Feedback
1748140 Members
3773 Online
108758 Solutions
New Discussion

Re: NO satisfied with the this new ITRC

 
maf
Valued Contributor

Re: NOT satisfied with the this new ITRC

Would it be too difficult to provide a link to the migrated post on the 

"ITRC redirect announcement"

page? Sure, over time google reindexes, but until then this is purely annoying.

 

Also, Google is not the only way to get here. Surely everybody has emails containing links to the original itrc forum.  Browser history, Web page scraps, Tab sessions, external crossreferences - all these are broken.

 

 

BGroot
Esteemed Contributor

Re: NO satisfied with the this new ITRC

Ajdin,

 

Thanks for your feedback. I understand where you are coming from. As I mentioned we will be evaluating the situation in a few months, so I hope you can have some patience with us until we make the decision. We also will be asking our members opinion in this matter.

 

What you could do in the mean time is to subscribe to both forums * click on subscribe at a board level" and get a summary of new threads on a daily or weekly basis. That way you don't have to look through the boards to see what is new unless you want to search for a specific topic. Just a thought.

 

Greetings,

 

B

George Glynn
Advisor

Re: NO satisfied with the this new ITRC

Is it really possible that no one involved with this enormous project at HP realized before the new community site was put into production--or really, way, way earlier, in the development and conception stage of the process--that this was going to be a gigantic problem? If so, it shows a tremendous lack of foresight and common sense on the part of the project managers and lead developers.  If not, that means y'all realized it but didn't actually care, which almost, but not quite, worse.

 

Bottom line: this should have been planned for from the get-go, and the transparent redirection from the old URLs should have been an integral component of the new site.  As many others have pointed out, not having this not only breaks search results from all outside search engines, it destroys links between old forum posts embedded in the body of the posts, which is, in fact, worse.  A lot of people really dropped the ball here, but given the status of modern corporate culture, I doubt anyone will suffer any repercussions for it, so it's party time!

John O'Neill_6
Regular Advisor

Re: NO satisfied with the this new ITRC

I demand (as someone who has invested literally hundreds of thousands of dollars into HP equipment and services) that the entire team of people responsible for this travesty of a website be sacked.

 

Odds are that HP have 'offshored and outsourced' this new forum to some 'Web 2.0' start-up and have washed their hands of it.

 

HP are really starting to slip in my view, this week we find out that faulty memory modules in servers are deemed 'user replaceable parts'... Really!?

 

Be careful HP... if you keep devaluing your brand like this, then people like me (who make the purchasing decisions) will soon decide that the premium paid for the HP gear is not worth it and we'll start looking at DELL.

 

That's right.. DELL.

 

-John O'Neill

Stephan.
Honored Contributor

Re: NO satisfied with the this new ITRC

Just make sure that Dell will not offer you the same "service"

 

http://support.dell.com/support/topics/global.aspx/support/csr/cust_replaceable_parts?c=us&l=en&s=gen

 

That is how it works, everything on hardware should get cheaper and cheaper and at some point the costs must be saved ... which does not mean that I like it.

 

My 2 cent,

Stephan

 

 

Pete Randall
Outstanding Contributor

Re: NO satisfied with the this new ITRC

And when a customer screws up inserting a customer-replaceable memory module in a Dell box, the entire box can be replaced for, at most, a few thousand dollars.  If it's a pricey HP server, with a pricey HP support contract, you're looking at tens of thousands of dollars to replace the damaged machine.  If HP is going to charge top dollar to purchase the machine at the outset and then charge top dollar to maintain a support contract on the machine, HP should be willing to do something to earn all that money, not shift maintenance/repair duties onto the inexperienced customer's shoulders.

 

I'm sorry, Stephan, but your 2 cents, while affordable, just don't stand up.


Pete
Dennis Handly
Acclaimed Contributor

Re: NOT satisfied with the this new EBC forum

>Odds are that HP have 'offshored and outsourced' this new forum

 

Well to Lithium as it says on the bottom of each page.

Stephan.
Honored Contributor

Re: NO satisfied with the this new ITRC


@Pete Randall wrote:

And when a customer screws up inserting a customer-replaceable memory module in a Dell box, the entire box can be replaced for, at most, a few thousand dollars.  If it's a pricey HP server, with a pricey HP support contract, you're looking at tens of thousands of dollars to replace the damaged machine.  If HP is going to charge top dollar to purchase the machine at the outset and then charge top dollar to maintain a support contract on the machine, HP should be willing to do something to earn all that money, not shift maintenance/repair duties onto the inexperienced customer's shoulders.

 

I'm sorry, Stephan, but your 2 cents, while affordable, just don't stand up.


I don't want take this to far offtopic but screwing up a box during the replacement of a memory modul sounds like breaking the engine of a car while putting the key into the door. Anyway it may happen and just to add it, customer replaceable memory is only on the cheap proliant boxes available, not on the pricey big irons and I thought that I did mention that I'm not a big fan of it?

 

Stephan

 

 

Pete Randall
Outstanding Contributor

Re: NO satisfied with the this new ITRC

Right, you did.


Pete