Can a hard disk shrink? Or did ****USA steal my HD?

wrote in message ...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 04:43:45 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
George L wrote

Do computer repair centers ever replace HDs with smaller
ones and not tell customers? I took my Compaq equipped
with 80 gig HD to ****USA but got back a 40 gig. My data
wasn't lost, but the drive is definitely smaler, according to
the BIOS and the label on the HD.

My original problem was that the computer would freeze
or blue screen every other day, and changing the PS didn't
help. Apparently the original PS was bad and the second
one was inadequate because the repair center put in yet
another, and the computer has been rock solid ever since.

The repair center denies that the replaced the drive and
said that they only ran a diagnostic on it. I have the receipt
for the original HD (was an upgrade) and registered its serial
no., but the repair center says that it's not enough proof.

What can I do?

Unless you can actually prove thatt he drive in question
was actually in the box when you took it into the store,
you'll be hard pressed to win any action. A receipt only
shows that you bought the drive, not that it was in the
box when you took it in.

Dunno, he clearly aint got what is listed
on the original receipt anymore.

What original receipt?
The OP says he has a receipt forthe drive;

That receipt.

he didn't say the receipt was for the system.

Doesnt need to be. Its the receipt for the upgrade he got done.

Why would they swap drives? There's no economic incentive to
do so; there's not enough involved to make it worth their while.

Sure, but that doesnt mean some monkey didnt put the wrong
size drive in the box when replacing the original, by accident,
say when testing that possibility for the freezes when the
second power supply behaved the same way as the first.

But that doesn't explain the copy. Copying takes time,
and these places make their money charging for such work.

Not when the system freezes or bsods every other day after
the upgrade. They get to wear whatever it takes to fix the the
problem. Presumably he paid for the copy to the upgraded drive.

I have a hard time believing the tech would replace
the drive, do an image/copy, and not document it.

It wouldnt be the first time with a complicated problem
where the obvious swap, the power supply, didnt fix the
problem, and other possibilitys were tried, and turned
out to not be the problem either. Turned out to be the
power supply after all and it took the third one to fix it.
Presumably the first two had the same design problem.

And the tech forgot to put back the original
80GB drive when it turned out to not be the
cause of the freezing and bsods every other day.

wrote in message ...
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:45:03 -0700, W7TI wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:38:24 -0700, wrote:

A receipt only shows that you bought the drive, not that it was in the
box when you took it in.

_________________________________________________ ________

A receipt by itself neither proves nor disproves anything. Its function
is to backup what the plaintiff testifies, and the testimony is what the
judge is going to give the most weight to - if it's believable.

Right.
The OP says, "I have the receipt for
the original HD (was an upgrade)..."
The receipt is for the drive, not the system, and says nothing about
the drive being in the system when it was taken to ****USA.

He appears to be saying that he paid for that upgrade,
has the receipt to prove that, and that he took it back
when it started to freeze and bsod every other day to
get them to do the upgrade he paid for properly in the
sense of getting a reliable system with an 80GB drive in it.

"jeffc" wrote:
No, you don't get it. The point is NOT how much money I have. It's how
much the computer repairers have. They DON'T work for $4/hr.,

Huh? Yes they do, close to it.

-Mike

Rod Speed wrote:

wrote in message ...
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:45:03 -0700, W7TI wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:38:24 -0700, wrote:

A receipt only shows that you bought the drive, not that it was in the
box when you took it in.

_________________________________________________ ________

A receipt by itself neither proves nor disproves anything. Its function
is to backup what the plaintiff testifies, and the testimony is what the
judge is going to give the most weight to - if it's believable.

Right.
The OP says, "I have the receipt for
the original HD (was an upgrade)..."
The receipt is for the drive, not the system, and says nothing about
the drive being in the system when it was taken to ****USA.

He appears to be saying that he paid for that upgrade,
has the receipt to prove that, and that he took it back
when it started to freeze and bsod every other day to
get them to do the upgrade he paid for properly in the
sense of getting a reliable system with an 80GB drive in it.

When someone buys a new disk drive, it's typically considered an
upgrade. Using that term in no way means that someone else did
the installation for him. And even if they had, there is no
proof that it was in the machine at the time he brought it to
CompUSA.

I would like to hear some answers from George L that others have
been asking. What brand disk drive did he have in it? What's
there now? Is the data exactly the same as was there before he
brought it in? And did he check to make sure that it is not
partitioned in Windows?

BIll

"Bill Rubin" wrote in message ...
Rod Speed wrote:

wrote in message ...
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:45:03 -0700, W7TI wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:38:24 -0700, wrote:

A receipt only shows that you bought the drive, not that it was in the
box when you took it in.

_________________________________________________ ________

A receipt by itself neither proves nor disproves anything. Its function
is to backup what the plaintiff testifies, and the testimony is what the
judge is going to give the most weight to - if it's believable.

Right.
The OP says, "I have the receipt for
the original HD (was an upgrade)..."
The receipt is for the drive, not the system, and says nothing about
the drive being in the system when it was taken to ****USA.

He appears to be saying that he paid for that upgrade,
has the receipt to prove that, and that he took it back
when it started to freeze and bsod every other day to
get them to do the upgrade he paid for properly in the
sense of getting a reliable system with an 80GB drive in it.

When someone buys a new disk drive,
it's typically considered an upgrade.

That phrase is generally used when someone
gets the hard drive upgraded in a system.

Using that term in no way means that
someone else did the installation for him.

Bull****. It generally does, and the
OP can say what he meant anyway.

And even if they had, there is no proof that it was in
the machine at the time he brought it to CompUSA.

Doesnt need to be any proof. CompUSA
would have to do the proving on that.

I would like to hear some answers from George L that
others have been asking. What brand disk drive did he
have in it? What's there now? Is the data exactly the
same as was there before he brought it in? And did he
check to make sure that it is not partitioned in Windows?

Separate issue entirely to the claims that
its unlikely that the drive did get swapped.

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:04:34 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:


"Bill Rubin" wrote in message ...
Rod Speed wrote:

wrote in message ...
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:45:03 -0700, W7TI wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:38:24 -0700, wrote:

A receipt only shows that you bought the drive, not that it was in the
box when you took it in.

_________________________________________________ ________

A receipt by itself neither proves nor disproves anything. Its function
is to backup what the plaintiff testifies, and the testimony is what the
judge is going to give the most weight to - if it's believable.

Right.
The OP says, "I have the receipt for
the original HD (was an upgrade)..."
The receipt is for the drive, not the system, and says nothing about
the drive being in the system when it was taken to ****USA.

He appears to be saying that he paid for that upgrade,
has the receipt to prove that, and that he took it back
when it started to freeze and bsod every other day to
get them to do the upgrade he paid for properly in the
sense of getting a reliable system with an 80GB drive in it.

When someone buys a new disk drive,
it's typically considered an upgrade.

That phrase is generally used when someone
gets the hard drive upgraded in a system.


According to you, perhaps. I upgrade my systems frequently, and no
one but me ever touches them.

Using that term in no way means that
someone else did the installation for him.

Bull****. It generally does, and the
OP can say what he meant anyway.

And even if they had, there is no proof that it was in
the machine at the time he brought it to CompUSA.

Doesnt need to be any proof. CompUSA
would have to do the proving on that.

nope - CompUSA would be "innocent until proven guilty" - it would be
up to the accuser to make his case.

"Bob Ward" wrote in message ...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:04:34 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:


"Bill Rubin" wrote in message ...
Rod Speed wrote:

wrote in message ...
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:45:03 -0700, W7TI wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:38:24 -0700, wrote:

A receipt only shows that you bought the drive, not that it was in the
box when you took it in.

_________________________________________________ ________

A receipt by itself neither proves nor disproves anything. Its function
is to backup what the plaintiff testifies, and the testimony is what the
judge is going to give the most weight to - if it's believable.

Right.
The OP says, "I have the receipt for
the original HD (was an upgrade)..."
The receipt is for the drive, not the system, and says nothing about
the drive being in the system when it was taken to ****USA.

He appears to be saying that he paid for that upgrade,
has the receipt to prove that, and that he took it back
when it started to freeze and bsod every other day to
get them to do the upgrade he paid for properly in the
sense of getting a reliable system with an 80GB drive in it.

When someone buys a new disk drive,
it's typically considered an upgrade.

That phrase is generally used when someone
gets the hard drive upgraded in a system.

According to you, perhaps.

According to many others too.

I upgrade my systems frequently,
and no one but me ever touches them.

Clearly not the case in his case when he clearly got CompUSA
to work out what was causing the freeze or bsod every day or so.

Using that term in no way means that
someone else did the installation for him.

Bull****. It generally does, and the
OP can say what he meant anyway.

And even if they had, there is no proof that it was in
the machine at the time he brought it to CompUSA.

Doesnt need to be any proof. CompUSA
would have to do the proving on that.

nope - CompUSA would be "innocent until proven guilty"

Nope. And civil law is on the balance of
probabilitys, NOT beyond reasonable doubt.

- it would be up to the accuser to make his case.

Wrong. In spades with a small claims court.

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 16:23:46 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:


- it would be up to the accuser to make his case.

Wrong. In spades with a small claims court.


Care to explain this rubbish?

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:20:23 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:


Bob Ward wrote in message
.. .
Rod Speed wrote
Bob Ward wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Bob Ward wrote

And even if they had, there is no proof that it was in
the machine at the time he brought it to CompUSA.

Doesnt need to be any proof. CompUSA
would have to do the proving on that.

nope - CompUSA would be "innocent until proven guilty"

Nope. And civil law is on the balance of
probabilitys, NOT beyond reasonable doubt.

- it would be up to the accuser to make his case.

Wrong. In spades with a small claims court.

Care to explain this rubbish?

Even you should be able to bull**** your way out
of your predicament better than that pathetic effort.

Rule of Holes.

So youi can't support your statement? I thought not.

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:41:51 +1000, "Rod Speed" wrote:


frankg wrote in message
.. .
Rod Speed wrote
frankg wrote

Generally you're wrong

Nope.

but technically you can be right

Corse he's right.

(these links explain in better detail) ....

Read the links I supplied

None of those are any news to me.

and they answer it correctly.

Dont say anything different to what I said
with FAT32 partitions over 32GB with Win2K.

I'm not going to waste my time arguing
with people who think they know it all.

Even you should be able to bull**** your way out
of your predicament better than that pathetic effort.


I think it answers the OP's question(s). It may not satisfy the
"I think I know it all / more" types but nothing would and that wasn't
my intent.