Talk:Dell Dimension

Resent edits

check your facts i belive the integrated video card in the E520 is a X3000 not a radeon X300 and dell has AMD computer already...

Link Edit

I recently updated the link at the bottom of the page for Dell Memory for etc. darrennie (talk) 19:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

History

I have written the new Dell Dimension article, and tried to find the history behind the product series using Google, but I was unsucessfull. Can anyone help inprove this article? --Admiral Roo 12:22, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Keep

keep the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.129.101.179 (talk • contribs)

Keep

If not keep, than move to Dell 4700. That is a serious issue/fire hazzard. Not only can that destroy a customers computer, it may also harm the customer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.58.69 (talk • contribs)

Keep

Right now there just isn't enough info about the Dimension product line to justify creating separate articles for each model. I've directed the search terms "Dell 4700", "Dimension 4700", and "Dell Dimension 4700" to this article. It may not *seem* astheticly pleasing to have specific info about just one Dimension model and no others but the lack of information about other models is not a justification to further obscure relevent Dimension info by hiding it behind another link.--Onesloth 09:03, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Fan Problem

The info about the 4700 fan problem was removed from the article without any edit summary or discussion comment so I reverted it. If there is a reason you believe this info shouldn't be here explain it please.--Onesloth 09:03, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Discontinuation

As of late, the 4700 model has been discontinued; there is now (as the top of the models) the 5150 model

Image:Dell_dimension.JPG

Hi, this image is a suspected copyright violation and may soon be deleted from the Commons:. If your Wikipedia allows fair use, please consider uploading the image locally. Thank you. -- skINMATE

Concerning the removal of the backwards fan statement

It seems very interesting to me that this article was removed also with no notice...the reason it was interesting to me, is that I have a Dell Dimension 4700 that happen to overheat due to the improperly installed fan (yes it was installed in reverse). Thankfully Dell agreed that it was install incorrectly and has since replaced all affected components. As to who edited this article and claimed that having the air blow inwards is the correct fan configuration, instead of having the air blow out of the case, is just plain wrong. Not to say that there are not computers made that way, but the dimension 4700 is not one of them. A sure way to know this is that the cpu only has a heat sink, not a heatsink and fan combo, along with a shroud that covers the heatsink and directs the heat from the cpu directly out of the pc case. Good move on changing this article back as it is a serious problem that Dell needs to address before someones home and/or property is destroyed due to fire.

I agree with your decision to reinstate that Dimension 4700 article

That's all I have to say on this issue.

A former dimension 4700 owner.

I am a Dell representative

My name is John, and I am a customer advocate at Dell headquarters.

Unfortunately, the problem as cited in this article is incorrect. I have taken this article to our engineering department, and they have informed me that the Dimension 4700 was designed with the intent that the rear fan blow inward due to the specific cooling needs of the processor and chipset on this system. I have also received engineering documentation which clearly shows the correct fan orientation, and the fan is depicted in these engineering documents to be blowing inward. Unfortunately these documents include Dell internal information, and are not for public release.

It is my understanding that reversing the fan's orientation so that the fan blows out will reduce the case's internal temperature several degrees, but will also increase the CPU temperature to the point where performance will be degraded. The increase of case air temperature that comes with the correct orientation of this fan is within the specifications for this system and presents no hazard. If a customer is experiencing overheating problems with their 4700 it is not due to the factory fan orientation, but rather to a malfunction.

If any of you would like to discuss this with me, please feel free to email me at customer_advocate@dell.com.

Nice to Hear from Dell on the 4700 Issue

John (from Dell),

Your response will hopefully bring this issue to closure.

A Dell Community Forum Member

4700 Backwards Fan Back?

As I stated before, this system was engineered to pull air into the case and directly over the CPU due to the cooling needs of this particular chip. To encourage people to reverse the fan so air is being blown out of the case is actually encouraging people to make harmful modifications to their systems.

This system was designed to have air pulled directly into the system to the CPU heat sink/shroud, and this fact is verified by internal engineering documents I have personally examined.

To prevent the dissemination of incorrect information I highly recommend the removal of the incorrect assertion contained within this article, i.e. fans were being installed backwards at the factory, and what orientation that actually is. From an engineering perspective, all 4700 fans should be installed in an orientation that would normally be considered 'backwards' on other systems.

John

Dell Customer Advocate

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.166.255.41 (talk • contribs). (20 Oct 06)

I'm just saying this so I can keep my job. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.40.83.254 (talk • contribs). (23 Oct 06) ((Disclaimer: Removed comment was re-inserted by Fourohfour, I am not the author, and do not endorse it if it is deliberate misrepresentation, but I don't feel this should have been removed. Particularly as following comment makes less sense outwith context!)

P.S.-

To the person that edited my comment with the words at the end: "I am just doing this so I can keep my job."

Dell is making great effort to be transparent as much as possible. The information I have given you is correct, and was given in the spirit of transparency and cooperation with the editors of this article. It is our thought that this type of communication is healthy and promotes goodwill between our company and communities such as this. To blatantly modify my post with those words in an attempt to vilify a Dell representative attempting to ensure correct information is provided you for your project is in direct opposition to the journalistic spirit your community is trying to achieve.

It is my sincere hope that such vandalism is not supported by the majority of the members of this community. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.166.226.42 (talk • contribs). (10 Nov 06)

Biased Language?

In the article, the sentence "However, their motherboards are noticeably less powerful than their XPS brethren, which makes them less able to be upgraded and necessitates their replacement earlier than would otherwise be the case (thus generating more revenue for Dell)" seems rather biased, as it insinuates the division of product line was done with ulterior motives.

Dell does market the XPS line as higher performance desktops for customers wanting a more capable system, but the Dimension series is customizable, the E520, for example, includes an nForce4 chipset, 2 PCI slots, 1 PCIe x16 slot, and 1 PCIe x1 slot. While this is not as powerful as the nForce 590 SLI, Dimensions are not marketed towards gamers needing "bleeding edge" gaming technologies. The article as written insinuates that a) the average customer wanting one of these desktops will need to upgrade before it is reasonably time, and b) this was done primarily to increase revenue for Dell. Neither a) nor b) are correct. Dimensions are sold primarily to customers wanting a mid-grade PC for home entertainment use, and don't want to spend 2-3 thousand dollars on a top-of-the-line cutting edge performance gaming system. This is reflected quite negatively by the statements in the article.

Compare the verbiage with the verbiage in the article concerning systems from Dell's competitor, HP:

"As of October 2006, HP offers six customizable notebooks which carry the Pavilion name. They are: the 17" dv9000t and dv9000z, the 15.4" dv6000t and dv6000z, and the 14.1" dv2000t and dv2000z, the "t" designating use of an Intel Processor and the "z" designating the use of an AMD Processor. Customizable features include: a webcam, unique HP Imprint Finish, choice of three different Windows Vista operating systems (Home Basic, Home Premium or Business), 6 or 12 cell battery or 8 cell or high capacity 8 cell battery(depending t=on the laptop), ATI, Nvidia, and Intel graphic cards, and processors such as the Intel Celeron M, Intel Core 2 Duo, AMD Sempron, or AMD Turion 64 X2 Dual-Core processor. HP also offers twelve customizable desktops that carry the Pavilion name: eight HP Pavilion desktops, two customizable HP Pavilion Media Center desktops, and two HP Pavilion Slimline desktops. The HP Pavilion Slimline desktops are unique in that they take up 1/3 the space of a normal desktop."

No similar negative connotation is given to HP's systems in their "everyday computing" section, though their chipsets are arguably a less popular make.

edit- I also noticed that the link to "a Dell E521 owner's blog about their E521" is similarly biased. Please note that 64-bit Windows is only available on HP "workstations" found here: http://www.hp.com/sbso/busproducts-workstations.html , and also note that the first three items on his list do not even exist yet. Not only does Dell charge extra for XP Pro 64 bit, SO DOES EVERYONE ELSE. It is a more expensive OS upgrade, so I don't see the purpose or relevancy of including such a link on a website that purports to be an unbiased treatment of its subject material. Why not include this link: http://www.cheapcomputer.org.uk/the-versatile-dell-dimension-e520-series/ ? Or this link: http://www.planetfeedback.com/index.php?level2=blog_viewpost&topic_id=295878 ? How are these two links any less relevant than what is posted? The first is a product review, while the second is a blog from a customer who purchased a Dell system and had slight problems with data transfer, but loves his new system anyway. Why is the non-issue of not offering an OS upgrade without charging for it even being brought up when it is industry standard practice? This article presents a very slanted view of Dell and Dell products overall. I would expect better from an encyclopedia.

Further edit- The picture of the trash can, with the caption "The average Dell computer" is absolutely outrageous coming from a source that is purporting to be an unbiased source of accurate information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.166.255.42 (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

John

Dell Customer Advocate —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.166.255.17 (talk) 22:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC).

Dimension 2400 redirects to Dell Dimension

So, if you're looking for the discussion, it's here. Fourohfour 12:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Picture

I have uploaded a suitable picture from our archive to the commons, and it is public domain. It can be found here:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:2_dim_e521_300.jpg

I noticed the person who placed that photo (of the trash bin) on this page was Wily Wonka. He has vandalized other pages by looking at his history. Being a Dell representative, I didn't feel comfortable editing this page directly, but implore all editors who may be joining this discussion to address the concerns I have raised. A reversal of the vandalism is imperative, and a discussion about the biased language in this article would be at least productive.

John 143.166.226.41 23:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Older Dimensions

Article needs information on older Dimension models. Drutt 12:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

The charts listing different models of the Dell Dimension should have the dates each model was released included. (this is what I came here to find & it's missing. Hope I'm not making a mess of things posting this.) StarGehzer (talk) 22:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dell Dimension. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120708022532/http://docs.us.dell.com:80/support/edocs/systems/dmum/specs.htm to http://docs.us.dell.com/support/edocs/systems/dmum/specs.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:03, 29 November 2016 (UTC)