À propos
Toutes les évaluations (3 858)
f***h (1159)- Évaluation laissée par l'acheteur.
Six derniers mois
Achat vérifié
Never received or responded
wolf_den_goods (138)- Évaluation laissée par l'acheteur.
Six derniers mois
Achat vérifié
Great buyer
halo-dreamhouse (4168)- Évaluation laissée par l'acheteur.
Six derniers mois
Achat vérifié
Hope to deal with you again. Thank you.
vef189 (1727)- Évaluation laissée par l'acheteur.
Six derniers mois
Achat vérifié
Wonderful buyer, thanks
superinktoner (37276)- Évaluation laissée par l'acheteur.
Six derniers mois
Achat vérifié
Hope to deal with you again. Thank you.
expeneon (46255)- Évaluation laissée par l'acheteur.
Six derniers mois
Achat vérifié
Thank you for an easy, pleasant transaction.
Avis (24)
08 janv. 2010
Fellowes S40C-2 Shredder
Okay, I admit it...I'm a shredder junkie! Nothing goes out in my trash with my personally identifying information on it. Bank statements, receipts, pre-approved credit card offers, envelopes, you name it--it all goes through the shredder. In today's age of dumpster diving and identify theft, you can't be too careful!
I've gone through several personal shredders in the past few years. In that time, I've learned that you really get what you pay for. I've tried the cheap $19.95 "shredder on a stick" that sits over a wastebasket--and that will only shred one sheet of paper at a time. I've tried the more substantial, yet still ineffective, $29.95 units. Most recently, I had one of those cute little desktop confetti shredders that require you to fold the paper in half.
Having used some very expensive ($150+) shredders at work, I know that a good shredder doesn't come cheap. But unwilling to fork over the cost of a new printer or fax machine, I was content cursing at my little desktop shredder as I dissected it to remove the paper jammed in the cutting mechanism.
Fortunately, i was tired of taking out my frustration on the little shredder, and got myself a Fellowes SafeShred S40C shredder last Christmas. After using it extensively, I can say that it bucks the conventional wisdom that you need to spend a lot of money to get a good shredder.
White in color, the shredder sits on top of its own wastebasket that collects the confetti-cut paper. It's quite compact for a full-sheet shredder, measuring approximately 14" wide, 18" high (mostly due to the wastebasket), and 6" deep. You can easily fit it under a desk or even put it on top of the desk or behind a door.
The shredder will only operate when the unit is firmly set on to the wastebasket--there's a kill switch that will instantly stop the shredder if it is knocked over or lifted up. That's a good thing, since the cutting blades are fully exposed on the bottom of the unit. Speaking of operation, the shredder automatically starts and stops, thanks to a tiny switch that activates when you put a sheet of paper into the unit.
You can feed up to four sheets of 8.5 x 11" paper into the top of the shredder, although if you insert more than two pages, the unit will slow down considerably and emit some truly labored noises. It will shred staples, but you'll need to remove paper clips first.
The end result is a pile of narrow, rectangular confetti. The security that this type of shredder provides would not pass muster for sensitive material, since you can easily identify the type of document (receipt, letter, etc.). Also, on closer examination, you can read a few words here and there, depending on how big the type on the shredded document was. In other words, someone could still gather bits and pieces of information from the shreds and given enough time and patience could reconstruct the original document. While not good enough for military secrets, it's certainly fine for personal use, and much, much better than using a shredder that only chops documents up into strips.
What are some of the highlights of the shredder? First, it's rock solid...unless you feed too many pages at once or improperly insert them (say, diagonally), it won't jam. Part of this has to do with how the shredder operates: once you've fed all of the documents through, the shredder continues to operate for a few seconds before shutting off. This ensures that the blades have a chance to clear.
31 janv. 2013
Magellan RoadMate 1475T 4.7 Inch GPS Navigator
1 personnes sur 1 ont jugé cet avis utile. This review is from: Magellan RoadMate 1475T 4.7-Inch Portable GPS Navigator (Electronics)
Unlike other reviewers who have predisposition to certain brand, e.g., someone who used a Garmin for long time and now came to criticize the Magellan, I am a long-time user of GPS of both Magellan and Garmin since 1998. My first Garmin cost me about $1500 and my first Magellan cost me about $2000. My later Garmin and Magellan cost me $800, $500, $300, etc. When the baby TomTom came to market, I also tried it.
One thing that is lacking in most of the previous reviews of this product is an objective opinion. People usually write the review based on their predisposition, not based on objective criteria.
The biggest advantage of any Magellan is its routing capability. For example, when you only have vague idea of the address of your destination, a Magellan would provide adequate context for you to figure out where you need to go. One time, I had forgotten the street number and exact spelling of the street name. I simply type in whatever part that I could remember and the Magellan gave me a list of the road names to choose from. Eventually it took me to where I need to go. Based on that experience, I formulated a test for evaluating any new GPS unit I buy. All the Garmin I tried failed that test. A TomTom unit I tried passed that test.
Another marvel of a Magellan GPS unit is its bell sound signaling the turning point or highway exiting point. This is extremely useful in the complicated highways like in New Jersey, I never miss a turn with a Magellan GPS, but often take a too-early turn with other brands.
The spoken language of Roadmate is clearest of all the GPS units over Garmin or TomTom. When I used Garmin nuvi 680, it would mispronounce "state road 1" as "stage road 1"
I also like the seamless integration of the traffic information into the routing. It only provides the traffic incidents related to your route, or if you do not have a route, it provides only the incidents within 15-mile radius of the current location. It does not provide too much traffic information to burden you unnecessarily. With Roadmate 1475T, the traffic is free forever. In contract, with a Garmin nuvi 680, I had to pay $19/year for traffic subscription! And in nuvi 680, the traffic information is completely separate from the routing, and I have to make decision of which traffic incidents are relevant to my trip.
Other strong points of Roadmate 1475T are its large screen size, clear view of the screen, and its customization of the screen menu to fit anyone's taste.
However, Magellan does share some weakness of all the GPS units. For example, the less perfect map accuracy. There are occasions that a Magellan would say the destination is on the left side of the road when actually the destination is on the right side, and so do all Garmin or TomTom units. One time, my Garmin nuvi GPS attempted to direct me to drive into the middle of a lake! Another weakness of any GPS is the confusion of which direction (left or right) to go at the beginning of the route, and the efficiency within a city. My suggestion of using any GPS is to also print a routing map from Yahoo Maps or Google Maps before you go on a trip so that you have some idea of the routing.
Update on Nov 30, 2009:
I also published a comparison of Magellan Roadmate 1475T and Garmin nuvi 1490T under real-time situations in my car side-by-side. It contains more details of the feature comparison of these two GPS units. To read
09 mai 2010
Microsoft LifeCam VX-3000 Web Cam
2 personnes sur 2 ont jugé cet avis utile. My high-end Logitech Fusion web-cam never worked properly on a consistent basis with my system. Logitech support wasn't able to help so I finally gave up and decided to try the Life-Cam VX-3000.
The Life-Cam VX-3000 is my 5Th web-cam since the late 90's. So far, it's the best I've ever used. My main purpose for the web-cam was to communicate with my family in another state, in both video and audio. I have to say, mission accomplished.
The size of the VX-3000 is more diminutive in size than I expected. I included a photo so people get an idea. It looks a lot bigger in the photos than it really is. It also fits a lot snugger on my Dell 19 inch LCD monitor than did the Logitech. Because of the base design, I can put it flat on the desk or hook it on top of the monitor.
The main review I read from PC Magazine states that the mic did a poor job so I was a concerned as the audio is almost as important to me as the video. The fear was unfounded as I tested it with my family for over an hour and they could hear me just fine with only a slight echo when I placed it too close to my speakers.
The video resolution is 640x480, more than enough for my needs. The VX-6000 has higher resolution, but is also more than twice as expensive. I was very satisfied with the video and the low light support was excellent and worked better than the Logitech Fusion.
The Live Call button on top of the camera is actually a nuisance when trying to adjust the angle of the camera. I don't see myself ever using it and only works with Windows Live Messenger anyways. The cam itself swivels vertically and horizontally. The vertical swivel is actually quite stiff so you need to hold the cam with both hands to adjust. I guess it's a good thing so that the cam doesn't get out of position easily. The cord is also a decent length so if you want to pick the camera up and move it around, it gives you some freedom to do so.
The only thing lacking that I would have wanted is a sliding lens cover, both to protect the lens and for privacy. I went back and forth on wanting the VX-3000 and the VX-6000. The comparison table shows that the VX-6000's only benefits are 3x digital zoom, high-speed USB and a wide angle lens. I know that the video resolution is also higher. For me, I didn't need the digital zoom. Also, I didn't know that there was a difference in USB. I thought all USB 2.0 was "high-speed." The instructions on the web-cam recommend connecting to USB 2.0 so what exactly is "high-speed?" The wide angle lens would've been great, but not worth the extra cost. Certainly, the two most compelling reasons to get the VX-6000 is the wide angle lens and the higher video resolution. Based on my needs, the better value was the VX-3000.
The version of the drivers that came on CD-ROM with the cam was 1.1 but I downloaded 1.3 from Microsoft's website. I have to say that after some weeks of using Windows Live Messenger, it has a habit of getting disconnected quite often. My family has observed this as well. Until Microsoft remedies this, I may have to switch over to Google Talk with a video plug-in but the webcam itself, is exactly what I wanted.