I totally agree with what is said here.
We came to the same conclusions here!
Lucent please do something with your crappy modem
code, quick please!
Christian
At 06:19 PM 2/21/99 , you wrote:
>On Sat, Feb 20, 1999 at 07:38:30PM +0000, pmaster@sentex.net wrote:
>> Lets face it, the #1 and #2 things that consumers want are availability
>> (i.e. no busy signals) and stability and performance (i.e. their connection
>> is not slow and doest get dropped). Yeah, I like the ComOS interface, I
>> like the fact that through OSPF I can do routing easily... But for the
>> majority of my customers, they dont give a rats ass. They just want to go
>> to whatever.com and not have their modem drop their connection.
>>
>
> While I hate to be a "me too" person, I have to concur with everyone
>that's pissed off about the terrible modem code. It really is aweful. While
>some people apparently aren't seeing quite as many problems as others, we are
>definately having major problems with Winmodems (both LT and USR/3COM) and
>Rockwell. These modems are by far the most common in our area and the
>Winmodems come in all the new Dells, Compaqs and Gateways. Upgrading these
>modems generally seems to just move the problem from a failed initial
>connection, to a disconnection after being connected for a few minutes. This
>is just as bad.
>
> While I would love to blame it on the modems and the phone company,
>every single customer we have dial into our single Total Control Hiper works
>flawlessly and immediately. While I REALLY hate the Total Control rack for a
>variety of reasons the most important reason for its existance, the
ability to
>actually get customers online and keep them online, is why we'll probably not
>buy any more PM3's and start using the Total Control racks, at least until
>Lucent gets around to fixing their modem code. Despite what MZ often says
>about the TC and Portmasters having comparable modem code, based on our
>experience, he is WAY off base. I haven't found a customer yet that couldn't
>connect faster and with more stability to the TC compared to the PM3.
>
> How Lucent can delay for months releasing some sort of fix, or at least
>a few quick-release beta versions of ComOS, to address problems with the
SINGLE
>MOST IMPORTANT part of their product I fail to understand. Enough people are
>posting about problems that this is certainly far more widespread than
just the
>few complaints to the list would lead one to believe. Our customers don't
want
>to hear excuses. They want a service provider that works with their
equipment
>with as little hassle as possible. Blaming all these problems on the newness
>of V90 is wonderful but doesn't help anyone. In our case the only
solution was
>to buy a different brand of terminal server. Anyone stuck with just
>Portmasters has my sympathy. If you're one of those lucky people who's
>customers don't have Winmodems or Rockwell modems, or who's customers don't
>particularly care if they get a 56K connection, or who's customers don't get
>upset if they get disconnected every 3 or 4 minutes, then more power to you.
>
> And yes, we've had an open ticket for about 3 weeks now. It took 2.5
>weeks just to get it escalated to "the asynch guys". By that time our future
>plans for new terminal servers was changed to non-Lucent equipment. 2.5 weeks
>is an eternity with the tech support phones ringing off the hook all day and
>night about modem problems.
>
> While this may seem like just another rant, its actually a strong plea
>from a customer. I love everything about the portmasters except their modem
>code. And I'll say it again - the modem code is the single most important
>part. Any other feature or lack thereof can generally be worked around by the
>staff, but not the modem code.
>
> -Scott
>--
>+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
>| Scott Lampert | Systems Administrator |
>| scott@ioa.com | Internet of Asheville |
>|(828) 687-8848 Ext 310 | http://www.ioa.com |
>+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
>-
>To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
>'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
>Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
>
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>