Technical support Ethical behaviour??? 8

[PalmStrike]

Hi all, i am just curious to peoples opinion about chargeable technical support from the big software providers.

Namely... actually, no names lets keep this wide.

I personally go on the net a lot to try and find answers to problems, as a lot of you will have noticed (a big thankyou to anyone who has answered any of my threads in the past)

But sometimes, the answer is so elusive for so simple a problem. And more often than not, it is an answer people don't think of giving because it is so obvious that you assume that has already been looked at.

I personnaly resent sending more money to a big corporation for a three minute phone call (well 20 minute phone call, 17 mins to get to the techy). Maybe it is just the anarchist in me, but there are a lot of modest people out there that are so willing to help, it is a shame we are being held to ransome by big corporations.

I am willing to accept that I might be missing the point.
Gis an opinion.

 

[cdogg]

SATWizard,
Compaq's response is understandable. Older systems are not tested with newer operating systems that weren't available at the time of the their purchase. That's not to say that newer OS's won't work with your system - just that Compaq won't be there if something goes wrong.

It sounds like you understand that, but feel backed in a corner because Micro$oft won't continue to support Win98. Don't be. If everything is running fine now, then it will continue to run fine until you make a change in the environment. Anytime you install new software, it's your responsibility to back up your current configuration so that you can restore it if something goes wrong. Also, it is up to the software vendor whether or not to continue to make software for aging environments. If they do, you install it, and something goes wrong, then they should be the ones to help you out.

Maybe it's just me, but 10 years seems a bit on the extreme side for software. 5 years sounds reasonable. If you don't like it, upgrade. In the case with Compaq, if you don't like it, don't buy another Compaq (though most OEMs will have the same policy).

Again, it's not like you invested thousands - you're $100-$300 only goes so far...


~cdogg

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."
- A. Einstein

 

[SATWizard]

SkiFlyer,
While I might accept that requiring an OS vendor (i.e. M$) to support a 10 year old OS would be costly, would it not be reasonable for them to put non-supported OS source code into the Open Source community? After all, M$ contends that anyone who buys or is donated an old computer really should pay M$ for the OS . . . whether it is supported or not! (M$ tried that when a few thousand old computers were donated to some kind of charity in Australia a few years back.)

CDogg,
I would agree with your statement "If everything is running fine now, then it will continue to run fine until you make a change in the environment." . . . unfortunately, Win 98 goes thud about every 36 to 40 hours and progressively contaminates things to the point of my needing to re-install everything about every 13 to 15 months. What really galls me is that my Compaq is really only about 3 years old . . . and it isn't all that difficult to test Win2K on a box,is it? Alternatively, they could at least have tested Win NT on the box when they were first selling the box so that there would be an alternative to Win98.

Re: "if you don't like it, don't buy another Compaq"
Don't worry, I won't be buying another Compaq . . . although, I am hoping that Dell doesn't have the exactly same attitude.

I guess my real issues are a) the fact that a computer manufacturer would make a deal with M$ to "customize" the OS to the point of making a generic version of even the same OS not work properly with the machine and b) the fact that the OS vendor leverages its sales by effectively forcing users to upgrade in order to have any hope of not having bugs/security holes in the OS. Ralph D. Wilson II
<http:thewizardsguild.com>

&quot;Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.&quot; A.C. Clark

 

[cdogg]

a) &quot;the fact that a computer manufacturer would make a deal with M$ to &quot;customize&quot; the OS to the point of making a generic version of even the same OS not work properly with the machine&quot;

That's one downside to Compaq's. They're relentless on using proprietary methods and components. I despise them for that reason alone. Again, research your purchases thoroughly and understand that there are thousands of others in the same boat. If you go with the consensus in ratings, chances are you're getting the best deal possible on pre-built systems.


b) &quot;the OS vendor leverages its sales by effectively forcing users to upgrade in order to have any hope of not having bugs/security holes in the OS&quot;

Well, now take Win98 for example since that's the issue at hand. How many years did you receive bugs/patches for that OS? Almost 5 years now, right? This &quot;use of force&quot; as you describe is characteristic of the industry as a whole. In many parts, companies will only support the previous 1-2 releases of a particular product. Micro$oft is quite generous in this respect.


&quot;it isn't all that difficult to test Win2K on a box,is it?&quot;

Up the ante to dozens of models (potentially a hundred or so) sold in a 5 year period. At what point do you just say 'NO' in order to avoid wasting your resources? Sorry, I can't come to grips with this perspective.


It all boils down to whether you plan on continuing to change your environment and use it with newer products/components. Eventually, the industry is going to move away from you. 5 years seems plenty for your 100-dollar operating system which was practically free in your case (BTW, it can still be used after 5 years, just not supported). On top of that, your vendor says they'll continue to &quot;try&quot; to support that OS to the best of their ability. What more can you ask for?

Professional or non-professional, businesses have to draw a line. It's continually costing them money, and in the end, you're just not worth the expense! If they go on, they'll reach a point where they've lost money...


~cdogg

&quot;The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.&quot;
- A. Einstein

 

[cdogg]

There's a time to gripe and there's a time to suck it in and move on
- especially when you've gotten your money's worth ~cdogg

&quot;The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.&quot;
- A. Einstein

 

[greyted]

If one upgrades their system what are the legal requirements (if any) when they sell their old system with the original software? Can the purchaser of the older system use the software if he has the original copy?
Any legal eagles out there? I have seen this argument on different tech sites but as yet I have never read a satisfactory conclusion to the question.
This may seem a trivial point but I personally think it very important as in the U.K. there are many people of all ages who can't afford the expense of a new system so have no choice but to purchase an older system.
If the answer to the above is affirmative would software companies help these new computer users?
What a golden opportunity for the companies to impress the new computer users with their help and support, be they hardware or software.

SATWizard,
Have great sympathy for your point of view, your comment would suggest they have lost your future custom. What a waste as a more positive response from them could have resulted in a satisfied customer who maybe would recommend good service to others. I am involved with quite a few small businessman and word of mouth counts for a lot with these guys.

cdogg,
Five years and they are still finding bugs, funny you mention that as I read in the Windows 95/98 forum yesterday that they have issued 3000 fixes or updates for 98.
A lot of people I know and help do move on, unfortunately the greater percentage of them with a sense of mistrust towards IT companies and that is very sad for us all.

 

[skiflyer]

I believe the law is quite simple...

You bought one copy, you can install one copy.

So if I sell you the old computer with say oh I dunno, Win98 still on it. We're all good.

Now if I go and install that Win98 CD on my new computer, one of us is breaking the law... dunno who though, prolly me since I'm the one with the knowledge, though maybe you since I can pull out the CD and claim that I warned you to erase that.

-Rob

 

[cdogg]

greyted,
The fact alone that M$ has released so many fixes/patches/upgrades is a demonstration of their commitment to the customer (though it may be lacking in other areas). The point I was trying to make about 5 years is that many software companies (small and large) have a tendency to drop support when a version is more than 1 or 2 releases old. Could you imagine if M$ dropped support for Win95A right when Win98 was released? Say it with me...HELLISH NIGHTMARE!


Besides, there's something like 5-10 million lines of code in Win98, and more than 20 million in Win2K. It's just a disaster waiting to happen when you don't go open source! But is it always the OS's fault? While we know the answer to that, many consumers out there don't. The mistrust won't be erased or even minimized just by offering unrestricted support. It takes knowledge to understand the situation which is unfortunate for those who will never know.

I'm no fan of M$, but from a business perspective, you have to give credit where credit is due. I have my own gripes against M$, but I think I'll save them for another day!


~cdogg

&quot;The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.&quot;
- A. Einstein

 

[greyted]

cdogg,
Only mentioned Windows 95/98 in reply to your previous post, I have not mentioned the company name at all. My point was referring to the IT industry in general and the attitude of the majority of these companies to their clientele.
Actually I well remember the Win95 release, the company concerned learnt a big lesson from that. The price of Win 3.1 was very nearly halved and guess what they sold so well that the price increased again to make Win 95 more attractive.
I often wonder how Howard Hughes would have reacted to this new technology and the DOJ investigation, did he not lose TWA for very similar reasons? Your comments regards disaster waiting to happen are spot on, someone did make that point earlier in this thread.
There are companies who will help with support free of charge, perhaps we should be praising these guys?

skifler,
&quot;One of us is breaking the law, dunno who though.&quot;
I did comment in my post that all software was sold with the computer so there is only one copy in the possesion of the new owner. Has the new owner legal entitlement to use the software or does he have to pay for a new license for old software?

 

[skiflyer]

As long as the original owner isn't holding onto a backup or original installation disk for personal use I believe the new owner is perfectly justified. Some software may be different, but as far as I'm aware, it's very similar to a real good. One purchase one use... not one purchase one user.

Then again some Eula's let you install the software on as many machines as you like as long as you don't use more than one at a time (been awhile since I've seen that one though).

I'm sure someone knows the details better than myself though.

-Rob

 

[lionelhill]

Skiflyer,
you have to be careful with a surprising amount of software. A lot of EULAs prevent the passing on of the software to a third party without the prior permission of the license issuer. The &quot;software is like a book&quot; people are my friends. It's an attitude that makes life very simple, yet preserves author's rights to get some payment for their work. I wish everyone thought their way.

 

[PalmStrike]

I think SATWizard is right, surely if M$ are no longer going to support an operating system, make the source code available so others can pick up the trail. That way an OS has this right to die of old age as opposed to being cut off.

I think certainly for me this is where the heart of the matter lies. Forcing software to be obsolete by witholding information. I mean, I like win98, for me it is useable, I am used to it, I know how to sort out it's little excentricities that affect me, and if I can't, then i come on here, and see if anyone else knows. I don't want to necesarily have to upgrade to something else where I have to start from scratch, and have less control, or rather feel i have less control, over what I can do with a system. My bike it is thirty years old, gets me from a to b in style, I can't break the spead limit on it, cos over 75, it vibrates so much I can't see where I'm going, it is allowed to be stylishly loud and when it breaks down, I can fix it, and will still be able to fix it in 40 years time. why on earth would I want to upgrade to a yogurt pot that does 170mph and sounds like a hairdryer, just because I am told that this is what you have to ride now. Brown is the new black darling.

Now the point I am making is that anyone can make bits for my bike, because the manufacturers and importers have allowed the spec to be known, so why don't the software companies do the same, and let the public decide if they want to use it themselves.

If the S*** fits wear it!!

I think it is important that you should let people have their opinion and their choice and not impose your opinion on others.

Sorry, is that what I am doing? LOL

 

[Tarwn]

Yes, but as someone pointed out earlier, later versions of windows are based off the earlier versions. So while John Q Hackker has a dissassembled version of the earlier OS's, wouldn't it be grand if he could get the commented copy with the easy to understand and well layed out code? ________________________________________________
Get better results for your questions: faq333-2924
Frequently Asked ASP Questions: faq333-3048

 

[gurner]

Posting from above

&quot;Just ask anyone who works for a company that charges a yearly service contract for unlimited service... glad it's not my job, but I hear those phones ringing all the time.&quot;

This particular company policy is driving me absolutly Nuts!!!

Talk about abuse of a helpdesk.

If it doesn't change soon then...

 

[ST0RMCHASER]

I think one point to make is even if you purchase some of this software, it's not yours. The EULA says so. They just give you the privilege to use it, after you pay for it. Gosh, I am glad they don't sell cars, and homes! Tech support to me is a joke. They read from cards or programs that are installed on their computers, but they have no clue to what they are reading, or trying to explain to you. I run into this all the time. Not that I call them, but because people I know call them, and get passed from hold to hold, and get info they can't use, and the Tech person, can't explain any better because they are just reading a silly card. Then I end up with a irate individual to sort through, and walk through a virtual mess that a paid Tech support person created. I feel if you are going to pay for Tech support, then for Gods sake train a person so they know the difference between Internet Explorer, and Explorer. (That really happened) (So did a tech person didn't know their was a software program called just &quot;Outlook&quot
They want you to pay, fine. But have someone on the other end that knows what they are talking about. Gosh hire some ITs that need work! (There's a thought) I don't think it is fair to the caller to have to pay a Tech support a fee for a worker they hire, that has no clue to the software they are pushing on the consumers.
Maybe they need to revamp the system they have set up, cause I tell people, dont pay for tech support you can still get the same ill advice online for free. But I have hardly gotten ill advice online free. There are too many online willing to help for nothing, and they have a head on their shoulders too. Gosh they even know the difference between Internet Explorer, and Explorer! (I hope I didn't go off subject! Sorry if I did!)

 

[Tarwn]

Heh, just to be a pain, the only real difference between explorer and internet explorer these days is a slightly different toolbar and the fact that one goes on the internet and the other lists items from the file system. I wish I could remember where the stylesheet for the explorer window was hiding, I remember making some minor modifications a couple years ago so that all my folder names on the left side were followed by the words &quot;Mmmkay&quot; and instead of the little blue line under the name I found this nifty green line with a lemming playing golf (animated gif) that made my folders look a lot more classy

Actually, the cool thing was back with IE 5.0 the explorer stylesheet actually had a hack in it. Anyone that has done web programming for a while knows there were some minor timing issues with things line form submits and so on. The work around was to pause it 1 millisecond before calling the function. Well inside the stylesheet for explorer there was a case to display the mini-media player if you select a media file it can play. With a 1 millisecond pause before it. With a comment that said &quot;I don't know why this works, but don't delete it or explorer will crash.&quot;.



For some reason that made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Sorry for hijacking the thread, brain dead after work,
-Tarwn [sub]01010100 01101001 01100101 01110010 01101110 01101111 01101011 00101110 01100011 01101111 01101101 [/sub]
[sup]29 3K 10 3D 3L 3J 3K 10 32 35 10 3E 39 33 35 10 3K 3F 10 38 31 3M 35 10 36 3I 35 35 10 3K 39 3D 35 10 1Q 19[/sup]
Get better results for your questions: faq333-2924
Frequently Asked ASP Questions: faq333-3048

 

[dilettante]

Well we've drifted a long way in this thread, but here are my two cents. Hope I'm not too far off-topic.

If Win9x was so bad, how is it I (and many many others) still use it? Yep, I have some XP and Win2K machines. But I need several Win9x installations to test products because people are still using the stuff. Heck, I even have one peer-to-peer network DOS 6.22 &quot;server&quot; for some testing. No Win 3.x right now though. ;-)

I'm even on a 98SE machine as I type this.

MS' support has been pretty good for me. Perfect? Far from it. But pretty good.

DOS and 95 went off support already. My biggest gripe? They've pulled most of the fixes, add-ons, and other doo-dads I need to do a clean install. I captured most of these and burned 'em to CDs awhile back though.

I'm still a little perturbed that my customers can't do this though 'cause some of my software needs things installed like DCOM95 and later MDAC upgrades. Some of that I can't legally distribute to them either.

When 98's lights go out I'll be in the same boat there. Same for NT 4 pretty soon (2005 now?).

I don't need MS to support these OSs forever. Heck, my life would be easier if the old OSs just evaporated! But I don't need new bug fixes, security fixes, and I sure don't need new features.

I just wish they'd sell an update CD for about $15 that would let you do a clean install from the original Windows CD and then bring that installation up to the state of things at the time the OS went off support. Then give us two years to &quot;buy 'em and burn 'em&quot; and let us distribute the stuff (patches/upgrades). You'd still need your CD and key to reinstall, so they'd be covered on piracy as much as ever.

Heck, I'd even pay another $30 for a set of CDs with the Win95 Knowledge Base articles on it - though I'm pretty well covered here because I hang on to my old MSDN subscription CDs. Lots of people should be hanging onto their TechNet CDs too - that probably already has all the patches and stuff along with the KB articles.

But I do NOT expect them to take bug reports and issue fixes on a 5 year old OS. Don't need new features neither.

 

[skiflyer]

Out of curiosity, how does your idea (the first one not the second), differ from MS's service packs?

Perhaps they have the idea right just aren't complete enough?

-Rob

 

[dilettante]

The service packs represent an accumulation of core-OS fixes and some features here and there, thrown together representing the state of things at a point in time.

Something like a Win95 service pack with the most recent versions of various functionality fixes and security fixes and such would have been a good idea to have at &quot;end of life.&quot; I'm not aware they did anything like that though.

And a whole lot of &quot;Windows Family&quot; features weren't part of service packs. Things to help Win95 machines interact with newer Windows OSs. Things to support Internet use (later Winsock and DUN versions for example). Things to support applications using technologies that came out after Win95 was released.

A lot of things like DirectX, DCOM, and MDAC fall into that category, as do more recent versions of IE - which truly DID become part of the Windows platform that applications rely on. Media Player, NetMeeting, Personal Web Server... a lot of these weren't on the Win95 CD, or were replaced by more capable/usable versions after the CD was released. None of these sorts of things go into service packs.

Well &quot;none&quot; is a strong word, but this isn't the primary purpose of a service pack.

For example I am pretty sure that IE 6.x won't install on a Win95 machine. I'm not even sure about IE 5.5 though early 5.x versions will. At some point you won't FIND an IE 5.x to download at all though.

And if you need to add the Desktop Update to Win95 I'm pretty sure you need to install an IE 4.x version first, to get the DU, and ONLY THEN upgrade to an IE 5.x version. Desktop Update provided the Shell.Application component for example. Lots of programs and scripts make use of Shell.Application.


So yes, service packs get you partway there. But there were also a lot of add-on goodies that made a Win95 machine able to run applications created for Win98, Win98SE, WinMe, WinNT4, Win2K, and WinXP. Things only truly began to unravel with .Net's and XP's release - but time marches on.

 

[gurner]

Where does MS Law stand on MDACs, DCOMs, SPEU e.t.c?

I am forever sending them out on CD or Email coz someone is still running Win95b or Win98.

The way i look at it, and yes there are thousands of dumb 'techies' out there but, here in the UK per year you pay £500+ for car insurance, £100+ road Tax, £40 a week petrol or £2080 a year, NEW tyres £50 a pop for bog standard. You get clamped £80 for release £100 for towing £100 per day in the pound.

It costs £5 a day just to drive into london, or if you drive in and out, in and out, £5 pounds each time you pass that camera! (times that by 200+ journeys) to park it costs about £15+ in London for a day and most places outside about £10

Your car breaks down and the HeadGasket blows your talking several Thousand Pounds, the Car Mechanic hired is a Cowboy that is robbing you blind, the cost of parts is less than a tenth of the final bill but you still pay it because your car is your life line!

So is your computer these days!

The IT Techie is the 21st century Car Mechanic, every so often you find a bad apple, other times you find absolute diamond geezers that go out of their way to help, people here on this site and us here in this office (i'd like to think!)

 

[PalmStrike]

Yes, good point Girth, do you think that you will see classic computer festivals, compujumbles and a virtual London to Brighton run too?