"dre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I've personally never experienced any problems with the TAC.
> It is often that I get a front line person that has no idea
> what I'm talking about, and sometimes they try to help anyways,
Andre..
The 'front line' person you get is the CRC agent (Customer Response Center).
They are not engineers/technicians. However, they are encouraged, and
trained, to field as much of the problem as is possible for them. Their
efforts off-load a great deal of the calls that otherwise would be going to
the TAC engineers. Leaving TAC free (or reasonably so) to put more effort
into handling their already heavy technical related call volume. Another
benefit, is that it gives the CRC agent, some experience into the technical
side of the Cisco world, and some of them progress to move to TAC.. and
begin their own learning & certification track. It's a win for TAC in their
assists, a win for the CRC in their growth, and since Cisco support is
considered hands-down the best.. it's a win for Cisco as a whole.
> Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone
bad"...
Bob..
I can definitely relate to the story.. but do keep in mind, that TAC was
100% on the ball in taking care of the problem. Unfortunately, this sounds
like a shipping related problem. I'd also suspect some mishandling at the
fulfilment docks. I can further tell you, that issues like that are followed
up on internally.
The worst case I dealt with.. was a call I fielded to a customer who said
his product (don't recall what it was) looked like it had been beaten up &
thrown around. Of course, I felt he was exaggerating, and figured the unit
was a refurbed product with some cosmetic damage. Well.. he was quite
descriptive of the damage.. which totally shocked me to think a Cisco
product arived in the condition he stated. I asked him to send me a picture
of the box & the shipping it came in.
I have no idea who was smoking what that day in shipping, but the product
was in a shoddy cardboard carton, and the casing truly was crushed in on one
side and gouged severly on 2 others. Needless to say, it was an overside
wrecked paperweight.
He was of course sent a new replacement immediately. Unfortunately, I never
did find out what happened to create this problem in the 1st place. And I
definitely tried ;-)
--
----------------------------------------------
| __O_/ ____
| |___, _ |CCIE
| \ _ |CCNP Never stop climbing!
--> | ./ |CCNA - Stephen E. Hildenbrand
----------------------------------------------
"dre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:94lis6$icg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bob Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Just curious about other peoples experiences with TAC on products "gone
> > bad"...
>
> > 1) Get call while almost in bed at 9:30 PM
> > 2) 3548XL GigE interface goes down...
>
> The problem here was that you are using 3548XL switches...
> if you were using a modular chassis with redundant
> everything (i.e. 6500 w/ dual PSs, SUPs, et al), you
> probably wouldn't be worried about your 3548XL. Not
> to mention that the MTBF numbers on the XL series
> suck in comparison to the 6000/6500.
>
> > I was lucky as the first unit worked (though it's fan did not) and did
not
> > over heat (mainly due to it's location)... Had there been cooling
problems I
> > would have yanked a fan off one of the other units (though as the part
was
> > not a "service item" TAC did not support such creativeness)..
> > Just curious as to what anyone elses TAC horror stories have been like?
>
> I've personally never experienced any problems with the TAC.
> It is often that I get a front line person that has no idea
> what I'm talking about, and sometimes they try to help anyways,
> but after I explain to them that I would like it escalated,
> they do it. Good team of people, IMHO. Best tech-support ever.
>
> It sounds like your problems were not even TAC related, more
> like shipping and receiving problems (UPS, anyone?). So be
> more careful when trying to pin the blame on a tech-support
> department, especially the Cisco Technical Assistence Center.
> They were doing their jobs just fine.
>
> -dre
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
