| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 3708.1 | no | CSC32::C_BENNETT | | Mon Feb 20 1995 15:03 | 11 |
| Sometimes it takes spending some money to make some money.
FOR EXAMPLE... If support specialists who will be supporting
OSF/1 and Windows NT operating environments don't get trained
and properly equiped FOR EXAMPLE how can we justify making
money supporting these products?
Digitals previous investments in chip technology is another
example...
To think that Digital could lop off spending on itself would
doom the company in these days of hitech changes...
|
| 3708.2 | one man's junk is another man's empire | BIGUN::BAKER | where the rubber hits the toad | Wed Feb 22 1995 00:21 | 31 |
| r.e: .0
I think you may be confusing cost with investment.
For instance,
flying consultants somewhere for a conference when they could drive is a
cost.
flying consultants somewhere for a conference when they could drive
because the time they would take driving is time that they would
be getting billable dollars way over the cost of the flight for is
probably an investment.
upgrading a modem pool to the latest technology is a cost
upgrading a modem pool to the latest technology so that those dialling
in can achieve what they need to do in a third of the time and utilise
the saved time to expend more energy on customers is probably an investment.
giving me a laptop is a cost
giving me a laptop that I can make presentations to 20 times the number
of people I can get into the office is probably an investment
making cost benefit analysis arguments is a cost
making cost benefits analysis arguments that result in more reasoned
decision making is probably an investment
- John
|
| 3708.3 | | UBOHUB::HOPE_T | | Wed Feb 22 1995 09:46 | 11 |
| I am a customer service engineer working In-house and I am fed up with
users saying to me "cant I have a new super duper high resolution
monitor instead of this old one I've got". When I try to explain that
the part to get there old monitor working will cost $50 and a new
monitor will cost $1430.
I don't like to waste company money. So why do the user look at me
like I am an alien when I point out I dont want to waste my chance
of a payrise or even a job on a new monitor for them!.
Tracey
|
| 3708.4 | | KLAP::porter | the mantra of the walls and wiring | Wed Feb 22 1995 12:15 | 6 |
| Well, you see, you're just not looking at it correctly.
Paying $1430 for a super hi-res monitor isn't a cost,
it's an investment. The payoff will be in avoiding
a high-cost lawsuit for the eyestrain caused by looking
at some nasty VGA 60Hz flickering monitor.
|
| 3708.5 | VGA 60Hz.. that's what I got | PCBUOA::BEAUDREAU | | Wed Feb 22 1995 16:41 | 11 |
|
RE .4 You mean you can sue due to eye strain and damage
resulting from long term CRT exposure? Just had
caterac surgery (at 38 yrs old). Been staring at these
tubes for most of my adult life.
Please send mail off line if you have any solid data.
Thanks
|
| 3708.6 | Depends ... | AIMTEC::FARLEY::PORTER_T | Terry Porter - Customer Support | Wed Feb 22 1995 17:11 | 14 |
| This is purely personal opinion but I would think that you would have to
some some level of negligance on the part of Digital to sue.
If you were required to use a CRT that was clearly sub-standard (e.g.
visibly flickered) or there were known problems with the model of CRT you
have and Digital failed to resolve those problems then you may have a case.
If the equipment was adiquate for the job (even if it was not to your
personal liking) and up to the safety standards current at the time then
you probably don't have a case.
Having said that, you never can tell until the jury decides.
Terry
|