My 2 cents! I can't honestly agree with you guys! I haven't actually timed the response time from a submitted question to an answer, but I am reasonably sure it has not been a week on any one question. SuSE support has even given me help on things that don't actually deal with installation problems and have been very prompt with their replies. I can think of one just recently dealing with an Nvidia graphics card update. I am glad to hear also that Linux is showing up more in the stores there, I wish it were so in the USA. Finding Linux anything in most stores is unlikely yet. I am sure they are busy, considering the many updates of KDE seen recently on their site as well as getting v7.3 ready for us. I can only offer you this, use the list for your questions as that is what it was created to do. I didn't know about it for a couple of months after getting my SuSE, but it has been invaluable for help and hand holding learning this great new OS! I also have found it to be one of the most user friendly distros available. For a desktop replacement, it is an install and go pretty much. The biggest problems I have seen are just hardware incompatibilities and if you understood PC hardware, you would better understand the problems associated with it. Plus users become so excited to be using a good OS for a change, they begin to tinker, which causes further problems, usually this list can help with. I find the Linux community in general one of the best groups of people I have ever worked with on something. Thanks SuSE and SuSE users worldwide for having and being the best distro available! SuSE Rocks! end of line Tracer ------------------------------ On Friday 21 September 2001 01:55 am, Timothy Mason, babbled about:

Hello

My own experience is rather less dramatic than is Hing's : my initial call for help, posted last Sunday, lead to a request for further information, which arrived yesterday. This is certainly far slower than one could hope. One wonders what the 90 days free support really means, once divided by turn-around time.

On top of this, the higher profile of Linux in general, the recent antics of Microsoft, and the proselytism of some sections of the Linux community, have all lead to the deeper penetration of the market. In stores such as the Fnac - not a 'geek' hangout, by any means - gaily coloured boxes of different distributions of Linux are in great prominence - often, like Suse, pushing the ease with which their particular system can be installed and maintained. This means that people - like me - who are not regular programmers, and who have usually had nothing more complex to do than to click on an icon or two, are finding themselves confronted with a rather more formidable system. This, I would surmise, leads to overload of such support staff as has been maintained.

"Some OS are 'user friendly' ; Linux is expert friendly' proclaimed someone on this list. This clashes with the blurb on the Suse box. It does seem that the system has become more usable for the un-initiated since last I tried it : I have been able to install it on my portable with no trouble at all (it's the Packard-Bell desk-top that freezes at the first screen). Sledging my way through the documents, I find some leads that suggest to me that my problem (like Hung's) just may be something to do with my DVD player. But if the Suse people don't manage to answer my request fairly soon, I will have to come to this forum instead - and I don't see why you should spend your time doing what Suse ought to be doing..

So I think that, unfortunately, Linux is making it into the mainstream at a very bad time. Newbies will encounter frustrations that cannot be quickly answered, both because the system is more complex than those who live with it ever realize, and because the economic downturn will lead - has lead - to glitches in the support system.

Best wishes

-- ---KMail 1.3.1--- SuSE Linux v7.2--- Registered Linux User #225206 /tracerb@sprintmail.com/ *Magic Page Products* *Team Amiga* http://home.sprintmail.com/~tracerb

Please don't get me wrong : I'm not complaining, simply observing what's happening. Compared with the people at SoftQuad, for example, who got back to me almost directly - we exchanged two e-mails each in the first day - the four days did seem a little long. Once contact with Suse had been made, exchange became quite frequent - although the problem still has not been solved. As I did manage to install without problems on the Toshiba portable, I have been able to begin to appreciate Suse's offering - so far, so good (although I don't have an internet connection on that machine) - things have certainly got better since I first tried Linux. And yes - here in France, the Linux OS is being marketed in the mainstream - but there are few shrink-wrapped boxes offering programmes. But that isn't the way it works, is it?- Best wishes -- Timothy Mason http://perso.club-internet.fr/tmason/

By biggest problem with support being just help with "_getting_the_basic_system_functioning_" is that it misses upgrades completely. Both a co-worker and I had problems after upgrading. SuSE denied that their upgrade process was the problem and refused to help my co-worker. In my case, the timestamp on /etc/fstab was in the middle of the upgrade and three entries for VFAT filesystems were changed from auto to noauto. I have used these filesystems for at least six months with VMWare and they have been automatically from the beginning. Although it makes sense that these aren't automounted during the install. However, I reported this a a bug. SuSE support said the fstab was not touched during the upgrade and the support rep was "annoyed" that I was not "prepared to pay for the product although I am asking for support." Granted I was using my co-worker's copy and I even told them that, but I don't see a need to pay to report a bug. Further, the comment about being "annoyed" was completely unprofessional and the only response to the comment was that the "economic life of the company" depended on them deciding on what services to provide at what cost. They seem to have forgotten that particularly in the Linux market, the "economic life of the company" depends more on customer loyalty. Being press, I have gotten free copies of SuSE since 5.x. This time I decided to save SuSE some money and use my co-worker's copy. Even through I also get Caldera and RedHat for free, my loyalty is still with SuSE. I also manage the hotline for a company that develops software for online brokers and did tech support for several years, so I know all about decided who gets what support and at what price. However, it **seems** to me that SuSE listens more to the bean counters than their loyal supporters. My loyalty hasn't changed because of this incident, as I know that one twit in support does not represent the whole company. Plus, most everyone else has been/is really helpful. regards, jimmo Martin Webster wrote:

On Friday 21 September 2001 4:18 pm, you wrote:

...

Please don't get me wrong : I'm not complaining, simply observing what's happening. Compared with the people at SoftQuad, for example, who got back to me almost directly - we exchanged two e-mails each in the first day - the four days did seem a little long. Once contact with Suse had been made, exchange became quite frequent - although the problem still has not been solved.

As I did manage to install without problems on the Toshiba portable, I have been able to begin to appreciate Suse's offering - so far, so good (although I don't have an internet connection on that machine) - things have certainly got better since I first tried Linux.

And yes - here in France, the Linux OS is being marketed in the mainstream - but there are few shrink-wrapped boxes offering programmes. But that isn't the way it works, is it?-

Some interesting points by all. I have to say that my experience has been pretty good; last time turn around was less than a day. We should also remember that unlike Microsoft SuSE offers installation support for free to registered users for _getting_the_basic_system_functioning_.

I'm not suprised that Hing's e-mail hasn't got the result he wanted. For one, there are two many questions; an e-mail to support should address a single issue. Also, dual-booting is not really covered by the support arrangements but is in the manual (which you should read first). The problems with the DVD-ROM could well be hardware related but scarse information was provided.

One last point, you will always get a reply from installtion support even if it's only an automated message with the ticket number. See http://support.suse.de/en/services/faq-support.html.

M

Martin Webster wrote:

Alas customer loyalty isn't enough on its own (that said, I'm not sure that receiving free copies of SuSE counts as loyalty anyway). The Linux community also needs cash to sustain itself. Do you think that you're entitled to support that you haven't paid for? And were you really reporting a bug or just hoping they would fix _your_ problem for free?

First, it's simply the nature of press. Although I neither demand nor expect it always, I am disappointed when it doesn't happen. Hardware companies "donate" hardware to me and I talk about them in my books and articles. The same with other software vendors (Adobe, Corel, RedHat, Caldera, to name a few). They get free (usually good) press and they can write it off as a marketing expense. That's the nature of the business. When someone reads one of my books or articles and then asks my opinion, I am not going to tell them that the vendor who just donated software to me are all incompetent bozos, despite a few who really might be. That's loyalty. This part of the business hasn't changed and probably won't too fast in the near future because the companies typically gain much more than the cost of the product (or even support). As for _my_ problem, I really don't need SuSE's (or anyone else's) help to edit /etc/fstab. That's what it took to get things back to the way they were. So, *no*, I was not reporting the bug just to get free support.

It's all to easy to say that this is a bug or that's a bug when things don't work out quite how you'd expect. Isn't it a bit arrogant to tell the _expert_ that they have a bug when you don't have the know how to explain what the cause is either?

Maybe. On the other hand, typically front-liners are not "experts". They *might* be "knowledgeable", but particularly in a free support environments (like SuSE install support), it is not really cost effective to have the "experts" on the front-line. In a front-line/ back-line model, like most low-end support the front-liners filter the hard calls for the "experts". In a touch and hold model, the first person who handles is the owner and is generally better skilled. I have never needed SuSE support, so I cannot say if the use FL/BL or T&H. Sun and HP use FL/BL, which seems to be the most common for low-end support (as I said). If we were to pay more money, we would get a dedicated analyst, which is simply a modified T&H. You typically pay more to get directly to the experts. I have talked to two other people that I would definately consider Linux experts. Neither have an explanation other than the upgrade routine. I start up VMware and have access to the three VFAT partitions. It then occurs to me that I had planned to do the upgrade to 7.2. I do the upgrade, start VMware and my three partitions are not there. I check the mount table and they are not mounted. I check fstab and the timestamp is about 20-30 minutes prior, which was right in the middle of the upgrade. I look in fstab and the three VFAT filesystems have been changed from auto to noauto. I don't believe in magic and I did not change them. (I said most of this in my original post) So, my conclusion is that the upgrade routine did it. Like Sherlock Holmes: eliminate the impossible and whatever is left over, however improbable, *must* be the truth. I did not change it and the only other possibility is that it was the upgrade. Since I have eliminated the impossible and although it seems improbably that SuSE would do something like that, it *must* be the truth. Hey, if you can provide a plausable explanation, I'll buy you dinner (if you ever get to Germany). Sorry, Martin, but I think your comment about it being "a bit arrogant to tell the _expert_..." is a little silly. How often do people call the so-called experts at Microsoft to report bugs that they cannot explain, only prove. In this case, I **can** explain it. SuSE is not going to install on a mounted VFAT that sits under /windows. Therefore, they deactivate them (set it to noauto) during the upgrade, but just forgot to set it back to auto when they were done. To me that's a bug. Since you made the comment, what was it in my original post that makes you say I "don't have the know how to explain what the cause is"? Considering the fact that in my original post I did say that it made sense not to mount them during the install, it seemed pretty obvious that I do have the "know how" to explain it. In that case, I find your comment a baseless, personal attack on my professional compentence. I sincerely hope that was not your intent, but I do find it hard to read anything else from that comment. Regards, jimmo

On Sunday 23 September 2001 15:22 pm, James Mohr wrote:

When someone reads one of my books or articles and then asks my opinion, I am not going to tell them that the vendor who just donated software to me are all incompetent bozos, despite a few who really might be. That's loyalty. This part of the business hasn't changed and probably won't too fast in the near future because the companies typically gain much more than the cost of the product (or even support).

Uhhh I would hope you would be truthful about the situation. To do otherwise is to lose confidence with your readers..... No? -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Bruce S. Marshall bmarsh@bmarsh.com Bellaire, MI 09/23/01 17:58 + +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "Welcome to the Microsoft tour. Please don't feed the lawyers."

On Sunday 23 September 2001 7:22 pm, James Mohr wrote:

Martin Webster wrote:

...

Alas customer loyalty isn't enough on its own (that said, I'm not sure that receiving free copies of SuSE counts as loyalty anyway). The Linux community also needs cash to sustain itself. Do you think that you're entitled to support that you haven't paid for? And were you really reporting a bug or just hoping they would fix _your_ problem for free?

First, it's simply the nature of press. Although I neither demand nor expect it always, I am disappointed when it doesn't happen. Hardware companies "donate" hardware to me and I talk about them in my books and articles. The same with other software vendors (Adobe, Corel, RedHat, Caldera, to name a few). They get free (usually good) press and they can write it off as a marketing expense. That's the nature of the business. When someone reads one of my books or articles and then asks my opinion, I am not going to tell them that the vendor who just donated software to me are all incompetent bozos, despite a few who really might be. That's loyalty. This part of the business hasn't changed and probably won't too fast in the near future because the companies typically gain much more than the cost of the product (or even support).

As for _my_ problem, I really don't need SuSE's (or anyone else's) help to edit /etc/fstab. That's what it took to get things back to the way they were. So, *no*, I was not reporting the bug just to get free support.

...

It's all to easy to say that this is a bug or that's a bug when things don't work out quite how you'd expect. Isn't it a bit arrogant to tell the _expert_ that they have a bug when you don't have the know how to explain what the cause is either?

Maybe. On the other hand, typically front-liners are not "experts". They *might* be "knowledgeable", but particularly in a free support environments (like SuSE install support), it is not really cost effective to have the "experts" on the front-line. In a front-line/ back-line model, like most low-end support the front-liners filter the hard calls for the "experts". In a touch and hold model, the first person who handles is the owner and is generally better skilled. I have never needed SuSE support, so I cannot say if the use FL/BL or T&H. Sun and HP use FL/BL, which seems to be the most common for low-end support (as I said). If we were to pay more money, we would get a dedicated analyst, which is simply a modified T&H. You typically pay more to get directly to the experts.

I have talked to two other people that I would definately consider Linux experts. Neither have an explanation other than the upgrade routine. I start up VMware and have access to the three VFAT partitions. It then occurs to me that I had planned to do the upgrade to 7.2. I do the upgrade, start VMware and my three partitions are not there. I check the mount table and they are not mounted. I check fstab and the timestamp is about 20-30 minutes prior, which was right in the middle of the upgrade. I look in fstab and the three VFAT filesystems have been changed from auto to noauto. I don't believe in magic and I did not change them. (I said most of this in my original post) So, my conclusion is that the upgrade routine did it.

Like Sherlock Holmes: eliminate the impossible and whatever is left over, however improbable, *must* be the truth. I did not change it and the only other possibility is that it was the upgrade. Since I have eliminated the impossible and although it seems improbably that SuSE would do something like that, it *must* be the truth. Hey, if you can provide a plausable explanation, I'll buy you dinner (if you ever get to Germany).

Sorry, Martin, but I think your comment about it being "a bit arrogant to tell the _expert_..." is a little silly. How often do people call the so-called experts at Microsoft to report bugs that they cannot explain, only prove. In this case, I **can** explain it. SuSE is not going to install on a mounted VFAT that sits under /windows. Therefore, they deactivate them (set it to noauto) during the upgrade, but just forgot to set it back to auto when they were done. To me that's a bug.

Since you made the comment, what was it in my original post that makes you say I "don't have the know how to explain what the cause is"? Considering the fact that in my original post I did say that it made sense not to mount them during the install, it seemed pretty obvious that I do have the "know how" to explain it. In that case, I find your comment a baseless, personal attack on my professional compentence. I sincerely hope that was not your intent, but I do find it hard to read anything else from that comment.

I think you're over reacting a little here. It was you afterall who publically directed critism ("[he] was completely unprofessional") at a SuSE employee. Furthermore, you haven't convinced me that there is a bug; software that does not display a characteristic that you'd expect to see does not necessarily constitute a bug. And providing an explanation is not the same as identifying the cause... Anyway bug reports should be sent to feedback@suse.de. I apologise if I've caused you any grief. That was not my intention. M

James Mohr wrote:

Oranges and apples. I have proof/evidence of his unprofessional behaviour: the comment. There was no evidence or indication of any lack of technical or professional compentence. I manage a hotline, I am writing a book on the subject and I would consider myself an expert in the field. In my professional experience, every hotline manager would say that telling a customer you are annoyed, whether justified or not is unprofessional. Maybe you tolerate comments like that, I don't and would never allow one of my employees to behave that way toward a customer, whether or not they actually paid for support. Saying that I "don't have the know how to explain what the cause is either" is completely baseless. The cause **was** the upgrade, regardless of the reason.

The fstab is a not so unimportant file and it **should** be common knowledge to SuSE that people do, in fact, make changes to it based on their own invididual needs. Making significant changes to an important system file and neither backing up the file or saying that the change was made could have some serious effects on the system. IMHO that's a bug. At the very least it is not something I would expect from a company that is trying to market itself as a business solution.

It was the feedback address that the original "bug" report was sent to and where the IMHO unprofessional comment came from. That is, the place that was annoyed that I didn't pay for the priviledge of reporting a (IMHO) bug.

It's clearly in the interests of SuSE to encourage bug reporting and suggestions for improvements through the feedback channel. At the same time I can see the problem they face: lots of the messages they get are technically misinformed or requests for help from people who are no longer entitled to support. My experience is that many of my messages get no response beyond the automated one -- even a recent message where I not only reported a bug but provided the fix for it. I agree that it's inappropriate for the response person to express annoyance. If he thinks your problem isn't a bug, then he should either just say that in a nonjudgmental way or say nothing at all. Paul