Dell 4550 dead

Hi!

The amount of information in those numbers is too numerous
to list.

Nonsense. It's a go or no-go test. You *know* whether the voltages
fall within specification or do not. You *know* whether those voltages
are at the right levels in a given mode of operation or not.

See previous examples where 20 posters denied the meter's
value using the same technical ignorance.

The reality of the post does not agree with you. Maybe you should
*read* the thread before referencing it in a way that the facts don't
support?

Jan Alter was one of the first to reply to the thread and suggested a
multimeter test immediately.

I saw nobody (yes, that's right, *nobody*) that attacked the OP when
they did the tests you suggested and posted the results.

The original poster never said that they solved their problems, only
that they did the tests you suggested.

I found your recommendation of a multimeter that costs as much as a
hammer to be humorous at best. Do you *really* trust the accuracy of
such an inexpensive instrument? Come on. I'm not saying that a person
should spend hundreds of dollars to buy a suitable meter, but a
discount store special that cost $5 shouldn't be expected to have
pinpoint accuracy and may be more of a hindrance than anything else.

It is also dangerously incorrect to report that someone cannot hurt
themselves or harm the computer parts with only a multimeter. You
don't consider what people who don't know what they are doing will
try--maybe you've never seen it happen. I have, it is experience that
I can speak from.

Your suggestion that the loading of the CPU does not represent a good
load test is also somewhat ridiculous. The CPU in a modern computer
typically operates on multiple input voltages coming from multiple
power supply outputs (as well as a motherboard-based step-down
supply), and any form of increased processor utilization is going to
drive up power consumption.

You can see this with a simple thermometer. The CPU is typically the
single largest consumer of power (although today's video cards are
very close and in some cases beyond the CPU in terms of power
consumption) in a computer. Driving its utilization up to a higher
level is going to put more stress on the power supply. Period.

in alt.syste.pc-clone.dell.

alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt

No reason explain the value of meter numbers. *The attitude
here is to not learn. *Attack better ideas.

Nobody here is attacking better ideas, working smarter or learning.
The only thing being disputed here is your uncanny ability to latch
onto threads involving personal computer power systems and power
protection devices with a certain...fervor. That is all.

You're missing the point. People object to your incessant "look at me,
look at me, look at me, nobody else knows what they're doing!!!"
prattling. Say your piece, offer your theory, it's Usenet and nobody
can stop you. It might even make things better because you did care to
venture your opinion. But quit berating others on the basis of their
being unconditionally wrong just because they don't agree with you!

You are not, despite your demonstrated belief to the contrary, the
only person in the world that knows anything about power distribution,
power supplies and power protection.

The attitude here sounds so much like the blue collar
workers who attacked Japanese cars in the 1970s - rather
than 'work smarter'.

I have my doubts that you have ever worked on a car in enough depth to
know.

The Japanese cars of those times (and most of the 80s as well) sold in
massive numbers. They were popular with many different people from all
kinds of backgrounds, including the blue collar ones of which you
speak. They represented inexpensive, reliable and fuel efficient
transportation in an era where the US-based car makers wern't
effectively catering to that market or didn't have competitive
offerings.

Mechanically, however, things are a different story. The Japanese had
some...interesting...ideas about how to do some things. One example of
many is a 1984 Plymouth Reliant with a Mitsubishi 2.6L engine. It is
truly the most unique design I've ever seen. There are huge numbers of
vacuum lines, a large number of vacuum driven and mechanical actuators
on the carburetor. There's even an engine computer--the first time
I've ever seen any carburetion based system with one.

Does it get the job done? Oh, yes. Was it manufactured to high quality
standards? Certainly. Is it much, much harder to understand and repair
than it should be? Absolutely and beyond a doubt. Can it be considered
a bad quality product? No.

Any comparison to the Chrysler engine in the *factory* service manual
will show you that the Mitsubishi engine is much, much more complex to
tune and adjust if it needs to be done. That's no lie, no bias and no
favoritism. The two engines both move a car down the road, but one is
much easier to comprehend and maintain.

I don't intend to participate in this thread any longer. If you fail
to understand what's being said even after my having taken the time to
explain it, then you're not going to understand.

It is because of that--and not because of any testing methodology you
suggest--that people say the things they do about your postings.

William

westom wrote:
On Aug 2, 6:55 pm, Ben Myers wrote:
Better still,westomcould even be extremely helpful by explaining
exactly how he would use a multimeter to test a standard ATX power
supply and/or motherboard.

Tthe amount of information in those numbers is too numerous to list.
See previous examples where 20 posters denied the meter's value using
the same technical ignorance. Then the OP used 30 second to take
measurements on 7 Oct 2008. Identified the problem almost immediately
in alt.syste.pc-clone.dell.
http://tinyurl.com/6khcnf
Those 20 naysayers wasted bandwidth with "it could be this" or
"replace that".. Then attacked Larc because he used the meter to
quickly identify the failure and move on to a solution.

After so many nasty comments here, the OP has been scared off. No
reason explain the value of meter numbers. The attitude here is to
not learn. Attack better ideas. Stay ignorant because "this is how
we always do it", which is also what the Japanese describes as "work
harder, no smarter".

Larc ignored that same attitude, used the meter to isolate the
problem to its source, and was then attacked for "working smarter".
The attitude here sounds so much like the blue collar workers who
attacked Japanese cars in the 1970s - rather than 'work smarter'.

"The attitude here is to not learn." Au contraire! Your attitude is
condescending and you do not teach. You only preach, and we are all
tired of people who preach generalities without getting to a meaningful
level of detail. Exactly like a troll... Ben Myers

On Aug 3, 1:35 pm, Ben Myers wrote:
Au contraire! Your attitude is condescending and you do not teach.
You only preach, and we are all tired of people who preach
generalities without getting to a meaningful level of detail.

Post meter numbers and reams of detail appear. But maybe 10 people
would attack the messenger rather than help the OP - who qucikly left
after so many silly ideas such "remove things and see what happens".
Bad procedure often found where a tech becomes quickly unemployed.
Demonstrated by so many here is the same blue collar mentality that
attacked 1970s Japanese cars rather than first learn what the problem
was.

30 seconds to collect numbers using a tool that sells for the price
of a hammer - and is more than sufficiently accurate. Jan Alter also
made that same recommendation. It was never done – despite what
William Walsh claimed.

Larc did that back in Oct 2008 ( http://tinyurl.com/6khcnf ).
He had a fruitful discussion while others (like so many here) attacked
him for solving the problem faster and accurately. Just another
example of "blue collar workers attacking Japanese cars". (Are we
really doomed to repeat history every 30 some years?)

I did not preach anything. Posted was a simpler procedure to obtain
facts. Posted was why those facts would result in useful replies
without foolish "try this or swap that" shotgunning. Jeff left after
so many here only posted attacks. He never did post those numbers –
therefore nobody could provide a definitive solution. The attackers
now blame me for THEIR condescending attitude?

Those who want to learn were driven away long ago by constant
snipping and cheap shots. Those with basic electrical knowledge would
know why numbers from a meter - sold for less than $18 in Walmart -
are so definitive. Amazing how some even attack the meter because it
is so inexpensive and so scares them - because they never learned how
to use one. More cheap shots - and then blame me for their
condescending attitude? Nonsense. Fear too often found in negative
"we fear to learn" attitudes. "Work smarter; not harder" creates so
much fear especially among naysayers who only learned how to
shotgunning.

On Aug 3, 5:01*pm, westom wrote:
On Aug 3, 1:35 pm, Ben Myers wrote:

Au contraire! *Your attitude is condescending and you do not teach.
*You only preach, and we are all tired of people who preach
*generalities without getting to a meaningful level of detail.

* Post meter numbers and reams of detail appear. *But maybe 10 people
would attack the messenger rather than help the OP - who qucikly left
after so many silly ideas such "remove things and see what happens".
Bad procedure often found where a tech becomes quickly unemployed.
Demonstrated by so many here is the same blue collar mentality that
attacked 1970s Japanese cars rather than first learn what the problem
was.

* *30 seconds to collect numbers using a tool that sells for the price
of a hammer - and is more than sufficiently accurate. * Jan Alter also
made that same recommendation. *It was never done – despite what
William Walsh claimed.

* *Larc did that back in Oct 2008 ( *http://tinyurl.com/6khcnf* )..
He had a fruitful discussion while others (like so many here) attacked
him for solving the problem faster and accurately. *Just another
example of "blue collar workers attacking Japanese cars". *(Are we
really doomed to repeat history every 30 some years?)

* I did not preach anything. *Posted was a simpler procedure to obtain
facts. *Posted was why those facts would result in useful replies
without foolish "try this or swap that" shotgunning. *Jeff left after
so many here only posted attacks. *He never did post those numbers –
therefore nobody could provide a definitive solution. *The attackers
now blame me for THEIR condescending attitude?

* Those who want to learn were driven away long ago by constant
snipping and cheap shots. *Those with basic electrical knowledge would
know why numbers from a meter - sold for less than $18 in Walmart -
are so definitive. *Amazing how some even attack the meter because it
is so inexpensive and so scares them - because they never learned how
to use one. *More cheap shots - and then blame me for their
condescending attitude? *Nonsense. *Fear *too often found in negative
"we fear to learn" attitudes. "Work smarter; not harder" creates so
much fear especially among naysayers who only learned how to
shotgunning.

YOU started being belligerent and condescending...now you don't like
the heat.
And by your own definition...you are wasting the band-width.

bob_v

On Mon, 3 Aug 2009 15:01:23 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Aug 3, 1:35 pm, Ben Myers wrote:
Au contraire! Your attitude is condescending and you do not teach.
You only preach, and we are all tired of people who preach
generalities without getting to a meaningful level of detail.

Post meter numbers and reams of detail appear. But maybe 10 people
would attack the messenger rather than help the OP - who qucikly left
after so many silly ideas such "remove things and see what happens".
Bad procedure often found where a tech becomes quickly unemployed.
Demonstrated by so many here is the same blue collar mentality that
attacked 1970s Japanese cars rather than first learn what the problem
was.

30 seconds to collect numbers using a tool that sells for the price
of a hammer - and is more than sufficiently accurate. Jan Alter also
made that same recommendation. It was never done – despite what
William Walsh claimed.

Larc did that back in Oct 2008 ( http://tinyurl.com/6khcnf ).
He had a fruitful discussion while others (like so many here) attacked
him for solving the problem faster and accurately. Just another
example of "blue collar workers attacking Japanese cars". (Are we
really doomed to repeat history every 30 some years?)

I did not preach anything. Posted was a simpler procedure to obtain
facts. Posted was why those facts would result in useful replies
without foolish "try this or swap that" shotgunning. Jeff left after
so many here only posted attacks. He never did post those numbers –
therefore nobody could provide a definitive solution. The attackers
now blame me for THEIR condescending attitude?

Those who want to learn were driven away long ago by constant
snipping and cheap shots. Those with basic electrical knowledge would
know why numbers from a meter - sold for less than $18 in Walmart -
are so definitive. Amazing how some even attack the meter because it
is so inexpensive and so scares them - because they never learned how
to use one. More cheap shots - and then blame me for their
condescending attitude? Nonsense. Fear too often found in negative
"we fear to learn" attitudes. "Work smarter; not harder" creates so
much fear especially among naysayers who only learned how to
shotgunning.


You are beginning to annoy me because you refuse to recognize what
several posts said, keep repeating yourself and now call others' ideas
as silly.

The true judge of how smart you are will be how many are willing to
listen to you and follow your advice and not how smart you proclaim to
be.

On Aug 4, 12:07*am, RnR wrote:
The true judge of how smart you are will be how many are willing to
listen to you and follow your advice

Which proves George Bush Jr is a genius.

On Aug 4, 9:16*am, westom wrote:
On Aug 4, 12:07*am, RnR wrote:

The true judge of how smart you are will be how many are willing to
listen to you and follow your advice

* Which proves George Bush Jr is a genius.

....which proves you are demented.

Bob Villa wrote:
On Aug 4, 9:16 am, westom wrote:
On Aug 4, 12:07 am, RnR wrote:

The true judge of how smart you are will be how many are willing to
listen to you and follow your advice
Which proves George Bush Jr is a genius.

...which proves you are demented.

And a puppet of a president is a genius? With Darth Cheney pulling all
the strings? ... Ben Myers

On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 07:16:07 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Aug 4, 12:07*am, RnR wrote:
The true judge of how smart you are will be how many are willing to
listen to you and follow your advice

Which proves George Bush Jr is a genius.


Go off topic is you must but we'll see.

"Ben Myers" wrote in message
...
Bob Villa wrote:
On Aug 4, 9:16 am, westom wrote:
On Aug 4, 12:07 am, RnR wrote:

The true judge of how smart you are will be how many are willing to
listen to you and follow your advice
Which proves George Bush Jr is a genius.

...which proves you are demented.

And a puppet of a president is a genius? With Darth Cheney pulling all
the strings? ... Ben Myers


http://tinyurl.com/dldbar