HP3000-L Archives

April 1998, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Lars Appel <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lars Appel <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 1 Apr 1998 18:11:15 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
At 12:33 30.03.1998 -0500, Jim wrote:
>I have opened an HPRC call for this, so while I am waiting on a
>call-back, can anyone give some idea of what's happening here?

Okay, only speaking for myself but with a little RC engineer bias,
of course... I have seen quite a number of postings in the past
that started with such a phrase or similar wording.

This makes me wonder...

Does the "let's better ask HP RC and 3000-L at the same time" give
an indication that you do not trust the HP RC to call back within
reasonable time (depending on the priority/criticality you indicated
when starting the RC call) or to be able to deliver a reasonable
solution?

When there is a helpful response from HP3000-L then the RC engineer
will basically have wasted valuable time he could have been spending
helping other customers... So would it probably be reasonable to ask
HP3000-L first and call the HP RC later on, if still needed?

Hey, not trying to sound offensive... just curious...

Lars.

(yes, I admit working at an HP RC... but only speak for myself here)

ATOM RSS1 RSS2