Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!att!chinet!saj
From: saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: HP Customer Support...
Summary: Computerized instruments get the dirty end
Message-ID: <1989Dec3.054538.22732@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 3 Dec 89 05:45:38 GMT
References: <203@limbo.Intuitive.Com> <7810017@hpuamsa.UUCP> <205@limbo.Intuitive.Com>
Reply-To: saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs)
Organization: Chinet - Chicago Public Access UNIX
Lines: 19

I'm using my second HP computerized analytical instrument.  This one is a
top-of-the-line gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer controlled by an A series
box, and running RTE/A with both FMGR and CI (wotta mouthful).  Software for
this system can uncharitably be considered one gigantic bug (and operation
a gigantic workaround).  Support people are uniformly courteous and energetic;
since the system is a bit .... odd, they aren't necessarily all that well-
informed (particularly when the guy we need is on vacation, or some such).
Still, we have printer drivers that work badly or not at all YEARS after the
bug reports went in, procedures that should be automatable with (what I call)
command files querying the terminal for what should be command line arguments,
and numerous reproducible situations that hang various programs 'Acknowledged
as problems'.  Aside from making all those workstations and departmental
computers, HP makes an awful lot of automated test equipment.  And the 
traditional attitude that the computer division doesn't support the the 
instrument division still seems to be around (not universal anymore, but there).
   Basically, I get the impression that if the most frequent operations run
by most of the customers work ok, further development isn't considered 
necessary.
                                      Steve J.