8 ms·

I've worked in tech support for many years, and the vast majority of people would blame the PC manufacturer or the operating system for the problems. I spent ma

by jads 11y ago

I've worked in tech support for many years, and the vast majority of people would blame the PC manufacturer or the operating system for the problems. I spent many years on the Genius Bar (back in the PowerPC and early Intel days) and, in almost, every interaction, the device was to blame - as far as the customer was concerned. In some cases, they were right, in others it was due to outdated software, buggy third-party drivers or just something they bought that was not Mac compatible. But as far as the customer was concerned, it didn't work so therefore it was a problem with their computer. What has to be remembered is that the types of people who read Hacker News would understand, in more detail, what might be causing the issue and know troubleshooting is all part of the process. I bet printer companies get many calls a day from people who bought third-party cartridges (sometimes without realising) and complaining that their stupid printer isn't working and that it must be the printer's fault. The vast majority of consumers who would walk into an Apple Store or Best Buy to purchase something like this, they just think of it as one big ecosystem. If it doesn't work with a bulb they bought off the internet, they will simply assume the product, as a whole, is terrible.

gmac 11y ago
On the printer point, I once bought a 3rd-party cartridge for a Dell laser printer that not only didn't work but actually broke the printer (it stopped recognising all cartridges in that slot). The first question they asked on the phone was whether I'd used a 3rd-party cartridge. I said yes. The second question was where I'd like the free replacement printer delivered (now with added WiFi, and a full set of cartridges). Painful for Dell, but I'll buy from them again.
- ars 11y ago
  Your post makes we wonder if the printer broke on purpose with that 3rd party cartridge, and that's why they sent you a new one.
hrktb 11y ago
It's true, but wouldn't you receive extraordinary amount of misplaced calls anyway? I remember discussing with a website support guy who would get calls about printers not working, screen flickering and claims about some other unrelated websites that he didn't even know existed. There is of course tweaks that can be made to a product to reduce the amount of support calls, but misplaced blame should be par for the course whatever you do.
- jads 11y ago
  True, but limiting their system to first-party bulbs will likely mean a higher resolution rate and avoids the dreaded "sorry, you're going to have to speak to the bulb manufacturer". There's nothing more toxic to a customer support experience than two separate companies saying the other is to blame.
emp_zealoth 11y ago
Well, the printers part is kind of wrong - of course it is a printers fault - if it sabotages the cartridges
- jads 11y ago
  Actually, this statement is kind of wrong - it's only the printers fault if it sabotages the cartridges. What if it doesn't? It could be the case that the cartridge was faulty, I wouldn't assume all printers sabotage cartridges (I use third-party epson ones all the time, have had the occasional faulty one). Not disputing that some printers just refuse to work with third-party carts, but it's not the case with most printers I've used.
izacus 11y ago
Honestly, so what?! We've survived through 30 years of computing with this and somehow the big brands didn't implode. Why do we start compromising future technology due to some minority refusing to understand the basics of how their stuff works? People calling tech support are a minority of users and do not represent the full market. It's really strange that smart people here are actually proposing making the product worse due to some loud incompetent individuals.
- throwaway2048 11y ago
  its simply a post hoc justification, nothing more
geon 11y ago
> I spent many years on the Genius Bar (back in the PowerPC and early Intel days) and, in almost, every interaction, the device was to blame - as far as the customer was concerned. Selection bias. The people coming to the genius bar obviously think there's something wrong with the computer.
- masukomi 11y ago
  yes, selection bias but the fact that he had a constant stream of people thinking that proves the point that many folks just don't have a freaking clue about how computers work or what's responsible for what.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    No one is disputing that there are many people like that; the question is, how many in relation to more savvy customers, and whether this amount is in any way significant for the company.
    - afarrell 11y ago
      To build on and adjust that: you actually want to compare how vocal the people like that are.
    - jads 11y ago
      Since tech-savvy folks tend not to contact support, I'd wager this would've been viewed as significant.
pmontra 11y ago
Well, I think this was the point of all the complaints yesterday: people couldn't connect a 3rd party bulb to Philips' hub and assumed that the product (the hub) is terrible.
scrapcode 11y ago
The vast majority of who? If you mean a vast majority of your customers calling into a support center, I'd argue that is a very small amount. I'd venture to say very few of peers in my circles call into support outside of account level tasks.
- jads 11y ago
  That's exactly my point, the majority of people who do contact support are just average consumers. If removing third-party bulb support means a better experience for everyone and reduces the burden of support overall (both for users having to contact support and the support load itself), I completely understand their decision. We tech-savvy people have a better understanding of things like compatibility, the drawbacks of third-party/unofficial accessories etc. But try explaining that to someone who has no interest or experience in this, and they'll just not understand - or care. If Philips had stuck to their decision, it would've meant that, for anyone contact support, they could handle the entirety of the problem. This avoids the boomeranging of "well it might be your bulb, go speak to the people who made it". I don't know many people who use home automation, lighting systems like this, but of those that do - all but one is not someone I'd consider tech-savvy. I have no strong feelings one way or the other about this decision. Honestly, if I ever used this, I'd probably stick to first party products. As I get older, I find that I just don't care or want to spend the time fiddling with compatibility issues. If I'm in the market for automated light bulbs, chances are I'll have no problem stretching my budget to first party bulbs.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
yourapostasy 11y ago
Speak with tech support for other vendors enough, and the same picture emerges. As computers and software take on a greater utility role with more users, this is likely to be expected. Steve Jobs' early instinct to deliver a walled garden experience to consumers was correct. My guess is we'll see a widening bifurcation of the market, where consumers go ever-deeper into a walled garden, while professionals/commercial purchasers pay much higher price points for more accessible, manipulable gear. Once the complexity of some commercial gear reaches a certain threshold of support costs however, I expect that gear will head towards black box, closed designs. Maturing the software we write so it tames the complexity and makes managing it fun/ego-engaging in some manner could go a long ways towards pushing back that trend (if it emerges in the way I think it will).
- michaelmrose 11y ago
  The reverse seems to be true now with the closed gear commanding outsized prices I see no particular reason why this should be reversed. Factually I think we should forbid selling devices we are forbidden to touch and avoid the whole issue.
  - yourapostasy 11y ago
    I hope you are right, and I'm wrong. I suspect this is a temporary, happy circumstance that we enjoy today, due to the segment of history we inhabit, but am concerned it will be reversed due to physics, further market segmentation, and an ongoing miniaturization mania. As semiconductor fabrication processes get smaller, die sizes larger, and operating frequencies higher, I think we will see the hardware become more opaque. Already the test equipment to hack on cutting edge workstation- and server-class processors is spendy; just a 2GHz 10GS/s oscilloscope is 5 figures USD $ even used and just-calibrated. As manufacturers head towards greater integration on the die to differentiate themselves in a furiously- and constantly-commoditizing industry, we'll likely see more binary blobs at first, then market segmentation hits those of us who want open/powerful gear with a double-whammy. We enjoy the fruits of commodified hardware components now, but I'm not sanguine that state of affairs will last indefinitely due to the aforementioned integration trends. As everyone noticed that personalized gear enjoys outsized margins, we're seeing ever-increased pressure to further integrate and miniaturize into smaller packaging; repairability and accessibility to the hardware not invited at all to the design party. I really wish this specific trend would reverse. I suspect that the PC as we know it will morph into a greater walled-garden device in the next several decades, and if we want open/powerful gear we will find ourselves in a tiny market segment. At best, paying very high prices for the small volumes catered to, and at worst, in a technology ghetto. For now, I agree with you, but the long-term constraints are not promising to me further openness of the hardware.
fleitz 11y ago
Yup, I worked tech support at an ISP back when NIC drivers could be a PITA. There was a phenomenon I called 'first blamer advantage', whoever the customer called first whether it be the NIC maker, Microsoft, their ISP would blame their problems on someone else and the customer would think whoever was blamed was at fault. Usually we'd blame the NIC company, and then offer to send a tech out to fix the problem we blamed on them as a courtesy which made the customers accept the ridiculously long time it took to get a tech out.

by jads 11y ago

gmac 11y ago

On the printer point, I once bought a 3rd-party cartridge for a Dell laser printer that not only didn't work but actually broke the printer (it stopped recognising all cartridges in that slot). The first question they asked on the phone was whether I'd used a 3rd-party cartridge. I said yes. The second question was where I'd like the free replacement printer delivered (now with added WiFi, and a full set of cartridges). Painful for Dell, but I'll buy from them again.

ars 11y ago
Your post makes we wonder if the printer broke on purpose with that 3rd party cartridge, and that's why they sent you a new one.

hrktb 11y ago

It's true, but wouldn't you receive extraordinary amount of misplaced calls anyway? I remember discussing with a website support guy who would get calls about printers not working, screen flickering and claims about some other unrelated websites that he didn't even know existed. There is of course tweaks that can be made to a product to reduce the amount of support calls, but misplaced blame should be par for the course whatever you do.

jads 11y ago
True, but limiting their system to first-party bulbs will likely mean a higher resolution rate and avoids the dreaded "sorry, you're going to have to speak to the bulb manufacturer". There's nothing more toxic to a customer support experience than two separate companies saying the other is to blame.

emp_zealoth 11y ago

Well, the printers part is kind of wrong - of course it is a printers fault - if it sabotages the cartridges

jads 11y ago
Actually, this statement is kind of wrong - it's only the printers fault if it sabotages the cartridges. What if it doesn't? It could be the case that the cartridge was faulty, I wouldn't assume all printers sabotage cartridges (I use third-party epson ones all the time, have had the occasional faulty one). Not disputing that some printers just refuse to work with third-party carts, but it's not the case with most printers I've used.

izacus 11y ago

Honestly, so what?! We've survived through 30 years of computing with this and somehow the big brands didn't implode. Why do we start compromising future technology due to some minority refusing to understand the basics of how their stuff works? People calling tech support are a minority of users and do not represent the full market. It's really strange that smart people here are actually proposing making the product worse due to some loud incompetent individuals.

throwaway2048 11y ago
its simply a post hoc justification, nothing more

geon 11y ago

> I spent many years on the Genius Bar (back in the PowerPC and early Intel days) and, in almost, every interaction, the device was to blame - as far as the customer was concerned. Selection bias. The people coming to the genius bar obviously think there's something wrong with the computer.

masukomi 11y ago
yes, selection bias but the fact that he had a constant stream of people thinking that proves the point that many folks just don't have a freaking clue about how computers work or what's responsible for what.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  No one is disputing that there are many people like that; the question is, how many in relation to more savvy customers, and whether this amount is in any way significant for the company.
  - afarrell 11y ago
    To build on and adjust that: you actually want to compare how vocal the people like that are.
  - jads 11y ago
    Since tech-savvy folks tend not to contact support, I'd wager this would've been viewed as significant.

pmontra 11y ago

Well, I think this was the point of all the complaints yesterday: people couldn't connect a 3rd party bulb to Philips' hub and assumed that the product (the hub) is terrible.

scrapcode 11y ago

The vast majority of who? If you mean a vast majority of your customers calling into a support center, I'd argue that is a very small amount. I'd venture to say very few of peers in my circles call into support outside of account level tasks.

jads 11y ago
That's exactly my point, the majority of people who do contact support are just average consumers. If removing third-party bulb support means a better experience for everyone and reduces the burden of support overall (both for users having to contact support and the support load itself), I completely understand their decision. We tech-savvy people have a better understanding of things like compatibility, the drawbacks of third-party/unofficial accessories etc. But try explaining that to someone who has no interest or experience in this, and they'll just not understand - or care. If Philips had stuck to their decision, it would've meant that, for anyone contact support, they could handle the entirety of the problem. This avoids the boomeranging of "well it might be your bulb, go speak to the people who made it". I don't know many people who use home automation, lighting systems like this, but of those that do - all but one is not someone I'd consider tech-savvy. I have no strong feelings one way or the other about this decision. Honestly, if I ever used this, I'd probably stick to first party products. As I get older, I find that I just don't care or want to spend the time fiddling with compatibility issues. If I'm in the market for automated light bulbs, chances are I'll have no problem stretching my budget to first party bulbs.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

yourapostasy 11y ago

Speak with tech support for other vendors enough, and the same picture emerges. As computers and software take on a greater utility role with more users, this is likely to be expected. Steve Jobs' early instinct to deliver a walled garden experience to consumers was correct. My guess is we'll see a widening bifurcation of the market, where consumers go ever-deeper into a walled garden, while professionals/commercial purchasers pay much higher price points for more accessible, manipulable gear. Once the complexity of some commercial gear reaches a certain threshold of support costs however, I expect that gear will head towards black box, closed designs. Maturing the software we write so it tames the complexity and makes managing it fun/ego-engaging in some manner could go a long ways towards pushing back that trend (if it emerges in the way I think it will).

michaelmrose 11y ago
The reverse seems to be true now with the closed gear commanding outsized prices I see no particular reason why this should be reversed. Factually I think we should forbid selling devices we are forbidden to touch and avoid the whole issue.
- yourapostasy 11y ago
  I hope you are right, and I'm wrong. I suspect this is a temporary, happy circumstance that we enjoy today, due to the segment of history we inhabit, but am concerned it will be reversed due to physics, further market segmentation, and an ongoing miniaturization mania. As semiconductor fabrication processes get smaller, die sizes larger, and operating frequencies higher, I think we will see the hardware become more opaque. Already the test equipment to hack on cutting edge workstation- and server-class processors is spendy; just a 2GHz 10GS/s oscilloscope is 5 figures USD $ even used and just-calibrated. As manufacturers head towards greater integration on the die to differentiate themselves in a furiously- and constantly-commoditizing industry, we'll likely see more binary blobs at first, then market segmentation hits those of us who want open/powerful gear with a double-whammy. We enjoy the fruits of commodified hardware components now, but I'm not sanguine that state of affairs will last indefinitely due to the aforementioned integration trends. As everyone noticed that personalized gear enjoys outsized margins, we're seeing ever-increased pressure to further integrate and miniaturize into smaller packaging; repairability and accessibility to the hardware not invited at all to the design party. I really wish this specific trend would reverse. I suspect that the PC as we know it will morph into a greater walled-garden device in the next several decades, and if we want open/powerful gear we will find ourselves in a tiny market segment. At best, paying very high prices for the small volumes catered to, and at worst, in a technology ghetto. For now, I agree with you, but the long-term constraints are not promising to me further openness of the hardware.

fleitz 11y ago

Yup, I worked tech support at an ISP back when NIC drivers could be a PITA. There was a phenomenon I called 'first blamer advantage', whoever the customer called first whether it be the NIC maker, Microsoft, their ISP would blame their problems on someone else and the customer would think whoever was blamed was at fault. Usually we'd blame the NIC company, and then offer to send a tech out to fix the problem we blamed on them as a courtesy which made the customers accept the ridiculously long time it took to get a tech out.