RE: Homevision

["Malcolm Surgenor" <malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'd love someone to come up with a repair solution - I've four sitting on
the desk in front of me gathering dust, one in use and a spare in the attic
for when it burns out!  Pretty close to a SH Homevision in cost..

Malcolm
-----Original Message-----
From: UKHA [mailto:mailinglists@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 01 June 2004 21:24
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Homevision


I thought that until a couple of weeks ago, when my two year old CM12U
started smelling of burnt plastic and stopped working.... :(
Can anyone repair them? I've dismantled it and it looks OK, the smell
seems
to be coming from the small transformer...

Lee

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Daykin [mailto:simons.lists@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 01 June 2004 21:15
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Homevision


Ok,  I must be missing something,  my CM12U has been running fine for
years
not missing a beat!  Have it connected to a PC running Heyu and some
custom
scripts....

Are the CM12Us really that unreliable?

Kind Regards

Simon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Morgan" <smorgo@xxxxxxx>
To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 9:07 PM
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Homevision


> Ooh, dear. Sorry to rub salt into the wounds.
>
> I was only on my second before I saw the light. I did manage to damage
my
> HomeVision once, when I shorted one of the input ports. However, it's
> _designed_ with easily replaced buffers protecting the critical
components.
> Cost me about 80p to get it up-and-running again. Other than that,
it's
been
> entirely reliable.
>
> Sometimes, you just have to cut your losses.....
>
> Steve
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Malcolm Surgenor [mailto:malcolm@xxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 01 June 2004 20:20
> > To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Homevision
> >
> > >>actually, it always was, and you're about to find out
just how
much!
> >
> > as someone who has probably now spent the equivalent of a
> > Homevision unit in burnt out CM12s over the years, could you
> > expand on that statement for me please Steve...  [ or have I
> > just answered my own question?! :-)  ]
> >
> > Malcolm
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]