davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) (08/11/87)
I really like the SCO product, but their support policy seems just short
of useless. It is aimed for the first time user, who will ask stuff like
"how do I add my xyz printer?" It only covers the first N days (90 I
think, but it may only be 30).
Of course the serious user may not have a question for months, after
which he calls and is told the answer is: "send $600 and we'll listen to
you." I personally believe that three hours help in the first 12 months
is more useful to the serious users. And questions answered with "that's
a known bug" shouldn't count toward the time, since you didn't get an
answer.
My favorite was a bug in a recent version (the answer to all questions
about older versions is "it may be fixed in the current release" even if
what you have is only six weeks old) wherein a user program caused a
system crash "Trap 0D in kernel: <register dump>". I was told that this
was a hardware error, although it was replicable on several systems. It
was fixed in 2.1.3. I was also asked if I was running an "real Intel
80287" when calling about a memory fault in the C compiler.
Since I can't run ethernet on 2.latest, I guess I don't have to worry
about upgrade for awhile. Sure would be nice to have some tech support,
though.
Does anyone else share my opinions?
--
bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa)
{chinet | philabs | sesimo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -mejay@splut.UUCP (08/15/87)
In article <6974@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>, davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) writes: > I really like the SCO product, but their support policy seems just short > of useless. It is aimed for the first time user, who will ask stuff like > "how do I add my xyz printer?" It only covers the first N days (90 I > think, but it may only be 30). > [...] > Does anyone else share my opinions? I can't speak to SCO, but Microport has the same policy (though they're not quite as expen$ive). They want $149/year for technical support, and that includes calls to report bugs! Real, live, system crashes. I don't object paying for handholding (I'll do without instead), but for a vendor to charge me to fix a bug in his product is absurd. I love SV/AT, but would not recommend it to anyone except a Un*x wizard, simply because it'll cost him too much to get it running, both in sweat/tears and tech support $ (they also removed the tech support people from their 800 number :-P ). -- >splut!<...Jay Maynard, K5ZC | uucp: ...!seismo!soma!uhnix1!sugar!splut!jay "Don't ask ME about Unix... | GEnie: JAYMAYNARD (...e-i-e-i-o!) I speak SNA!" | CI$: 71036,1603 FidoNet: SysOp @106/64 The opinions herein are shared by neither of my cats, much less anyone else.
root@turnkey.UUCP (Super user) (08/21/87)
In article <56@splut.UUCP>, jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard) writes: > In article <6974@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>, davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) writes: > > I really like the SCO product, but their support policy seems just short > > of useless. It is aimed for the first time user, who will ask stuff like > > "how do I add my xyz printer?" It only covers the first N days (90 I > > think, but it may only be 30). > > [...] > > Does anyone else share my opinions? > > I can't speak to SCO, but Microport has the same policy (though they're not > quite as expen$ive). They want $149/year for technical support, and that > includes calls to report bugs! Real, live, system crashes. > > I don't object paying for handholding (I'll do without instead), but for a > vendor to charge me to fix a bug in his product is absurd. I love SV/AT, but > would not recommend it to anyone except a Un*x wizard, simply because it'll > cost him too much to get it running, both in sweat/tears and tech support $ > (they also removed the tech support people from their 800 number :-P ). I think both of you are forgetting the proper perspective in this issue, after all have you ever inquired what a company running Unix on, say, a Vax 11/780 is paying for its tech support? I have a feeling that $149/yr would be a paltry sum by comparsion. Jay, when you say you would not recommend uport to anyone but a "Un*x wizard" you forget that most sites employ just such a person to keep their system functional, they are called system administrators and it is a full time job. Of course when you port Unix to a small system like an AT, it is a different economic situation, but the operating system is no less complex and, thus, to expect support to compare to, say, your printer problem with Wordstar under DOS just is not fair. Believe me, I sympathize with you both in terms of our dollars spent, but I also understand the position of SCO and Microport. Technical staffs are not cheap, and if SCO must employ the so-called Un*x wizard to help you, then why should they foot the whole bill? It all boils down to the issue of the cost of such a system, you cannot run a complex OS likeXenix or uport Unix without the attendant costs of tech. administration, if you are able to provide it yourself, fine, otherwise one must just expect to have topay for that service, whether from an independent consulting firm, or from SCO or Microport directly. You may even be able to get a freebie or two from the net :-}. -- Jack F. Vogel Turnkey Computer Consultants, Costa Mesa, CA UUCP: ...seismo!uunet!ccicpg!turnkey!root ...ucbvax!ucivax!mickey!conexch!turnkey!root
bhj@clsib21.UUCP (Burt Janz) (08/24/87)
In article <133@turnkey.UUCP>, root@turnkey.UUCP (Super user) writes: > In article <56@splut.UUCP>, jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard) writes: > > In article <6974@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>, davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) writes: > > > I really like the SCO product, but their support policy seems just short > > > of useless. It is aimed for the first time user, who will ask stuff like > > > "how do I add my xyz printer?" It only covers the first N days (90 I > > > think, but it may only be 30). > > > [...] > > > Does anyone else share my opinions? > > > > I can't speak to SCO, but Microport has the same policy (though they're not > > quite as expen$ive). They want $149/year for technical support, and that > > includes calls to report bugs! Real, live, system crashes. > > > > I don't object paying for handholding (I'll do without instead), but for a > > vendor to charge me to fix a bug in his product is absurd. I love SV/AT, but > > would not recommend it to anyone except a Un*x wizard, simply because it'll I also am a uport user, and am, quite frankly, pleased at the quality of the software. I have also been a ver6, ver7, 4.1, and 4.2 user, and have seen an INCREDIBLE amount of bugs in those versions as well. The question must be asked: "How much is a bugless piece of software worth to you, and what are you willing to give up to get one?" Running SV/AT on an AT clone is MUCH better than running PCDOS on it (my opinion - no flames please...), and the cost of SV/AT was quite reasonable (check out the ads for Programmer's Connection...). If I wanted a bug-free kernel, should I have purchased XENIX? From what I read on this (and other) newsgroups, XENIX has its share of bugs as well. So, the issue is definitely NOT bugs. Support? Well, I've have nothing but praise for the support team at Microport. They have been eager to help me on several calls, and have solved my problems on all except one (has to do with the lp driver...) which I can work around for now. Cost of support? Ok, fella... cost out a DECService contract sometime... then price the independents. Most of the independent service out there can help with the larger issues, but get really STUCK on the smaller issues (you know, the ones requiring you to have worked on the source for the software). By the way, I also have DOSMerge. That's the Locus Computing kernel mod which lets uport users run PCDOS under UNIX. One of the truly marvelous products around. Imagine typing "% dos<CR>" and seeing "C>"! I wasn't aware that XENIX had that yet... Let's stop picking on Microport. The 68000 had a slower start than the 8086, but look where it went... Burt Janz
jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard) (08/25/87)
In article <133@turnkey.UUCP>, root@turnkey.UUCP (Super user) writes: > In article <56@splut.UUCP>, jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard) writes: > > In article <6974@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>, davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) writes: > > > I really like the SCO product, but their support policy seems just short > > > of useless. It is aimed for the first time user, who will ask stuff like > > > "how do I add my xyz printer?" It only covers the first N days (90 I > > > think, but it may only be 30). > > > [...] > > > Does anyone else share my opinions? > > > > I can't speak to SCO, but Microport has the same policy (though they're not > > quite as expen$ive). They want $149/year for technical support, and that > > includes calls to report bugs! Real, live, system crashes. > > > > I don't object paying for handholding (I'll do without instead), but for a > > vendor to charge me to fix a bug in his product is absurd. I love SV/AT, but > > would not recommend it to anyone except a Un*x wizard, simply because it'll > > cost him too much to get it running, both in sweat/tears and tech support $ > > (they also removed the tech support people from their 800 number :-P ). > > I think both of you are forgetting the proper perspective in this issue, after > all have you ever inquired what a company running Unix on, say, a Vax 11/780 > is paying for its tech support? I have a feeling that $149/yr would be a paltry > sum by comparsion. Jay, when you say you would not recommend uport to anyone > but a "Un*x wizard" you forget that most sites employ just such a person to > keep their system functional, they are called system administrators and it is a > full time job. Of course when you port Unix to a small system like an AT, it > is a different economic situation, but the operating system is no less complex > and, thus, to expect support to compare to, say, your printer problem with > Wordstar under DOS just is not fair. Believe me, I sympathize with you both > in terms of our dollars spent, but I also understand the position of SCO and > Microport. Technical staffs are not cheap, and if SCO must employ the so-called > Un*x wizard to help you, then why should they foot the whole bill? It all boils > down to the issue of the cost of such a system, you cannot run a complex OS > like Xenix or uport Unix without the attendant costs of tech. administration, > if you are able to provide it yourself, fine, otherwise one must just expect > to have to pay for that service, whether from an independent consulting firm, > or from SCO or Microport directly. You may even be able to get a freebie or > two from the net :-}. Before I get into this, let me mention my personal background. I've been involved in microcomputers for 10 years, doing everything from dedicated control systems to accounting applications to OS implementation. I am also a systems programmer (IBM/370-style) with 6 years experience at the systems level. I know enough to RTFM, and even diddle around with likely problems, before I call for support. (asbestos suit on) IBM's support policy is one of the most enlightened I've seen. If you suspect a software problem, you pick up the phone, call 1-800-237-5511, give them your customer number, and then get as much technical support as they can provide on the phone. If they can't resolve it on the phone, they'll dispatch a person to come look at the problem locally and talk to you and the support center. If your system's down, they'll drag as many people out of bed to work on your problem exclusively until it's fixed. I realize that this level of support is unnecessary in the personal computer environment. I expect, however, to at least be able to call in to check if the problem I'm having is a reported bug, or a new one, and to have someone look at it if it hasn't been reported before. I don't demand that they have someone work on my problem alone, or that they drop what they're doing to get my system back up; I don't think that I should have to go to a Un*x internals class to run a system on my AT, either. There have been several major problems reported against SV/AT; a couple of them are deadly - like the bug that panics the system if you hang up on it while it's sending output to a /dev/tty line. Bugs they know about, and should be in the process of fixing; or bugs they haven't heard about yet, and are serious enough to cause major user problems. I should be able to do nothing in installation or customization to cause the entire OS to panic and go down in flames. Systems implementors assume a responsibility to have the Un*x wizards on staff to resolve problems such as this. Supposedly, the sale price of the product covers such expenditures. I don't object to charges for user handholding, and would not even object to giving them a Mastercard or Visa number at the beginning of the phone call, but I would object to having that card charged if the problem turned out to be a real, live system bug. I paid for working software. -- Jay Maynard, K5ZC...>splut!< | uucp: hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!nuchat!splut!jay "Don't ask ME about Unix... | (or sun!housun!nuchat) CI$: 71036,1603 I speak SNA!" | internet: beats me GEnie: JAYMAYNARD The opinions herein are shared by neither of my cats, much less anyone else.
rcw@qetzal.UUCP (sysop) (08/26/87)
> The question must be asked: "How much is a bugless piece of software worth > to you, and what are you willing to give up to get one?" Running SV/AT on More, if money will solve the problem. My business will depend upon this software working. > an AT clone is MUCH better than running PCDOS on it Yes, I agree. Otherwise I would not be waging this crusade. > please...), and the cost of SV/AT was quite reasonable (check out the ads > for Programmer's Connection...). Yes, I agree that it is a good deal. I'm thorougly impressed with the product, even the text preparation system that a lot of people flame. You can't come close to the utility of that package for the same price in Dos. > So, the issue is definitely NOT bugs. But it most definitely is! For all the love I have for Microport, I can't recommend it to a customer. How would YOU like to write a software package then deliver it on a system that "Double panics" all the time? Dos is flaky, but not THAT flaky, and SCO is also considerably more reliable. I don't mind the awk bugs, but I most definitely whine bitch and otherwise cry about terminal kernel cancer. > Support? (Lots of stuff about how great uport support is deleted) Yes. I don't know how they can even break even offering support at $149 per annum. > Cost of support? Ok, fella... cost out a DECService contract sometime... Don't remind me. I just wrote out an $8,000 check... > By the way, I also have DOSMerge. That's the Locus Computing kernel mod > which lets uport users run PCDOS under UNIX. One of the truly marvelous > products around. Imagine typing "% dos<CR>" and seeing "C>"! I wasn't > aware that XENIX had that yet... Funny. I have heard from lots and lots of folks that this product left lots to be desired... > > Let's stop picking on Microport. The 68000 had a slower start than the > 8086, but look where it went... > > Burt Janz Burt - we're not. We just want to have forty one bugs fixed. Is that too much to ask? Actually, I'd be happy if the frickin thing just didn't crash constantly. BTW - Please send me info on what the bug in the lp driver was all about.
fyl@ssc.UUCP (Phil Hughes) (08/28/87)
In article <133@turnkey.UUCP>, root@turnkey.UUCP (Super user) writes: > I think both of you are forgetting the proper perspective in this issue, after > all have you ever inquired what a company running Unix on, say, a Vax 11/780 > is paying for its tech support? I have a feeling that $149/yr would be a paltry > sum by comparsion. The differences in attitude seem amazing. We do consulting as well as tech support (dial-a-guru) and generally I see people who will listen to a salesman sell them $20,000 worth of hardware where $10,000 would have done their job, then balk at spending $75/month for support. Those same people who wasted $10,000 on hardware would never consider paying $1,000 to a consultant to see what hardware they should buy. The attitude seems to be, "If I get something made out of metal for my money it's worth it, if I just get information, it should be free." -- Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155 (206)FOR-UNIX ...!uw-beaver!tikal!ssc!fyl
tif@cpe.UUCP (09/02/87)
> > > I really like the SCO product, but their support policy seems just short > > > of useless. [...] It only covers the first N days (90 I think, but it > > >may only be 30). > > I can't speak to SCO, but Microport has the same policy (though they're not > > quite as expen$ive). They want $149/year for technical support, [...] > [...] have you ever inquired what a company running Unix on, say, a Vax 11/780 > is paying for its tech support? I have a feeling that $149/yr would be a > paltry sum by comparsion. Tandy -- One up again. Tandy has always provided indefinite free telephone support. Granted, the knowledge base of Customer Services may be more limited than what you would get from DEC or whoever, but they can usually solve your problem. Paul Chamberlain (x4982) Computer Product Engineering trsvax!cpe!tif