Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!apple!sun-barr!lll-winken!abhg!misko
From: misko@abhg.UUCP (William Miskovetz)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Adaptec controller problems
Summary: from the horses mouth...  sigh...
Message-ID: <321@abhg.UUCP>
Date: 17 Nov 89 07:05:43 GMT
References: <36506@ism780c.isc.com>
Organization: W. Miskovetz - Consulting, Livermore, CA
Lines: 114

I have been rather quiet on this since my initial posting, but I have to
reply to some of this.  I had written a long (100+ lines) article on
my experiences but chose not to post it.  I'll e-mail it if anyone is
interested. It contains fun facts like system configuration, why 1.05,
1.0.6, 2.0.1, and 2.0.2 didn't work, and my point of view of what has
gone on since I sent in my drive.  Hopefully, no one will be interested
in such a dull report...


In article <36506@ism780c.isc.com>, support@ism780c.isc.com (Support  account) writes:
> ...
> ISC did request the use of the drive because
> it had too many defects to work on 2.0.2.  The problem was related to Mr.
> Miskovetz's specific drive, and the number of defective tracks/sectors
> involved.  Release 2.0.2 does in fact work with, and is compatible with the
> Adaptec 2322B-8 controller and most existing Maxtor drives.

I am somewhat confused by this.  The Maxtor 8760E is a 760 MB (unformatted)
drive.  The defect list from Maxtor listed approx. 37 defects. (I can't
be exact, the defect list is with the drive)  I have a couple of 72 MB
drives in another system (MFM) that have at least 30 defects on them and
they work fine.  I guess I don't understand why ~37 defects are too many.
IF ISC has discovered that my drive has more that ~37 defects, I will
be rather irritated as this is the first I heard of it and the warranty
on the drive expired while ISC had it.  Second, the 2322B-8 is a 15 MHz
controller (although I think it will do 10 MHz).  I believe any drive that
is 15 MHz is going to be large so I can't believe that it can be stated that
it will work with most Maxtor drives.

> ... 
> There was regular communication between ISC support and Mr. Miskovetz during
> this period without any perceived animosity on the part of the customer.
> INTERACTIVE's intent, in all instances, is to assist customers in the
> successful utilization of our product, as well as provide a product with
> increasing integrity as it matures.  When this necessitates the cooperative
> resources of both the customer and ISC, we seek to employ those resources as
> quickly as possible, and to cause as little inconvenience to the customer as
> is feasible.

Well, there was regular contact.  I called them every other week or so.  I
have the phone bills to prove it.  ISC *NEVER* called me except this week
after I posted.  In my phone conversation with Mr. Alcorn, we both agreed
that there was a breakdown in communication.  Perhaps I should have called
him when I was never called, but they certainly should have called me at
least once in a while.  One of their support people went as far as to tell
me that he was going to put a Post-It in his machine so that he would
remember to call me once a week.  Did he ever call?  No!

I must admit, there was/is no animosity towards them.  I attempted to stress
that I wanted them to keep the drive as long as necessary for them to get
me a working system, BUT, I did let them know that I was letting them have
my disk from my primary system and that I could make do with the 60 MB
I replaced it with but I was running out of disk space too often.  I had
hoped that would be enough to let them know I was hoping this could be
done quickly.  Especially since I over-nighted the drive to them. (Anyone
ever pay $80 to overnight a disk drive?  Yeah, I feel silly.)

> In speaking directly with Mr. Miskovetz today, he did not indicate a feeling
> of great negligence on the part of ISC, or express a critical need for the
> return of the hardware.  He was very appreciative of our efforts, although
> frustrated at not being able to yet use the product.  He is satisfied with
> the plan for getting him up and running with his hardware and 386/ix.

True, no feeling of great negligence.  Perhaps a little unprofessional in
that if I am told I will be called, I expect to be called.  And if someone
has $4,000 of my equipment, I expect them to tell me they received it, let
alone tell me that they are working on the problem.  As for a critical need,
in our conversation, we discussed sending the drive back that day, or later
this week.  A couple of days after 4 months was not going to matter to me.

I DO appreciate the effort ISC has put into getting me a working system,
and I am satisfied with the plan we put together this week for getting
me up and running with my hardware.  But, I am a little (ok, maybe more than
a little) disappointed at how long it took, but I really wanted a working
UNIX.  Xenix ran fine with the drive, but I preferred ISC or AT&T UNIX.

> 
> Bill Miskovetz is one customer that had a problem pertaining to an agressive
> use of Unix on PC hardware.  INTERACTIVE worked with him, and with his
> cooperation in loaning the necessary equipment, was able to support his
> specific environment as well as improve the general nature of our software
> for future customers.  We look forward to continuing this close association
> with our customers.
> 
> Mike Alcorn
> Manager, Product Support
> INTERACTIVE

I guess I don't see my use as "aggressive".  I bought a large drive hoping
to use it for DOS, OS/2, and UNIX.  DOS and OS/2 worked fine.  Xenix worked
fine but I was not interested, but no ISC UNIX.  I believe that after I
had sent my drive to ISC, someone in support mentioned that there were some
European customers with a similar problem.  Maybe I dreamed that.  Anyway,
ISC did work with me and hopefully soon I will be able to say, "Yes, I 
have my hardware and I have a running system."  Hopefully, ISC will also
improve their communications with their customers.  Even AT&T, as much
as I have disliked their tech support, followed up their support calls
with a survey to see how well you were dealt with, how promptly, etc.

Bottom line: I appreciate ISC's efforts, I don't want this to get blown out
of proportion, I hope ISC will improve it's customer contact, especially
when they have a piece of the customers hardware, and I will be very glad
when I get my hardware back IF it has a working OS.  If it doesn't, time
to see if INTEL really deserves to be in the UNIX OS market 1/2 :-)

With respect to customer contact, e-mail would have been sufficient.
Even automated mail once a week saying "yes, we still have an open 
trouble report from you".  I am certainly glad to see ISC taking a more 
active roll on the net.  I hope they continue to do so.

Bill Miskovetz
{uunet!lll-winken, apple!mathworks, pyramid}!abhg!misko
misko@mathworks.com
abhg!misko@lll-lcc.llnl.gov