If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
Graham wrote:
Did you go and read the supplied info at the link I posted. It clearly states what can and cannot be done with an OEM disc. You total ****ing idiotic ****-headed pillock. You can't just post a ****ing link then tell people to go and read it. You have to quote the text and argue why it supports your position, you stupid ****ing ****. Kindergarten kids debate better than that, you ****witted ****. The earth is flat: www.flat-earth.org/ read the link. The proof is there. Get the idea, you ****ing fool? No? I figured as much. -- Kadaitcha Man: Usenet Anarchist - http://kadaitcha.kicks-ass.org:83/ Anarchy is having to put up with things that **** you off. MVP - Most Valueless Prostitute |
Ads |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
D.Currie wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see some way to enforce the rule that OEMs have to support the software. Or maybe lose the ability to sell OEM. There is no way to enforce this rule. It is always possible for the unethical provider to come up with a plausible excuse for non-support. As a small system builder, my customers can come in and ask me questions face-to-face, and that's fine. Or they'll call. But I also get plenty of calls from people who have bought from the big guys, and they can't get an answer. And as a result, the unethical providers are dumping their support costs on your back -- increasing their profits at your expense. Their shareholder dividends are the direct result of your altruism -- and this is a very conscious and deliberate policy on their part IMO. Then there are the people who sell the oem software with trinkets, and have no intention or ability to answer questions. See above. Another example of the same. You've just described simply a more-obvious example... I don't mind answering customer's questions, and even the not-yet customers -- I figure some day I will get their business. No. Many customers are just as unethical as the abovementioned providers. They'll rape you and leave you freezing -- pay you 5 cents on the dollar and scream with outrage at that -- and drive your business into the ground. Save your time and energy for clients who come to you straight-out looking for value and willing to pay a fair price in the first place. These are the only people worth your time and energy. But it does irritate me that others shirk the responsibility to give the technical support they're supposed to. They aren't footing the cost for proper support, so they sell their stuff cheap, which is fine for the customer until they need help. And in the meantime, I'm providing free tech support in the hopes that I'll get work from that person in the meantime. You're a fool to give these people the time of day. "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote... "Testy" wrote... Personally I think it is time to discontinue the OEM program and have every maker include a full CD. Agreed. I am tired of this industry's inane appeals to the lowest-common-denominator cheapthink-element in our society. The braindead marketeering policies currently in effect are a *very efficient* way to ensure that *anyone* with enough brains to amass the cash to buy a PC will *surely* avoid buying one from any of the common suppliers. And now you know why we're having this slump -- and why it won't go away until we replace the airheads with engineers and start producing computers with solid performance instead of stalling and sputtering insanely unreliable junk. Best I can do for now. tm Bill |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote in message = ... I knew you weren't talkin' about me :-) =20 You're a ****ing cockeyed, arse ****ed, pillocking, bint bred, gormless = **** brain! This bitch heaps praise on you, as her code of ethics, for you not using = the expletives that she "would assume" you'd use (in her self-honouring = mind) to the OPs complaint letter. Yet you (at/or MS) remove(s) messages = that you('d) otherwise deem offensive. This **** regularly ("regularly = being 50-100 times/day) calls others, ****wits, cretins, morons, etc. = Yet you shine through MS customer service excellence, by telling the OP = INUT, that he's ****ed into a cocked hat, AFAMSIC, by then acknowledging = a known ****'s praise on you and ignoring real customer concerns. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
I think Ted has a few issues - too bad he doesn't have anything to say from the
other orifice in his body "Ted" """"""""""""""" wrote in message s.com... "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote in message ... I knew you weren't talkin' about me :-) You're a ****ing cockeyed, arse ****ed, pillocking, bint bred, gormless **** brain! This bitch heaps praise on you, as her code of ethics, for you not using the expletives that she "would assume" you'd use (in her self-honouring mind) to the OPs complaint letter. Yet you (at/or MS) remove(s) messages that you('d) otherwise deem offensive. This **** regularly ("regularly being 50-100 times/day) calls others, ****wits, cretins, morons, etc. Yet you shine through MS customer service excellence, by telling the OP INUT, that he's ****ed into a cocked hat, AFAMSIC, by then acknowledging a known ****'s praise on you and ignoring real customer concerns. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
"Gail" wrote in message = ... I think Ted has a few issues - too bad he doesn't have anything to = say from the other orifice in his body =20 You mean, you get a better understanding of these NGs, while you = aspirate the ferocious gases released out from between the cheeks of = one's bums?=20 By the way, you're a top-posting bint too! |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
Actually I was inferring that you are spouting from your bum and the result is
quite nauseating. Gee thanks for pointing out that I am a top poster -- I had not noticed that! Wow -- the observation prowness that you profess. I bow low in your presence) "Ted" """"""""""""""" wrote in message s.com... "Gail" wrote in message ... I think Ted has a few issues - too bad he doesn't have anything to say from the other orifice in his body You mean, you get a better understanding of these NGs, while you aspirate the ferocious gases released out from between the cheeks of one's bums? By the way, you're a top-posting bint too! |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
"Bill Drake" wrote in message ... D.Currie wrote: Personally, I'd like to see some way to enforce the rule that OEMs have to support the software. Or maybe lose the ability to sell OEM. There is no way to enforce this rule. It is always possible for the unethical provider to come up with a plausible excuse for non-support. As a small system builder, my customers can come in and ask me questions face-to-face, and that's fine. Or they'll call. But I also get plenty of calls from people who have bought from the big guys, and they can't get an answer. And as a result, the unethical providers are dumping their support costs on your back -- increasing their profits at your expense. Their shareholder dividends are the direct result of your altruism -- and this is a very conscious and deliberate policy on their part IMO. Then there are the people who sell the oem software with trinkets, and have no intention or ability to answer questions. See above. Another example of the same. You've just described simply a more-obvious example... I don't mind answering customer's questions, and even the not-yet customers -- I figure some day I will get their business. No. Many customers are just as unethical as the abovementioned providers. They'll rape you and leave you freezing -- pay you 5 cents on the dollar and scream with outrage at that -- and drive your business into the ground. Save your time and energy for clients who come to you straight-out looking for value and willing to pay a fair price in the first place. These are the only people worth your time and energy. But it does irritate me that others shirk the responsibility to give the technical support they're supposed to. They aren't footing the cost for proper support, so they sell their stuff cheap, which is fine for the customer until they need help. And in the meantime, I'm providing free tech support in the hopes that I'll get work from that person in the meantime. You're a fool to give these people the time of day. The advice I offer on the phone costs me as little as what responding on these newsgroups does. And the ones on the phone have the potential of becoming customers. Actually I've gotten quite a few customers who've come in for service after calling, since some people, even with instruction, are skittish about doing certain things with their computer. And I have quite a number of customers who ignore their warranty and bring the computer to me for repair. Or I diagnose they problem, they get parts under warranty, and I replace them. So it's not all bad. As far as the enforceability of it, there's no way they could get all of the ones who don't provide support, but they could crack down on the most blatant offenders. And you'd think it would be easy for them to muscle companies like Dell and Gateway and the like. When people call for support and day, "Dell won't help me" they've got the evidence right there. Of course, they won't do it, but it would be nice. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
"Ted" """"""""""""""" wrote in message s.com... "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote in message ... I knew you weren't talkin' about me :-) You're a ****ing cockeyed, arse ****ed, pillocking, bint bred, gormless **** brain! This one sentence clearly defines what and who YOU are. PLONK. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
In article , "D.Currie"
wrote: The advice I offer on the phone costs me as little as what responding on these newsgroups does. And the ones on the phone have the potential of becoming customers. A lot of people make this same assumption when posting to Usenet - that they are engaging in a dialogue, that only their correspondents are involved in. For every person that writes a post in Usenet, there are at least a dozen, up to several hundred, that read that post. The advice you offer here may be more valuable than advice you offer over the phone, which is very definitely a one-to-one medium. Actually I've gotten quite a few customers who've come in for service after calling, since some people, even with instruction, are skittish about doing certain things with their computer. And I have quite a number of customers who ignore their warranty and bring the computer to me for repair. Or I diagnose they problem, they get parts under warranty, and I replace them. So it's not all bad. There's a lot to be said for treating everyone nicely - it's a great way to attract new business. "I shan't buy my computer from the company that treated me like an irritation even when they were supposed to be obliged to help me; I'll buy it from the company that treated me like a valued customer even though I hadn't bought anything from them yet". Of course, there has to be some balance, otherwise you get freeloaders taking advantage of you, or even just a wealth of well-intentioned newcomers who just haven't got around to buying from you, and put you in the red as a result. As far as the enforceability of it, there's no way they could get all of the ones who don't provide support, but they could crack down on the most blatant offenders. And you'd think it would be easy for them to muscle companies like Dell and Gateway and the like. When people call for support and day, "Dell won't help me" they've got the evidence right there. Of course, the problem with that is that it takes a lot of effort to allege contract breach, and when you do, it's not generally a quick or satisfactory solution that comes out of the other side. Alun. ~~~~ |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
D.Currie wrote:
"Bill Drake" wrote... D.Currie wrote: Personally, I'd like to see some way to enforce the rule that OEMs have to support the software. Or maybe lose the ability to sell OEM. There is no way to enforce this rule. It is always possible for the unethical provider to come up with a plausible excuse for non-support. As a small system builder, my customers can come in and ask me questions face-to-face, and that's fine. Or they'll call. But I also get plenty of calls from people who have bought from the big guys, and they can't get an answer. And as a result, the unethical providers are dumping their support costs on your back -- increasing their profits at your expense. Their shareholder dividends are the direct result of your altruism -- and this is a very conscious and deliberate policy on their part IMO. Then there are the people who sell the oem software with trinkets, and have no intention or ability to answer questions. See above. Another example of the same. You've just described simply a more-obvious example... I don't mind answering customer's questions, and even the not-yet customers -- I figure some day I will get their business. No. Many customers are just as unethical as the abovementioned providers. They'll rape you and leave you freezing -- pay you 5 cents on the dollar and scream with outrage at that -- and drive your business into the ground. Save your time and energy for clients who come to you straight-out looking for value and willing to pay a fair price in the first place. These are the only people worth your time and energy. But it does irritate me that others shirk the responsibility to give the technical support they're supposed to. They aren't footing the cost for proper support, so they sell their stuff cheap, which is fine for the customer until they need help. And in the meantime, I'm providing free tech support in the hopes that I'll get work from that person in the meantime. You're a fool to give these people the time of day. The advice I offer on the phone costs me as little as what responding on these newsgroups does. And the ones on the phone have the potential of becoming customers. If you are successful at this, you will find yourself spending more and more time giving "free" advice to these people. As long as you *have* free time -- this is fine. It's when you get busy and start saying things like "I can't help you now" -- that you will find there are unreasonable and loutish clients who are simply rude and demanding -- even when you are being a "nice guy". Actually I've gotten quite a few customers who've come in for service after calling, since some people, even with instruction, are skittish about doing certain things with their computer. And I have quite a number of customers who ignore their warranty and bring the computer to me for repair. Or I diagnose they problem, they get parts under warranty, and I replace them. So it's not all bad. Fine. They're paying you for this service. As far as the enforceability of it, there's no way they could get all of the ones who don't provide support, but they could crack down on the most blatant offenders. And you'd think it would be easy for them to muscle companies like Dell and Gateway and the like. When people call for support and day, "Dell won't help me" they've got the evidence right there. Of course, they won't do it, but it would be nice. I noticed you didn't quote the further paragraphs in my previous post. Nor did you comment on that. Yet you made the above remark. I find that sad. The "Of course, they won't do it" is *intimately" tied into the whole airhead marketing-mentality avoidance-of-responsibility mindset that dumps marketeer-created problems into other people's laps. And your high-minded "noble" attitude to the problem is part of the reason this silly nonsense continues. Marketeers need to be ground up, spit out and pounded into the ground for turning this business into a circus that only a fool could love. Best I can do for now. tm Bill |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
With a mouth like yours you should not only be banned from this newsgroup
but from The internet as a whole.!!! idiot "Mister Charlie" wrote in message ... "Ted" """"""""""""""" wrote in message s.com... "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote in message ... I knew you weren't talkin' about me :-) You're a ****ing cockeyed, arse ****ed, pillocking, bint bred, gormless **** brain! This one sentence clearly defines what and who YOU are. PLONK. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
"Alun Jones [MS MVP]" wrote in message . .. In article , "D.Currie" wrote: The advice I offer on the phone costs me as little as what responding on these newsgroups does. And the ones on the phone have the potential of becoming customers. A lot of people make this same assumption when posting to Usenet - that they are engaging in a dialogue, that only their correspondents are involved in. For every person that writes a post in Usenet, there are at least a dozen, up to several hundred, that read that post. The advice you offer here may be more valuable than advice you offer over the phone, which is very definitely a one-to-one medium. I wasn't commenting on how many people get helped per message, just that helping on the newsgroup and helping on the phone "cost" me the same as far as my effort is concerned. And the only reason I said that was because someone else had called me a fool for helping people who aren't customers. The newsgroups is less likely to yield paying customers, but I do it anyway, as do many others. Actually I've gotten quite a few customers who've come in for service after calling, since some people, even with instruction, are skittish about doing certain things with their computer. And I have quite a number of customers who ignore their warranty and bring the computer to me for repair. Or I diagnose they problem, they get parts under warranty, and I replace them. So it's not all bad. There's a lot to be said for treating everyone nicely - it's a great way to attract new business. "I shan't buy my computer from the company that treated me like an irritation even when they were supposed to be obliged to help me; I'll buy it from the company that treated me like a valued customer even though I hadn't bought anything from them yet". Of course, there has to be some balance, otherwise you get freeloaders taking advantage of you, or even just a wealth of well-intentioned newcomers who just haven't got around to buying from you, and put you in the red as a result. There's always a point where I can say that I don't have time to chat, or that the problem is not one that can be fixed easily over the phone. But there's always some lagtime in the day, and it's better to be doing something than nothing. As far as the enforceability of it, there's no way they could get all of the ones who don't provide support, but they could crack down on the most blatant offenders. And you'd think it would be easy for them to muscle companies like Dell and Gateway and the like. When people call for support and day, "Dell won't help me" they've got the evidence right there. Of course, the problem with that is that it takes a lot of effort to allege contract breach, and when you do, it's not generally a quick or satisfactory solution that comes out of the other side. Suppose so. The ones I'd really like to hang are the ones who sell supposed "full" versions of the OS, then when the customer gets it, it's OEM, it won't do an upgrade, they can't get support for MS, and they usually can't return the product. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
"Bill Drake" wrote in message ... D.Currie wrote: "Bill Drake" wrote... D.Currie wrote: Personally, I'd like to see some way to enforce the rule that OEMs have to support the software. Or maybe lose the ability to sell OEM. There is no way to enforce this rule. It is always possible for the unethical provider to come up with a plausible excuse for non-support. As a small system builder, my customers can come in and ask me questions face-to-face, and that's fine. Or they'll call. But I also get plenty of calls from people who have bought from the big guys, and they can't get an answer. And as a result, the unethical providers are dumping their support costs on your back -- increasing their profits at your expense. Their shareholder dividends are the direct result of your altruism -- and this is a very conscious and deliberate policy on their part IMO. Then there are the people who sell the oem software with trinkets, and have no intention or ability to answer questions. See above. Another example of the same. You've just described simply a more-obvious example... I don't mind answering customer's questions, and even the not-yet customers -- I figure some day I will get their business. No. Many customers are just as unethical as the abovementioned providers. They'll rape you and leave you freezing -- pay you 5 cents on the dollar and scream with outrage at that -- and drive your business into the ground. Save your time and energy for clients who come to you straight-out looking for value and willing to pay a fair price in the first place. These are the only people worth your time and energy. But it does irritate me that others shirk the responsibility to give the technical support they're supposed to. They aren't footing the cost for proper support, so they sell their stuff cheap, which is fine for the customer until they need help. And in the meantime, I'm providing free tech support in the hopes that I'll get work from that person in the meantime. You're a fool to give these people the time of day. The advice I offer on the phone costs me as little as what responding on these newsgroups does. And the ones on the phone have the potential of becoming customers. If you are successful at this, you will find yourself spending more and more time giving "free" advice to these people. As long as you *have* free time -- this is fine. I've owned the store for 6 years, and I've managed to work it out. Some things can't easily be solved over the phone, and some people should not stick their hands inside their computers. In six years, I've had very few people who simply waste my time, and if I have other things that need to be done, that's what I do. If it's a problem that intrigues me, or a person the I enjoy helping, it's my time to waste. It's when you get busy and start saying things like "I can't help you now" -- that you will find there are unreasonable and loutish clients who are simply rude and demanding -- even when you are being a "nice guy". I've done that. No one's gotten rude or demanding. Actually I've gotten quite a few customers who've come in for service after calling, since some people, even with instruction, are skittish about doing certain things with their computer. And I have quite a number of customers who ignore their warranty and bring the computer to me for repair. Or I diagnose they problem, they get parts under warranty, and I replace them. So it's not all bad. Fine. They're paying you for this service. And many have come to me because they called first, and I offered some simple suggestions. If it was something they couldn't do, or didn't work, they bring the work to me. It doesn't always happen, but we also get a lot of referrals from those sorts of people because we're not rude when people call with questions. As far as the enforceability of it, there's no way they could get all of the ones who don't provide support, but they could crack down on the most blatant offenders. And you'd think it would be easy for them to muscle companies like Dell and Gateway and the like. When people call for support and day, "Dell won't help me" they've got the evidence right there. Of course, they won't do it, but it would be nice. I noticed you didn't quote the further paragraphs in my previous post. Nor did you comment on that. Yet you made the above remark. I find that sad. I snipped after Mike B's header as that seemed to be a response to what he said. Why you find that sad, I don't know, as now that I've looked back on it, you snipped all of his post and responded to Testy's one line. As far as my not commenting on it, this "marketeer" thing seems to be one of your personal hotspots, which is fine. But I tend to respond to things that either I can help with or that I have a comment about because it interests and/or amuses me. I'm sure that you also pick and choose what you respond to. The "Of course, they won't do it" is *intimately" tied into the whole airhead marketing-mentality avoidance-of-responsibility mindset that dumps marketeer-created problems into other people's laps. And your high-minded "noble" attitude to the problem is part of the reason this silly nonsense continues. Oh, I doubt that I'm being noble at all. I help non-customers on the phone because I find that it's a good way to turn a percentage of them into customers. If I look at what it costs me to answers those questions vs. what it costs me for print advertising, then look at the number of customers each gets me, the "being nice to people" on the phone gets me more customers. As far as answering questions on the newsgroup, it's a great way to learn what sorts of problems other people are having on their computers, so that when I run across the same issue with a customer's computer, I have some ideas what to look for. It's certainly more interesting than memorizing the knowledge base. Marketeers need to be ground up, spit out and pounded into the ground for turning this business into a circus that only a fool could love. Well, you've already called me a fool, so there you have it. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
The problem may also be that not everyone who sells OEM software has an OEM
agreement with MS. Somewhere I have a document that says what I'm supposed to do for the end user, and that includes providing support. Among other things. OTOH if a person buys OEM software independent of a system, he is probably considered the system builder, and the seller is acting as a distributor (albeit not one of MSs authorized distributors; another problem). As an OEM with an agreement with MS, I get support from MS, but that individual who buys one copy on the 'net doesn't get support as he's not in the program. Another thing is that some people don't know where the line is between technical support and training. And they aren't clear where they should go for support, so they look in all the wrong places and get frustrated. Many people think the system builder should be responsible for everything that goes into the computer, and are quite surprised when Dell or whoever won't troubleshoot their printers or games or obscure software. "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message ... But is there "the rule that OEMs have to support the software" or is that support if any comes from the OEM and not Microsoft. The real fault may be that the customer is not informed why the OEM is cheaper and what all the customer does and does not get. Of course the idea "You get what you pay for" escapes many consumers when they think they see a bargain and a not so informative salesperson. Microsoft may have a part in this as the packaging could be modified to show it, however the package is not always seen by the consumer. -- Jupiter Jones [MVP] An easier way to read newsgroup messages: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...oups/setup.asp Please respond to newsgroup only for everyone's benefit. "D.Currie" wrote in message ... Personally, I'd like to see some way to enforce the rule that OEMs have to support the software. Or maybe lose the ability to sell OEM. As a small system builder, my customers can come in and ask me questions face-to-face, and that's fine. Or they'll call. But I also get plenty of calls from people who have bought from the big guys, and they can't get an answer. Then there are the people who sell the oem software with trinkets, and have no intention or ability to answer questions. I don't mind answering customer's questions, and even the not-yet customers -- I figure some day I will get their business. But it does irritate me that others shirk the responsibility to give the technical support they're supposed to. They aren't footing the cost for proper support, so they sell their stuff cheap, which is fine for the customer until they need help. And in the meantime, I'm providing free tech support in the hopes that I'll get work from that person in the meantime. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
An open letter to Microsoft's support personnel, should they exist
D.Currie wrote:
"Bill Drake" wrote... D.Currie wrote: "Bill Drake" wrote... D.Currie wrote: Personally, I'd like to see some way to enforce the rule that OEMs have to support the software. Or maybe lose the ability to sell OEM. There is no way to enforce this rule. It is always possible for the unethical provider to come up with a plausible excuse for non-support. As a small system builder, my customers can come in and ask me questions face-to-face, and that's fine. Or they'll call. But I also get plenty of calls from people who have bought from the big guys, and they can't get an answer. And as a result, the unethical providers are dumping their support costs on your back -- increasing their profits at your expense. Their shareholder dividends are the direct result of your altruism -- and this is a very conscious and deliberate policy on their part IMO. Then there are the people who sell the oem software with trinkets, and have no intention or ability to answer questions. See above. Another example of the same. You've just described simply a more-obvious example... I don't mind answering customer's questions, and even the not-yet customers -- I figure some day I will get their business. No. Many customers are just as unethical as the abovementioned providers. They'll rape you and leave you freezing -- pay you 5 cents on the dollar and scream with outrage at that -- and drive your business into the ground. Save your time and energy for clients who come to you straight-out looking for value and willing to pay a fair price in the first place. These are the only people worth your time and energy. But it does irritate me that others shirk the responsibility to give the technical support they're supposed to. They aren't footing the cost for proper support, so they sell their stuff cheap, which is fine for the customer until they need help. And in the meantime, I'm providing free tech support in the hopes that I'll get work from that person in the meantime. You're a fool to give these people the time of day. The advice I offer on the phone costs me as little as what responding on these newsgroups does. And the ones on the phone have the potential of becoming customers. If you are successful at this, you will find yourself spending more and more time giving "free" advice to these people. As long as you *have* free time -- this is fine. I've owned the store for 6 years, and I've managed to work it out. Some things can't easily be solved over the phone, and some people should not stick their hands inside their computers. In six years, I've had very few people who simply waste my time, and if I have other things that need to be done, that's what I do. If it's a problem that intrigues me, or a person the I enjoy helping, it's my time to waste. Agreed. And if you've managed to stay in business for 6 years, then obviously you've managed to find a way to balance your time between altruistic behaviour and stuff that pays the bills. It's when you get busy and start saying things like "I can't help you now" -- that you will find there are unreasonable and loutish clients who are simply rude and demanding -- even when you are being a "nice guy". I've done that. No one's gotten rude or demanding. My own personal experience in the business -- along with the experience of many of the dealers with whom I associate -- has been the complete opposite. The vast majority of people in the Computer Industry I've talked to in any of the major metropolitan centres in North America tell me monotonously-similar stories. I am *really* pleased this hasn't happened to you. I am also *very* surprised this hasn't happened to you. All things considered -- I'd move wherever you are in a nanosecond and work there happily... grin Actually I've gotten quite a few customers who've come in for service after calling, since some people, even with instruction, are skittish about doing certain things with their computer. And I have quite a number of customers who ignore their warranty and bring the computer to me for repair. Or I diagnose they problem, they get parts under warranty, and I replace them. So it's not all bad. Fine. They're paying you for this service. And many have come to me because they called first, and I offered some simple suggestions. If it was something they couldn't do, or didn't work, they bring the work to me. It doesn't always happen, but we also get a lot of referrals from those sorts of people because we're not rude when people call with questions. And that's simply good business practice. So, if that's good business practice, then why don't Dell, Gateway, HP, IBM, or MS follow those procedures? Because they cost more money than dumping the process on the backs of others. And this simply encourages an irresponsible attitude on the part of *everyone* in the business -- and that irresponsible attitude turns broken hardware and software into a way of life that makes computers so frustrating and unrewarding that *fewer and fewer* use PCs willingly anymore. And that's why we're in this slump. As far as the enforceability of it, there's no way they could get all of the ones who don't provide support, but they could crack down on the most blatant offenders. And you'd think it would be easy for them to muscle companies like Dell and Gateway and the like. When people call for support and day, "Dell won't help me" they've got the evidence right there. Of course, they won't do it, but it would be nice. I noticed you didn't quote the further paragraphs in my previous post. Nor did you comment on that. Yet you made the above remark. I find that sad. I snipped after Mike B's header as that seemed to be a response to what he said. Why you find that sad, I don't know, as now that I've looked back on it, you snipped all of his post and responded to Testy's one line. As far as my not commenting on it, this "marketeer" thing seems to be one of your personal hotspots, which is fine. But I tend to respond to things that either I can help with or that I have a comment about because it interests and/or amuses me. I'm sure that you also pick and choose what you respond to. Agreed. The "Of course, they won't do it" is *intimately" tied into the whole airhead marketing-mentality avoidance-of-responsibility mindset that dumps marketeer-created problems into other people's laps. And your high-minded "noble" attitude to the problem is part of the reason this silly nonsense continues. Oh, I doubt that I'm being noble at all. I help non-customers on the phone because I find that it's a good way to turn a percentage of them into customers. If I look at what it costs me to answers those questions vs. what it costs me for print advertising, then look at the number of customers each gets me, the "being nice to people" on the phone gets me more customers. No problem. Sound business practice. See above for why so many in the industry don't follow the practice -- and the inevitable consequence. As far as answering questions on the newsgroup, it's a great way to learn what sorts of problems other people are having on their computers, so that when I run across the same issue with a customer's computer, I have some ideas what to look for. It's certainly more interesting than memorizing the knowledge base. And we're all here on the newsgroups because our collective knowledge is *way* more powerful than the knowledgebase will *ever* be. And everybody knows it. And that's why I participate in discussions like this one -- because *this* is how we gather the consensus required to change the world. Marketeers need to be ground up, spit out and pounded into the ground for turning this business into a circus that only a fool could love. Well, you've already called me a fool, so there you have it. You've missed my point. I said you were a fool if you wasted your time dealing with the ungrateful and those who would pay you 5 cents on the dollar for your work. I stand behind that statement. From what you've told me -- you have somehow avoided that trap. Good for you. By a combination of good luck, good management and good location -- your client-base is remarkably free of the kind of wasteful freeloaders that drive many well-intentioned businesses into the ground. This is great -- and I wish you well. Best I can do for now. tm Bill |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|