Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

[Jeanette Guire]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 03:23:40 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:

That's REALLY BAD design.

I agree -- a reviewer should have caught this and at least warned potential
buyers.

Thank you for this kind note. When I googled for this problem, I found that
it's a common problem. But I had read the major reviews, e.g., dpreview,
and I never saw any mention that this was going to be a disaster.

The folks at dpreview pumped up the camera so much that I now look at
dpreview with total distrust.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0302/03021803cp3100preview.asp

How can ANYONE trust a reviewer who totally misses the fact the camera will
be made senseless within a year of use in almost every case?

 

[Jeanette Guire]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:05:12 GMT, Jeanette Guire wrote:

And why didn't the legion of reviewers for the Nikon Coolpix series notice
this? Are THEY that stupid?

I partially blame the reviewers like dpreview and Steve's DigiCams who
never told us the camera they were touting so blatantly would be a brick
within a year due to Nikon's poor engineering.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/nikon3100.html

I have totally lost my faith in at least the two reviewers I trusted
- Dpreview
- Steve's DigiCams

I guess the next question is whether or not there are ANY reliable &
reputable camera reviwers out there who actually test the cameras for more
than a day or two & report accurately on such obvious mechanical flaws?

 

[Smitty Two]

In article <ssKQi.10805$4V6.2806@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>,
Jeanette Guire <jeanetteguire@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 03:31:11 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:

I'd suggest you get the necessary part and have an independent service
shop fix it -- though the cost might be more than you would care to pay.

PS: Pardon my stupidity in not having first looked carefully at the photos.
The "part" is a major chunk of the body, and is not easily replaceable.

I was going to mention that.

Not only is the "part" the camera body, but it's guaranteed to break given
the stresses on a little tiny loop of plastic.

Why couldn't Nikon have designed the latch better?
Is Nikon that stupid?

And why didn't the legion of reviewers for the Nikon Coolpix series notice
this? Are THEY that stupid?

Or is it just me?

You know, even intelligent people make mistakes. Nikon fixed the problem
in a later iteration of the camera, as you yourself pointed out. If
you're so smart, how come *you* didn't see it as a design weakness
before you bought two of them?

Have you ever seen the show "Engineering Disasters?" Things that men
build that are a lot more significant than a cheap dime store camera, do
break. It seems to me you're milking this one for a lot more attention
than it's worth. Be glad you fixed it, and get back to something
important in your life.

 

[Frank Arthur]

"Jeanette Guire" <jeanetteguire@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:ssKQi.10805$4V6.2806@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 03:31:11 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:

I'd suggest you get the necessary part and have an independent
service
shop fix it -- though the cost might be more than you would care
to pay.

PS: Pardon my stupidity in not having first looked carefully at the
photos.
The "part" is a major chunk of the body, and is not easily
replaceable.

I was going to mention that.

Not only is the "part" the camera body, but it's guaranteed to break
given
the stresses on a little tiny loop of plastic.

Why couldn't Nikon have designed the latch better?
Is Nikon that stupid?

And why didn't the legion of reviewers for the Nikon Coolpix series
notice
this? Are THEY that stupid?

Or is it just me?

Aha!

 

[SMS]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 23:31:03 -0700, Jeanette Guire wrote:

For the record, I had called Nikon Service Relations at 800-645-6678
and they basically said that many people have the problem with the
Nikon Coolpix series battery latch door breaking and that it wasn't
something they cared about.

This is perhaps a good reason for not owning a Nikon camera. Canon seems to
have a better attitude -- at least about their SLRs. (You can reach Customer
Service on Saturdays. Even early in the evening.)

There are a couple of advantages to Canon. First, their designs seem to
be more rugged, even the plastic ones. This is because Canon is more of
an engineering company than a marketing company.

Second, Nikon U.S.A. is really strict about not honoring the warranty on
Nikon products purchased outside the U.S.A., while Canon doesn't make a
big deal about it. Nikon U.S.A. won't even fix products purchased
outside the country when the owner is willing to pay for the repair.
It's their way of fighting gray-market goods, but it does cause problems
for owners that have bought Nikon products outside the U.S..

It's worth noting that manufacturers are legally obliged to provide
"mechanical" replacement parts for at least three years after a product is
discontinued. The availability of parts _implies_ the availability of
service (though there seems to be no guarantee of _that_).

The problem is that it's not the battery door that breaks, it's the
whole camera body that breaks. Unless the entire camera body is
considered a "part."

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:12:34 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

There are a couple of advantages to Canon. First, their designs seem to
be more rugged, even the plastic ones. This is because Canon is more of
an engineering company than a marketing company.

Maybe. However, they're not so wonderful about fixing what few
engineering mistakes Canon does make. For example, the Error 18
problem which plagues their bottom of the line cameras:
<http://www.e18error.com>
This has actually been a benifit to me as I've been buying Canon
cameras that display Error 18 and repairing them. Clean out the sand,
un-jam the lens drive gears, and it's as good as ummm... used.

Second, Nikon U.S.A. is really strict about not honoring the warranty on
Nikon products purchased outside the U.S.A., while Canon doesn't make a
big deal about it.

Canon is marginal at honoring the warranty on bottom of the line
cameras. Two of the cameras I've fixed that displayed E18 were well
within the warranty period. Both were S510's. The authorized repair
center claimed that it was abused by the customer and therefore was
not covered under warranty. This may have been true, but I was able
to fix one by simply tinkering with the partly extended lens, and the
other by tearing it apart and removing some accumulated dust that was
jamming the gears.

Incidentally, I own a Canon A70, S510, A40, and just ordered a new
S5-IS. On the computer front, I really like Canon printers.



--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
# http://802.11junk.com jeffl@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

 

[Meat Plow]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 00:53:14 +0000, Michael Black wrote:

Meat Plow (meat@petitmorte.net) writes:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:55:02 -0700, jJim McLaughlin wrote:



You are just a crossposting fool without the sense to understand that
this is
wildly OT for at least two of the three groups you polluted.

Let's see, three groups xposted to:

ba.general (Announcements of GENERAL INTEREST to ALL readers
I don't think there is much if anything that could be construed as
off topic in that group except for Usenet spam.)

But one has to really wonder why there and nowhere else. After all,
it's general to the Bay Area.

Maybe she lives in the Bay area considering she posts using Pac Bell based
in San Jose?

rec.audio.tech (the Coolpix does create audio recordings hence not off
topic here)


Yet that is stretching it, rather like asking about old computer
hardware or the price of vacuum tubes in sci.electronics.repair

Those questions have been asked in SER and I don't recall anyone whining
and crying like a baby about it unless you did. I welcome all electronic
questions in electronic news groups. If the questions need more specific
answers I try to steer the poster to a group where those answers are more
likely to be found and not immediately bitch and fucking moan about it
being off topic like you do.

Cross-posting, like off-topic posts in general, is usually the > result
of someone too lazy to find the proper place to post.

A post describing a repair of an A/V device was posted to an AV group and
a repair group.

You can stretch things, but if you overlook the proper place, then
you're caught.

You're the one stretched out. And you've been lambasted from head to toe
by people from many different walks of life and culture in
sci.electronics.repair for being the topic censoring fuckhead you are.

rec.home.repair (the Coolpix can be considered an item of the home as in
many other items in the home, mowers, drills, chain saws, that get
freely and very regularly discussed without people like you crying
about the topic and content being off topic.)

But is it about the repair of household items, or the repair of the
house?

It only matters to topic censoring fuckeads like you.

Even in the former case, surely it relates to things not likely found
beyond the house. So a lawnmower would fit, but a camera is more than a
stretch.

You might as well put your computer questions there, because after all,
many/most houses have computers at this point.

I've answered many computer questions there and don't remember anyone
whining about being off topic. Well not until a topic censoring fuckhead
like you came along.

The only thing worse than cross-posters and off-topic posters is their
defenders.

Cross posting is the preferred way to propagate one message to multiple
groups while keeping only one record of the message on each server hence
saving server resources. I wouldn't expect a topic censoring fuckhead like
you to know that.

Michael

Michael Black the topic censoring fuckhead.

 

[Jeanette Guire]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:12:34 -0700, SMS wrote:

The problem is that it's not the battery door that breaks, it's the
whole camera body that breaks.

SMS is right. This tiny flimsy piece of plastic holding the stress of the
battery door is part of the body of the camera. So when it eventually
breaks (within weeks in some cases, within a year in others - but given the
design, it just has to break sooner rather than later) - the camera is
kaput.

Now, I wonder why Nikon didn't just put a paperclip-like metal pin in the
camera body. It would have cost pennies (how much can it cost) per camera
and they'd not have the ruined reputation that the entire coolpix series
has now.

Nobody who ever owned these coolpix cameras would ever trust Nikon again.

 

[Geoffrey S. Mendelson]

SMS wrote:

Second, Nikon U.S.A. is really strict about not honoring the warranty on
Nikon products purchased outside the U.S.A., while Canon doesn't make a
big deal about it. Nikon U.S.A. won't even fix products purchased
outside the country when the owner is willing to pay for the repair.

They also won't sell parts for the repair by a third party. The one exception
is that if you were a resident of the country you bought the camera in when
you bought it, they will honor the warranty.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/

 

[Smitty Two]

In article <I4YQi.45283$RX.8343@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>,
Jeanette Guire <jeanetteguire@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:12:34 -0700, SMS wrote:
The problem is that it's not the battery door that breaks, it's the
whole camera body that breaks.

SMS is right. This tiny flimsy piece of plastic holding the stress of the
battery door is part of the body of the camera. So when it eventually
breaks (within weeks in some cases, within a year in others - but given the
design, it just has to break sooner rather than later) - the camera is
kaput.

Now, I wonder why Nikon didn't just put a paperclip-like metal pin in the
camera body. It would have cost pennies (how much can it cost) per camera
and they'd not have the ruined reputation that the entire coolpix series
has now.

Nobody who ever owned these coolpix cameras would ever trust Nikon again.

Good lord, woman, STFU already. No one who's ever listened to you drone
on and on and on about this obscenely trivial issue you're having would
ever want to hear another peep out of you.

 

[SMS]

Jeanette Guire wrote:

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:12:34 -0700, SMS wrote:
The problem is that it's not the battery door that breaks, it's the
whole camera body that breaks.

SMS is right. This tiny flimsy piece of plastic holding the stress of the
battery door is part of the body of the camera. So when it eventually
breaks (within weeks in some cases, within a year in others - but given the
design, it just has to break sooner rather than later) - the camera is
kaput.

Now, I wonder why Nikon didn't just put a paperclip-like metal pin in the
camera body. It would have cost pennies (how much can it cost) per camera
and they'd not have the ruined reputation that the entire coolpix series
has now.

The body is injection molded, they are not going to start adding bits of
steel which would add significantly to the production cost. The big
mistake they made was to make the part that is most likely to break a
non-replaceable part.

For all the complaints about the iPhone, at least they have no flimsy
doors over battery compartments or memory slots. They have no buttons
that will break after extended use.

 

[Chuck]

I broke my rear window top hinge (backed into carport with window open) and
so can't get into the back until friday. I will check am radio reception
then.

 

[clifto]

piggypalace.1@goodtimessociety.net wrote:

Global Warming is caused by the Sun, the Moon and the Stars.

Global warming is caused by beer farts.

--
One meter, to within 0.0125% accuracy (off by just under .005 inches):
Three feet
Three inches
Three eights of an inch

 

[James Sweet]

I looked underneath today. There is a hose going to the garbage disposal
and another hose going to the faucet. There is a wire going to an
electrical outlet. I'll look more later this week as I had to visit my
grandchildren tonight and didn't get back home till late.

Here is what the dishwasher looks like:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/donnaohl/2279233722/

When I take the kick plate off, I'll snap a picture and show you what that
"solonoid" looks like.

Donna

Hey that looks identical to the one I just yanked out of my place, the motor
died and the rest was in pretty sad shape, but the new one is very similar
and works great. At any rate I'm familiar with the innards. When you remove
the kick plate, you'll find adjustable screw feet and you should be able to
lower it down enough to get it to fit under the counter lip. The solenoid
valve will be right up front on the left side, mine is blue.

 

[Michael Kennedy]

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4714ffc8$0$79869$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...

Jeanette Guire wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:12:34 -0700, SMS wrote:
The problem is that it's not the battery door that breaks, it's the
whole camera body that breaks.

SMS is right. This tiny flimsy piece of plastic holding the stress of the
battery door is part of the body of the camera. So when it eventually
breaks (within weeks in some cases, within a year in others - but given
the
design, it just has to break sooner rather than later) - the camera is
kaput.

Now, I wonder why Nikon didn't just put a paperclip-like metal pin in the
camera body. It would have cost pennies (how much can it cost) per camera
and they'd not have the ruined reputation that the entire coolpix series
has now.

The body is injection molded, they are not going to start adding bits of
steel which would add significantly to the production cost. The big
mistake they made was to make the part that is most likely to break a
non-replaceable part.

For all the complaints about the iPhone, at least they have no flimsy
doors over battery compartments or memory slots. They have no buttons that
will break after extended use.

Well the touch screen is a giant array of buttons so there is potential for
them to stop working.

Mike

 

[krishmaniac@hotmail.com]

hi,
Thanks for your earlier replies. i tried to solve theis problem.
Before taking any step further, first what i did was just shook the
instrument gently and opened it. I took out the A6 and A7 boards and
inserted them back in again.upon turning on the power supply now the
error message has changed to "B: ROM check sum err 004". Please
suggest how to get it fixed.
thanks.
kristo

 

[JW]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:59:17 -0700 "krishmaniac@hotmail.com"
<krishmaniac@hotmail.com> wrote in Message id:
<1192600757.382525.201980@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com>:

[restored non-quoted text]

On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 00:58:31 -0700 "krishmaniac@hotmail.com"
krishmaniac@hotmail.com> wrote in Message id:
1189411111.211691.300360@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>:

[Sorry for the repost, but I just noticed that sci.electronics.repair
is not in the groupline - I've taken the liberty of adding it.]

We got some problems with HP/Agilent 4194A Impedance/gain-phase
analyzer.

It get stuck when the equipment starts up.
The error message shows "CPU_A RAM R/W error. 40000H".

Please advice us how to fix the problem. Is there any third party
repairing these instrument? We have called Agilent, it is sad to know
that they have stopped support for this instrument since 2005.

kristo

I work as a tech for a company that salvages and repairs test equipment:
https://www.techrecovery.com/
We don't normally do repairs for third parties, though...

We have called Agilent, it is sad to know
that they have stopped support for this instrument since 2005.

I haven't worked on this particular piece of equipment (yet) but start
with the service manual:
http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/redirector.jspx?action=ref&cname=AGILENT_EDITORIAL&ckey=818491&lc=eng&cc=US&nfr=-536902489.536879058
If that link doesn't work go here and navigate to the manuals section:
http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/home.jspx?cc=US&lc=eng&cmpid=4533

This would be a tough one, as the schematic of the A6 and A7 boards is
unreadable (Why did they even bother?) There appears to be two banks of
DRAM on each board, each bank is 256KB. Given this, it appears that the
upper bank of memory is defective on either the A6 or A7 board. Start by
probing the WE, RAS and CAS lines on each bank of A6 and A7. If they
appear OK, look at each DRAM's data line for a bit that may appear to be
tied or faulty. If you had a signature analyzer, that would be a plus!

hi,
Thanks for your earlier replies. i tried to solve theis problem.
Before taking any step further, first what i did was just shook the
instrument gently and opened it. I took out the A6 and A7 boards and
inserted them back in again.upon turning on the power supply now the
error message has changed to "B: ROM check sum err 004". Please
suggest how to get it fixed.
thanks.

This error is indicating that the problem is now in the A8 board's ROM
located at U4. Is the problem consistent over multiple power ups - do you
get the *exact* same message each time you cycle the power? If so, you
could try re-seating that board as well checking the gold fingers for
contamination/dirt. If that doesn't solve the problem, I would begin by
getting the pinout for U4 and probing it's chip select and output enable
pins. Also, have you checked the voltages on all the power supply outputs
as well as checking them for ripple?

Unfortunately, the schematic of this board is just as bad as the A6 and A7
boards.

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

On Oct 16, 9:01 pm, piggypalac...@goodtimessociety.net wrote:

Global Warming is caused by the Sun, the Moon and the Stars.

Sure. Indoubitably.

Sincerely yours,

Sorry, don't want you.

Sh*t happens.
Species come and go with regularity.
Humans on earth may be likened to mold on an orange. We are at best a
temporary condition.
So, don't complain about life, it ain't nohow permanent.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

 

[SMS]

Michael Kennedy wrote:

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4714ffc8$0$79869$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
Jeanette Guire wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:12:34 -0700, SMS wrote:
The problem is that it's not the battery door that breaks, it's the
whole camera body that breaks.
SMS is right. This tiny flimsy piece of plastic holding the stress of the
battery door is part of the body of the camera. So when it eventually
breaks (within weeks in some cases, within a year in others - but given
the
design, it just has to break sooner rather than later) - the camera is
kaput.

Now, I wonder why Nikon didn't just put a paperclip-like metal pin in the
camera body. It would have cost pennies (how much can it cost) per camera
and they'd not have the ruined reputation that the entire coolpix series
has now.
The body is injection molded, they are not going to start adding bits of
steel which would add significantly to the production cost. The big
mistake they made was to make the part that is most likely to break a
non-replaceable part.

For all the complaints about the iPhone, at least they have no flimsy
doors over battery compartments or memory slots. They have no buttons that
will break after extended use.

Well the touch screen is a giant array of buttons so there is potential for
them to stop working.

Not it isn't. There are no mechanical buttons in the iPhone. I've been
to manufacturing sites for items like cell phones and PDAs. The "button
tree" is something that is almost guaranteed to be the first part inside
to fail.

 

[nospam]

In article <4716154b$0$79919$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

Well the touch screen is a giant array of buttons so there is potential for
them to stop working.

Not it isn't. There are no mechanical buttons in the iPhone.

wrong. there are five mechanical buttons on the iphone.