From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 09:26:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 09:26:40 -0400 Received: from tmr-02.dsl.thebiz.net ([216.238.38.204]:14355 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 09:26:39 -0400 Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 09:23:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Davidsen To: Daniel Egger cc: Anton Altaparmakov , Thunder from the hill , venom@sns.it, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: IBM Desktar disk problem? In-Reply-To: <1025883147.17269.24.camel@sonja.de.interearth.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5 Jul 2002, Daniel Egger wrote: > This is unacceptable; if my problem is really fixable by a firmware > upgrade IBM should have pushed this very upgrade publically after they > started to learn about the problem. Saying "Hey, BTW: if you had this > firmware version you would never have experienced your data loss" is > a very strong argument to never buy any IBM hardware again. Not so. More people would mess up the firmware upgrade and destroy drives which were working (for them) without error than would be helped. Two old adages apply here, "first, do no harm," and "if it ain't broken don't fix it." I never upgrade firmware unless I have a problem or need a new capability, new firmware can have new bugs. > Still, the techsupport insisted on a software problem and didn't mention > a firmware upgrade; up to now I didn't even knew such a thing exists. > And letting customers lowlevel-format a drive, restore their data, > and experience the same problem again a week later is anything but > professional. With that I *totally* agree, tech support should be on top of this. -- bill davidsen CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.