(Was: Can't backup to floppy)

[Scott Turner]

In article <270 at belltec.UUCP> dar at belltec.UUCP (Dimitri Rotow) writes:
>Scott, you're being unfair to the deal you made by buying UNIX from Bell 
>Technologies.  Until our release of System V/386 Release 3.2 (pending), we
>have not sold UNIX with the full support commitment we give in our hardware
>lines.  We explicitly sell it with "installation support" only:  that's 
>only the support necessary to tell if the media shipped out is defective.
>The salespeople go to great pains to make this clear to every customer, because
>they make a lot more money selling SCO Xenix to someone who needs support
>services on an extended basis than they do shipping UNIX System V/386.

What deal? The only deal I made was that I wanted to get a W.G.E. card in
to evaluate and show off to customers (to see if they'd want to buy 'em.)

I guess I should note that Alan Holmes is my sales person.

(I guess I should also admit I was just waiting for someone at Bell to come
back with a long winded "explanation" for me to sink my teeth into.)

When contacted about purchasing said W.G.E. I was told that the card would
currently only work with System V/386 Vr.3.0, as sold by Bell Technologies.

I asked SPECIFICALLY if the driver's supplied would work with Microport
System V/386 2.2 and I was told that they would NOT. In fact I kept asking,
over many conversations (it took a few attempts to get the card out the
door), and kept getting the same answer: NO.

And I was also told that only the Merge 386 sold by Bell would work with
Bell's unix. Couldn't use the DOSMerge 386 I had.

The big slick glossy advert they had mailed me was hot, I was drooling,
everyone I showed it to was drooling. I guess I should underscore one more
time, the W.G.E. is one hot product! I can't heap enough praise on it.

But no matter what Dimitri says, and maybe someone else has had their sales
person made it clear to them, no one at Bell told me squat about support
for the unix except that it was available to help me get the product installed.

In fact I made a POINT of asking if support WOULD be available since the
prototype system here at L5 Computing has 92 defects on the hard drive.
System V/386 release 3.0 only supports mapping out 62 defects. Having dealt
with this under Microport's version I KNEW I'd need some hand holding since
I'd have to run a MANUAL installation, I wouldn't be able to use the INSTALL
script provided. Alan assured me that such support would be available.

No mention was ever made that Bell policy was to only provide support to see
if the supplied disks were defective. Your posting to USENET is the first
I've heard of this policy.

>The idea is to provide a high quality UNIX for professional users at low cost
>under the assumption that there is a class of UNIX users who do not need the
>support services which are bundled into the price of other UNIX's.  There are

That's all well and good. But if I find a bug in your product are you going
to fix it and send the fixed version to me? To my customers? I mean if all
that's required is to supply a YACC compiled with the #define set for big
memory are you guys going to do it?

>Consider what happens when you pay $495 to $1495 a copy of the base system:
>a big chunk of your purchase price goes to pay for a technical support 
>capability that comes bundled with the software.  When you compare pricing, 
>you could be paying as much as $100 to $1000 for that tech support capability.
>Suppose you're one of the people who has in-house integration capability
>and never calls tech support (the majority of customers)?  Wouldn't you feel
>bad about being forced to pay $100 to $1000 more per copy of UNIX for a
>service which you don't use?  Wouldn't you rather have the ability to pay
>less for the package and forgoe a service you don't use?  I know you feel
>you need the support (as is your right), but others don't want it and 
>don't want to pay for it.

I don't want support, I want BUGS FIXED! I want the damn thing to work with
an Adaptec ACB2322 controller without some excuse like "Our driver gets
confused by onboard ROMs" (A direct quote from Jennifer in your tech
support dept.) Or "We haven't had alot of luck running our software on
Mylex motherboards with Maxtor hard drives." What the hell does a Maxtor
hard drive have to do with the motherboard? Much less wether your software
is going to work reliably?

>Likewise, there will be bugs in the release which affect some users.  The
>idea behind the program is that for most people, those bugs will not be
>show-stoppers.  After all, there are bugs in every release of UNIX, no
>matter who does it.  Again, there is a large class of users which desires
>direct access to UNIX at as low a mark-up as possible and is willing to 
>make their own determination if the release is right for them.  Many 
>people prefer to have the (comparatively) limited set of bugs in the 
>official, SVVS-debugged version of UNIX System V/386 than to have the
>unknown layer of bugs injected when people massage the official release
>into proprietarized code.  You pays your money and you takes your choice!

I read the above paragraph and I wonder to myself, aren't we both saying the
same thing? If it's broke yall aren't going to fix it? And yall are going to
be MORE than happy to issue an RMA?

So am I unwarrentedly bashing Bell when I say the same thing only what I'm
saying I only discover AFTER direct experience?

It's not everyday someone claims I'm flaming them and then turns right around
and supports what I had to say.

I mean you WILL agree, I hope, that your policy is sure to raise the blood
pressure of anyone who runs into a show stopper (like I did)?

>Since we're not here to play Big Brother, the best we can do is to treat
>our customers with respect and give them the ability to make 
>their own determination as to how appropriate UNIX System V/386 and our
>support policies are for their particular use.   If they don't like the
>deal once they're into it, we cheerfully refund their money and let 
>them return the product.  Why are you bashing us for giving people an 
>option that they otherwise wouldn't have, and which many thousands of 
>people are happy to exercise?

Otherwise wouldn't have? I dare say that most reputable software suppliers
are more than happy to refund a customer's purchase if it turns out they
got something that just plain won't work for them.

As for my "bashing" I'd say we're riding a VERY fine line here. After all,
what sounds like an advisement of a policy that some people might find
unsettling could definitely look like bashing to someone concerned with
their public image. 

I think you will agree that your policy of non-support is going to look REAL
bad to alot of users. Your words about most unix users not needing support
to the contrary, frankly I have a hard time swallowing that. I've never met
anyone who upon finding a bug goes "Gee, a bug. Rather than calling Bell
to see if they already have a workaround or patch for this bug I think
I'd rather spend my valuable time possibly re-inventing the wheel."

I also find it curious that there is no clear statement ANYWHERE in the dox
that comes with your unix that says "If you find a bug, don't call us for
a fix."

>Note that our hardware products are sold under a different support policy,
>where we have unlimited support for use.  Also note that we are respectful
>of your comments and sensitive to the idea that a large class of customers
>desires to have support bundled in or as an extra price option.  We will
>be providing such a support program with our 3.2 "merged" product.

Then I read this paragraph and go "ARGH! I'm trying to nail Jello to the
wall." Did I make an unwarrented bash against you guys or not? I'm confused
now.

My hat is definitely off to yall about your hardware support. The DOS Upgrade
arrived just as promised. It didn't quite perform as I expected, BIOS level
emulation of a MDA is just a tad lacking at times. :) But you guys hopped right
on the busted W.G.E. and sent one back out the same day you got the busted
one in. Not bad, damn good in fact.

But the software angle is driving me CRAZY. I can handle alot, but missing
fonts/dox are a tad beyond what I expect to deal with. I managed to make
links from existing fonts to supply a standin for the missing vtsingle and
timrom12 fonts but why did I have to? Why have my efforts to get a complete
X10R4 with these kinda necessary fonts meeting with so little success? Surely
missing fonts falls under "installation support to see if you have defective
disks"??? (Especially when uwm won't fire up out of the box!)

I don't want to bash you guys, I just want yer stuff to WORK. You've got
better things to do, and I've got better things to do. Make it work and I'll
sing yer praises, it's unfortunate that these software snafu's are tarnishing
the image of what is an otherwise STUNNING (I mean NO ONE, and I do mean NO ONE
who's seen the one here goes away unimpressed) product, the W.G.E..

>
>Dimitri Rotow

Scott Turner
scotty at l5comp -or- uunet!l5comp!scotty