Abby Normal

I haven't logged in for awhile, but just happened by today. Congratulations to SonyInsider for adding such a person to their Admin team.

Goodbye Mary Travers:

Why not just dispense with the premise that "it has to be Sony"? That appears to be the fuel that keeps this issue burning. There's a nice warm fire just a few feet away--why continue to pray that the barely sparking ash will rekindle itself while you shiver?

Not so fast, not so fast--I just tried this with dates. It still doesn't "work fine". Update: Okay--it works sort of. But the circumstances are very narrow. You must have to know within a small range (30 days maybe?) when the topic you're looking for was updated (last post in the topic). For example, if you expand the To parameter to 'Now', it fails to go earlier than July 11 again. This is reminiscent of the search problems I had with IPB 2--which is why I pursued a Google custom search. I need to make a new one for SI, obviously.

I was selecting all. It is still "broken" if you have to know to "specify dates". My dad used to avoid fixing stuff too--"that lock isn't broken, just wiggle it while standing on one foot and apply 3PSI torque one way and 5PSI torque the other."

I know that I needed to update my topic numbers--I just couldn't find my posts before. Thanks for finding the workaround to the broken search. That'll help. It really is broken, by the way. If you click on the "Topics" tab in my profile, it only displays back to July 11, but as you can see, by using the Advanced Search and highlighting Hardware and Other as you instructed, I was able to find my new topic numbers and update my signature. In the meantime, until the search is fixed, people will be missing results because it is very natural just to highlight everything.

Yes, try searching for any of the titles I have crossed out in my signature. Do it on Google first so you can see the cached version from MDCF. Then try searching by title for them here. After you compare the dates on Google-cached versions of messages I've posted, then search for all topics posted by me--go to the last page and you'll see that the earliest date is July 11 even though Google's cache shows posts for me going back to June.

All the topics I posted before July 11 are missing still.

I've been running Adblock Plus for so long I generally don't realize that sites I frequent ever had ads. It's a bit of a shock sometimes if I sit down at a computer that doesn't have it.

Before this conversion started I think I mentioned that reconciling links would be the tricky part. This being a commercial product, hopefully the vendor has a solution that SI management is willing to use. These two link numbers correspond to what used to be the topic number and post number for the first post of "MZ-RH1: My MiniDisc Initiation" on MDCF. The topic link goes someplace and the post link goes some place entirely different now--if it were correct, they'd both land in the same place and it would look like this cached copy Google has: "MZ-RH1: My MiniDisc Initiation" Topic Link Test-22606 Post Link Test-143809

I know what you mean. There's other content that's missing, too. I've been assured it will all be restored.

I put my pics on Picasa and link them from here. Unless SonyInsider is on the all-you-can-eat bandwidth tier it's probably nicer to the people paying the bills here, too.

Thanks, Richard. I was just replying to the comment that I simply am too lazy to edit my profile.

Ahem--I said posts are MISSING. Let's see you fix THAT in 5 minutes. Topics are GONE--not just their topic numbers.

Posts are missing, links are broken. Examples--see the links in my signature.

That's what I'm talking about. That little area in between is what I'm calling a "flange". The two little "marks" that I see on my unit are to the left of the USB jack, just above the symbol that identifies it as usb (the warped trident-like thing). The two marks are slightly less than one centimeter apart and don't look like scratches so much as what it might look like if someone polished off the matte coating from the black paint in just those two tiny spots.

Are you talking about just above the symbol (like a warped "trident") for USB connectivity? I see a couple of what I'd call manufacturing artifacts. Looking at the blow-up views in the service manual, the location of those marks appears to be on a flange attached to the lower panel and corresponds (coincidentally or not?) with a location on the main board where they describe two solder points for the overwrite head. Yeah, I wouldn't worry about it.

I couldn't tell you. You might be better off seeing what your local USPS can do for you. You might be forced to upgrade the shipping to a more expensive option in order to get those add-ons.

Good to know. I just today received a unit that uses the same battery and presumably doesn't have the same problem--a DH10P. I think the battery is showing signs of capacity issues, though. I may be buying some batteries and one or two of those Targus universal chargers soon.

I bought an MZ-DH10P with all accessories in its original packaging--in great condition. Friendly, patient, professional, and absolutely no hassles. Did I mention he was patient? We negotiated the shipping and payment terms to the smallest detail until we were both satisfied. I highly recommend this seller and would certainly buy from him again.

You should post a picture if you can so we can get an idea of the length, width, and depth, and character of the scratch. When I was first taking pictures of my RH1 I noticed a tiny speck on the surface where the paint has come off, but I only noticed it in the pictures and only at a certain angle. I imagine yours is probably worse than that. I did take care of it in a rather unprofessional way, but it did the trick for my situation. I just barely touched the spot (I had to locate it first--since I couldn't see it hardly with the naked eye) with an extra fine Sharpie and then polished it gently immediately with a soft cloth. Do not do this At least wait until others have weighed in. Post a pic if you can.

New ebay ID with 0 history. I've dealt with sellers in that situation and haven't had a problem--though not from France. I have a whole philosophy for how to judge whether to deal with a particular ebay seller or not and it involves looking at how recent the negative feedback is, what the negative feedback actually says, and if there's a common "thread" to the complaints. Seeing 98 or 99% isn't a slam dunk in my book--I have to dig deeper. What I have noticed about sellers from France is they tend to ask a lot more than what an item is worth--perhaps it follows they'd be willing to pay more, too. http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...em=260462406122 (bid history on ChrisG's RH10) By the way, for a situation like that, I would opt for paying for verified signature out of my own pocket (as the seller) and insurance as well. It's a small price to pay to cover your butt.

This doesn't appear to be a very common problem. So, what you are saying is that an otherwise healthy battery has dropped below the minimum voltage for the RH1 to detect it as healthy, whereas other units have a lower threshold. Interesting. Well, if it is isolated to the RH1 then that opens up a whole new realm of possible explanations--active and passive. [conspiracy mode] If I wanted to get into the spirit of the bash-Sony bandwagon I could imagine that it could be a Sony engineer practicing his or her own form of "hacktivism" by introducing subtle defects into the SOPs. It doesn't matter that the end result only hurts the consumer. Disgruntled employees don't always think these things through. [end conspiracy mode]

(round and round--getting dizzy) Even if it were an established fact that Sony deliberately engineered the RH1 to expire sooner rather than later (which is the fulcrum of the disagreement here), it can't be a very practical or cost-effective research effort. If Sony is all about greed, presumably they understand that quality breeds brand loyalty and the focus of their R&D dollar would be put to better use in this area. Your argument doesn't stand the objectivity test very well. You appear to favor cynical conclusions and ignore all premises that can lead to equally likely innocuous ones. Your statements suggest you are even filtering these premises out in your own mind so that your apparent refusal to qualify your statements results in no internal conflict. This suggests an unknown (to me) personal motive on your part. It is also possible that, at least in this particular case, you have a slight affinity for conspiratorial thinking. Please note how I've put all my qualifying statements in italics.

I didn't say it was only your opinion. Others share your opinion as well. I believe the statistics can lead to that conclusion and to other conclusions--so in a way, I share your opinion as well, to an extent.