We also become tired waiting for Lucent to fix their modem
problems with the PM3. Can anyone give us an update
on when we can expect to get our hands on a new and hopefully
better working modem code for the PM3?? I do not need 3.9,
I simply want a 3.8 working comos.
Christian
At 03:48 AM 4/8/99 , you wrote:
>We have been evaluating for 30 days, Assured Access x1000 chasis with 96
modems on 4 PRI's here in New Hampshire! They are sitting next to PM3's and
the customer's who were having problems before, are not having anymore and
we are getting less complaints now!
>
>I also can do much more with this box (for my needs) than I can with PM3!
It is also cheaper as well!
>
>Anybody is interested in eval units, can get them for 30 days as well!
>
>Gent
>Metro2000.Net
>
>
>
>At 05:29 PM 4/3/99 -0600, you wrote:
>>> This is my take on the whole thing.. The fact that it works for MOST
>>> people shows to me that the code obviously works. If the code was bad or
>>> at fault here, we would ALL be having problems, therefore I can conclude
>>> this is not the sole cause here.
>>
>> Sometimes it's the 1% of the people that's persistent that finds the
>>root of the problem. I understand perfectly that in the perfect
>>environment the PM3 is probably perfect. However what I am asserting is
>>that in the real-world you're never going to get that perfect environment
>>and I don't think the PM3 deals with some variations very well. Just
>>because your PM3 works well enough for you in your environment doesn't
>>mean that it's working well enough for me in my environment. And yes,
>>some of us are actively investigating other vendors' equipment.
>>
>>> Most of us have a technical background, very related to scientific. Take
>>> a look at this in that light. You say your compeitor gets clean connects
>>> on his equipment. Has it occured to you that it is possible his line it
>>> set up different, or his copper segment is cleaner?
>>
>> Has it occurred to you that many of so called "whiners" have a technical
>>background as well? I will go out on a limb and say that I probably have
>>*more* of a technical background than you do, but I am not trying to get
>>into a pissing contest here and certainly I wouldn't be ignorant enough
>>to say that automatically means any of my assertions is more valid than
>>yours. If a customer calls and says he's having problems - I don't ask
>>whether he's got a degree or not - I evaluate the evidence he has presented
>>and try to take an educated guess.
>>
>>> Every problem we have expiereinced has been solveable with a little bit of
>>> homework on the tech's end, and an init string or driver update.
>>
>> Nobody ever said we aren't doing this.
>>
>>> Please, kill the whining thread. Maybe someone should email lucent and
>>> request a portmaster-whiners mailing list.
>>
>> If you don't like it, don't read it.
>>
>> Tim
>>-
>>To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
>>'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
>>Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 2000 Internet Services http://www.Metro2000.Net
> 1 (603) 623-2002 Fax: 1 (603) 647-7576
> Serving Northeast in NH, MA, ME, RI, CT, NY
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Affiliation given for identification not representation
>-
>To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
>'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
>Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
>
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>