| June 13, 2001 | 02 05 04 61 01061301 |
Mr. Einar Ekholm
Technician
v-1eekh@mssupport.microsoft.com
Windows 2000 Support
Applications and Performance
Microsoft Corporation
16011 NE 36th Way
Box 97017
Redmond, WA 98073 9717
| Subject: | DOSX Case SRX010207601263 |
Dear Einar,
Thanks for your letter this morning responding to the voice mail yesterday, requesting status on subject problem. Your letter saying....
....needs additional attention for the following reasons.
Joe reported on March 10, 2001 that he is unable to provide a solution.
We have sent letters and left messages asking about follow up, but have not heard back, for example on March 13, 2001.
Welch is not a computer expert. We rely on Microsoft and other vendors to provide serviceable products. Our letter to Microsoft on March 13, reported that we were able to clear one of the problems reported to you on February 7, 2001. This took 2 or 3 weeks of work on our part. The DOSX problem, however, is of a different character, and so MS should take responsibility for fixing it, because customers do not have access to the MS code that enables correction. Only Microsoft can do this.
Steve Balmer reported on May 10, 2001 that Microsoft's goal is to improve productivity for customers. Your letter on February 9, 2001 promised to meet this commitment by solving the DOSX problem to the customer's satisfaction. We do not expect MS to satisfy unreasonable and unnecessary requests. But performance that impacts productivity justifies correcting defects.
A big part of productivity is reliability. In this case, DOSX is not performing reliably. This is not an anomaly for a single customer who has odd equipment or is less skilled with computers than other MS customers. We have received a number of inquiries from around the world about the DOSX problem, asking if we got a solution, for example, on April 23, 2001.
Can you, therefore, check with Joe, and, if he is still stuck for a solution, then notify the MS engineers to correct the DOSX defect. Please submit a copy of the notice so we are informed on progress.
Here is another performance issue you might comment about.
We installed W2K because W98 was not performing reliably. Our computer vendor reported that W98 had known problems, and recommended we change to W2K, so we did. For the first number of months W2K has worked well, and in fact has largely solved the prior problems with W98. We have only had one or two blue screen crashes since March 2000. On the other hand, in the past few months, it has begun taking W2K longer and longer to re-boot and to shut down. This is particularly problematic on our notebook computer. If we are on BART or in a similar situation where we have to shut down, delayed shut down can become traumatic. So, this goes to productivity, which Balmer cited is a Microsoft concern in his interview on May 10.
Is there an issue of shut down with W2K? Sometime ago there was a report that W2K needs to be reinstalled every few months to re-set itself. You can see from our record on February 2, 2001 that this takes a lot of work over several days, because a lot of software has to be configured. I actually enjoy installing the operating system, from the work you requested on February 14, when this was done about 30 times. In that case, the skill level goes up, and it becomes very easy. However, we cannot really afford to take days off work every few months to re-install W2K. Is there another solution?
We notified Microsoft on February 7, 2001 about several problems under subject case number. This cost $200 or $300, just to visit with someone about the problems. Eventually, you took command, and wrote a letter on February 9, 2001 promising to fix the DOSX problem to the customer's satisfaction. As seen herein, this matter is still pending. The other two problems were never addressed by Microsoft. Does the customer get a refund, if satisfaction is not achieved? What is the procedure for addressing this?
Sincerely,
THE WELCH COMPANY
Rod Welch
rowelch@attglobal.net