Thank you for the welcome! This place is great, wish I had found it a lot sooner!
I have a difficult decision to make, and no time to make it so it seems.
I really disagree with the post:
"In that first link I posted, a "newb" made a very nice summary of the discussion... in case you didn't get that far, here's a link directly to that post:
http://www.chiptalk.net/forum/464899-post157.html"
IMHO, Paulson got it's high quality reputation by putting out high quality product. I have read on several vendor sites how Paulsons are made to the highest tolerance standards for weight, thickness, etc, AND how these chips are made on the same machines by the same people, on and on.
Never saw anything about this on the retail sites, just how they are the highest quality. But this is really a manufacturing problem, not so much a retailer fault, I imagine they are getting stuck in the middle having to take a mute stance on the issue.
They can put whatever sticker they want on it, use whatever colors they want, and none of it matters if they can't make the most basic characteristic of the chip up to minumum standards.
I don't think any of this is arguing about if this is a flaw, I think it is more of how big of a flaw and to what extent we as consumers will put up with to avoid the hassle of returning and getting a replacement set. I actually think the new guys post is absolutely backwards, we PAY for the highest quality chip as advertised but don't recieve a chip that meets the claim, therefore we are not getting what we paid extra to get.
I believe that it has been argued about and twisted so much that the very simple fact of cost vs. quality vs. claim was lost. I was upset when I saw it and posted a fast post without searching first, but have calmed down and researched the issue level headed (I think). I don't think that expecting the chip to be flat, and maybe
even flatter than others is unreasonable considering the price and hype.
Either that, or I am totally wrong and completelly missing the point, haven't decided yet.
