<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I think the best thing is to communicate your frustrations to
your manager and/or the person who signs the cheques. They can then communicate
to the account manager who then might do something.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Us lowly administrators have little to no pull - same as TAC.
;)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>Lelio
Fulgenzi, B.A.<BR>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario
N1G 2W1<BR>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX
(JNHN)<BR>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<BR>"I can eat fifty eggs." "Nobody can eat fifty eggs."</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=sumdingwong@gmail.com href="mailto:sumdingwong@gmail.com">Sum Ding
Wong</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=rratliff@cisco.com
href="mailto:rratliff@cisco.com">Ryan Ratliff</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, July 13, 2006 1:12
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [cisco-voip] Incompatibility
Issues</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>This is exactly my point. It is too complicated. Our sales
staff<BR>didn't order the right part. We almost need to hire someone full
time<BR>just to keep up with Cisco's release, EOL cycles ... for both
hardware<BR>and software ... and monitor the compatibility matrix. Its
crazy.<BR><BR>Our sales people have to piece these cryptic part numbers
together to<BR>try to get us the right stuff. Here's our cycle. We order
servers and<BR>software...and they're wrong somehow. Then, we talk to someone
at<BR>Cisco and they say "Oh yeah, you should have ordered _______. Now
we<BR>need to do an RMA and send back the CDs you just recieved. I'm
sorry<BR>"you" screwed up on your order." All this does is waste our time.
Then<BR>we finally get the right combination. We sell the combination a
couple<BR>times, then it is EOL. Then we start the cycle all over
again.<BR><BR>Why can't Cisco just post those OS software on the web for
registered<BR>users? Or at least allow the TAC engineers to post it. The OS
software<BR>will not install if you do not have cisco hardware.<BR><BR>Unity
connection is the best software release I have seen from Cisco<BR>....
probably ever. The software is available for download with a<BR>limited
license. (I can test it to see if I like) If you want to use<BR>the full
version, you buy licenses. CCM5.0 seems to be on that track,<BR>but I don't
know because I can't get it from anywhere without<BR>purchasing it. I really
don't want to purchase it because it is<BR>probably not compatible with
something.<BR><BR>I know you TAC engineers do the best you can and probably
have more<BR>complaints regarding this issue than I do. Simply because you
have to<BR>deal with people like me and you are the last man on the long
chain. I<BR>don't want you to think this is directed at you. I just want you
to<BR>forward this on to someone that might be able to help.<BR><BR><BR>Others
on this list. If you have a problem with this...speak up. They<BR>will not
change anything if I am the only one
complaining.<BR><BR>Thanks.<BR><BR><BR><BR>On 7/13/06, Ryan Ratliff <<A
href="mailto:rratliff@cisco.com">rratliff@cisco.com</A>> wrote:<BR>> I
feel your pain, we see many, many cases come in with people who got<BR>>
the wrong software. Unfortunately most of the time it's because
they<BR>> ordered the wrong software to go with the hardware (not saying
this<BR>> is what happened in your case).<BR>><BR>> When you buy an
MCS server you don't get the OS. The CallManager<BR>> software is
what comes with the OS. This means when ordering your CM<BR>>
software you have to keep in mind the server it is destined for.<BR>> For
example the MCS-7825-I1-IPC server requires CM4.1-K9-7825-I2<BR>> (until
the 7825-I1 was replaced by the I2 the CM part also had I1).<BR>> If you
buy CM4.1-K9-7835I1-1 then you aren't going to get the OS<BR>> 2000.4.1
CDs.<BR>><BR>> This happens all the time and it causes nothing but
frustration for<BR>> the customer and the TAC engineer they inevitably end
up talking to<BR>> because we can't do anything about it. We recently
got the ability<BR>> to RMA CDs but we can only do this if you ordered the
right product<BR>> and received the wrong disks. If you
ordered the wrong thing then<BR>> TAC can't help you and you need to call
customer service.<BR>><BR>> -Ryan<BR>><BR>> On Jul 13, 2006, at
12:11 PM, Sum Ding Wong wrote:<BR>><BR>> Can anyone
relate?<BR>><BR>> We just received our order for a MCS-7825-I1-IPC
server and Call<BR>> Manager 4.1.3 software bundle to go with it. The OS
version that was<BR>> shipped with the CCM software is version 2000.2.7a
which is not<BR>> compatible with the MCS-7825-I1-IPC server. I need
version 2000.4.1 or<BR>> later.<BR>><BR>> I am beginning to hate
Cisco over software incompatibility issues. I<BR>> have not had one install
this year where I did not have<BR>> incompatibility issues with
software/hardware or software versions.<BR>> TAC engineers can not send out
media or make it available for<BR>> download. They just forward me to the
PUT tool. The PUT tool is no<BR>> help, because I do not have a SASU
contract yet. Our vendor can't help<BR>> because they cannot get the OS
version individually.<BR>><BR>> I keep hearing that things will get
better with ver 5.0 …. But I do<BR>> not seeing a light at the end of this
long tunnel.<BR>><BR>> There are too many IPT vendors for Cisco to make
things this<BR>> complicated. Nortel, Avaya, Mitel ... the list goes on.
Open source<BR>> IPT is building steam. Even Microsoft has anounced an
interest. I<BR>> think Cisco could be the next SUN if they do not change
their<BR>> practices. I think they could be giving software away just to
sell<BR>> hardware. Don't get me wrong, I think Cisco's IPT product is the
best<BR>> but so is Solaris.<BR>><BR>> - Why does Cisco not allow
downloads for the full OS versions for IPT?<BR>> - Why is it impossible to
get a demo for CCM 5.0?<BR>> - Why is the Compatability matrix such a
mess?<BR>><BR>> --<BR>> Ding<BR>><BR>> "I feel more like I do
now than I did a while ago"<BR>><BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> cisco-voip mailing
list<BR>> <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A><BR>>
<A
href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</A><BR>><BR>><BR><BR><BR>--
<BR>Sum Ding Wong<BR><BR>"I feel more like I do now than I did a while
ago"<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>cisco-voip
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A><BR><A
href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</A><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>