(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Am I missing something, (like gold plating)

Or do they really think someone is stupid enough to pay $100 for a USED
1gb flash drive?

PNY Mini Attache 1 GB USB 2.0 Flash Drive.
Buy it Now for - Only $99.99 on Ebay

eBay item number:  131733242123

http://www.ebay.com/itm/PNY-Mini-Attache-1-GB-USB-2-0-Flash-Drive-P-FD1GB
U3-MINI-RF-/131733242123?hash=item1eabe9c10b:g:nakAAOSwMHdXSMdO

And for an additional $15.99 you can get a one year warranty on it.
-WOW-

But at least the shipping is Free....

And it has a "Make an Offer" option.

I wonder if they would accept my offer of $1.00?

I'm tempted to do it....




Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 07/06/17 17:58, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

It depends. How many Bitcoins does it contain?


Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Wanna explain that....

This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the
last month. What the heck does that mean?  

I'm not up on some of this stuff that is probably another facebook gag,
and I would not touch facebook with someone else's computer on the end
of a 10 foot pole.

I was thinking that this flash drive contains some pirated software
though, like a Windows installer or something, but reading the docs on
that webpage, no one would know what was on it, so what is the point.
And for $100 you can nearly buy a retail version of Windows 10 (I
think). I recall seeing it at Walmart for $129 a year ago.  

Not that it matters, I'll stick with Windows XP and even Win98. I use
both. Everytime I have to use the WIn 10 computers at the local library,
I have to ask WHY? I can do the same things in XP with a lot less bloat,
less CPU power, less hassle, and less much less tracking.

Anyhow, I can only think that this item is a joke. But it should have
been posted on April 1.
Ebay dont seen to care about prices. As long as an item fits their terms
of service, it's listed. (sensible or not).



Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Bit coins are not a joke.  You will have to research it for yorself to  
full details.

It is something to exchange money on the internet.  A few years back  
they were not very expensive, but the value keeps going up.



Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote on 6/7/2017 2:27 PM:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Not trying to give you a hard time, but where have you been for the last  
decade?  Bit coin is a digital currency backed by nothing but what others  
will pay for it.  While it has no real basis for its value, it is the same  
as other investments like art or gold, worth what someone will give you for  
it.

Bitcoin has been significant in the news for some time now being reported as  
used as payment for criminal activity and of more importance to users, one  
bitcoin exchange which was supposedly hacked loosing some millions of  
dollars worth of currency with no way to trace it... which I found odd since  
they can track bitcoin.  That's also why it's odd that it would be used for  
criminal actions, it is traceable!

Whatever.  I'm happy with the folding stuff.

--  

Rick C

Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 08/06/17 06:06, rickman wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Like every other currency.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Like ever other currency.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Like every other currency.

Currency has value because of the real stuff you can buy with it.
You can buy real stuff with it, because the seller accepts its
value, because they can buy stuff with it. Exactly the same is
true with bitcoins, but unlike cash, no physical artefact needs
to cross a border.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The bitcoins are traceable, but the owner is not. Like cash.


Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:27:48 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin

Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Thanks for the link. I now know I will avoid bitcoins. Sounds like a big
game and likely a scam,or at least someone profits from it, and everyone
else pays a sucker fee.


Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 08/06/17 13:52, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You have your head in the sand.

I'm sure the early trading economies encountered more than
a few people like you when they started to move from IOUs
to exchangeable tokens. "Why would I give you these nice
vegetables for this inscribed chunk of clay, or that paper?"

That's all cash is, tokens. That's all Bitcoins are, too.

Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yea, but cash is controlled by the government, making it safe. Not that
the government is always right, but unless the economy collapses, a
dollar will always be worth a dollar and can be used anywhere in the US
and many other parts of the world.  


Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
Quoted text here. Click to load it

But dogs can't smell bitcoins.

Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote on 6/7/2017 11:52 PM:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

It's not a scam.  It has been around for a long time now.  There is long  
term growth in the value of bit coin, which is not required for it to be  
useful.  That's not to say there aren't scammers out there to use bit coin  
in some way that will rip you off, but you don't need bit coin for that to  
happen.

But because there is nothing to set a value on bit coin, the value can go up  
and down with events that cast it in a good or poor light.

--  

Rick C

Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 6/7/2017 1:27 PM, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Hardly a day goes by where you don't once again prove how
incredibly ignorant you are.

They have nothing to do with Facebook.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin



--  
Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Having never used anything newer than XP, I was wondering if Win7 boots
as fast as XP, or is it slower?  

I've never had any problems with the boot time of XP. Only once did I
get a computer that booted so damn slow I reinstalled XP. I had bought a
used laptop on ebay and they seller sold it with a fresh install of XP,
but then he put so much anti-virus software on it, that it literally
took near 5 min to boot. Once booted the thing ran so slow I could not
even use it. I finally wiped the HDD and just reinstalled XP. Problem
solved!  


Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 14:56:24 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@tubes.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


I've been told that Win 7 is somewhat faster.  As I previously
mentioned, such comparisons turn into apples and oranges comparisons
due to differences in hardware, differences in 32bit vs 64bit, etc.
The only comparisons I find valid is when I take a single machine, and
swap out two identical hard disk drives, one with XP and the other
with Win 7.  Also, both machines should have XP and Win 7 updated to
the latest, with typical resident programs installed (virus scanner,
acrobat, skype, fancy video drivers, etc).  Only then will I get a
valid comparison.  Also, there's the question of when does one
consider the boot timing to end?  I usually use when task manager
shows near zero CPU and disk usage.  Or, maybe when the HD light
almost stops flashing.  That's fine, but if the machine decides to
download or finish installing updates just after boot, the benchmarks
get mangled.

I've also seen benchmarks claiming that XP is faster than Win 7.  When
I dug deeper, I found that the Win 7 machine was a fully loaded
production machine, while the XP machine had only the basic
installation to SP3 (service pack 3) without any further updates.
That's not very fair since the subsequent updates, and typical
installed resident programs, really slow down XP.  On a fresh install,
on an Intel E8500 dual core machine, XP can easily boot in 45 seconds.
However, install the mass of updates and junkware, it will slow down
to about 6 minutes.  Win 7 has even more updates, but the slowdown is
less.

For entertainment value, I just timed my HP Pavilion Elite m9077c
desktop, running Win 7, quad core Q6600, 8GB RAM, Seagate 1TB drive.  
Well, that was a monumental waste of time.  I'm at 10 minutes and the
HD is furiously bashing away.  I haven't had it on for about a week,
so it's catching up with updates, virus scans, disk maintenance
(defrag), backup to NAS, etc.  All that usually takes about an hour.
Maybe I'll try again later.  Remind me if I forget.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I bought both my home and office XP machines in about 2006.  I loaded
XP once, and have never had to reinstall XP.  When I needed a larger
disk drive, I would clone the old drive to the new driver, and
continue merrily on my way.  If you have to reinstall XP (and you're
not cleaning up the mess left by a virus), then you're doing something
wrong.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sure, but did you install a virus program, any virus program?  Even
MSE (microsoft security essentials) takes its toll on performance.
Comparing performance with and without an anti-virus program isn't
fair.

Incidentally, I don't care much about speed when the differences are
minor.  Initially, most of my customers want speed and features. After
the smoke clears and reality sets in, they change their mind and
demand reliability at whatever speed and features will produce a
reliable machine.  My days of overclocking, registry tweaking, and
alleged performance boosting software are long over.


--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sunday, 11 June 2017 18:01:51 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann  wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

My slowest machine ever was a 486 that hung around long past its best befor
e date. It never skipped a beat in its entire life, and was occasionally us
eful (partly to punish users that screwed machines up). I once virus scanne
d it - it started scanning the first file after 16 minutes! With carefully  
chosen apps it ran ok, though the 256 colour graphics were grim.


NT

Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 12:17:14 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I have to guess the dates, but I think between 1987 and 2014, I ran a
Xenix mail server in my palatial office on a 486DX2-66 system with
4MBytes (that's MegaBytes, not GigaBytes) RAM, 1GB Conner CFP-1060S
SCSI hard disk, and an assortment of tape drives and SCSI peripherals.
At various points during its 27 year life, I replaced the motherboard
once, power supply twice, and video card thrice, but never reloaded
the Xenix operating system.  If you don't mind character based
computing from the command line, the machine ran just fine and was
very fast for most things.  I kept waiting for the machine to die so
would have an excuse to replace it with something more modern, but it
just wouldn't die.  So, I killed it and gave it a proper funeral at
the local recycler.

Also, I used to maintain some CNC controllers, that ran commodity 486
motherboards behind the fancy exterior.  Until recently, I had a
fairly good stock of replacement 486 motherboards, EISA, ISA, VESA,
and VL bus cards for fixing these.

--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sunday, 11 June 2017 22:32:33 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann  wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Anything can run command line & single app, even an Apple II. Add multitask
ing & GUI and it's another story.

I had an impressive 24M RAM, but ISTR the HDD was just 100s of M. So many t
imes I hoped it would die. So did people that used it. But it never did. Ma
ny more modern PCs came & died, but not that 486. I guess you got a better  



NT

Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:55:19 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Reminds me of a funny story from way back.  Microsoft released Windoze
2.0 with a new feature, cooperative multitasking.  Included was a
rotating wire frame graphic intended to show that it was possible to
run multiple copies of the program in separate windows.  The problem
was that each additional copy of the program required more overhead
than it saved.  As I vaguely recall, it took 150% more time to run
time to run a 2nd copy of a program.  It was faster to run one program
at a time than to use the cooperative multitasking.  Run enough copies
and the machine would grind to a halt.  MS solved the problem by
removing the demo program.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


ISTR that I paid almost $1000 for that 1GB hard disk.

However, you don't have to worry any more about keeping a machine or
operating system alive for 20+ years.  The new and improved paradigm
is that nothing is expected to last more than 5.0 years.
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201624
MS does it a little better, but not much:
<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/13853/windows-lifecycle-fact-sheet
Maybe Windoze 10 will have a "Best used before Oct 13, 2020" sticker
on the box?


--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: (OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I couldn't resist, so I ran a quick boot speed test.  For timing, I
used:
<http://stopwatch.onlineclock.net

The XP box is a Dell Optiplex 960.  Core 2 Duo E8500 at 3.16Hz with a
1333MHz FSB (Passmark = 2,293), with 4GBytes RAM, and a Seagate
ST31000340AS 1TB drive.  XP is 32 bit.

The Win 7 box is an HP Pavilion Elite m9077c.  Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600
at 2.4GHz with a 1066MHz FSB (Passmark = 2,972), with 8GBytes RAM, and
a Seagate ST31000524S 1TB drive.  Win 7 is 64 bit.

I started the clock at first light (when the bios screen appeared
after power is turned on) and stopped when the Performance Monitor
showed very little CPU or HD activity.

Both machines have identical resident programs to slow things down. In
this case Avast anti-virus, Skype, Google Drive, MS OneDrive, Nvidia
GeForce Experience, Everything, and Teamviewer.

For results, I got:
  Win 7:   5min 10sec.
  Win XP:  3min 39sec.

The machines are not identical, but using what I have, XP boots 29%
faster than Win 7.  My guess(tm) is that I tried it again with
identical CPU's, the boot times would be closer.



Now for a something a little different.  Let's see how fast my shiny
new Chromebook boots.  It doesn't run Windoze, so there's no sense in
trying to load it down with things to slow it down.  It's an Acer
CB3-431-C5EX.  Refurbished from the eBay Acer Store at:
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/252557970886
1.4GHz Intel N3160 quad core, 4GB RAM, 32GB SSD.  I'm running the IPS
screen at 1536x864, but it will go up to 2400x1350.

For cold boot time, I got 24 seconds, starting with power on, and
ending when the Chrome browser reloaded the mess of web pages I was
looking at when I turned it off.  That also includes hitting <ctrl>D
on startup to get past the developers mode warning, and logging in
with my Google password.  Add another 8 seconds to start the Android
on ChromeOS script, and 3 seconds to login again.

So, if you really want boot speed (like I do when going to a coffee
shop, meeting, event, or need a quick Google search, get a Chromebook.

--  
Jeff Liebermann     snipped-for-privacy@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.

Site Timeline