Conference 7.286::digital

>>                       <<< Note 3381.0 by CSC32::PITT >>>
>>                           -< Some direction please >-

First,  I can sympathize.

>>    Product mgt has stated that if it's not in the SPD listed as a
>>    supported printer, than it's not a supported printer (I KNOW THAT). 

But,  since it's not supported,  why are you wasting your time on it?
By the above product mgt has stated that its not important to Digital
to support that printer.

So just tell the customer its not supported and here's the number of
the product manager to contact to get it supported...

Let product mgt get the feedback (or feel the heat) as directly as 
possible.  If it makes business sense to support the printer,  than it
might happen.

Garry    
(who has a HP LaserJet 4M working just fine off an NT system)

        Hi Cathy,
        
        I'd start with Dick Sellers.  I remember a few years back when he
        came to the Alpharetta CSC and said something like, "I've got all
        these millions of dollars for equipment and nobody is asking for
        anything."  Someone had directed him a question asking why we get
        calls regarding equipment we don't have.
        
        Dave Zaniewski

    I don't know where your located but Circuit City in Nashua has a 30 day
    "No questions asked" return policy, as does Computer city down the
    road. You can purchase at Circuit and then if you still need one return
    it to Circuit and buy one at Computer. This is not as ludicrous as it
    sounds, if you are serious about only needing it for 30 days. HP won't
    mind, they'll sell more printers in the long run.

I'll call this to some folks attention around Components and Peripherals and
see what I can get.  If you're looking for someone to mention it to, there's
always Larry Cabrinety.

Jeff
Components and Peripherals Headquarters Technical Support (printers and video)

    If the problem exists with the vendors equipment, then it's up to
    your local PSC to work with the vendor to resolve the problem.

    If the problem has been isolated to a Digital Product, such as 
    Ultrix, then it's up to the Ultrix engineering support group
    to resolve the problem.

    If the problem hasn't been isolated to any particular product,
    then enter an IPMT case under the class EXCEPTION. This will
    be routed to the MultiVendor System Engineering group to
    *isolate* the problem. Problem resolution would need required
    the appropriate groups (or vendors).

    I believe, this is more or less, the guideline.

    Obviously we should be supporting HP laserjets.  Suggest you contact
    Tim Yeaton OSF/1 product management group.
    
    Dave
    

I think there are some libraries that come with Pathworks for OSF/1 that
support HP printers.  I'll check around.  They're not bundled with the
operating system, though.  

Have you checked around AOSG::ALPHA_OSF?  There might be some discussion there.

j.

    If this is an OSF/1 specific issue then:
    
    OSF/1 V3.0 has support for HP printers (yes finally!)
    
    PATHWORKS for OSF/1 kit also has support for HP printers if you're not
    at V3.0 of OSF/1 (like 99% of our current OSF/1 installed base).

    re .3
    
    That presumes you can adequately test the printer without breaking
    the seal on and installing the toner cartridge.
    
    (Read the fine print regarding return of laser printers.)

    
    
    I found the HP4m filter on our v3.0 system this morning. 
    Will test it when we find an HP4m printer. 
    
    ...
    
    by the way, I even called HP......tried to convince them that it would
    be mutually beneficial for them to let us borrow an HP4SI (with
    ethernet card)...that way we could find out exactly what it takes to
    get it to work from either ultrix or OSF, we could share the results
    with them and we BOTH could say that our OSF and ULTRIX support this
    particular printer....
    
    they laughed. 
    
    I didn't see the humor.....
    I still don't.
    
     

    RE: HP laughing
    
    When you're on top of the heap you can afford to be arrogant ... we
    were the same in the glory days.  However in this industry the ride to
    the top is often followed by a quick slide down from the peak.
    
    With AXP and OSF/1 competing with tired old HP-UX is getting less
    painful every day.

    re .10
    
      I guess the joke is that it appears that Digital can't afford to
    buy the equipment it needs in order to do the business it claims 
    to be a leader in (multivendor customer services).  What happens when
    another problem arises with this printer.  Are we going to call HP
    and tell them we need to borrow their printer again?
      
    
    David

    
    
    re .12
    
    You're right...
    the term "misrepresentation" comes to mind when I think about our
    claims as "multivendor customer support"..........
    
    And yeah, it was/still is pretty embarrassing to have to go groveling
    to out competitors for free loaner equipment ......
    
    :-(

    I work with Cathy (author of .0).  We see many calls on many third
    party printers.  HP probably being the most frequent.  It is difficult,
    at best, to configure a ULTRIX/OSF for a printer that you don't have.  
    I feel that being able to support numerous (I didn't say all) third
    party printers could be a good marketing tool.  
    
    We obviously couldn't support each and every third party printer out
    there as a practical matter but we could do a good many of them. 
    Work-stations are commodities any more, like PC's.  My wife's PC with
    Windows 3.1 contains a list of over 100 printers that it can be
    configured to support.   This includes a good selection of Apple, 
    Digital, IBM, HP, Epson, and Panasonic printers.  There are more but
    that is all I can remember at the moment.  
    
    So how is it that a $1,350.00 PC can be configured to support all these
    third party printers but we can't on $10,000.00+ systems? 
    Maybe if Microsoft sold printers it would be a different story.
    
    Why stop at printers?   What about third party terminals, disk/tape
    drives,  etc.  We truly could be multi-vendor customer services.  In 
    effect we are attempting to support this third party stuff anyway.  Why
    can't we just make it official, buy some of the latest and greatest
    third party stuff (some of the latest Digital stuff wouldn't hurt 
    either) and make it work?
    
    I better stop now.  It is time for my medicine.  
    
    Just my $0.02,
    
    Carl       
                                      

One of the things we're trying to do is have a lab with the major competitors'
printers and enough platforms to do some interoperability testing and
verification.  And now that we're working selling through distributors, they
also have access to many different platforms and can hopefully feed back
information to us.  We'll be setting up some information repositories with the
information and doing what we can to help.  I agree that it's near impossible
to support these things without being able to get your hands on them.

To speculate on why PCs support many different printers and our more
sophisticated operating systems don't, there are probably many reasons.  One
that pops to mind is that OpenVMS and/or Unix customers haven't had the
pleasure of having a new driver available daily from a local bulletin board. 
We've had this impression that they prefer stability and new features only in
regularly scheduled releases.  But that can change ;-).

j.

    
    Just curious.  How many other vendors printers are supported by
    HP-UX?  Also, keep in mind that the software companies that provide
    all the drivers for all those printers probably buy printers.  It
    would be reasonable to arrange purchases to cover the needs.  Of
    course, they don't SELL printers.  How many non-DEC printers have
    you seen in Digital facilities?
    
    

>To speculate on why PCs support many different printers and our more
>sophisticated operating systems don't, there are probably many reasons.  One
    
    The real beauty of it from MicroSoft's point of view is that they don't
    have to do a thing - it's up to the printer mfr. to write the driver
    for XYZ printer if they want Windows to support it (although I assume
    MS might write them for a select few that are in their own developers'
    offices, or perhaps for obvious "standards" like Epson FX80 or LaserJet
    IIP that many, many printers provide an emulation mode for).
    
    In the meantime, don't some DEClasers have a PCL mode you could use to
    generate/test a "least common denominator" printcap entry for HP
    printers?

    
    >Just curious.  How many other vendors printers are supported by
    >HP-UX?  Also, keep in mind that the software companies that provide
    
    According to their docset, there is one generic interface for
    "dumb" which can be used for non-HP printers.  HP recommends that
    you contact the printer manufacturer for a driver.
    
    SCO UNIX provides drivers for many different printers.
    
    In DEC OSF/1 V3.0, support was added for several NEC, IBM, HP and
    Epson printers.  This support is documented in Chapter 12 of the
    DEC OSF/1 System Administrators Guide.
    
    C 

>    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>    This was after I'd sent the customer a 'cheat sheet' that we put
>    together based on input from OTHER customers on how they configured
>    their HP printers to work..obviously, neither the cheat sheet, nor my
>    suggestions (guesses) got it working).
    
>No, we do not have specific documentation on printing to HP lazerjets from
>Digital systems.
    
     This problem is totally ludicrous, but it illustrates how the new Digital
     handles it's problems.  The old DEC would have sent someone out to the 
     customer to get his printer working, and then would have documented and 
     distributed the solution.

     Charles

    
    re .15
     
    >One of the things we're trying to do is have a lab with the major
    >competitors'
    >printers and enough platforms to do some interoperability testing and
    >verification.  And now that we're working selling through distributors,
    >they
    >also have access to many different platforms and can hopefully feed
    >back
    information to us.  We'll be setting up some information repositories
    >with the
    >information and doing what we can to help.  I agree that it's near
    >impossible
    >to support these things without being able to get your hands on them.
    
    Yeah..we used to have some vendor stuff too (I work in the OPEN SYSTEMS
    NETWORKS GROUP) but we had to send them back to save money (they were
    leased). It was a couple of Sun, HP and IBM work stations that we neede
    to simulate client/server stuff. I guess it was a good decision though
    since Digital is trying to get away from client/server support, right?
    ;-);-);-) 

    
    
    I just wanted to thank all of the people who sent me suggestions or 
    requests to call them directly. 
    
    If I haven't called you yet, it's only because I've been a tad busy....
    (who hasn't?) ...
    
    thanks again..
    It's much appreciated.
    
    cathy

    Why not call explain to some HP manager that borrowing a printer is
    needed to solve a problem for a common customer.  Nobody need be
    embarrassed that nobody else has ever tried to hook them together
    before, that speaks to the quality of our other printers that other
    folks use.  They're apparently in demand.
    
    IMHO, when a cross-vendor problem like this occurs, it's in the best
    interest of all three parties to cooperate in a businesslike fashion.
    
    /Steve
    

    ...and taking this one step further you might have the customer
    call HP asking if they're willing to help out to solve the problem.
    I doubt that HP will laugh in the customers face.
    
    At the end of the day a lot of customers are finely tuned
    to the lengths you're willing to go to help solve his/her
    problems. Tell them you called HP, tell them you tried to get
    a HP on loan to solve a common customers problem. Give them
    the name and telephone number of the person who laughed in your
    face and ask if they will make a call. I'm willing to bet that 
    it can make a difference. In other words, let the customer 
    help _you_. Many will when they realise the effort you're making.
    
    My $0.02 
                              

re Note 3381.22 by THEWAV::GASSNER:

>     IMHO, when a cross-vendor problem like this occurs, it's in the best
>     interest of all three parties to cooperate in a businesslike fashion.
  
        Certainly this is the ideal, but you don't want the quality
        of your service to be dependent on the cooperation of a party
        under no obligation to help you.

        Bob

    re: .22
    
    Cooperation is wonderful, but that is not the issue here.
    
    If we were having trouble interfacing with a $10 million snagfratz
    generator, then it might make sense to go to the producer of the system
    and suggest that we cooperate so that their product is properly
    supported.  After all, the producer of the $10 million snagfratz
    generator might understand the logic of us not wanting to shell out
    huge bucks for one of their generators when we are already knee-deep in
    our own snagfratzes as it is.  Besides, support on Digital platforms
    might mean another sale or two, which is always important in a limited
    marketplace.
    
    None of this is true, however, about this situation.
    
    HP already owns the printing desktop.  Everyone bows to them.  All
    serious software supports them.
    
    The printers are also cheap!  Not $10 million.  Not $10 thousand!  If
    we need to support it, wonderful.  Buy one.  What?  Can't afford one?
    a multi-BILLION dollar company can't AFFORD a few thousand here and
    there to ensure compatibility?  And we're ADVERTISING our ability to
    INTEGRATE WITH OTHER VENDORS???
    
    This is OUR problem, not HP's!  I see these el cheapo MS DOS programs
    which support DOZENS of possible printers and video cards.  They make
    no boasts about being "world class integrators", yet they get their job
    done, often with no fuss on the customer's part; just pick one of the
    choices from the menu and you're off!
    
    WE have said that we are striving to be the BEST-IN-CLASS INTEGRATOR.
    WE have said that we play the standards game.
    WE have said that we provide true added value.
    
    But we can't afford a defacto standard printer to support our
    customers.
    
    Only Digital believes that HP printers aren't standard.  Only Digital
    believes that GIF, PCX, TIFF, etc. files are not standards and we don't
    have to support them without the customer shelling out big bucks.  Only
    Digital reserves the right to the unbridled arrogance of dictating all 
    terms in the technical arena.
    
    The bottom line:  WE lose.  Not HP.  Us.  No one will believe that HP
    printers don't perform properly, even if it is true!
    
    WE need to learn.  Fast.
    
    We're almost out of time.
    
    -- Russ

    
    All you folks are not getting the picture!!!!!!  John Rando's
    philosophy is one of 'following' behind (note I said FOLLOW....NOT
    LEAD!!! Leading would take intellegence and a little bit of risk!)
    
    John's message is an old one......."If we tell em, then it will be
    so!"  Simple eh?  All you have to do is 'tell' the customer's what
    you are and then sell them the product, widget, etc! You get that money
    up front!  (YEAH! CREW nice job! Let's all go to DISNEYLAND and
    celebrate.)  Now leave the task of administering what you just lied
    about and sold to the customer to the poor slobs that hav to deal with
    the customer on a day to day basis!..........Sound familiar?
    
    Palmer would do the company a GREAT BIG 'service' to rid it of these
    management types.....It only took a little over a year to get rid of
    Lucente.....note the similar style and attitude.  This company will not
    survive until all that ARROGANCE and CALISNESS is removed from power! 
    Sorry folks, the party is over....it's time to start indicting these 
    highly paid, no return on investment management types that are causing 
    all the problems. We in Engineering will be looking to other areas to
    fill the void left in the Service organization. I mean, you can only
    live on a reputation for so long, John, it's time you put your money
    where your mouth is and change the stupididity you've caused for
    the past six years to get yourself in this prediciment.  If services
    continues to downsize the technical competence that engineering
    requires to sucessfully launch new products, then engineering will have
    no alternative than to seek other alternatives for a service delivery
    mechanism.  I've personally seen three products over the last four
    years fail miserably and cost the corporation millions in development
    costs that were wasted because the service organization did not
    do their part to adaquately prepare for service delivery.  And the time
    has come for someone to speak out to the management (if you want to
    call it that) of MCS upper levels to state finally, the following:
    
    	We are sick and tired of all the MCS re-organizes you do every time
    	the winds of the business world change.  Do it once, and if you
        can't get it right, then why not think about another career!
    (Kinda a different 'bottom-up' approach to Mr. Kams's suggestion)
    
    We can not bank Engineering's survival on a depleted service
    organization overbloated with management thats only value added is
    another person getting in the way of a customer's solution. Customer's
    don't want managers to manage their problems, they want technical
    expertise to SOLVE their problems.
    
    You prostituted yourselves into the organization you are now by taking
    on WAY more than you could actually chew with this Multi-Vendor
    Customer Services crap.  You state the obvious but don't offer one clue
    or strategy as to how you will get there. 
    
    Please, Please Please prove me wrong......Tell me that the company has
    not wasted millions telling the world that they are the service
    solution organization that can solve the customer's needs.  (and at the
    same time cost the company MILLIONS, in No problem found modules at the
    repair depots because service management AGAIN, didn't do their job and
    sent an untrained engineer to a site to solve a customer problem. I'm
    not blaming the service engineer, he/she are paid to get the customer
    back up running.......so their first instinct is to replace a failed
    component.....in the new PC low end arena, most of the problems are
    comfiguration/memory management types of problems and no amount of
    board swapping will ever get that customer up and running. So Digital
    encurs the cost of MCS not being adaquately prepared to service that
    product. And the customer must go through uncounted escalations (again
    which costs Digital money) until the customer's problem is fixed.
    
    I will add with my personal experiences working in MCS as
    a maintainability engineer. It used to be our job in CSSE to work with
    engineering to explain the service organization to engineering with the
    hopes that our inputs make a difference in the service revenue by
    helping design a serviceable product that did not require a double E
    degreed engineering to resolve problems.  This was working quite well
    and it took years to build up a reputation of understanding the service
    requirements and delivery processes that would ensure maximum
    profitability. Things that we got incorporated into products had a
    direct impact on the quality of service that was delivered, and when
    the product was ready for deployment, we engaged special training
    sessions, and spoon fed service engineers experience that would ensure
    their and our success.  A lot of the stuff we did was intangeble in the
    area of return on investment because nothing was ever put in place to
    monitor and weight the ROI.  And because of the work that CSSE did, MCS
    increased it's reputation of a world class service delivery organization.
    The problem was that management never had a clue as to what we did, the
    value added we provided, or the ROI to justify CSSE's existance when
    times got tuff. So, they were downsized, they changed their name so
    often that People were placing personal names in mail headers with
    things such as 'this space for rent' or What are we this week? etc etc.
    I watched a lot of really good technical skill be let go and management
    change their color as to disguise the obvious.....They were saving
    on their management butts and letting go the very expertise that got
    them there!  I was in the auditorium in SHR when Al Snyder told the old
    CSSE group that he was were he was that day because of the
    professionalism of the CSSE organization and thanked them for doing
    a seemingly insurmountable job. And he also promised them that we would
    continue to support the organization and provide them with all the
    newest state of the art tools, hardware and software cause we were
    REALLY on a roll now!!!!  What happened, he stuck them in a closet, fed
    them management crap for over TWO YEARS while they figured out how to
    fool the rest of the company that everything was hunky dorey with them.
    We were the first people to do a climate survey, and it wasn't until
    that was executed that the upper management in MCS found out that they
    had a morale problem!!!! Think of it!  Managers have to take a damned
    SURVEY to find out what any REAL manager would have seen as an obvious
    trend.  Well, folks the story continues, but I don't want to burn a
    Saturday venting my spleen about an organization that doesn't have
    the common sense to see what they are doing to the rest of the company.
    
    Personally I hope and pray that MCS DOES GET SOLD!!!!! It's the only
    way that the country club of management will be crumbled. 
    
    Chet White.
    
    	

>    Only Digital believes that HP printers aren't standard.  Only Digital
>    believes that GIF, PCX, TIFF, etc. files are not standards and we don't
>    have to support them without the customer shelling out big bucks.  Only
>    Digital reserves the right to the unbridled arrogance of dictating all 
>    terms in the technical arena.
    
	Tsk, tsk.  One must remember that this was a management command 
	decision.  And who would know better than management?

The answer lies somewhere in the San Diego Zoo.

;*)

    And in the haste to rightsize everything we've reached the point where
    to read performance monitoring or crash dump tapes received from some
    of our customers' we'll have to find an internal system with the right
    media outside our national boundaries.
    
    Which nation?  A small one in Digital terms?  Oh no...
    
    The UK

    I have worked in Ultrix/OSF/Unix support for the last five years and
    have seen the best and worst. I feel this is a perfect example of what
    has happened to Digital. A few years back we were getting so many "how
    do I connect my HP printer to your Ultrix box" questions we went out
    and leased a HP laserjet, made it work by writing a filter, then sold
    the filter to customers at a minimul fee to pay for the overhead.
    
    Since then times have changed and I have a hard time getting post-it's
    never mind getting h/w to do my job. If you have noticed that Unix
    support is not as good as it was awhile back it might be the Unix
    support group is losing people faster than an Alpha can process bits.
    
    p.s.
    
    Hey Chet its good to see you haven't lost you positive attitude.
    
    ray j
    csc/at

    
    Hey Ray,  I'll NEVER LOOSE THE POSITIVE ATTITUDE.  And I won't let
    them break me either.......not whilst there's a hint that I'm
    right.  Been right too many times in my lifetime to give in to 
    pressures.  I don't think my attitude is all that bad!  Sure, I don't
    have a way with the sweet words, and I don't have that false sincerity
    when dealing with beaurocrats.  But you can't deny that I make
    'stuff' (insert any appropraite word you choose) HAPPEN!  I know what
    my job is, and I'm REAL GOOD AT IT!  And I'll continue to do it
    till it succeeds.  An old friend described me quite well......Chet?
    
    He has the demenor of an old grizzly bear......but point him at any
    obstacle and he'll blow right through.....of course he forget to
    mention that I Step on everyone's toes along the way! ;^)
    
    
    later,
    ray,
    
    Say hi to the folks I know in the CSC!
    
    chet

    
    re .-2
    
    OSF SUPPORT?  What OSF Support?
    
    Ever noticed how many 0 replies in the ALPHA_OSF conference?
    My customer is learning real fast, no CSC support, no note responses...
    

>================================================================================
>Note 3381.33                  Some direction please                     33 of 33
>NEWVAX::MURRAY "and the BAND plays on"                8 lines  22-SEP-1994 11:16
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                               -< What SUPPORT? >-


>    re .-2

>    OSF SUPPORT?  What OSF Support?

>   Ever noticed how many 0 replies in the ALPHA_OSF conference?

518, as of this morning, out of 7168 notes.

Your point seems to be that 518 notes with no reply
constitutes "no OSF support".  Well, I'm sure everyone has
their own opinion on this.  Mine is: I disagree.

No one in OSF/1 engineering (that I know anyway) is expected to
spending any time answering notes.  We're expected to fix QARs, and
ship new releases.  We're pretty busy.  So what response you see
is entirely voluntary, and done in someone's 'spare time'.
And it's there because the individuals are making an extra effort
trying to support you and make OSF/1 more successful.

My overall impression of ALPHA_OSF is that technical questions
about OSF/1 are usually answered that same day.

You personally have entered 4 notes.  Two of them were answered
(relatively) immediately.  Hopefully they helped you get your
job done.  You're welcome.

Two of them received no replies:

    Hi,
        My customer said he saw a demo called 'Is it live, or is it Memorex'
    at the latest DECUS.  Sounds like it was a VMS shell.  Has anyone heard
    of this, or might know where else I should look?

    Thanks,
    Mike M.

Apparently nobody had heard of it.  If it's on VMS, why were you asking
here anyway?

    Hi,
        My customer (who is great and has been very pro-alpha) brought up
    the big-endian/lil-endian issue.  I've probably read all the 'endian'
    notes and would now like to ask for suggestions on what doc/papers I
    can provide them in regards to writing Architecture Independent Code.

    Suggestions?

    Thanks,
    Mike M.

I'm not sure what you mean, perhaps if you explain more fully what
your customer is trying to do or is worried about, you'd get some
response.  Maybe not, it's not a perfect world, and this doesn't
seem like an OSF/1 question/issue.

I'm sure you're feeling a lot of pain due to Digital's apparent
cessation of customer support.  But your implication that we're not
doing our job because notes response isn't to your liking pissed me
off to the point of actually writing to this conference...

> My customer is learning real fast, no CSC support, no note responses...

I'd say you and your customer, and hence all of Digital, have bigger
problems than the turnaround time in ALPHA_OSF.

My 2 cents, thanks for listening.

Mike

    
    ref -1
    
    that was going to be my comments problems should be qar'ed then
    they are assigned to someone, or were you talking about field
    support????
    
    
    bob c

    
    
    
    re. note .33                -< What SUPPORT? >-
    
    
    >>    re .-2
    
    >>    OSF SUPPORT?  What OSF Support?
    
    >>    Ever noticed how many 0 replies in the ALPHA_OSF conference?
    >>    My customer is learning real fast, no CSC support, no note
    >>      responses...
    
    If you think its bad now wait awhile longer as more unix types leave.
    Also understand as stated in .34 & .35 that notes is not a priority
    because we are measured on how many calls we take (utilization) not how
    many notes we answer.
    
    Also there are times when the queue is so backed logged folks don't do
    lunch or stay late. So why don't you ask them about "What support".
    
    ray j
    csc/at
    

    
    Even though this is not a product notesfile, the problem in .0 was
    elevated within DEC OSF/1 engineering a few hours after it was posted
    here.
    
    I was puzzled by it, as I new that HP support had been added in V3.0
    (as previously stated).  The drivers had been acquired from the
    PATHWORKS folks, who were also involved in the investigation by DEC
    OSF/1 engineering in UNX.
    
    In the course of testing 3pp printer installation, I did find a bug
    which could result in 3pp printer support being invisible to an
    installer.   That bug was verified, QAR'ed and answered within a day. A
    fix is available in the QAR database.
    
    The notes were mailed to the engineer who fixed the QAR and I was
    personally copied on responses from the PATHWORKS folks and from the
    engineer responsible for print drivers in DEC OSF/1.
    
    3pp printer support has been in the works for many months in response
    to customer requirements generated for V3.0.  It was documented in the
    Release Notes for V3.0 in addition to the Sys Admin Guide.  In response
    to customer comments on installing printers, the relevant sections of
    the System Admin guide were thoroughly overhauled for V3.0.  Given that
    HP-UX 9.0 has virtually no support for printers other than their own,
    that's one up to us.
    
    I'd say that's not a bad response for an unofficial channel.
    
    Regards,
    
    Colin
    

    re. 34 & 35
    
    Its been a irritating week, your right, NO SUPPORT was inappropriate
    and that was not exactly what I meant.  Sorry! and I mean it!
    
    I was trying to put in a observation, that it seems to take considerably
    longer to get a response when dealing with the ALPHA_OSF notes
    conference, opposed to other main-line conferences, VMSNOTES,
    WINDOWS-NT, etc.  Perhaps I should of worded it better.  I was curious
    what others thought.  Perhaps, in my case, it has just been bad timing?
    Maybe I've been spoiled?  I don't know.
    
    I'm sorry you have to spend your own time, I assumed people were
    usually assigned notes-duty.  I also thought engineering was
    evenly divided between OSF and VMS?  You have a great product and I'm
    excited about it!  I just don't get the opportunity to work on it much,
    nor do I have a system which will run it.  My customer sometimes wants
    answers now.  I've got no CSC support.  I'm one person with a million
    products to try and support, and I live on-site.  I use the Digital way,
    notes.
    
    The funny part of this is all I keep trying to do is position our
    products to have the best shot at being the platform of choice.  And
    at times all it seems the company does is turn its head the other way.
    
    Again, my apologizes.
    Mike M.