Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cica!travis!greg From: greg@travis.cica.indiana.edu (Gregory TRAVIS) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware Subject: Re: More info on A2091 woes Message-ID: Date: 16 Jan 91 15:44:18 GMT References: <9696@cica.cica.indiana.edu> <1991Jan14.193336.13387@convex.com> <1991Jan15.155835.5230@javelin.es.com> <17655@cbmvax.commodore.com> Sender: news@cica.cica.indiana.edu Lines: 67 jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) writes: > Turning off reselection should totally solve the problem. The problem is caused > Explanation of the problem and how to fix it deleted. THANK YOU Randell. I'll try your program to test if I've "really" turned off reselection when I get home and let you know. It feels much better that someone has finally acknowledged what's going on. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. > There has been much discussion of this workaround here on the net >in the past. Obviously responses from us here at commodore (on a non- >official basis) may include information or suggestions that have not made it >out to dealers/repair people yet. Personally, I think the A2091 is a really I've been looking at as many articles titled "A2091" as possible and never saw anything other than "Did you turn off reselection, that MAY help" kinds of things. If there was something posted which was more substantive than that I must have missed it and I apologize. >nice unit, and until I recently switched to an A{model deleted}, I was >using an A2091 with 2x200Mb drives, a 50Mb drive, a 40Mb drive, and a SCSI >tape unit (most of those are now on the other machine). Worked flawlessly, >including doing diskcopies between HD partitions while running compiles, or >when validating 4 partitions on each 200 meg drive at the same time (can you >say "thrash"?) > I'm sorry if you feel you've been given a run-around. I severely >doubt it was intentional, and was mostly caused by dealers/repair people >being further down the information stream (especially since we only fairly >recently (3 months? 6 months? I don't remember) figured out what was causing >the problem). We try quite hard to support our users and let them know >what's happening, including spending a lot of time giving help on the net and >by mail when we're not required to. Run-around hardly covers it. The person who initially affirmed the problem to me totally dissappeared e-mail wise (would not respond, etc.) almost immediately. Calls to Commodore were either blown off or referred to mysterious "Tech Reports" that "My dealer SHOULD have" which, as far as I can tell, no dealer has ever received. A real catch-22 situation in which all I got were a bunch of "we can neither confirm nor deny" responses. I believe Dylan Mcnamee describes a similar run-around with his experience and I have received numerous pieces of e-mail from people bemoaning the same (I wish they would have posted!). More than one person (and this is what really surprised me) wrote me that I should "give it up as you won't get any help at all from Commodore, who will deny a problem exists." And, of course, there was the obligatory hate mail from Amiga-Krishnas because I had dared besmirch the machine in public. A cogent explanation of the problem, such as Randell gave, is all I ever wanted from Commodore. Hell, I've been willing to PAY big money for a fix for a long time now. But I couldn't even get that far because no one would own up to a problem. Coming clean initially would have gone a long way towards assuaging a lot of people's complaints. Let me suggest that Commodore do its best to let its dealers know about this - they seem to be totally in the dark. I can't imagine what the poor slob without Usenet access who's got the problem is doing. Why didn't Commodore test for this problem? I discovered it the day I bought my machine. -- Gregory R. Travis Indiana University, Bloomington IN 47405 greg@cica.cica.indiana.edu Center for Innovative Computer Applications Disclaimer: Everything I say is true and I never lie.