Subject: RE: [USR-TC] Software Agreement- RE

From: Joel - Fox Computers <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 02:08:22 +0000

Steve (and everyone) - 

I'm not the arguing type - and I don't necessarily mean to "bash" 3com, which is why I haven't said anything to this point.  Just making discussion here.

BUT - here's the reality - from what I've seen, the 3Com people are here, but don't care to participate.  I believe it's not their job to help, but then why are they here?  Apparently it is actually the job of the 3Com police to make sure that although we are allowed to discuss, they have to make sure we don't get out of line.

I've been on several mailing lists where the participants discussed issues of much greater legal consequence than a simple piece of firmware.  There were no spies monitoring the discussion to keep everyone in line.  Which is why I was a little disappointed in some things that occurred recently.

One simple request for an old firmware version results in Mr. Goodman posting the entire 3Com software license.  Then, I get a phone call from someone selling support contracts who says they were referred to me by 3Com (which I purchased by the way).  That's followed a couple days later by a phone call from 3Com's Corporate Security Department calling to protect 3Com's "Intellectual Property".  I hope he fealt like a shit when I told him I already purchased a service contract.

Since firmware, old or new, is sometimes required to make their hardware work like it was intended, I see it quite different than I do software, such as TCM.  I know, I know, 3Com would argue with that - I'm just saying that I disagree.  Remember - I did pay for the support so I could get the firmware, but I'm just stating my opinion, which is quite different from being unwilling to abide.  If I had any intention of not "following the rules" I would have been smart enough to keep my posts here anonymous.

And since any effort to improve the functionality of the 3Com hardware requires a service contract, where does it end?  What if someone decides that it is "Intellectual Property" to know how to configure a unit for DOV calls?  The 3Com police will be watching to make sure no one talks about it without paying the fee.

In fairness, I bought 3Com hardware because my previous experience (with modems, nic's, switches, etc) has all been very good.  And I'm keeping my 3Com hardware, which is why I bought the support.  But COME ON - I understand how people feel when they buy what they think is good hardware, only to find something doesn't work and they have to spend a ton of additional cash for what probably amounts to 5 minutes of help.

Here's another way to look at this:  If most manufacturer's sell defective goods, they are normally, and sometimes legally, expected to fix what's wrong.  Virtually every software publisher puts out free patches and bug-fixes when issues are found in their software, whether it's a $40 package, or a $40,000 package.  When 3Com sells a modem that doesn't work right because the drivers are buggy, they provide free driver updates via the web site.  But when Total Control hardware is found to be defective (due to bugs in firmware) they only fix them if you pay an additional fee.  Why doesn't that sound right?

Basically, I think there are probably several people (here and elsewhere) who feel a little duped.  Expecting top-quality hardware that 3Com is known for, we buy in, expecting the same kind of support offered by other manufacturers, including 3Com in regards to other 3Com hardware.  Then, when something doesn't work exactly right, they find out they are held hostage by 3Com's policies in regards to Total Control related software or firmware.  You can argue against the Cisco argument by saying their practice isn't their policy, but if a lack of enforcement is the way they do business, then that's their policy, written or not.

So what's my point?  My point is that I found that 3Com's "Intellectual Property" is freely available in the public domain, and I certainly could have obtained almost anything I wanted without buying the service contract or paying anyone anything.  I only did so because I, personally, want to do this right.  But the 3Com people out there that are reading this list should be aware that monitoring a discussion like this is the biggest waste of effort one could imagine.  I think someone else said it, but I'll repeat, they would be wiser to put the effort into developing a better product than policing a small number of people and thinking it's making a difference.

Again, just my opinion.  Thanks to everyone who offered to freely help out with my problems.

Joel

FYI: Another thing to consider as I talk to the guys at 3com is...
As much as we would like to see responses from 3com techs on this list
its just not their job. 3com techs are available at the commworks user
forum. Many of the responses that come from the 3com employees are
done on their own time and we should appreciate that...So be easy on them.
As I have been informed thats why they havent been adding in on your tech
questions. They dont appreciate the email beatings they take for 3com...They
are employees not owners or decision makers for the items that are
complained about on this list. So lets keep that in mind when they do take
the time to help us out.

---

From: Stephen Rivera <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:17:03 +0000

You makes some great points here and I completely agree. And I applaud your
business decision to take the proper measure to get the support you needed.
I just wish I could have sold you that support contract :)

I think if we can continue to discuss the problems in a professional matter,
(rather than bitching about it) maybe, and this is a long shot that we might
be able to make changes.Threats to buy Cisco is not going to get anything
accomplished. Commworks is not a routing company, they are an access
company, they dont claim to be Cisco. I personally feel that the comparison
of the 2 is like comparing apples to oranges.

We all agree for the most part that hardware does the job we expect it to do
but the support is not what we would expect from a company that has such a
large install base.

So what do we do from here?

PS: You mention the 3com police and I too have had my problems with the
authorities :) Thats why I am here at 3com getting training. I have been
denied the the ability to buy from source-t, netsource and the other
affiliates that service commworks contracts and if thats not fair I dont
know what is. Competing with these guys is nearly impossible on new product,
so thats why  push the refurb product. Is that fair? I think not and I am
sure I can supply the same service. But I dont complain about it. Instead I
too am taking the proper procedures to get on the same playing field. Will I
get there? Who knows but I will continue to try.

Thanks for not biting my head off and I defintely see your points.

Steve (and everyone) -

I'm not the arguing type - and I don't necessarily mean to "bash" 3com,
which is why I haven't said anything to this point.  Just making discussion
here.

BUT - here's the reality - from what I've seen, the 3Com people are here,
but don't care to participate.  I believe it's not their job to help, but
then why are they here?  Apparently it is actually the job of the 3Com
police to make sure that although we are allowed to discuss, they have to
make sure we don't get out of line.

I've been on several mailing lists where the participants discussed issues
of much greater legal consequence than a simple piece of firmware.  There
were no spies monitoring the discussion to keep everyone in line.  Which is
why I was a little disappointed in some things that occurred recently.

One simple request for an old firmware version results in Mr. Goodman
posting the entire 3Com software license.  Then, I get a phone call from
someone selling support contracts who says they were referred to me by 3Com
(which I purchased by the way).  That's followed a couple days later by a
phone call from 3Com's Corporate Security Department calling to protect
3Com's "Intellectual Property".  I hope he fealt like a shit when I told him
I already purchased a service contract.

Since firmware, old or new, is sometimes required to make their hardware
work like it was intended, I see it quite different than I do software, such
as TCM.  I know, I know, 3Com would argue with that - I'm just saying that I
disagree.  Remember - I did pay for the support so I could get the firmware,
but I'm just stating my opinion, which is quite different from being
unwilling to abide.  If I had any intention of not "following the rules" I
would have been smart enough to keep my posts here anonymous.

And since any effort to improve the functionality of the 3Com hardware
requires a service contract, where does it end?  What if someone decides
that it is "Intellectual Property" to know how to configure a unit for DOV
calls?  The 3Com police will be watching to make sure no one talks about it
without paying the fee.

In fairness, I bought 3Com hardware because my previous experience (with
modems, nic's, switches, etc) has all been very good.  And I'm keeping my
3Com hardware, which is why I bought the support.  But COME ON - I
understand how people feel when they buy what they think is good hardware,
only to find something doesn't work and they have to spend a ton of
additional cash for what probably amounts to 5 minutes of help.

Here's another way to look at this:  If most manufacturer's sell defective
goods, they are normally, and sometimes legally, expected to fix what's
wrong.  Virtually every software publisher puts out free patches and
bug-fixes when issues are found in their software, whether it's a $40
package, or a $40,000 package.  When 3Com sells a modem that doesn't work
right because the drivers are buggy, they provide free driver updates via
the web site.  But when Total Control hardware is found to be defective (due
to bugs in firmware) they only fix them if you pay an additional fee.  Why
doesn't that sound right?

Basically, I think there are probably several people (here and elsewhere)
who feel a little duped.  Expecting top-quality hardware that 3Com is known
for, we buy in, expecting the same kind of support offered by other
manufacturers, including 3Com in regards to other 3Com hardware.  Then, when
something doesn't work exactly right, they find out they are held hostage by
3Com's policies in regards to Total Control related software or firmware.
You can argue against the Cisco argument by saying their practice isn't
their policy, but if a lack of enforcement is the way they do business, then
that's their policy, written or not.

So what's my point?  My point is that I found that 3Com's "Intellectual
Property" is freely available in the public domain, and I certainly could
have obtained almost anything I wanted without buying the service contract
or paying anyone anything.  I only did so because I, personally, want to do
this right.  But the 3Com people out there that are reading this list should
be aware that monitoring a discussion like this is the biggest waste of
effort one could imagine.  I think someone else said it, but I'll repeat,
they would be wiser to put the effort into developing a better product than
policing a small number of people and thinking it's making a difference.

Again, just my opinion.  Thanks to everyone who offered to freely help out
with my problems.

Joel

_______________________________________________
USR-TC mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usr-tc

---

From: Charles Sprickman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 07:26:11 +0000

Another thing that I noticed, and is probably somewhat at the root of the
problem here is that this list seems to be mostly ISPs.  Not corporate IT
departments.  One thing that 3Com does not understand that Cisco caught
onto long ago is the difference between those two types of customers.

The IT guys will buy whatever they are told to secure their jobs (support,
sparing, training, whatever else...).  The ISP guys are looking for the
best buy.  I don't know if 3Com still sends sales reps out to drum up ISP
biz, but Cisco does... regularly.  And they have a specific group of
people that aren't surprised by the lower budget, higher clue, and
"creative" means of making things work on a shoestring.  They don't even
bat an eye, they've seen it all before.  And if you pull the Sales
Engineer aside and ask him if you can get one software contract to cover
what you're buying plus 5 more boxes you just got off Ebay, well, he'll
tell you no one's really going to care.  wink wink, nudge nudge, know what
I mean? :)  And your sales engineer is a good backdoor if you have a
problem and don't have a support contract.  Especially if you're
handing them a bug on a platter.

I'm basically saying Cisco knows the customer better, and they make
adjustments to keep the customer happy.  They still get their money where
they can on the Enterprise side, but they let the ISP guys play it a bit
loose.

I'm not necessarily bashing here, that's just how I see it.  3Com
reluctantly deals with ISPs, Cisco embraces them (any revenue is good
revenue!).

And yes, the platform is basically good, especially when you're buying
used.

Charles

--
Charles Sprickman
[email-masked]

---

From: Todd Bertolozzi <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 08:05:03 +0000

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Stephen Rivera
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 10:16 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [USR-TC] Software Agreement- RE

*******And there it is folks....it all comes down to money***************

Todd

Steve (and everyone) -

Joel

---

From: Jeff Mcadams <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:55:59 +0000

Also sprach Stephen Rivera
>You makes some great points here and I completely agree. And I applaud
>your business decision to take the proper measure to get the support
>you needed.  I just wish I could have sold you that support contract :)

>I think if we can continue to discuss the problems in a professional
>matter, (rather than bitching about it) maybe, and this is a long shot
>that we might be able to make changes.Threats to buy Cisco is not going
>to get anything accomplished.

Actually, threats to buy Cisco is *exactly* what will get things
accomplished.  If 3Com realizes that they are loosing customers (and
they *are*) over these policies, then they *should* (unless their
idiotic businessmen, which I don't rule out) find a way to change those
policies while still accomplishing their goals.  They have not done so
in over 4 years now.

>Commworks is not a routing company, they are an access company, they
>dont claim to be Cisco. I personally feel that the comparison of the 2
>is like comparing apples to oranges.

Then, to be honest, you don't have a good understanding of what routing
and access serving is.  An Access Server *is* a router, no two ways
about it.  An Access Server has to do everything that a router does, and
then some.  To be a good Access Server, a device has to first be a good
router.  Also, Cisco is a router company...but they're also an Access
Server company.  The AS5350, AS5400, and AS5850 are everything that the
TC1000 is and more.

>So what do we do from here?

Realize that 3Com management still has their heads in the sand and will
not change their ways short of Chapter 11 and quit buying their products
and start buying Cisco/Patton/Lucent/whoever.  3Com management *will
not* listen to our concerns at this point.  They are aware of them, I
promise you that...from the personal conversation that I had with Irfan
Ali and Al Huefner about 4 years ago, they are aware of our
concerns...these concerns have never been addressed in any shape or
fashion.

>Thanks for not biting my head off and I defintely see your points.

I hope I have not come across as taking your head off...its certainly
not my intent.  I hope, however, that you realize the futility of what
you're trying to do.  I've been around here for many many years at this
point, making the same points over and over, and they have never been
listened to.  There comes a point where you quit beating your head
against the wall.
-- 
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [email-masked]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: (502) 966-3848
IgLou Internet Services                        (800) 436-4456

---

From: Cyrus Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 20:02:41 +0000

What does a service contract cost?
Is everyone paying the same?
Are there deals?

I noticed in the licenses agreement that it can be transferred when
you sell the equipment (I'm not a lawyer) so potentially everyone
could have some sort of licenses?

Any ideas?

---

From: Lewis Bergman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 20:30:05 +0000

> Is everyone paying the same?
Last qoute I got was for about $2300 I think.

The only reason I would renew at this point is better modem performance and 
broader compatability. But, at the same time, I bought a fully loaded TNTMax 
for pretty cheap it works with the K56Flex modems that the TC won't and I get 
16 T's. Not so sure that I need a contract anymore. I also notice that when I 
set the thing up I was able to download v.92 code from lucent withou cost. To 
say the least I was pleasantly surprised.

I still like my TC better (its smaller and has more pretty lights on the 
front). But, I am beginning to wonder if those reasons are enough.
-- 
Lewis Bergman
Texas Communications
4309 Maple St.
Abilene, TX 79602-8044
915-695-6962 ext 115

---

From: Stephen Rivera <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 18:43:07 +0000

based on some postings yesterday I know Source-t is selling the basic 48
port contract for $1370. With my great(yeah right) I can sell it to you for
$2600. As you can see my price for these contract dont compare and I do sell
them. So to answer your question..No not everyone pays the same.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Cyrus Smith
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 10:11 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [USR-TC] Software Agreement- RE

Any ideas?

---

From: Stephen Rivera <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 00:43:01 +0000

Being a long time user of the TC1000 I am sure that you are aware that the
majority of the commwork ports installed are located in most of the largest
CLEC and ISP across the country. For instance AOL, MCI & Ameritech.

I personally would love to know the comparison in ports installed between
the 2. Cisco and Commworks. No one is debating that Cisco is everywhere. But
to think your 1000-5k ports installed is much, you're mistaken. AOL alone
just upgraded and deinstalled over 35k ports. Add the other 2 companies I
mentioned and I am sure combined they are over 200K installed ports.

Then, to be honest, you don't have a good understanding of what routing
and access serving is.  An Access Server *is* a router, no two ways
about it.  An Access Server has to do everything that a router does, and
then some.  To be a good Access Server, a device has to first be a good
router.  Also, Cisco is a router company...but they're also an Access Server
company.  The AS5350, AS5400, and AS5850 are everything that the TC1000 is
and more.

**** Point taken but...the hiper arc is not inteneded to be a backbone type
router. you have to agree with that :) And if you dont you might be the one
that doesnt have a firm grip of routing or the hardware that does it.

****No worries. I appreciate your reply. Maybe we should start a non-profit
org that would lets us all stand together in a professional matter and
address these problems as a group. Rather than a bunch of bitching business
men. I;ll spear head the organization if you guys stand behind me.

---

From: Ronald Kushner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 02:44:10 +0000

Jeff Mcadams wrote:
> accomplished.  

Why make threats? Like Nike says, just do it. I had about 48% of today's
traffic terminated on Cisco gear. That's money 3Com is not getting, and
will never get. The only thing the 3Coms do these days is service
existing customers, growth goes onto the Ciscos. Another ISP I know has
moved about 95% of his ports to Cisco from 3Com.

3Com has no clue, doesn't have a clue it has no clue, and doesn't even
want a clue.

I never really bitched too loudly about the contracts, I just voiced my
dissatisfaction of their software policies with my pocketbook. There
used to be a time where the Cisco modems had issues with about 15% of
new users, but these days it's not even 1/2 of 1 per cent. The only
advantage 3Com had has been closed substantially by Cisco.

-Ron

---

From: pankaj <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 09:00:28 +0000

Seriously , its too big ammount for us ($2600 is around 1.25 lakh
rupees). And nobody feel necessity to pay for bugfixes and software
require to run hardware correctly.

And there has to be exclusive mailing list support from 3com.
Cisco press is great and many more ways, unlike 3com.

-pankaj

---

From: Jeff Mcadams <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:13:10 +0000

>Being a long time user of the TC1000 I am sure that you are aware that
>the majority of the commwork ports installed are located in most of the
>largest CLEC and ISP across the country. For instance AOL, MCI &
>Ameritech.

>I personally would love to know the comparison in ports installed
>between the 2. Cisco and Commworks. No one is debating that Cisco is
>everywhere. But to think your 1000-5k ports installed is much, you're
>mistaken. AOL alone just upgraded and deinstalled over 35k ports. Add
>the other 2 companies I mentioned and I am sure combined they are over
>200K installed ports.

I understand...most everyone on this list is pretty small fry...but we
do still represent revenue that 3Com is forgoing based on their idiotic
policies.

>router. you have to agree with that :)

Oh, absolutely...that's just a matter of hardware scale though, not
software, and since this whole conversation is about software...  ;)
The Arc *could* be a *fantastic* router...I've said that all along, back
when I first started testing with them.  Its got some great
capabilities...a good architecture...its getting so its a bit
under-spec'ed in the memory department...but that's a perennial problem
with routers from all vendors.

Shoot...for a period of time, I gave some thought to using a TC rack
populated with a bunch of ARCs for customer T1 (frame and ATM)
aggregation, as well as potentially ethernet to ethernet routing.  I
don't think I could really get the density high enough to justify it at
this point, but when the Arc first came out, it could have done a pretty
decent job of that.  Interesting thought, isn't it?  :)  If 3Com would
have taken one of my suggestions and used the packet bus of the chassis
as a CDMA/CD type of media for communication in between cards, then it
would have been conceivable to have an ARC NIC with no ethernet ports on
it, allowing higher densities of customer aggregation as well.  Alas,
that idea pretty much bounced off of them.  I thought it was a cool
idea...they apparently either didn't get it, knew of some technical
reason that they couldn't do that, or something else, I don't know.

>****No worries. I appreciate your reply. Maybe we should start a
>non-profit org that would lets us all stand together in a professional
>matter and address these problems as a group. Rather than a bunch of
>bitching business men. I;ll spear head the organization if you guys
>stand behind me.

If you want to start it, I'll certainly take part...but I must admit to
being pessimistic about the likelihood of it actually accomplishing
anything of any significance.

We have banded together (remember the top 10 gripe list?) in the
past...and what changed?  The hold music.  Woo hoo...some accomplishment
there.  :/
-- 
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [email-masked]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: (502) 966-3848
IgLou Internet Services                        (800) 436-4456

---

From: Jeff Mcadams <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:18:32 +0000

Also sprach Ronald Kushner

>Why make threats? Like Nike says, just do it.

You're right, of course.  Just making *empty* threats won't accomplish
anything either.  Which is why I have been open and honest on this list
about demo'ing the Cisco gear...things move slowly around here (oi...one
of my complaints about working at IgLou), but we are moving towards
purchasing Cisco access server gear to replace the 3Com.

>dissatisfaction of their software policies with my pocketbook.

Indeed...ultimately, that's the only reason that 3Com will change their
errant ways, if they lose customers.  The reason that I have been vocal
about it because I had always hoped that 3Com would wake up to the fact
that they're pissing off a significant number of their customers and
change their ways before *I* had to make the jump.  I felt the more
noise that I made about the possibility of us switching, the more weight
it would give...but as Steve pointed out, I am just a small fry in the
overall scheme of things.  I do it anyway thinking maybe I'll be the
straw that broke the camel's back, but knowing that the chances are slim.

>There used to be a time where the Cisco modems had issues with about
>15% of new users, but these days it's not even 1/2 of 1 per cent. The
>only advantage 3Com had has been closed substantially by Cisco.

That's nice to hear about the Cisco actually...that had been my one
point that I had been unsure about the switch to Cisco...I knew that
there had been issues with the Cisco gear on this in the past...nice to
know that its been resolved (for all intents and purposes).  That tidbit
just makes it that much more likely that IgLou will switch.
-- 
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [email-masked]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: (502) 966-3848
IgLou Internet Services                        (800) 436-4456

---

From: Lewis Bergman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:19:34 +0000

> the 2. Cisco and Commworks. No one is debating that Cisco is everywhere.
> But to think your 1000-5k ports installed is much, you're mistaken. AOL
> alone just upgraded and deinstalled over 35k ports. Add the other 2
> companies I mentioned and I am sure combined they are over 200K installed
> ports.
If AOL uses TC1000's then how come (at least in my area) I get people who sign 
up with me from AOL who say "But I could connect to AOL without a problem, 
what is wrong with your service?"

Of coarse AOL probably has more than one type of equipment but I can only 
speak from my experience. And of course, it's my $20,000 piece of gear 's 
fault, not the crappy $5 winmodem gateway or whoever put in your computer.

WHAAAAAA!
Ok, done crying.
-- 
Lewis Bergman
Texas Communications
4309 Maple St.
Abilene, TX 79602-8044
915-695-6962 ext 115

---

From: Lewis Bergman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:27:29 +0000

> advantage 3Com had has been closed substantially by Cisco.
I know people have bragged about Cisco, but I have to tell you. I thought 
Cisco's router pricing and support were lousy. I switched because of it. I 
now an very happy with an Imagestream router that cost me tens of thousands 
less for the 8 T1, dual ethernet, 48 volt model I have. It is so much more 
capable and easier to configure. Comes with free software upgrades for life. 
Has all the routing and firewalling you could ask for.

That is one reason I was sad to hear of the guy's problems with Patton. 
Sounded a lot like that. But, alas, I'll take fewer problems over free 
upgrades. Anyone know if Patton is better now?

Anyway, Just to balance things out, Cisco is far from a great alternative, at 
least in my experience, even at what is supposed to be their core competancy. 
Maybe my experience is atypical though.
-- 
Lewis Bergman
Texas Communications
4309 Maple St.
Abilene, TX 79602-8044
915-695-6962 ext 115

---

From: Lewis Bergman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 14:33:41 +0000

> >only advantage 3Com had has been closed substantially by Cisco.
Do they have v.92 stuff on those RAS?
-- 
Lewis Bergman
Texas Communications
4309 Maple St.
Abilene, TX 79602-8044
915-695-6962 ext 115

---

From: Terry Kennedy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 09:40:05 +0000

"If AOL uses TC1000's then how come (at least in my area) I get people
who sign up with me from AOL who say "But I could connect to AOL without
a problem, what is wrong with your service?"

This is a good point and I have personally dealt with this over a period
of 5 years now. Not just AOL, but earthlink and whoever. Any know what
makes a difference between the small guy (1000-1500 ports) and the big
guy (AOL and company)when it comes to connections? Namely staying
connected but also connection rates?

Terry Kennedy 
OlyPen

---

From: Todd Bertolozzi <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 15:53:24 +0000

Now....from my understanding, and this is a MAJOR point the 3com contracts
work a bit differently then what is being presented on this list.
Please....someone tell me I'm wrong, but unless they changed their policies
without me knowing I believe the contracts cost a little more then what you
all are thinking:

The price of the contract is determined based on the total number of ports
terminating on 3com gear in your WHOLE network. Now...I don't know about
everyone else on this list but just a rough guess of the number of ports we
have would be around 40,000 ports on 3com gear.

So....40,000 / 48 ports = 833.33 x 2600 = $2,166,666.00

That's a bit more then I or my company want to spend on a service contract
especially since we pretty much just want software updates as the 1 time I
paid per hour to use their technical support....I found out how little they
really know about their own gear.

Todd

---

From: Jeff Mcadams <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 16:02:10 +0000

Also sprach Todd Bertolozzi
>Now....from my understanding, and this is a MAJOR point the 3com
>contracts work a bit differently then what is being presented on this
>list.  Please....someone tell me I'm wrong, but unless they changed
>their policies without me knowing I believe the contracts cost a little
>more then what you all are thinking:

>The price of the contract is determined based on the total number of
>ports terminating on 3com gear in your WHOLE network. Now...I don't
>know about everyone else on this list but just a rough guess of the
>number of ports we have would be around 40,000 ports on 3com gear.

>So....40,000 / 48 ports = 833.33 x 2600 = $2,166,666.00

We don't have that many ports, but you're basically correct.  The thing
that *really* makes them bad though is that it doesn't distinguish
between *types* of ports.  For example, a *majority* of our ports are
still quad cards, which are no longer supported, but we still have to
pay for them as if they were.  :/
-- 
Jeff McAdams                            Email: [email-masked]
Head Network Administrator              Voice: (502) 966-3848
IgLou Internet Services                        (800) 436-4456

---

From: Support <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 16:18:24 +0000

Hi Lewis.  I think I'm the PATTON guy you were referring to....  I can tell
you from my experience, and those on the [email-masked] list is almost
universally great.  There are essentially no complaints across all the
users.  Occasionally you'll get someone with a beef somewhere, but then they
RECIEVE a call FROM Patton.  (read:  Patton actually calls them) and they
resolve the problem.  Patton is fantastic, on a company standpoint, their
policies, the individual employees willingness to help and the product
itself.  Software updates are free for life, period.  Telephone support is
free for life, period.  Mailing list support is free for life, period.  The
hardware / firmware is stable as well.  The people running the last
production code (version 3.3.6) V.90 code from December have essentially
zero problems.

The only problems we had on our evaluation unit was that we were trying
their V.92 code, and it's just not ready for prime time.  It's still beta
code and there is no firm date in sight for a real release.  Even though, it
still worked pretty well for the most part.  We ran it for 87 days without a
reboot / lockup / or any substantial problem, except that the beta code
didn't support some modems & some features, so we found connection problems
with some V.92 client modem, but mostly the $25 softmodems.

For us, the real problem was the lack of MPPC or STAC compression as well as
the unfinished state of the V.92 software.  We had an Evaluation unit and it
just came down to us hitting the pay or return deadline.  I wasn't prepared
to pay with the uncertainty of the V.92 situation, so we returned it.  I
know it seems strange for a product we decided not to buy at this time, but
I give it my highest recommendations in all areas, except of course for
those couple week points which were 'deal breakers' for us.

Todd Chamberlain
[email-masked]

----- Original Message ----- EDITED FOR BREVITY
From: "Lewis Bergman" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 8:22 AM

---

From: Ed Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 15:10:24 +0000

Jeff McAdams wrote:
"The reason that I have been vocal about it because I had always hoped
that 3Com would wake up to the fact that they're pissing off a
significant number of their customers and change their ways before *I*
had to make the jump."

Yep... they pissed off these 3500+ ports years ago. We are simply
waiting for the right OUT and we are gone. 3com is filled with empty
promises, no customer care and lack of customer support. We get MUCH
better support with our Cisco Routers... and the sad thing is we have
spent 20x more with 3com. 

Ed Taylor

---

From: Charles Sprickman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 07:44:19 +0000

> a problem, what is wrong with your service?"

Simple, AOL is not a single vendor company.  At their POP at 32 Old Slip
in NYC, they have a large number of Ascend ports (TNTs and some older
Max's) as well as a few cabinets of loaded TC1000's w/DSP cards.

I remember back when David Bolen from ANS/AOL used to post here, he
mentioned that since they have control of the client and where it will
dial, they push you towards whatever number is getting you the best
connection.  Apparently they track connect rates and disconnect reasons
(and likely lots of other stuff) to determine what the best local number
is for you.  Not only do they have diversity in equipment, but also in who
provides dialtone.  In NYC alone I know they use Focal, ATT/TCG, and the
Level3 outsourced modem product.  I assume they use others, but that's
what I've seen.

It's a luxury a small (or even not so small) provider can't afford...

I'd have to assume they also use the aggregate of all this data to decide
who to purchase ras gear from; if any particular vendor is getting their
subs the worst performance, they probably get passed over in the next
go-round...

Charles

---

From: Stephen Rivera <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 03:23:23 +0000

So I see we have that list moving again. Thats great...And I was able to
make some good contacts when I was out there. So from here I want to put
together a link on my home page for people to sign up for this non-profit,
no-fee associationasically a compalint group that I can use to open the
doors a little more at 3com. I think this can  do it. THey can handle the
big accounts that seem to be their concern and I will combine the rest into
a single voice.

do you have any scripts or ideas for a page that can collect standard info?
company name, address, phone, fax, tC1000 ports, specified in quad, hiper
and the other cards.

Letstalk to today. I'd like your input. I have some other ideas for service
that I would like to run past you. Afterall you are the main tech I would
want to use. If thats ok with you.