| 1 |
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Peter Humphrey |
| 2 |
<peter@××××××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Tuesday 28 August 2012 21:57:43 Alex Schuster wrote: |
| 4 |
>> I wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > Well, all I can do now is to get a new board and see if things will |
| 6 |
>> > be okay then. |
| 7 |
>> [...] |
| 8 |
>> So I had to wait. And when it became available, I wondered if it |
| 9 |
>> might be the processor instead that has the problem, so I let the PC |
| 10 |
>> shop diagnose CPU and board. This took until today, and they |
| 11 |
>> confirmed it was the board indeed, not the CPU. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Let me get this straight. The shop ran tests and concluded that the |
| 14 |
> motherboard was faulty, not the CPU? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
>> Fine, I bought the board |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> ...it having been tested and found faulty! |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
>> guess what - it doesn't work. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Sorry, but I must be misreading this. You've said that the board was |
| 23 |
> diagnosed faulty, but you bought it anyway and it turned out faulty. |
| 24 |
> Where is the mystery? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
The test would have been done on his old board, which the shop |
| 27 |
diagnosed to be faulty. Having had that diagnosed, he proceeded to buy |
| 28 |
a new board, which also failed. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Is this a problem with the English language? I thought I knew it inside- |
| 32 |
> out, upside-down and back-to-front. I still think so. Yet your account |
| 33 |
> has you tying yourself in knots over a known fault. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Too many uses of the insufficiently-explicit "the board"...but (in |
| 36 |
English) such ambiguities are usually resolved by surrounding context. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
:wq |
Archives