Get a HP Mini for only $288!

Forums › Off topic › Get a HP Mini for only $288!

1 | ... | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | ... | 44

698 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#288718 10-Jan-2010 17:31

5loth: I would say the are the same thing.

Given the FTA only specifies for the term Rain Check, and you have done exactly what a rain check involves, if you went to the DT the Rain Check rules would apply.

Unless you can show me the laws involving a 'back order'?

Where exactly does it use that term? I cannot find it anywhere in the text of the Act itself (unless it is in one of the amendments, but I cannot be bothered finding it in there)

Mighty Ape

Shop Mighty Ape for electronics, games, computers books and more (affiliate link).

D.W

686 posts

Ultimate Geek

#288721 10-Jan-2010 17:36

then a raincheck is exactly what we have got, so the raincheck rules would apply.

stock can be on back-order for a raincheck, so having the word back order on your receipt is not all that relevant.

any stock that is incoming to fulfill existing orders, is a back order, even if it is to fulfill a rain check.

D.W

686 posts

Ultimate Geek

#288724 10-Jan-2010 17:37

Paulthagerous:
5loth: I would say the are the same thing.

Given the FTA only specifies for the term Rain Check, and you have done exactly what a rain check involves, if you went to the DT the Rain Check rules would apply.

Unless you can show me the laws involving a 'back order'?

Where exactly does it use that term? I cannot find it anywhere in the text of the Act itself (unless it is in one of the amendments, but I cannot be bothered finding it in there)

http://www.consumeraffairs.govt.nz/consumerinfo/fta.html

under 'Bait advertising'.

Paulthagerous

698 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#288732 10-Jan-2010 17:51

5loth:
Paulthagerous:
5loth: I would say the are the same thing.

Given the FTA only specifies for the term Rain Check, and you have done exactly what a rain check involves, if you went to the DT the Rain Check rules would apply.

Unless you can show me the laws involving a 'back order'?

Where exactly does it use that term? I cannot find it anywhere in the text of the Act itself (unless it is in one of the amendments, but I cannot be bothered finding it in there)

http://www.consumeraffairs.govt.nz/consumerinfo/fta.html

under 'Bait advertising'.

You do realise that this is not the Act itself, just their version of it designed to help joe average. Neither term is specified in the Act itself, so there is certainately scope for there to be a distinction. Whether the Disputes Tribunal would agree with your distinction is of course a different matter...

andyj14

47 posts

Geek

#288741 10-Jan-2010 18:02

drajk: I wasn't trying to imply that it would necessarily be irrational for robbyp to take them on at this stage, I was merely explaining how I felt about my own position.

Fair enough. I wasn't having a go at anyone and I'm in the same boat as you. I just wanted to know what robbyp's position now was, given he was earlier keen to see an HP machine supplied.

As for myself, I'm quite happy to wait until the end of the month in the hope that we will ultimately receive a 1005. I was told when I paid for my raincheck on the 28/12 that I would hear from HN in the week just gone. I've received no call from them, but I'm not concerned as I've heard enough from those in this forum to be comfortable with what HN are up to.

I would like them to clarify what they are having "custom-built" for us but I tend to think it can only be an existing model from their 2009 range, and hopefully the 1005. Perhaps the custom building refers to the fact that they've had to knock up a couple of thousand of the 1005's as they didn't have sufficent stocks of them left in the ASUS warehouse to meet this order from HN.

According to Wikipedia, ASUS have already moved to an Atom 330 based netbook (1201N) as of mid-December 2009, so perhaps it is a case of the 1005 inventory has been run down and they are in full scale production of the 1201N. That would mean having to build some more 1005's especially for this purpose.

Anyway, all speculation until someone at HN comes to the party with more details.

D.W

686 posts

Ultimate Geek

#288749 10-Jan-2010 18:15

Paulthagerous:
You do realise that this is not the Act itself, just their version of it designed to help joe average. Neither term is specified in the Act itself, so there is certainately scope for there to be a distinction. Whether the Disputes Tribunal would agree with your distinction is of course a different matter...

yes I am aware of that, however the point is more that there is nothing to specify the same brand is required, which it would even in the text for joe average if that were the case, and regardless of what is written on some peoples invoice we have all taken a 'rain check'.

basically HN have done exactly what they are required to do, and I believe if people aren't happy with their solution the best they will get is a refund, as I can't see anything that would back them otherwise.

Paulthagerous

698 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#288755 10-Jan-2010 18:22

5loth: basically HN have done exactly what they are required to do

Lol, at this point we hope they have. If they truely have 'custom built' one, and we cannot get drivers for it I think it would be of significantly less quality! But I agree that to prove the ASUS is inferior will (probably) be hard if they have truely got exactly the same specs.

I think at this point the 'reasonable time' requirement will be the bigger issue: they had other aceptable HP's in stock (via the 1197's), so waiting a month may be considered too long. Doubtful though.

robbyp

1199 posts

Uber Geek

#288769 10-Jan-2010 19:31

Paulthagerous:
5loth: basically HN have done exactly what they are required to do

Lol, at this point we hope they have. If they truely have 'custom built' one, and we cannot get drivers for it I think it would be of significantly less quality! But I agree that to prove the ASUS is inferior will (probably) be hard if they have truely got exactly the same specs.

I think at this point the 'reasonable time' requirement will be the bigger issue: they had other aceptable HP's in stock (via the 1197's), so waiting a month may be considered too long. Doubtful though.

This is a link to the bait advertising part of the act http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0121/latest/DLM96945.html#DLM96945 , which discusses reasonable time . I have done a search of the FTA, and can't see any mention anywhere of the term and definition of 'rainchecks'

This extract is also taken off the ComComs website at http://www.comcom.govt.nz/FairTrading/TradePracticesCoveredbytheFairTradingAct/falseormisleadingadvertising.aspx

There is no precise definition of what is meant by ‘reasonable quantities’ and ‘reasonable time’. In practice, it will depend on the market in which the business is operating, the likely demand based on experience, the attractiveness of the offer and the nature and extent of the advertising.

The Act prohibits businesses from advertising goods or services that they know they cannot or may not be able to supply in reasonable quantities. Because of advertising deadlines, some businesses place advertisements for goods before they actually have them on hand. Sometimes, advertisements for goods ordered from overseas are placed in anticipation of their arrival. Businesses should be careful to make sure they have reasonable grounds to believe the goods will be available when the advertisement appears.

D.W

686 posts

Ultimate Geek

#288771 10-Jan-2010 19:35

robbyp:
This is a link to the bait advertising part of the act http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0121/latest/DLM96945.html#DLM96945 , which discusses reasonable time . I have done a search of the FTA, and can't see any mention anywhere of the term and definition of 'rainchecks'

it is referenced in the link I provided earlier, which is an indicator as to what the correct procedures are when a particular model cannot be fulfilled.

whilst not listed in the official listing of the act, it gives you an insight as to what the outcome would be if you tried to pursue it further.

Anyway I'm fairly over talking about all of this, and as I have said previously if you/anyone else don't accept the Asus I look forward to seeing how you get on.

photoman

217 posts

Master Geek

#288808 10-Jan-2010 21:36

tons:
andyj14: I guess the major problem I can see is, with the 1000 being 18+ months old now, are they likely to have enough chassis left to build the number required for this raincheck? Let's hope they don't! Here are the dimensions of the 1000 & 1005 .....

ASUS 1005

262mm(W) x 178mm(D) x 25.9mm~ 36.5mm(H) 1.1Kg (with3-Cell Battery)

ASUS 1000

266mm(W) x 191.2mm(D) x 28.5mm~ 38mm(H) 1.45 kg

I have taken andyj14's info above and compared these to the HP Mini 110 dimensions:

                  Width (mm) Depth (mm) Height (mm) Weight (kg)
HP 110        262             172             263              1.17
Asus 1000    266            191.2          285              1.45
Difference     4               19.2            22                0.28

HP 110         262             172            263               1.17
Asus 1005     262            178            259               1.1
Difference      0                 6               -4                  -0.07

So from this we can clearly see that the Asus 1000 is wider, deeper, taller and heavier than the HP Mini 110.

Where-as the Asus 1005 is the same width, only slightly deeper, shorter, and lighter than the HP Mini 110.

The differences between the HP Mini 110 and the Asus 1000 are all large, where-as the differences between the HP Mini 110 and the Asus 1005, where they exist, are small.

So, the Asus 1005 is a far closer match to the physical dimensions of the HP Mini 110, than an Asus 1000 is.

Therefore, HN better be using the 1005 chassis for the 'custom build'.

Just a comment on the 1005, 1008 and 1197 options. When I went into HN on Friday I queried why they were going to supply ASUS models when the nearest equivalent model to the 1111 was the 1197. This was all but ignored. Later that day, I emailed Anna Johnson raising my concerns with her and wondered why we had to wait for a month after paying up front when the 1197 was the simplest and quickest solution. Again this was ignored and I was asked to contact the Propeitor. I replied saying that the propreitor never made an appearance when I was in and I just dealt with a salesperson going backwards and forwards. It now transpires that the propeitor was off sick that day and was being called at home. On Saturday morning I received a phone call from the propeitor who confirmed that it would be an ASUS model, but was unable to give the model number it was being based on. What may be of interest is that the only things he indicated that were being matched against the HP were the processor, hard disk and screen size. Nothing else was mentioned like dimensions, weights, battery or other specs.

andyj14

47 posts

Geek

#288823 10-Jan-2010 23:20

Hmmmm, mushrooms anyone ....?

LZ

22 posts

Geek

#288852 11-Jan-2010 08:57

I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that 'same specs' applies to both the technical and physical specifications of the device. Sure there may be some variance on the width, depth, breadth and weight but these should be minimal if they are having machines made to exact spec.

tons

48 posts

Geek
Inactive user

#288891 11-Jan-2010 09:58

Whatever ends up happening regarding the exact model of Asus we get, check out www.eeeuser.com for a great resource on Asus EEE PCs

tons

48 posts

Geek
Inactive user

#289166 12-Jan-2010 09:32

Any new news (or opinion)?

stuzzo

534 posts

Ultimate Geek

#289170 12-Jan-2010 09:52

Got a call today from my local Harvey Norman confirming the netbook will be an Asus of similar spec. ETA about 2 weeks.

Head Office not advising stores of the model number.

1 | ... | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | ... | 44