Noozer said:
AMD Pro 3100A+ MB... It a "Pro 3100A+" mainboard that uses an AMD CPU...
Yes, as I mentioned in another post I am aware of the 'type' of 'defense'
they might make but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a valid one.
'Intent' to misrepresent, even if one can argue the 'words' used are
'technically true', is generally still prima facie fraud, at least in most
of the U.S..
A rather amusing example I recall was in the form of a 'scam', if you will,
where the seller guaranteed his product would "cut your bills in half."
Send your money in and he sent you a pair of 10 cent kiddie scissors (snip,
snip, snip).
His defense was that he hadn't promised you'd pay less money; that he had
promised it would 'cut your bills in half' and, by golly, those 10 cent
sizzors *will*, physically, 'cut your bills in half'. Promise made: promise
kept.
The court was not amused.
And I'd argue that there's not even anything 'technically true' in the
PCChips nomenclature.
I would imagine, however, their real defense would be that if you bother to
look it up on their web site they 'disclose' what the 'real' processor is.
Same as a P4 P4C800E mainboard that Asus sells... It's a P4C800E mainboard
that uses a P4 CPU.
Except the Asus name doesn't misrepresent the processor and the numbers, at
least in that case, actually mean something consistent with the industry
(it supports the 800MHz data rate FSB and P4 processors).
The point is, it's apparent the nomenclature does not intentionally seek to
'fool' the buyer into thinking it's something it's not.
I still think it's slimy... What about the PC Chips mainboard with the
700Mhz Via/Cyrix "Gigapro" CPU's built in? Doesn't "Gigapro" imply 1000Mhz?
Of course.
PCChips has a long history of inventing, IMO, intentionally misleading
'brand names'.
