended for business use.

 

[Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User]

Kerry

I have two AMD systems running, and haven't noticed any attempt by WU to
supply upgrade chipset drivers..

 

[Kerry Brown]

It's not that WU supplies new chipset drivers but that some updates are not
compatible with some older chipset drivers. Usually this has to do with USB,
IDE, or RAID. SIS and nForce chipsets seem to need regular driver updates
with VIA not quite as bad. With Intel chipsets in most cases the drivers
that came with the motherboard rarely need to be updated. A notable
exception is some of the early Intel Application Accelerator versions. It
may be that I am wrong as all I have is anecdotal evidence from personal
experience. I have noticed that updating the chipset drivers often fixes
little glitches that crop up after installing Windows updates. With business
systems stability is more important than speed so I usually recommend Intel
chipsets which means I recommend Intel CPUs for business use. Personally I
have both Intel and AMD based systems and am very happy with both. AMD
systems with the nForce chipset outperform any comparable Intel systems I've
tried.

 

[NoNoBadDog!]

I administrate a network of just over 200 computers. The majority of these
computers are AMD based. I have never had *ANY* stability issues with *ANY*
of the AMD machines. I have never had *ANY* issues with software
compatibility.
I have never had *ANY* issues with any updates. I cannot understand how
anyone can claim that Intel is inherently *more stable* than AMD.

I feel sorry for your customers...sometimes AMD is a better fit. If you
make it a practice to recommend only Intel for business, you are doing your
customers a great disservice.

Many of the largest corporations in America are switching to AMD *FOR
STABILITY*. Google, GM and NASA are recent examples.

I am not saying that Intel in not appropriate in some instances, but with
each generation AMD becomes more and more the system of choice.

Bobby

 

[Kerry Brown]

I administrate a network of just over 200 computers. The majority of
these computers are AMD based. I have never had *ANY* stability
issues with *ANY* of the AMD machines. I have never had *ANY* issues
with software compatibility.
I have never had *ANY* issues with any updates. I cannot understand
how anyone can claim that Intel is inherently *more stable* than AMD.

I feel sorry for your customers...sometimes AMD is a better fit. If
you make it a practice to recommend only Intel for business, you are
doing your customers a great disservice.

Many of the largest corporations in America are switching to AMD *FOR
STABILITY*. Google, GM and NASA are recent examples.

I am not saying that Intel in not appropriate in some instances, but
with each generation AMD becomes more and more the system of choice.

Bobby

I was making a general statement. I always give my customers a choice. The
last few servers I built had AMD Opteron CPUs. I have also sold many AMD
based desktop systems to businesses. I'll rephrase my statement.

In general I have found desktop boards, especially all in one solutions,
with Intel chipsets to be more stable in a business environment than SIS,
nForce, or Via based boards in that order with SIS being the least stable.

It has nothing to do with the CPU but everything to do with the chipset,
particularly with USB, onboard video, IDE and RAID drivers. This is my
personal experience which while numbering in the many hundreds to thousands
is probably not a statistically valid sample. It is certainly possible to
build a very stable system with an AMD CPU. My experience shows me that I
will have to update the motherboard drivers more often to keep it stable as
Windows and other programs are updated. Your experience may lead you to a
different conclusion.

 

[atbusbook]

I was making a general statement. I always give my customers a choice. The
last few servers I built had AMD Opteron CPUs. I have also sold many AMD
based desktop systems to businesses. I'll rephrase my statement.

In general I have found desktop boards, especially all in one solutions,
with Intel chipsets to be more stable in a business environment than SIS,
nForce, or Via based boards in that order with SIS being the least stable.

It has nothing to do with the CPU but everything to do with the chipset,
particularly with USB, onboard video, IDE and RAID drivers. This is my
personal experience which while numbering in the many hundreds to thousands
is probably not a statistically valid sample. It is certainly possible to
build a very stable system with an AMD CPU. My experience shows me that I
will have to update the motherboard drivers more often to keep it stable as
Windows and other programs are updated. Your experience may lead you to a
different conclusion.

Back in 199x i bought a imac clone from em and it broke after about 1
week they took years to even replase the mobo and we said to hell with
it

 

[atbusbook]

I was making a general statement. I always give my customers a choice. The
last few servers I built had AMD Opteron CPUs. I have also sold many AMD
based desktop systems to businesses. I'll rephrase my statement.

In general I have found desktop boards, especially all in one solutions,
with Intel chipsets to be more stable in a business environment than SIS,
nForce, or Via based boards in that order with SIS being the least stable.

It has nothing to do with the CPU but everything to do with the chipset,
particularly with USB, onboard video, IDE and RAID drivers. This is my
personal experience which while numbering in the many hundreds to thousands
is probably not a statistically valid sample. It is certainly possible to
build a very stable system with an AMD CPU. My experience shows me that I
will have to update the motherboard drivers more often to keep it stable as
Windows and other programs are updated. Your experience may lead you to a
different conclusion.

Back in 199x i bought a imac clone from em and it broke after about 1
week they took years to even replase the mobo and we said to hell with
it