North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Cisco TAC KRAP !!
> Did you send back the survey with appropriate comments filled out? Did you > attempt to contact someone about the support level you received? Have you > made any attempt at all to help Cisco solve the problem? Yes, we are doing it every time. Note, we don't blame CISCO at all - I undertsnd the big company can't keep direct contacts betwee high-skilled technicians and the customers except some very important ones. We have a goot feedback by the technical seminars and local support people from the AMT Group (the better cisco reseller in the Russia), and sometimes with the CISCO Russia people. And then, there is different interests. If I understand the situation right, CISCO is injecting a huge intellectial and financial capital into the VoIP, ATM, WDM technology etc etc and is trying to get a goot rate amongs the big international TELCO's. No doubt, the traditional issues such as _IP CORE BACKBONE_, _DIALUP ACCESS_, etc etc are shifting to the second level. No one can blame the vendor for this approach. Through we had some success in technical contacts last months, but I recommend everybody don't hope to the technical support. It he (everybody) is not 100,000 employee telco. On the other hand, just CCO web service fill in this gup between _low skilled_ human support and _high skilled technicians_. I think it should be better if CISCO support some kind of WWW conferences, some kind of excanging _know_how_ between their customers, but I undersnand it's not so easy to develop such support. If we make some complains here, or if I (sometimes) refer to the CISCO as an example when something work wrong, it don't mean we are dissatisfyed - in comparation with the others CISCO have an excellent support. Through I think we are talking about one vendor too much here, and get quiet. Alex. > > Cisco is very concerned about the level of support our customers get; any > duly reported problems are looked into and we attempt to resolve everything > we can. > > However, calling people clowns and sissies on a public mailing list is > unlikely to solve your problem, regardless of what company your problem is > with. Grow up. > > And FYI, Cisco has over 7 million web pages internally just for Cisco > employees; just because your engineer may not be personally acquainted with > your exact question (I dare you to find *any* human who can be up on every > single detail of our products) doesn't mean he's wandering around on CCO. > > Stephen > > | | Stephen Sprunk, K5SSS, CCIE #3723 > :|: :|: NSA, Network Consulting Engineer > :|||: :|||: 14875 Landmark Blvd #400; Dallas, TX > .:|||||||:..:|||||||:. Pager: 800-365-4578 / 800-901-6078 > C I S C O S Y S T E M S Email: firstname.lastname@example.org > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: TOO MUCH > To: email@example.com > Sent: Friday, June 25, 1999 11:43 > Subject: Cisco TAC KRAP !! > > > > Over the last year it seems that the quality of service I have received from > TAC has diminished. At one time I found myself speaking to a knowledgeable > engineer. Who knew the product and protocols involved and they were willing > to share information. > > The norm these days is to get an engineer who knows less then I do. I'm call > requesting technical information pertaining to their products, What I get is > some clown telling me to hold on while he surfs the internal web page > looking for the answer. I can scan CCO myself!! > > Is it just me ? > > Phantom hates Cisco or should I say Sissy-Co TAC!! > > > _______________________________________________________________ > Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com > > > Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow (+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager) (+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)