Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!decvax!cca!ima!johnl
From: johnl@ima.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: Re: My AT is still alive.
Message-ID: <492@ima.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 23-Feb-85 23:42:23 EST
Article-I.D.: ima.492
Posted: Sat Feb 23 23:42:23 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Feb-85 06:04:47 EST
Lines: 30
Nf-ID: #R:uok:-490000900:ima:12700027:000:1649
Nf-From: ima!johnl    Feb 23 15:08:00 1985

>My AT is now 6 months old and I have yet to have a single problem.
>The rumours about hard disk problems, for the most part, are a farce.
>Yes there are people that have had hard-drive problems, but in
>reality, they have been exaggerated into unbeleivable proportions by
>the press because of shipping delays on the AT's..

Gosh, David, I'm glad to hear that your AT still works and that you believe
your employer's claims that there are no disk problems.  Unfortunately, just
because IBM says it's true and because your AT works doesn't mean that all
of the disks work.  We have nine ATs and eight of them have recurring disk
problems ranging from occasional glitches to total disk cancer making the
machines unusable.  Most of the disk problems occur on the inner half
of the disk, so if your disk is less than half full, you probably haven't
started to use the bad part yet.  For comparison, our XT disks work perfectly
all of the time, like you'd hope.

It's really dismaying to find that IBM is so totally unable to get a handle
on their quality control problems.  It may be true that there are not a
whole lot of dealer returns, but if our experience is any guide, that's
because sending in your AT to be "fixed" doesn't fix it, so we don't
bother to take them in.  If IBM could repair the problem, we'd have
made warranty claims on eight of our nine machines.

Sorry for the flame, but IBM's self-righteous claims that nothing is wrong
are starting to get to me.

John Levine, ima!johnl

PS:  My current theory is that the problem is in the data separator logic
located on the drive.  It may be CMI's mistake, but it's still IBM's problem.