Are other cable co. support dweebs this stupid and annoying?
John Navas
In <009F8997...@SendSpamHere.ORG>, sys...@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian
Schenkenberger, VAXman-) wrote:
>In article <D4%o6.147$9c6....@typhoon.sonic.net>, John Navas <spamf...@navasgrp.dublin.ca.us> writes:
>... The point is, this person was well
>aware of the cable outage -- tell the customer instead of wasting time.
With all due respect, your bitch is with management, not a person that
was probably just following instructions.
>>On the contrary -- it's pretty tricky stuff, especially for the average
>>subscriber. My webpage gets thousands of hits per day from those
>>seeking help.
>
>... only because Gates and Co. have complicated the hell out of some-
>thing that needn't be all that difficult. I didn't see you providing
>any information for the myriad flavors of unix and other non-unix O/S
>environments. ...
I actually do have some information on Linux and even Solaris. I don't
have more because the audience is very small, and because it tends to be
more sophisticated. Windows is marketed to average consumers, and
dominates the marketplace. While it certainly has its flaws, it's
considerably less complex than UNIX and UNIX workalikes -- the thought
of the average consumer using Linux makes me shudder.
>I've visited your page. You really ought to add a section on trouble-
>shooting. ...
Thanks for the advice. Feel free to step up to the plate. ;-)
>>On the contrary -- they should do what they are trained and instructed
>>to do (not what some subscriber thinks they should do).
>
>And that's where the problem lies and it's not just with the cable co.
>Apathy in the workforce is rampant. ...
I don't think the fundamental problems have anything to do with
workforce apathy. For starters:
1. Most consumers choose products based on price alone. Vendors have
little choice but to sacrifice robustness.
2. Most consumers are unwilling to pay for support, which is an
expensive proposition. Vendors have little choice but to ration it.
3. Most consumers are too lazy to even read the documentation, much
less educate themselves. It's so much easier to just call support.
Vendors have learned that long hold times help to reduce such calls, as
unfortunate as that might seem.
4. All too many consumers take out their frustrations on support
people, making an already difficult job unpleasant to boot. That makes
it hard to find good people, and to keep them once they are trained.
If anything is "rampant" it's a free-lunch mindset among consumers, as I
know from personal experience: I spend a large amount of time and money
publishing a free resource, free even from ads. Part of my "reward" is
getting flamed; e.g., by those demanding more help than I'm willing and
able to give.
>>I disagree -- looks to me like that support person was just doing
>>his/her job.
>
>You're going to play the devil's advocate no matter how rediculously
>absurd the situation. ...
No, I'm just not willing to join you in flaming the wrong persons.
>... FYI, thanks for posting the cabling FAQ URL.
You're welcome. Thanks for saying thanks.
>I am not in
>the mood to start any personal flame war with you.
Or I you.
>From the responses, the concensus is that support from the cable co. is
>generally considered poor, poorer, poorest. ...
We tend get what we pay for. Do you see people here asking which ISP
has the best support? Do you see people here offering to pay more money
for good support? I don't. I see people asking which service is
cheapest, and then complaining when they get cheap in both senses of the
word.
Personally I pay a premium for good service even though I'm more able
than most to solve my own problems -- that's not "holier than thou" --
that's what I think makes sense. (My DSL ISP is Sonic.net, which
charged about $56/month as compared to the going rate of $40/month from
the price leader, PacBell/SBC/Prodigy.) Are you willing to do that?
>I have spoken with people all over my community about cable modem and a
>great many have tried it. However, because of the support group's in-
>ability to assist many of them with successful installation/connection,
>they have opted for AOL, MSN, and similar dialup services. ...
The fundamental problem is that broadband is priced so low that
providers are swimming in a sea of red ink. In that environment it's
not terribly surprising that providers are reluctant to spend more on
expensive support, particularly with demand far outstripping supply.
This can't last -- providers are dropping like flies. Prices will
probably go up, and there is already evidence of that; e.g., PacBell's
quiet increase from $40/month to $50/month for DSL.
For more on this, see my new thread "A day in the Life of Phone
Support."
--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>
CABLE MODEM/DSL GUIDE: <http://Cable-DSL.home.att.net/>
Michael Walsh
John Navas wrote:
>
>
> I actually do have some information on Linux and even Solaris. I don't
> have more because the audience is very small, and because it tends to be
> more sophisticated. Windows is marketed to average consumers, and
> dominates the marketplace. While it certainly has its flaws, it's
> considerably less complex than UNIX and UNIX workalikes -- the thought
> of the average consumer using Linux makes me shudder.
UNIX is a valuable working tool for software development.
I have retired and have no desire to face it again.
Mike Walsh
Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-
{...snip...}
>I actually do have some information on Linux and even Solaris. I don't
>have more because the audience is very small, and because it tends to be
>more sophisticated. Windows is marketed to average consumers, and
>dominates the marketplace. While it certainly has its flaws, it's
>considerably less complex than UNIX and UNIX workalikes -- the thought
>of the average consumer using Linux makes me shudder.
Same here. I would say that if the average Joe had to deal with unix
they'd very quickly opt out of the computer revolution/(de)evolution.
>>>I've visited your page. You really ought to add a section on trouble-
>>>shooting. ...
>>
>>Thanks for the advice. Feel free to step up to the plate. ;-)
But I don't do PC which seems the mainstay of your page.
>1. Most consumers choose products based on price alone. Vendors have
>little choice but to sacrifice robustness.
Price, performance and quality. Choose any two you like.
>2. Most consumers are unwilling to pay for support, which is an
>expensive proposition. Vendors have little choice but to ration it.
But when it comes to paying for it, I'd expect something in return.
Also, since you're willing to speak for all consumers, I'll do the
same and state that they'd expect something in return as well.
>3. Most consumers are too lazy to even read the documentation, much
>less educate themselves. It's so much easier to just call support.
>Vendors have learned that long hold times help to reduce such calls, as
>unfortunate as that might seem.
Well, I've read some of that so called "documentation". Perhaps,
there is more to it than the deadly sin of sloth.
>4. All too many consumers take out their frustrations on support
>people, making an already difficult job unpleasant to boot. That makes
>it hard to find good people, and to keep them once they are trained.
I try not to be rude to these people. A recent thread here asked
about the salaries of these support people. From the responses, I
wonder why anybody would submit themselves to such abuses for the
meager wages they earn. A burger flipping position at a local McD's
would be far less stressful for similar compensation.
>If anything is "rampant" it's a free-lunch mindset among consumers, as I
>know from personal experience: I spend a large amount of time and money
>publishing a free resource, free even from ads. Part of my "reward" is
>getting flamed; e.g., by those demanding more help than I'm willing and
>able to give.
An altruist! :)
>You're welcome. Thanks for saying thanks.
:)
>>From the responses, the concensus is that support from the cable co. is
>>generally considered poor, poorer, poorest. ...
>
>We tend get what we pay for. Do you see people here asking which ISP
>has the best support? Do you see people here offering to pay more money
>for good support? I don't. I see people asking which service is
>cheapest, and then complaining when they get cheap in both senses of the
>word.
There's a widely held misconception between cheap and inexpensive. In
far too many cases, however, there is little distinction.
>Personally I pay a premium for good service even though I'm more able
>than most to solve my own problems -- that's not "holier than thou" --
>that's what I think makes sense. (My DSL ISP is Sonic.net, which
>charged about $56/month as compared to the going rate of $40/month from
>the price leader, PacBell/SBC/Prodigy.) Are you willing to do that?
I pay even more than that and I have had very little need to communi-
cate with the support group of my DSL provider because of problems.
>For more on this, see my new thread "A day in the Life of Phone
>Support."
I shall make a mental note to be sure to read it.
--
VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after them.
John Navas
In <009F89C9...@SendSpamHere.ORG>, sys...@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian
Schenkenberger, VAXman-) wrote:
>In article <Rp8p6.171$9c6....@typhoon.sonic.net>, John Navas <spamf...@navasgrp.dublin.ca.us> writes:
>>>Thanks for the advice. Feel free to step up to the plate. ;-)
>
>But I don't do PC which seems the mainstay of your page.
So do a page on UNIX and UNIX workalikes. Seriously.
>>1. Most consumers choose products based on price alone. Vendors have
>>little choice but to sacrifice robustness.
>
>Price, performance and quality. Choose any two you like.
When you choose price, you only get one IMHO. It's unrealistic to
expect otherwise.
>>2. Most consumers are unwilling to pay for support, which is an
>>expensive proposition. Vendors have little choice but to ration it.
>
>But when it comes to paying for it, I'd expect something in return.
>Also, since you're willing to speak for all consumers, I'll do the
>same and state that they'd expect something in return as well.
I'd say that when you actually pay for it, then and only then will you
be able to expect (demand) it.
>>3. Most consumers are too lazy to even read the documentation, much
>>less educate themselves. It's so much easier to just call support.
>>Vendors have learned that long hold times help to reduce such calls, as
>>unfortunate as that might seem.
>
>Well, I've read some of that so called "documentation". Perhaps,
>there is more to it than the deadly sin of sloth.
True, there's both good and bad documentation, but I know from
experience that consumers still call support even when the documentation
is good (thereby reducing the incentive to spend money on good
documentation).
>>If anything is "rampant" it's a free-lunch mindset among consumers, as I
>>know from personal experience: I spend a large amount of time and money
>>publishing a free resource, free even from ads. Part of my "reward" is
>>getting flamed; e.g., by those demanding more help than I'm willing and
>>able to give.
>
>An altruist! :)
I like to think so. ;-) There are actually quite a few of us on the
Internet, although the number seems to be dwindling. Pity.
Brad
"2. Most consumers are unwilling to pay for support, which is an
expensive proposition. Vendors have little choice but to ration it."
But if vendor's product's would work as advertised to begin with, they
wouldn't get so many calls.
"3. Most consumers are too lazy to even read the documentation, much
less educate themselves. It's so much easier to just call support."
Again, if the vendors would actually supply documentation that actually
provided some useful information, it would help. I don't see anything coming
with most computer products these days that even remotely pass's as
"documentation". 2 page's written with the same few words repeated in 6
languages does not cut it.
Trouble shooting sections in most manuals are a joke.
Look at any Sony so called manual for a perfect example of how NOT to write
a manual.
And in the case of my cable ISP, they provided no documentation at all!
John, IMHO your web site is a great example of HOW documentation should be
written. Vendors could take lesson's from you. And I for one DO appreciate
your site. I've used it several times to resolve problems and questions. Not
starting a pissing contest, I just see it differently than you do. :)
Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-
>
>"2. Most consumers are unwilling to pay for support, which is an
>expensive proposition. Vendors have little choice but to ration it."
>
>wouldn't get so many calls.
Harrumph!
>"3. Most consumers are too lazy to even read the documentation, much
>less educate themselves. It's so much easier to just call support."
>
>Again, if the vendors would actually supply documentation that actually
>provided some useful information, it would help. I don't see anything coming
>with most computer products these days that even remotely pass's as
>"documentation". 2 page's written with the same few words repeated in 6
>languages does not cut it.
>Trouble shooting sections in most manuals are a joke.
>
>Look at any Sony so called manual for a perfect example of how NOT to write
>a manual.
There are different documentation needs for hardware and software. I
don't think your Sony example is a good example, however I feel your
pain. I'm tiring of getting hardware manuals and/or assembly manuals
without a word printed on them -- just pictoral instructions.
>And in the case of my cable ISP, they provided no documentation at all!
>
>John, IMHO your web site is a great example of HOW documentation should be
>written. Vendors could take lesson's from you. And I for one DO appreciate
>your site. I've used it several times to resolve problems and questions. Not
>starting a pissing contest, I just see it differently than you do. :)
Good documentation is not difficult to provide but it does take a good
deal of time and effort. I used to write articles for a very technical
rag published every other month. Authoring good articles of 8-12 pages
took a great deal of time. So much so that I did not make every other
month. (It wasn't my full time profession either.) I'm now contracted
to author a book which I'm sure will take well over a year. Because of
this writing, I've read good documentation and I've read horrible docu-
mentation. In many cases of the horrible documentation, a lack of con-
cern for and time and devotion to providing the documentation is usually
quite evident.
Most providers of *good* documentation will have some mechanism for feed-
back from their readers. It is the reader that makes for good document-
ation. If you get documentation that sucks, you should let the party re-
sponsible for it know. Let them know what they need to do to improve it
for you. This is especially important with software, software which you
may buy into and use for a long time to come. Unfortunately, much of the
software documentation today sucks.
John, and others, try to fill in the voids especially since the inter-
net makes it so easy to publish. However, while there is nothing wrong
with the efforts of these altuists, one should not let their efforts be
a replacement for shoddy product documentation. If you don't demand it,
you won't get it. Same holds true, IMHO, for quality support which is
what started off this thread.
John Navas
In <tWcp6.992$646....@newsfeed.slurp.net>, "Brad" <m...@here.com> wrote:
>"2. Most consumers are unwilling to pay for support, which is an
>expensive proposition. Vendors have little choice but to ration it."
>
>But if vendor's product's would work as advertised to begin with, they
>wouldn't get so many calls.
Product quality has an effect, but less than you might think -- see #3
(below). Then there's:
5. Most consumers are too impatient to wait until products mature, so
vendors are left with little choice but to rush products to market
before they are really ready.
>"3. Most consumers are too lazy to even read the documentation, much
>less educate themselves. It's so much easier to just call support."
>
>Again, if the vendors would actually supply documentation that actually
>provided some useful information, it would help. I don't see anything coming
>with most computer products these days that even remotely pass's as
>"documentation". 2 page's written with the same few words repeated in 6
>languages does not cut it.
>Trouble shooting sections in most manuals are a joke.
True, there's a lot of bad documentation, but I know from painful
experience that consumers still call support even when the documentation
is good (thereby reducing the incentive to spend money on good
documentation).
>John, IMHO your web site is a great example of HOW documentation should be
>written. Vendors could take lesson's from you. And I for one DO appreciate
>your site. I've used it several times to resolve problems and questions. Not
>starting a pissing contest, I just see it differently than you do. :)
I sincerely think you. However, my site appeals to only a minority of
the market.
To be clear, I do think vendors can and should do a better job, but I
also think that we users bear much of the responsibility for the current
sorry state of affairs. As I wrote in another article:
We tend get what we pay for. Do you see people here asking which ISP
has the best support? Do you see people here offering to pay more
money for good support? I don't. I see people asking which service
is cheapest, and then complaining when they get cheap in both senses
of the word.
--
John Navas
In <009F89F0...@SendSpamHere.ORG>, sys...@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian
Schenkenberger, VAXman-) wrote:
>If you don't demand it,
>you won't get it. Same holds true, IMHO, for quality support which is
>what started off this thread.
We have to do more than demand it; we have to be willing to pay for it.
;-)
Theodore M. Seeber
> [POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable; PLEASE REPLY THERE]
>
> 5. Most consumers are too impatient to wait until products mature, so
> vendors are left with little choice but to rush products to market
> before they are really ready.
I'd ammend this to:
5. Most MANAGERS and SALES STAFF are too impatient
From my point of view, the customers are very patient and want something
that works. It's the Sales Staff who earn a living off of having new
things to sell, who put pressure on the managers, who put pressure on the
engineers. The consumers were never asked to begin with.
Ted
--
Theodore Michael Seeber
Coo! he's the remedial beer.
mailto:see...@aracnet.com
Check out the <A
HREF="http://www.aracnet.com/~seebert">IDIC Home Page!</A>
Jesus Christ Claimed "You will not know the hour or the day" of the end of
the world. My question, is this prophecy or promise?
Larry Jones
>
> Same here. I would say that if the average Joe had to deal with unix
> they'd very quickly opt out of the computer revolution/(de)evolution.
You say that like it's a bad thing.... ;-)
-Larry Jones
It's going to be a long year. -- Calvin
Scott Norwood
In article <tWcp6.992$646....@newsfeed.slurp.net>, Brad <m...@here.com> wrote:
>
>And in the case of my cable ISP, they provided no documentation at all!
I'm with you on the problems of crappy documentation. But some
things don't necessarily need documentation...since when does an
ISP's service come with documentation (other than stuff like
mail/news/dns server information, phone numbers for support/customer
service, etc.)? When I got my phone installed, the only "documentation"
I received from the phone company was a phone book.
But your general point is a good one. The hardware documentation
that comes with most PCs is a cruel joke. The documentation that
comes with a copy of Windows NT consists of a thin book on how
to use the mouse and run the installation program and a thick book
of compatable hardware. This is pitiful.
Scott Norwood
In article <Ifep6.14$fk...@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamf...@navasgrp.dublin.ca.us> wrote:
>
>True, there's a lot of bad documentation, but I know from painful
>experience that consumers still call support even when the documentation
>is good (thereby reducing the incentive to spend money on good
>documentation).
Partly true, but good documentation can be tremendously helpful to
those of us who aren't necessarily afraid to actually read before
calling. Check out the stuff that Network Appliance ships with their
file servers--it's really a model of good organization and a useful
format that other manufacturers should follow (but won't).
Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-
>[POSTED TO comp.dcom.modems.cable; PLEASE REPLY THERE]
>
>Schenkenberger, VAXman-) wrote:
>
>>If you don't demand it,
>>you won't get it. Same holds true, IMHO, for quality support which is
>>what started off this thread.
>
>;-)
I can agree with you to an extent. I was more than willing to see OOL
provide some sort of SOHO business connection and I am more the willing
to pay for that additional benefit. So far, all I have seen offered is
SOSO. ;) I'm not aware of any of cable modem internet access provider
offering a special @cost support service. Please point me to one if it
exists.
The issue I had was being made to do mindless, time expiring do nothings
to get them to offer (or more appropriately, acknowledge) that they were
having a wide-area outage.{*} It didn't require additional funds nor did
it require any additional skills within the service group. I believe the
real reason that OOL _WILL_NOT_ own up to certain system problems is that
many customers will be hounding them for compensation. If they can make
it seem as if it is only an isolated case, they won't have to deal with
an accounting disaster.
{*} I knew there was a problem when I called. What I wanted to know was
whether they were aware and working on it.
Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-
>Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- (sys...@SendSpamHere.ORG) wrote:
>>
>> they'd very quickly opt out of the computer revolution/(de)evolution.
>
Not at all. I'm no unix fan mind you. I just think it is far too terse
for Mr. and Mrs. Joe Average to deal with. With X based apps atop, it's
not too bad. MS Windows is no jaunt in the park either. In some ways,
it is far worse. The restrictions of a GUI only access and the "this is
what you do and nothing more" approach in Windows is leading people down
the computer de-evolution corridor.
Lonnie
ISP
> has the best support? Do you see people here offering to pay more
> money for good support? I don't. I see people asking which
service
> is cheapest, and then complaining when they get cheap in both
senses
> of the word.
Well put !!!
Brad
I do, that read message's about differant subjects, and try to choose the
one that's not getting bitched about the most. Whatever the product my be.
"John Navas" <spamf...@navasgrp.dublin.ca.us> wrote in message
news:Ifep6.14$fk...@typhoon.sonic.net...
Brad
they didn't supply the ftp site to upload our free home pages, I had to call
"several times" to find a so called customer service rep that even had a
clue as to what I was asking. They don't provide this info on their web site
either. Now that's lame.
The installer that came to the house just knew enough to get a web page to
load.
And I only have two choices in my area, one cable modem provider, and one
dialup provider, and believe me I've seriously considered going back to the
dialup provider.
"Scott Norwood" <snor...@redballoon.net> wrote in message
news:98408l$io8$1...@news.panix.com...
Brad
with a programmable two-way remote (computer) that's included with a new
home theater receiver I son-in-law bought, the darn think might as well have
been written in Mongolian, it is extremely difficult to decipher the broken
english and unfinished sentences.
I've had similar experience with computer equipment manuals.
"Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <sys...@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote in message
news:009F89F0...@SendSpamHere.ORG...
Andy Yee
>Well my Sony reference came from the dealing with the lame manual that
>came with a programmable two-way remote (computer) that's included with
>a new home theater receiver I son-in-law bought, the darn think might as
>well have been written in Mongolian, it is extremely difficult to
>decipher the broken english and unfinished sentences.
>I've had similar experience with computer equipment manuals.
>
"All your base are belong to us" :)
Brad
I see you've read a Sony manual.
"Andy Yee" <aXyX...@XjXaXsXcX.XcXoXmX> wrote in message
news:Xns905E89C6B4036aX...@207.225.159.7...
John Navas
In <%BAp6.96$Y1....@newsfeed.slurp.net>, "Brad" <m...@here.com> wrote:
>Yes, you get what you pay for. But i'm sure there are lurkers here just like
>I do, that read message's about differant subjects, and try to choose the
>one that's not getting bitched about the most. Whatever the product my be.
The problem with Usenet is that it's not a terribly good guide; e.g., a
better product with a large market share may well have more flames
posted here than a poorer product with a small market share. And that's
just the tip of the iceberg.
p.s. To de-spam an email address, use ".invalid" as the TLD (top level
domain) rather than ".com"/".net"/".org" (or any other potentially valid
TLD) in order to avoid unauthorized use of a valid domain and to
minimize unnecessary load on Internet infrastructure. Examples:
"use...@myisp.invalid" or "n...@spam.invalid" (Reference: RFC 2606)