Real Time Ascend Maling List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(ASCEND) 56K - How to promote/support?
Robert A. Pickering Jr. said:
>My user got an Answer from Supra/Diamond.
>
>The answer is: "Rockwell released beta firmware for their 56K modems in
>a "beta" chipset. Lot's of modem manufacturer's used this beta firmware
>to get modems to market. Rockwell is now telling us that we have to recall
>all of these modems and switch to "RAM Based" modems instead of "ROM Based"
>modems. The "RAM Based" modem is out for Windows, but is not out yet for
>the Macintosh [this user is a Macintosh user]."
>
>My user's response is that he's returning the modem where he got it and is
>suggesting that people NOT buy the Diamond modems since the majority of the
>modems on the shelves will be this "Beta firmware" modem.
This sounds like great fun and games. Open the weapons locker
and break out the riot gear boys, it is time for another seige!
Let's try to track the sequence of events:
a) An end-user hears about "56K" from any one of
a number of possible sources, and decides to
spend his money to "upgrade" to 56K.
a1) If he buys an X2 modem from USR, he
is limited to 33.6Kbps simply because
USR took so long to buy a vowel on the
subject of standards. (Unless, of course
we go out and get some USR racks as an
"interim solution" for a subset of
of out customers, which would be rewarding
USR for their high-handed tactics.)
a2) If he buys a K56Flex modem, he must try
to find out what the REV of the modem is
to insure that it is not "Rockwell beta
code/hardware". Since the sales
channels can be assume to be loaded with
"beta modems", he may have a hard time
finding anything that is known to be
"production firmware/hardware".
a2a) There is no easy way to do this,
since it appears that different
modem makers are using their own
hardware/firmware rev numbers.
a2b) Given Mr. Pickering's findings
["Rockwell is now telling us
that we have to recall all of
these modems and switch to 'RAM
Based' modems instead of 'ROM
Based' modems."], it seems that
the customer must go through
an RMA with the modem vendor.
The historical track-record of
modem makers in this area is not
good, and there are known cases
where the modem maker has blamed
the ISP, thus trashing the
credibility of the ISP, who is
working hard, spending money, and
honestly trying to HELP the customer
use the vendor's modem.
a2c) If he is lucky, the modem maker
does not require swapping the
modem, has a flash-rom upgrade,
and he can upgrade himself (or
burn up our 800-number while our
tech support staff talks him
though the process).
a2d) There will be some recalcitrant
modem makers, and ISPs will be
forced to "suggest" or "not
suggest" certain brands, thus
putting ISPs in an adversarial
position with modem makers.
b) Once he gets the proper modem with the proper firmware,
he can then get some results. If he connects at less
than 56000 (a certainty), he will call my 800-number
tech support line, and start burning up our money on
the issue.
c) If I give the COMPLETE information to my tech support
people, and instruct them to explain the complete facts
about "56K modems" to my customers, they will think that
we are liars. (The essential facts here are that "your
mileage may vary", and the term "56K modem" is a misnomer
that borders on fraud.) Given the fact that most of our
customers do not have engineering degrees, the mere
attempt to tell the truth to our customers opens up a
can of worms not seen since Frank Herbert's book "Dune".
Some number of users will get disgusted (with us) about
this, and we will lose their business to someone else
who tells the customer less than the unvarnished truth.
d) Once the user is made to understand that his telco line
quality can impact his performance, he might call his
telco, who will deny any responsibility to provide any
line quality above that required to recreate the immortal
words of Alexander G. Bell. This is in spite of the
fact that many dial-up users have extra lines that were
ordered to specifically support a modem.
e) Once a motivated, well-financed, and hardworking user
wades through all the issues, the best he can expect
is a LESS than 56000 connect. Once again, he will
likely blame us for this "problem". The facts of the
matter indicate that if we are not VERY careful about
how we talk about this new facility, we could be
indicted by the Federal Trade Commission for fraud and
misrepresentation. (Hard to imagine? Look no further
than poor old AOL, who had many Attorneys General
calling them criminals for daring to have customer
demand in excess of their capacity.) I expect that
pointing to the FCC regs in regard to 53K vs 56K will
not be an adequate defense.
e1) We can't say "56K", because there is a zero
percent chance of a 56000 rate. Perhaps
"53K" might be a more appropriate name.
e2) We can't say "higher performance", since the
only users to whom we can ASSURE higher
performance are the users who stick with
28.8kbps or 33.6kbps modems, and take advantage
of the higher net throughput at the lower
speeds.
e3) We can't claim any specific performance
improvement AT ALL, since we have no way
of assuring any specific customer that he
will gain any specific performance improvement.
e4) Our customers will be confused by conflicting
claims and poorly researched press articles
into thinking all sorts of things, and expect
us to deliver whatever others promise.
e5) We certainly can't charge extra for "56K"
service, even though the cost to support
such service (both in terms of infrastructure
and raw tech-support time and effort) is
much higher for any ISP who attempts to
offer 56K service. (Those ISPs who were
foolish enough to not invest in PRIs,
excess bandwidth capacity and so on
long ago now have to "upgrade" simply
to attempt to offer 56K service.)
f) If the user is very sophisticated, he might notice
the "throughput degradation" discussed in a prior
thread on this e-mail list. He will blame... guess
who? Correct! Us!
Gosh Ascend, it looks like the K56Flex group has some PR work
to do, now that USR is at last making nice noises, and we can
expect everything to interoperate "real soon now". My fellow ISPs
and I can make web pages until we are blue in the face to explain
all this, but it looks like we need to ask that each and every
modem maker create web and ftp-based resources to allow flash
rom upgrades, and track their firmware revisions against the
Rockwell/Lucent revisions.
Ascend and the other RAS vendors who support K56Flex need to
track/document THEIR revisions too, as well as insure that
they keep track of reported problems with specific brands
of modems that should otherwise "work".
A centralized "K56Flex" resource WebPage sounds like a real good
idea, but this set of resources must be oriented towards the
end user/customer rather than the engineer/ISP, and must be
kept up-to-date by a staff that is willing to try to keep up
with nearly every action of all the players. The ISPs cannot
be expected to keep up themselves.
This is NOT "28.8kbps all over again". There is no sense of
DejaVu here. Any sense of DejaVu felt by the reader should
be replaced by a sense of impending DOOM. This is worse,
much worse.
God, how I love this business! Where else can I find an
"improvement" that is a lose-lose-lose proposition? I expect
that the "K56Flex" industry standard spec should be modified to
include something like the following:
10.1.7.16 A group of peasants, marching upon the
offices of the ISP, armed with pitchforks,
torches, and blunt instruments, is known
to be a feature of early revisions of all
"56K" modems. Efforts will be made to
provide all ISPs with hunchbacked assistants,
who will entertain the crowds of angry users
by juggling dozens of phones in midair, being
polite to each and every caller, but making
obscene gestures as he hangs up each telephone.
It is a shock to realize that even Kurt Loder of MTV News has somehow
become a respectable journalist, while I am as lunatic fringe as ever.
james fischer jfischer@supercollider.com
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.shore.net/~dreaming/ascend-faq>
or <ftp://ftp.shore.net/members/dreaming/ascend-faq.txt>