Re: [cobalt-users] Follow up: Cobalt Support

["abc-123.net" <abc-123@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,
    If anyone has checked the site out at Cobalt on support, they will see
what they mean by this statement.

> Later this quarter, will announce numerous new support programs that will
> dramatically reduce wait and response times, as well as offer
> significantly
> more "value-added" support tools for our customers.

Here it is

      Telephone Support - Single Incident  $50.00
      Telephone Support - Package of 5 Incidents  $250.00
      Advanced Support Services - Charged per hour  $200.00

What I would like to know, is why charge high support prices to us, on
systems that are not no where near 100% being close to being a good server.
They say, well download this pkg, but we do not support it, and it will void
warranty. What warranty, the only warranty is on the hardware, and not the
software, and the software is 100% of any problems we have. The Raq2 servers
still have software problems all of the time, but no new patches to fix
them. Since the Raq3 came out, have they abandoned the Raq1 and Raq2 users?
Why should i go out and buy a Raq3, when it is not better than what we have
already? Why pay for support on something they should have fixed in the
beginning.  Is there honestly anyone out there who has not had a single
problem with a Cobalt server?



David

----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Forman" <doug@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <sdewitt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <peter_m@xxxxxxxxxx>; <gmartell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2000 4:17 PM
Subject: RE: [cobalt-users] Follow up: Cobalt Support


> Steve,
>
> Thanks very much for your prompt and frank reply to the concerns I
> expressed.
>
> I apologize for the way I characterized Cobalt's support foundation and
> commitment, but please undertstand that it was borne from the frustration
of
> not being able to get simple questions answered accurately and politely.
>
> Others have contacted me privately, wondering what kind of questions I
might
> have asked that Cobalt did not answer.  Here are two examples:
>
> ---
>
> 15Dec99 - My Question - "What kind of INTERNAL modem should I purchase to
> use with my Qube2?  Make and model?  Anything special I need to know about
> configuring it?"
>
> 16Dec99 - Cobalt Answer - Reply with link to Cobalt Knowledgebase Article
> describing EXTERNAL modems.
>
> 16Dec99 - My Question - Asked same question again, noting "INTERNAL"
again,
> which was [also] originally in ALL CAPS.
>
> 17Dec99 - Cobalt Answer - "The following work: 1. US Robotics 56k
> (sportster/faxmodem) 2. Diamond Supra Express 56k 3. MultiTech -
MultiModem
> MT1932ZDX 4. Viking 56k And from Japan: 5. Aiwa 56k (PV-BW5601) 6. OMRON
> (ME5614D)" - and answering my "Anything special about configuring...", the
> reply was "NO"
>
> Problems:  (1) There is NO "US Robotics 56k sportster/faxmodem" that will
> install in a Qube2.  (2) US Robotics is now 3Com.  (3) The ONLY 3Com/USR
56k
> PCI Faxmodem that DOES fit in the Qube is ignored by the Qube after
> installation (I discovered this by purchasing a 3COM 5610 Internal PCI 56k
> FaxModem
[http://www.3com.com/client/pcd/products/prod-faxmod5610-int.html],
> and later returning it).
>
> I did not go further down the list of "the following work" modems, since
my
> confidence in the accuracy of the answer was now established as "none."  I
> did, on my own, find a modem that works in a Qube2, [ActionTek 56k PCI]
but
> the performance was poor (due, I think, to being unable to use the
> 'setserial' utility under MIPS to properly configure the port).  I
> researched this issue, communicated with the author of setserial, then
sent
> all of my findings to Jeff Bilicki @ Cobalt.
>
> ---
>
> 27Dec99 - I asked a question regarding poor Internet throughput
performance
> after connecting via an ISP.  I provided lots of configuration details to
> assist the tech in accurately identifying the problem.
>
> 28Dec99 - Cobalt replied, "Please try to user other subnet. eg:
192.168.1.x
> or 192.168.2.x instead of 192.168.0.x I believe the diald is using
> 192.168.0.x subnet."
>
> Renumber my entire network?  He's kidding, right?  Okay, I renumbered
> everything on my [static IP] network.  Didn't make any difference. I later
> learned that diald has no problem with 192.168.0.x networks, and that I'd
> spent over an hour re-numbering (and later restoring) my network addresses
> for nothing.
>
> ---
>
> These are a couple recent examples; I've tried several other times before
I
> gave up completely on getting accurate answers from Cobalt support.
>
> Complaining, for the sake of complaining, it pointless; I hope these
> examples are helpful and perhaps serve to clarify my concerns in practical
> terms.
>
> Thank you again for your comments and your acknowledgement of the problems
> which I described.  Improvements in this area will only serve to benefit
> both Cobalt and it's customers in the future.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Doug
>
> ---
> Doug Forman, MCSE, MCSD (doug@xxxxxxxxxxx)
> Incline Systems Inc - Vancouver, WA
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cobalt-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:cobalt-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Stephen W.
> > DeWitt
> > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 1:31 PM
> > To: Doug Forman; cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: peter_m@xxxxxxxxxx; gmartell@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [cobalt-users] Cobalt Support
> >
> >
> > Doug,
> >
> > I appreciate your comments and the time taken to put this down.
> >
> > We take support very seriously, and no, we are not recruiting support
> > individuals with the skills you characterize. We are building a team
that
> > can deliver the best levels of support possible to our service provider
> > customers, our VARs, and our individual customers.
> >
> > Are we there yet today? No.
> >
> > We have taken numerous steps over the past number of months to
> > improve the
> > overall quality of our support infrastructure, and we have more
> > aggressive
> > plans for the weeks ahead.
> >
> > First off, we have been in the midst of completely overhauling our call
> > center. We were not nearly as prepared for the up tick in volume as we
> > should have been, We are resolving that. We are also revamping
> > our on-line
> > support infrastructure in order to assist customer in self-support.
> >
> > Later this quarter, will announce numerous new support programs that
will
> > dramatically reduce wait and response times, as well as offer
> > significantly
> > more "value-added" support tools for our customers.
> >
> > Recently, Cobalt add a COO, Gary Martell, copied on this response, to
the
> > company to add deeper leadership in this critical part of the business.
> >
> > Obviously, actions speak louder than words. We expect to be bench marked
> > against the best in the industry. We are comfortable with that. Customer
> > loyalty is driven by customer experience.
> >
> > No one, as you say, is trying to "dissuade" customers from using
support.
> > We will build this into as world-class a part of the organization as any
> > other part of our business. You have my commitment on that.
> >
> > Stephen DeWitt
> > President & CEO
> > Cobalt Networks
> >
> >
> > At 09:49 AM 1/27/00 -0800, Doug Forman wrote:
> > >Ummmmmm...
> > >
> > >I think the Qube is a terrific example of design and
> > engineering.  Because
> > >it is a linux box at the core, the Qube is quite flexible and very
> > >configurable for admins with basic -> intermediate linux skills.
> >  I have a
> > >Qube2 of my own, and have recommended Qubes and Raqs to several
clients.
> > >
> > >On the other hand...
> > >
> > >My experience with "Cobalt Tech Support"  - that is, the "official"
tech
> > >support from Cobalt (not to be confused with this list!) - has been
> > >abysmally poor.  I get "no answers" - "incorrect answers" -
> > "inappropriate
> > >answers" - and just plain "rude answers," but never yet have I received
a
> > >prompt, courteous and correct answer to *any* question which I
> > have asked.
> > >
> > > >From the level of support which I have received, I suspect the
support
> > >"experts" answering email at Cobalt are part-time minimum-wage
> > workers, with
> > >basic training in the Cobalt GUI interface, and a couple-dozen
> > >pre-programmed macro-keys on their keyboards for "canned answers" to
most
> > >questions asked.  Questions not covered by the canned answers are
either
> > >answered incorrectly, or are not answered at ALL.
> > >
> > > >From an article I wrote over a month ago (in which I
> > copy-n-paste my emailed
> > >questions and Cobalt Tech Support answers):  "...I suspect that
> > xxxx's job
> > >description is to dissuade as many customers as possible from bothering
> > >Cobalt tech support."
> > >
> > >Cobalt reminds me of Apple Computer in the 80's - 'insanely
> > great' products
> > >and 'insanely poor' product support.  The primary reason we
> > formed Macintosh
> > >User Groups [MUG] in the mid-80's was to get the education and
> > support Apple
> > >failed to provide.  I co-founded a MUG in 1985; today it still has over
> > >1,000 paying members - almost 15 years later.  This
> > [cobalt-users] mailing
> > >list - and Luke Tymowski's QubeQuorner
> > (http://weblogs.userland.com/qube/) -
> > >serve as virtual-user-groups to get practical and "real" support for
our
> > >[Cobalt] product questions.  Where else would we go???
> > >
> > >The obvious fact remains that, although this list is a form of
> > "community"
> > >for Cobalt product owners, if Cobalt was providing prompt, efficient
and
> > >accurate product support, 80% of the postings to this list would be
> > >pointless and would disappear overnight.
> > >
> > >If Cobalt were my company, I would be very *proud* of my products, and
> > >extremely *embarrassed* of my customer support.  But I suspect no-one
is
> > >embarrassed; I further suspect that this is all part of a
pre-calculated
> > >business plan...  push as much product (profit) as possible, and
> > provide as
> > >little support (expense) as possible.  Simple arithmetic.  Not rocket
> > >science.  Not many other things, either...
> > >
> > >Perhaps your experience has been different.  Better?  I hope so.  I
can't
> > >remember reading the last posting to this list ranting about how
"great"
> > >Cobalt support is; perhaps I missed it?
> > >
> > >Just my views...
> > >
> > >Doug
> > >
> > >---
> > >Doug Forman, MCSE, MCSD (doug@xxxxxxxxxxx)
> > >Incline Systems Inc - Vancouver, WA
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: cobalt-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > [mailto:cobalt-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of pete
monaghan
> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 2:34 AM
> > > > To: cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Re: [cobalt-users] cobalt cube
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If you have not bought the Qube yet I would look elsewhere as
> > it really
> > > > does not do the job properly and support is crap. I use a
> > Qube for this
> > > > purpose here plus giving LAN users web access. It only partly works.
I
> > > > have about 40 users. The only problem and its a major one is
> > that e-mail
> > > > which is originally sent via a mailing list such as this cobalt user
> > > > list ends up in the admin account not the user its intended
> > for. I have
> > > > been trying to get my supplier and cobalt support (both Europe and
US]
> > > > to sort it out but the only response I have had after over 6 months
is
> > > > that it's a known problem (that took 4 months to get) and its being
> > > > worked on by Cobalt.
> > > >
> > > > . In message <4.2.0.58.20000123163758.009aa990@xxxxxxxx>, Duane Cook
> > > > <lists@xxxxxxxxx> writes
> > > > >Hi, I want to use a cobalt cube as my dedicated mail server, teh
> > > > cube would
> > > > >not have any other duties except sending and receving mail.
> > Does anyone
> > > > >else use the cube like this?  How many email accounts could it
> > > > hold?  How
> > > > >would it perform?
> > > > >
> > > > >Any feedback, would be good.
> > > > >
> > > > >Duane
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >_______________________________________________
> > > > >cobalt-users mailing list
> > > > >cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cobalt-users mailing list
> > > > cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Stephen W. DeWitt
> > President & CEO
> > Cobalt Networks, Inc.
> > 555 Ellis Street
> > Mountain View, CA
> > 94043
> >
> > Phone: 650.623.2560
> > Fax: 650.623.2546
> >
> > NASDAQ: COBT
> > http://www.cobalt.com
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cobalt-users mailing list
> > cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cobalt-users mailing list
> cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users