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

[Jeff Bilicki <jeffb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am pretty sure that if you have a software problem(s) due a bug in
Cobalt's software that they will not charge you for support.  

Jeff-

"abc-123.net" wrote:
> 
> 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