I have to disagree that I'm boxing anyone into a corner. If I was a
client of your firm and you had a history of failing to deliver a product
or a feature within the time frame you yourself had established, how
could you feel you were being boxed into a corner by being asked for
some guarantee that you would indeed live up to the standard you set
for yourself?
Delivering a product or service when you say you will is simply a
fundamental business practice. Selecting the vendor who can best meet
one's needs is also quite rational. I'm obviously aware Ascend can meet
our company's needs right now, and I'm not bagging on Livingston for
their current inability. The intent of my post was a last-ditch effort
to NOT have to leave my preferred vendor (Livingston) and buy an Ascend
product.
Just because you are content to sit there and wait a few months for a
future ComOS release, doesn't mean that's an option for the rest of us.
If this company was like yours, with all services provided off one
Unix box and a small SprintLink pipe (yes, I looked at your net), then
maybe I wouldn't be so anxious. But we're in the middle of a large and
expensive upgrade, and I can't go tell the directors of the corporation
that we're simply going to have to call it off and freeze our growth for
a few months while we wait for a company to write some code.
While I like Livingston, and have purchased more than one of just
about everything they currently manufacture, I happen to like my job
even more and thus need to deliver a solution.
So keep it up...steer customers away from Livingston (and your own
company) when they as for an assurance that they'll (you'll) live up
to their (your) promises.
Lastly, Joe Sasek is a big boy and knows exactly what my post was about
and doesn't need you to defend him. And I don't know why you're even
responding to my message since being "content to wait..." for the
channelized T-1 support implies that you've ordered a PM3...which I
highly doubt.
</end flame>
Damien
like my job