[Info-vax] HP alerts full of broken links

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

Den 2015-08-18 kl. 19:57, skrev David Froble:
> IanD wrote:
>> Having worked once for the 'devil' itself, the issues I experienced
>> inside HP
>> many years ago are still the same issues I experienced recently as an
>> outsider looking in
>>
>> You eventually find someone who then says they have spun the issue off to
>> 'someone else' but that other entities details are neither provided nor
>> defined enough for you to be able to go to them directly if your problem
>> does
>> not move. Your stonewalled by the organization layers itself
>>
>> A recent similar experience I had was trying to source what parts would be
>> required to upgrade an old Alphaserver. It took no less than 11 different
>> people before I eventually got my answer! ok, some of those were the usual
>> lower order ranks that channel the call, like your initial call catchers and
>> incident guiders but it shows to me how fragmented things are internally
>>
>> Lack of ownership, lack of a single aggregated point of contact is the same
>> issue I experienced with trying to wrestle a parts list from HP verses
>> trying
>> to get back documentation what once was 'just there', working happily
>>
>> When I hear comments like "who at hp have you told about this?", with all
>> due
>> respect, should that actually matter? (assuming they didn't just have a
>> causal conversation to the gardener about the issue)
>>
>> It seems that Bill has managed to contact 'someone' who said 'someone else'
>> is looking at it. This is exactly what I experienced except I went through
>> the official pathway via the website and had to fight my way along until
>> someone eventually acknowledged there is an issue but it ended up in the
>> same
>> place, with 'someone' else whom I cannot contact directly to follow up with
>>
>> Let's reverse things a bit to get a customer sense. If I was to call HP and
>> ask can I speak to 'someone', they'd laugh at me, yet HP are still doing
>> this
>> to their customers (potential or active). A faceless entity doesn't foster
>> customer advocacy at all
>>
>> Perhaps HP splitting up might be better for it, I don't know, I myself are
>> skeptical, I just don't see fragmentation as providing any benefit other
>> than
>> to bean counters who can then slide and dice away at the bits
>> under-performing but sometimes some of those under-performing bits act as a
>> glue to join together disparate parts of an organization and add synergy
>> value enough to carry them along even if they are not making ends meet to a
>> bean-counter
>
> I don't understand the above rant.  We've known for some time that HP did
> not value VMS, except for milking the dying cow as much as possible.  Now
> they have basically gotten out of the VMS business, why would you still
> expect anything from them?
>
>> I sure as hell would love it if VSI would stand in the documentation gap
>> that
>> HP has created, at least they are small enough that when a problem is aired
>> it gets quick attention because it's still a relatively flat structured
>> organization
>
> This is the hope for the future.  I believe there is a determination to in
> time fix all the problems.  It's going to take a while.  Perhaps not fast
> enough for those who are impatient.

Or for the "market". Which is worse, of course.




   Reality usually trumps expectations.