NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/audio/17681

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-03 | 2.7 KB

Xref: sparky rec.audio:17681 rec.video:15329
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!torn!nott!dgbt!ted
From: [e-mail] (Ted Grusec)
Subject: Re: Radio Shack garbage
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: The Communications Research Centre
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 05:43:37 GMT
Lines: 41

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bruce A. Haugh) writes:
>In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ilana J. Getz) writes:
>>>> Radio Shack makes total garbage; most likely your problem is all Radio
>>>> Shack's fault.  I would never buy a Radio Shack product.
>>>
>>>This is a trifle overstated.  RS's upper-end scanners, for example, are widely
>>>considered to be among the best available, and they have a long history of
>>>reliability.  Many of their short wave (now often called "world band") radios
>>>are also well-regarded (these are relabelled Sangean units, so I guess you
>>>could say that they're not really a RS product).

>>I worked at good 'ol RS when I was in college, and I think I can provide
>>some insight.
>
>>Radio Shack manufactures about 50% of th stuff they sell, and the rest is
>>farmed out to other suppliers. For example, when I worked there, they made
>
>>What's the bottom line? A total lack of consistancy. You simply cannot say
>>that "all of the RS gear is bad," or even that all of one particular
>>line of products is good or bad. They may all come from a different place.
>
>>I agree that it is best to avoid RS products in general, but not because
>>they are all bad. Rather, there is no way to know which ones are bad.

Well, if you follow whatever sources you deem are reliable, you CAN
know that a particular product is good.  As one of the above stated,
they are known to put out terrific scanners (e.g. the Realistic
Pro-2006) and these are well-known to serious radio people who have
written about and reviewed them. (There is a newsgroup devoted to
radio, forget its name).  Radio Shack is, to a large extent, a
marketing, rather than a manufacturing company, so it's not meaningful
to deal with the "RS" label as a brand name.  No doubt much, perhaps
most, that they sell is low end but one shouldn't dismiss them
completely without specific information about whatever your interested
in.  The converse hold true of other companies, of course - e.g. a
known high-end company may turn out many superior products yet bomb on
a few, sometimes quite a few.
>
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ted Grusec - Communications Research Centre, Ottawa, Ont., Canada