Got my Mac back
in [Mac Systems]
|
Prev: Display Problem
Next: Buying a new Mac soon
From: Mike Rosenberg on 7 Feb 2010 22:54 John <jwolf6589(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: > So in my case its the RAM on the logic board, hardware or a software > issue. RAM _IS_ hardware. And he OS was installed several times, wasn't it? That would rule out software, unless you're doing something really silly like reinstalling Norton Utilities each time. -- My latest dance performance <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_9pudbFisE> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi>
From: Jolly Roger on 7 Feb 2010 23:05 In article <jwolf6589-E8F93A.22461207022010(a)newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com>, John <jwolf6589(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: > In article <1jdjdst.1s0d2pf17htbrqN%mikePOST(a)TOGROUPmacconsult.com>, > mikePOST(a)TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote: > > > John <jwolf6589(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Passing a test tells you no problems were _detected_, not that no > > > > problems actually exist. Memory tests, no matter how extensive, cannot > > > > simulate all possible real-world situations, nor can they test the > > > > portion of RAM that's needed to boot the computer and run the test > > > > software in the first place. > > > > > > I ran Memtest overnight and it also reported no problems. However I have > > > received 2 more Kernel Panics. I complained to the computer repair shop > > > and the guy got all bent out of shape and defensive. Apparently he did > > > not fully do his job and test my hardware like he claimed he would. So I > > > am going to argue for somewhat of a refund or I may take it to the BBB > > > if needs be. > > > > Um, did you actually _read_ what I wrote? Reread the paragraph of mine > > quote above over and over under you understand this: It'a not uncommon > > to have bad RAM and not be able to detect it through testing. > > > > That means two things to you: > > > > 1. You can only truly determine if you have defective RAM by removing or > > swapping it out. > > > > 2. Since it's something that often cannot be tested for, it's wrong to > > say the tech did not fully do his job. He'd have to run the iBook > > exactly as you do, and the one person who can do that is you. > > Its not the RAM. Remopving the chip increased the panics. However I > never get them in safe mode. That doesn't mean it's not RAM. It just means it's not the RAM you removed, and it's not RAM that doesn't get used during Safe Boot. -- Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts. JR
From: Jolly Roger on 7 Feb 2010 23:22 In article <1jdkfci.1uzpmbo4y68t8N%mikePOST(a)TOGROUPmacconsult.com>, mikePOST(a)TOGROUPmacconsult.com (Mike Rosenberg) wrote: > John <jwolf6589(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: > > > > That means two things to you: > > > > > > 1. You can only truly determine if you have defective RAM by removing or > > > swapping it out. > > > > > > 2. Since it's something that often cannot be tested for, it's wrong to > > > say the tech did not fully do his job. He'd have to run the iBook > > > exactly as you do, and the one person who can do that is you. > > > > Its not the RAM. Remopving the chip increased the panics. > > Thereby providing extremely strong evidence that it's the built-in RAM > on the motherboard, as _that_ RAM will be active a much greater > percentage of the time you're using the computer. You do know there's > built-in RAM, don't you? If there wasn't, you couldn't boot up with > nothing in the expansion slot. Exactly. -- Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts. JR
From: John McWilliams on 8 Feb 2010 10:48
John wrote: > In article <2010020620504716807-sdfisher(a)spamcopnet>, > Steven Fisher <sdfisher(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > >> On 2010-02-06 10:38:06 -0800, John said: >> >>> The mac certified tech says that my Mac had no hardware problems. Also I >>> ran multiple tests on the hardware and found no problems. My Mac DOES >>> NOT have hardware problems. >> I'm not gonna say you do have hardware problems, but the tests the tech >> will run are hardly exhaustive. I had my mini in four times before they >> finally swapped out the RAM. All my problems went away after that. >> >> This is a laptop, right? That rules out power supply. So I'd still be >> looking at RAM. > > Its not RAM. I swapped out the 1 GB chip and still got the panics > (unless its the 256MB on the logic board). But perhaps its the video > card. You really ought to set your newsreader to view Threaded, and try to read all the replies to YOUR questions before posting what your expert analysis says it isn't. Pay particular attention to Messrs. Empson, Rosenberg, Fisher and Roger in this case. -- john mcwilliams |